tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-60712602024-03-08T17:16:21.933-07:00Joe Thornton's RantJoe Thornton's insider comments on the movie industry in Canada, writing, stuff, life, relationships and occasionally politics...Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-76748492182918363272022-06-29T22:39:00.000-06:002022-06-29T22:39:52.409-06:00<p> The Delusions of Faith<br /></p><p><span>"A delusion is a false, unshakeable idea or belief, which is out of </span><span>keeping with the patient’s educational, cultural and social background; it is held with extraordinary conviction and subjective certainty. ~ Professor Andrew Sims - Is Faith Delusion?"</span></p><p><span>In other words, perfectly normal people now doing and thinking irrational things. The Trump phenomenon is inexplicable when otherwise sane people suddenly go rabid and take up arms to follow a madman. <br /></span></p><p><span></span></p><p><span></span></p><div data-en-clipboard="true" data-pm-slice="1 1 []">Lucian K. Truscott IV seems to hit the nail on the head. About 20 times. This is his essay.<br /></div><div data-en-clipboard="true" data-pm-slice="1 1 []"> </div><div> There was a reason Mark Meadows and Donald Trump were “unconcerned,” as Cassidy Hutchinson testified yesterday, when police lines broke on January 6 and Trump’s followers began battering the Capitol trying to get in. A violent assault on the Capitol was the plan all along, or had been at least since December 14, after electors had met and cast their ballots in the states and reported the results to the National Archives. Trump was out of options. Violence was all he had left.</div><div> </div><div> The next step was certifying those ballots, counting them, and declaring the winner of the presidential election at a joint session of Congress on January 6. Trump’s plan to get Jeffrey Clark to send letters to states, beginning with Georgia, falsely asserting that the Department of Justice had found irregularities in the votes in battleground states, and the DOJ was recommending that the state legislatures meet and appoint their own slates of Trump electors, had been shot down at the late night meeting in the Oval Office when practically the entire top rank of the DOJ had threatened to resign if Clark was appointed.</div><div> </div><div> That was only days before January 6. Already in the Willard Hotel, across Lafayette Park from the White House, a so-called war room had been established to oversee the events that would take place on the 6th, beginning with the speech on the Ellipse followed by the march on the Capitol and the violent assault that would take Trump’s army inside. Mark Meadows wanted to go to the Willard to join the war room in progress on the night of January 5, but was disabused of the idea by, yes, Cassidy Hutchinson. He called into the war room meeting instead.</div><div> </div><div> Attempts had been made in the run up to the Ellipse rally by Pat Cippollone and others in the White House to get speech writers to take the lines about going to the Capitol, among others, out of Trump’s speech, without success. Riling up the crowd with lies and sending them to the Capitol was written into the speech days ahead. Trump apparently didn’t decide that he wanted to go to the Capitol himself until that morning, but when he did, he tried to take control of the presidential limousine himself and assaulted his own Secret Service agent when he was told there wasn’t enough security and he was returning to the White House.</div><div> </div><div> In the West Wing, as cable news showed images of his followers violently attacking Capitol police and breaking into the Capitol, Trump sat calmly in the Oval Office dining room watching it happen. Mark Meadows was a few dozen yards down the hall in his own office “on his phone,” as Ms. Hutchinson put it.</div><div> </div><div> Neither man was shocked because the assault on the Capitol was going just as it had been planned.</div><div> </div><div> I think when the hearings reconvene that we’re going to hear and see evidence of coordination between Trump or his close associates like Rudy Giuliani and possibly his own sons with Proud Boys and Oath Keepers in the days immediately before the assault. The entire leadership of both groups are presently behind bars, held without bail, pending trials on charges of conspiracy to commit sedition against the government of the United States. The indictment of the Proud Boys revealed that more than one of them has flipped and has given evidence against his fellow Proud Boys leaders.</div><div> </div><div> Multiple people in Trump’s close orbit are in the same place the Proud Boys have found themselves, facing multiple years in prison. Somebody is going to flip.</div><div> </div><div> Unless a corrupt leader has the country’s military behind him, coup attempts don’t work. The Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers and a few wrung-out drunken lawyers aren’t enough to bring down a government, even when the president of the United States is the one leading them. </div><div> </div><div> After the hearings, right-wing commentators and Trump loyalists went after Cassidy Hutchinson with a vengeance. What she had described – a grown man throwing temper tantrums, Trump attacking his own Secret Service agents trying to get them to take him to the Capitol – was so pathetic, something had to be done to discredit her. Trump himself, of course, immediately claimed "I hardly know who this person, Cassidy Hutchinson, is, other than I heard very negative things about her (a total phony and “leaker”).</div><div> </div><div> Hemingway famously wrote that you go bankrupt in two ways: “Gradually, then suddenly.”</div><div> </div><div>Trump, no stranger to bankruptcy, has left the gradual stage. </div><p><span> </span></p><p><span> </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-7018560807310220552022-02-17T16:02:00.003-07:002022-02-17T16:28:19.644-07:00<p><span style="font-family: arial;">Canadians and Democracy or the Great Truck Ball debacle.<br /><br />by Joe Thornton</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">17 Feb 2022<br /><br />What we are currently looking at is a marginal segment of Canadian society who have suddenly decided that because they aren’t being heard they have the right to make people listen. So with that in mind they all saddled up their pickup trucks, balls dangling, rounded up a few semi’s and its off to the Ottawa rodeo. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;"><br />The problem with our representational democracy is that we elect people to speak for us. We seldom have the opportunity to approach the king of the hill directly in any substantive manner.<br /> <br />Representational democracy generally allows for dissent to be heard and dealt with through discussion and a vote taken of those elected officials present – our Members of Parliament or at the provincial level our Members of Legislative Assembly. Here’s the thing. If you don’t like what is happening in government the person for you to talk to is your representative. No one talks to their reps. No one makes them accountable. They keep electing them over and over for years without ever attending a constituency meeting or a townhall.<br /> <br />We have argued and discussed the shortcomings of such a system many times over the decades, always arriving at the conclusion that it’s still the best system we have, short of direct participation in democracy.<br /><br />The problem with direct participation is that there are just too damn many of us. 27.4 million Eligible electors to be exact, more or less… We’d never get anything passed ever if we had to wait for them all to have their say and vote.<br />Until now that is.<br /><br />Electronically it might be possible to accomplish this by allotting a few moments daily while the house is sitting to vote via a secure electronic device on the issues of the day. The internet and parliamentary servers would have to be beefed up somewhat to allow for that kind of traffic but that’s coming anyway… you know, “the Metaverse”.<br /> <br />That works until someone decides not to play. They want all the marbles and don’t want anyone else to have any. These are the disrupters who don’t care what anyone else wants. They demand that their wants and desires apply to everyone else whether the others want them or not.<br /><br />Then comes the small block protests who refrain from voting to prove their point, later coming out in opposition because they didn’t vote and their voices weren’t heard. Again with the pickup trucks and the semi’s and the hot tubs on Wellington… <br /><br />In order to have a law and order society we need to have law and order. It is evident that occasionally the enforcement of those principals has to be more heavy handed than we would like.<br /> <br />The part of democracy that everyone is missing is “responsibility”. We are all responsible to make democracy work. This is not a top down initiative, it is a bottom up action. Get with it Canada, we can be the crown jewel of democracy or continue to be the laughing stock of the world.<br /></span><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-56055908513543726882018-03-30T19:55:00.000-06:002018-03-30T19:58:22.018-06:00British Columbia vs Alberta and BC’s increasing need for fossil fuels<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false"
DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="371">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footnote text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="header"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footer"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="index heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="table of figures"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="envelope address"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="envelope return"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="footnote reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="line number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="page number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="endnote reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="endnote text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="table of authorities"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="macro"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="toa heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Bullet 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Number 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Closing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Signature"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="List Continue 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Message Header"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Salutation"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Date"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text First Indent"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Note Heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Body Text Indent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Block Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Hyperlink"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="FollowedHyperlink"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Document Map"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Plain Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="E-mail Signature"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Top of Form"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal (Web)"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Acronym"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Address"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Cite"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Code"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Definition"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Keyboard"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Preformatted"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Sample"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Typewriter"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="HTML Variable"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Normal Table"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="annotation subject"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="No List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Outline List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Simple 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Classic 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Colorful 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Columns 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Grid 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table List 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table 3D effects 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Contemporary"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Elegant"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Professional"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Subtle 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Subtle 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Web 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Balloon Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true"
Name="Table Theme"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true"
Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true"
Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true"
Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true"
Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true"
UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46"
Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51"
Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52"
Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:107%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->Written by Joe Thornton - March 29, 2018<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Material compiled from corporate and government web sources.</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Want some sobering facts about automobiles, airplanes and
Vancouver fuel requirements?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> This</span> article
is analyzing where the oil comes from and who are the owners. Who benefits
financially from the Trans Mountain Pipeline? It's not who you think. I get that some of you
won't accept facts even when they are in front of you, so if that's you, don't
read this. It'll be a waste of time. Go buy some weed and chill. Yes, I'm being
purposefully provocative.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Onward. There are over 1 billion cars on the world's roads
as of right now, almost all of them petroleum powered.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As of today 17,516,700 Cars produced so far
this year,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>203,017 Cars produced today
as of this posting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="http://www.worldometers.info/">http://www.worldometers.info/</a> There
are about ten produced every minute on a worldwide basis. <a href="http://energybc.ca/cache/oil/www.worldometers.info/cars/index.html">http://energybc.ca/cache/oil/www.worldometers.info/cars/index.html</a>
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Bloombergs best estimate is that Tesla
has manufactured 11,189 Model 3s so far, and is now building approximately 975
a week. (<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/">https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/</a>)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Other electric car manufacturers currently
have a negligible output when compared to global totals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ya with me so far?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Unless you want to walk everywhere, or invest in pedal power, Vancouver,
you're going to need gasoline for quite awhile yet.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are now almost 2.5 million people living in BC's Lower
Mainland, representing 60% of the province's population. But only one small
refinery remains in the area - a 55,000 bbl/day facility on the edge of Burnaby
Mountain operated by Chevron. The Chevron refinery only supplies 30% of the
area's gasoline needs. In the past, Edmonton was able to satisfy the balance.
But pipeline constraints and a growing population in Alberta and BC result in
periodic shortfalls. And that shortfall is made up by importing gasoline from
Washington State refineries located just across the BC/US border.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Vancouver's YVR International Airport is the second-busiest
in Canada. The number of long-haul flights to Asia grows every day, and with it
grows the need for jet fuel. The Chevron plant only supplies 40% of the
airport's jet fuel requirements, forcing them to truck in 1,000 loads of fuel
per month from BP's Cherry Point Refinery in Washington State. Every additional
flight to Asia adds another 800 truckloads per year. The airport's growth is
becoming unsustainable under current circumstances. Even a minor supply
disruption of jet fuel would threaten their existing operations. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But YVR Airport isn't waiting for Canadian refineries to
make more jet fuel. The city is building a marine terminal on the South Arm of
the Fraser River. The plan is to import jet fuel from Washington State by
tanker and run a 13 km underground pipeline through the city of Richmond to the
YVR airport.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ya with me so far?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Tankers coming INTO the area with fuel on board.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Huh? I can't hear you? No protesting? No one
upset?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Hmmmm...<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So here's the deal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>West coast refining margins are some of the best in the world, none
better than those located in Washington State, just a stone's throw from BC's
Lower Mainland. The northwestern corner of Washington State is home to 5
refineries with a combined capacity of over 630,000 bbl/day. These refineries
have a major competitive advantage - they can source discounted heavy oil from
the oil sands (via the Trans Mountain Pipeline) and discounted light oil from
the Bakkens (delivered by rail). The state produces premium low-sulphur
gasoline and diesel shipped out to lucrative markets such Oregon, California,
Hawaii, Asia and yes, even Vancouver.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Washington State exports a whopping 14% of its final products to BC's
Lower Mainland.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Anybody getting it yet? This is what Alberta is trying to
accomplish.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We are trying to get our
supply to the markets in our/your backyard. A product that you are going to
need for quite a while unless you want to go back to equine transportation.
Going cold turkey on your petroleum addiction won't cut it this time. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Why do you hate Alberta so much? It'd be so much easier if
you'd just work with us and we can get to green together. We want to, but we
need your money to do it, and you need our fuel.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 16.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Kinder Morgan</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Kinder Morgan is a pipeline company not an oil producer.
They just provide a service, like CN/CP Rail is also doing. Any bitumen being
discussed is supplied by Suncor – the percentage makeup is explained below.
Toss into the mix some crude that is coming from Fort St John BC through
Edmonton and some light crude that comes from several smaller Alberta oil
companies. Trans Mountain is a multipurpose pipe that is also transporting
Aviation fuel made just outside Edmonton, gasoline, diesel and condensate also
get a slot. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Trans Mountain Pipeline carries crude and refined oil
from Alberta to the west coast of British Columbia, Canada. It is wholly owned
by the Canadian division of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners (Kinder Morgan) and
has been in use since 1953. It is the only pipeline to run between these two
areas.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Burnaby Refinery is an oil refinery located in the city
of Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada owned by Parkland Fuel Corp.. The facility
refines crude and synthetic oil into gasoline, diesel, jet fuels, asphalts,
heating fuels, heavy fuel oils, butanes, and propane. Crude oil is supplied to
the facility from Northern British Columbia and Alberta through the
1,200-kilometre Kinder Morgan Pipe Line. The refinery is divided into Area 1
now used for offices and oil storage and Area 2 the modern refining area. Former
and original owner-operator Chevron sold its Canadian assets to Parkland Fuel
Corp for C$1.46 billion in April 2017, including 129 gasoline stations, three
terminals and the Burnaby oil refinery.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The refinery was established in 1935 by Standard Oil of
California as one of few heavy industries in the area at that time - 2000
bbls/day. Major expansion took place in mid 1950's to 11,000 bbls/day as part
of post war BC building boom. Further capacity increases in mid 1970’s to
35,000 bbls/day including a steady advancement in technology. Other lower
mainland refineries were converted to terminals in early 1990’s with production
transferred to Alberta.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moving right along getting to the issue at hand which is
bitumen. Who owns it? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 107%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The Oil Sands Syncrude Partnership</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Syncrude Canada Ltd. is one of the world's largest producers
of synthetic crude oil from oil sands and the largest single source producer in
Canada. It is located just outside Fort McMurray in the Athabasca Oil Sands,
and has a nameplate capacity of 350,000 barrels per day (56,000 m3/d) of oil,
equivalent to about 13% of Canada's consumption. It has approximately 5.1
billion barrels (810,000,000 m3) of proven and probable reserves (11.9 billion
when including contingent and prospective resources) situated on 8 leases over
3 contiguous sites. Including fully realized prospective reserves, current
production capacity could be sustained for well over 90 years.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The company is a joint venture between five partners. As a
result, Syncrude is not traded directly, but rather through the individual
owners. As of February 2018, the partners (by percentage): Suncor Energy
(58.74%), Imperial Oil (25%), Sinopec (9.03%), Nexen (7.23%). Because of
Nexen's subsequent takeover by CNOOC, over 16% of the shares in Syncrude are controlled
by State Owned Enterprises (SOE).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The ownership board must approve all annual operating
budgets and proposed capital spending projects, and are required to provide the
funding for said activities based on their ownership share.<br />
<br />
Calgary’s Suncor Energy Inc. - increased its stake in the Syncrude joint
venture and acquired a stake in the Fenja Development, an offshore project in
the Norwegian Sea, in a pair of deals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Under
the first agreement, Suncor acquired Mocal Energy’s five per cent interest in
Syncrude for approximately $920 million.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The acquisition increases Suncor’s share in Syncrude to
58.74 per cent from 53.74 per cent. The other partners include Calgary’s Imperial
Oil Resources with 25 per cent, Calgary based <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Sinopec Oil Sands Partnership</b> with 9.03 per cent and the Calgary
based <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Nexen Oil Sands Partnership</b>
with 7.23 per cent.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Imperial Oil Limited is a Canadian petroleum company. It is
Canada's second-biggest integrated oil company. ... Imperial owns 25 percent of
Syncrude, which is one of the world's largest oil sands operations.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Suncor is the world's largest producer of bitumen, and owns
and operates an oil sands upgrading plant near Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada.
Originally developed by Great Canadian Oil Sands which was a majority-owned
subsidiary of Sun Oil, it is now wholly owned by the independent Suncor.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Sinopec Canada</b> is a diversified unconventional oil
and natural gas company, focused on developing our asset base in Alberta
and north east British Columbia. The Company has a balanced mix of crude oil,
liquids-rich natural gas and resource play natural gas and is a 9.03% partner
in the Syncrude Oilsands Joint Venture. Sinopec Canada is a business unit of
Sinopec International Petroleum Exploration and Production Corporation (SIPC)
and is indirectly owned by China Petrochemical Corporation (Sinopec Group), one
of the world's largest enterprises.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Nexen</b> is an
upstream oil and gas company responsibly developing energy resources in the UK
North Sea, offshore West Africa, the United States and Western Canada. A
wholly-owned subsidiary of CNOOC Limited, Nexen has three principal businesses:
conventional oil and gas, oil sands and shale gas / oil.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">CNOOC Limited</b>,
incorporated in the Hong Kong Special Administration Region in August 1999, was
listed on the New York Stock Exchange (code: CEO) and The Stock Exchange of
Hong Kong Limited on 27 and 28 February 2001, respectively. The Company was
admitted as a constituent stock of the Hang Seng Index in July 2001. The
Company’s American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”) was listed on the Toronto Stock
Exchange (code: CNU) on 18 September 2013.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a separate heavy oil operation that spans the Alberta
Saskatchewan border, Calgary based <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Husky
Energy </b>is a publically traded Canadian company<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>that<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>operates the Husky
Lloydminster Upgrader, in Lloydminster, Saskatchewan, which converts heavy oil
to a high-quality, low sulphur synthetic oil. This travels via pipeline
eastward through Prince Albert and down to Regina where it supplies under contract
to the Co-op <i>Refinery</i> Complex which was established in 1935.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It eventually joins the Keystone One and I believe
the pipeline east to Ontario.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Westward it provides petroleum to service it’s Husky Prince
George Refinery, and from its Oil Sands Sunrise Energy Project, it supplies heavy
oil/bitumen into the Trans Mountain pipeline.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Husky owns and operates the Prince George Refinery in Prince
George, British Columbia. The refinery provides unleaded gasoline, seasonal
diesel fuels, mixed propane and butane, and heavy fuel oil. The refinery's
capacity is 12,000 bpd.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So the Canadian Oil Sands being a total corporate foreign
owned venture is pretty much just a myth. There are foreign ownership elements
but they are minor at this point as mentioned earlier in this article.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The corporations involved are all Canadian Corporations
headquartered in Calgary.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ownership
shares are partially owned in a few cases by foreign entities but overall as
mentioned the majority of the Oilsands are now owned by SunCor a Canadian
Company.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The actual shareholdings are a bit more difficult to pin
down but they are owned entirely by institutional investors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That generally indicates a conglomerate of
pension funds and banks.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On that basis, the top five institutional shareholders of
Suncor are - FMR LLC; Wellington Management Group, Royal Bank of Canada,
Capital World Investors, Invesco Ltd. FMR is a Boston investment company. Wellington
Management - Also a Boston Investment company. Royal Bank no explanation
necessary I hope, Capital World Investors - based in Los Angeles. Also an
investment company. Invesco is from Atlanta Georgia and does not appear to be
an institutional investor but is likely a single purpose. company setup to
raise capital. So no Texans in the top five. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Capital investment in Canada’s energy sector generates development activity,
which in turn spurs job creation and economic growth across Canada for all
levels of government – including about $19 billion in revenues in 2015 and
533,000 jobs across the nation in 2017.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oil sands development creates a significant number of jobs
outside Alberta. In fact, more than 3,400 Canadian companies outside of Alberta
supplied the oil sands with good and services in 2014 and 2015. The goods,
materials and services used to construct and operate in situ oil sands
projects, mines and upgraders come from across Canada. Many of the components –
trucks, gauges, valves, pumps – are produced in Ontario and Quebec.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 2017, the oil sands supported and created more than
223,000 direct and indirect jobs across Canada. (Prism Economics, 2017). Many
of these jobs are in provinces outside of Alberta - the goods, materials and
services used to construct and operate oil sands projects, mines and upgraders
come from across North America. Many of the components — tires, trucks, gauges,
valves, pumps, etc. — are produced in Ontario and Quebec.<br />
<br />
According to the Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI), almost every region
in Canada has been stimulated by oil sands development through job creation and
economic activity.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alberta’s natural resources belong to Albertans. In exchange
for the right to develop these resources, companies pay the government a
royalty. This is a percentage of revenues generated from the sale of oil and
natural gas products, or in some cases takes the product in-kind for the
government to sell.<br />
<br />
Royalties are just one way oil and natural gas producers contribute to
government revenues. Many different government taxation policies affect
exploration and development of Alberta’s natural resources.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The oil and natural gas industry is Canada’s largest private
sector investor, with oil sands alone injecting almost $14 billion into the
economy in 2017. The oil sands industry and its suppliers contribute to
government revenues through corporate taxes, personal income taxes, property
taxes, royalties, land sales and other costs. Over the next 20 years, the oil
sands industry is expected to pay $1.7 trillion in provincial and federal taxes
– including royalties. These revenues contribute to government spending on
infrastructure, social services and other important programs. A healthy oil
sands industry results in higher revenues for governments.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The drive towards sustainable growth in the economy, along
with a new Climate Leadership Plan introduced by the Government of Alberta in
November 2015 will create a wide range opportunities in Alberta’s renewable
energy market.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alberta’s government is serious about addressing climate
change. Alberta’s plan features a phase out of coal-fired power by 2030 and
replacing at least 50-75% of retired coal generation with renewable power,
increasing the overall share of renewables to 30%.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alberta is serious about renewable energy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As one of its first actions under the Climate
Leadership Plan, the Government of Alberta chose the Alberta Electric System
Operator (AESO) to develop and implement a renewable electricity program (REP)
to add additional renewable generation capacity into Alberta’s electricity
system. REP 1 results were announced in December 2018. This is the lowest
renewable power prices seen in Canada at $37/MWh.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As of February 2018, there are two more REP procurement
auctions available.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Alberta government has also established Energy
Efficiency Alberta to administer multiple efficiency programs for Alberta
residents and businesses. Program details can be found here.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The transition to a larger proportion of renewable energy in
Alberta's electricity market offers a phenomenal business opportunity. It's
estimated $10.5 billion in new investment will flow into the provincial economy
by 2030, creating at least 7,000 new jobs for Albertans as projects are built.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The province has proven potential for large scale
investments in both wind and solar energy. For example, Alberta’s solar resource
is 25% greater than Ontario’s and 30% greater than Germany’s, according to the
Canadian Solar Industries Association. Alberta is Canada’s third largest
producer of wind energy and that’s using only 1% of the estimated total wind
energy potential in the province.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As Canada’s only fully deregulated electricity market,
Alberta offers extensive opportunities for renewable power generation and smart
grid technology. Alberta’s competitive electricity market has resulted in over
9000 megawatts (MW) of new electricity generating capacity since 1998. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is currently 16,242 MW of installed generating
capacity in Alberta.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As of August 2015, future development proposed by industry
includes over 2,400 MW of renewable generation and over 7,700 MW of thermal and
other generation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Coal-fired plants account for almost 38 per cent, while
natural gas accounts for almost 44 per cent of the market, as of August 2015.
The remaining 13 per cent is generated through hydro, wind, biomass and waste
heat. Critical as well to Alberta’s electricity industry is the use of
cogeneration. The process of cogeneration is economically friendly and
efficient as the input fuel (such as natural gas or biomass) generates
electricity and steam/heat for industrial processes simultaneously.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Co-generation of electricity strongly contributes to
Alberta’s energy supply with over 30%, or 4,600 MW, of total installed
generation capacity as of December 2014. Co-generation is environmentally
efficient as it substantially reduces greenhouse gas emissions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The province has nine biomass co-generation facilities and
four waste heat facilities.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) is Canada’s
first customer-focused exchange for electricity. As an independent system
operator, the AESO leads the safe, reliable and economic operation and planning
of Alberta’s interconnected power system. The AESO also facilitates Alberta’s
competitive wholesale electricity market which, in 2014, had 196 participants
and approximately $5 billion in annual energy transactions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alberta’s electricity system is owned and operated by a mix
of investor-owned and municipally owned companies, of which many are based in
Calgary. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-34646602370547302762016-05-27T15:39:00.000-06:002016-05-27T15:39:00.619-06:00The Great Conservative/Republican Jobs Deception<br /><div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By Joe Thornton May
27, 2016<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The US Republicans, The Libertarians, the Canadian
Conservative/Reform/Alliance Party, The UK Tories are all frauds. They promote the ideal that social welfare is
somehow evil in and of itself, that empathy and compassion for ones fellow man
is abhorrent and must be eliminated at any cost, that it drags the country into
debt and poverty itself.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now think about this for a moment. Every one of those political parties support
corporate tax cuts, corporate subsidies, almost non-existent resource royalties
where the unarguably rich are allowed to steal the resource wealth of a country
for their own gain – in essence they are all for corporate welfare.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The hue and cry is: Who will provide the jobs if the
corporations are not given the right breaks? Hmmmm… following the money here. If the governments of the countries involved
are giving those kind of massive business and tax breaks to corporations so
that they will be the job creators – isn’t that the government creating the
jobs, not the corporate structure, or even the rich?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What’s the difference between that and the ruling party of a
country creating job making incentives directly? Or even doing roadwork and public construction
projects through the public works department and putting the workforce directly
on payroll? It would eliminate the middleman corporations who seldom pass along
the promised jobs and what is supposed to be a literal money flow from the
government to the citizens of the country.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To make matters worse most often these days corporations
keep the bucks and offshore the tax liability then they further offshore the
labour for product production, shipping the goods back from India and China
with no net gain of any jobs to the country who provided the breaks in the
first place. Where in this scenario are
the poor a drag on the system? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is an implicit promise by the corporations to be good
citizens and help the country grow and prosper – the old “what’s good for
General Motors is good for America” is an adage long gone. <o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Regardless of political stripe people have to wake up to the
reality that governments have ALWAYS been the job creators regardless of the
political party involved. Eliminate the
middlemen. Hire direct.<o:p></o:p></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-72156566681231733052015-10-15T01:52:00.000-06:002015-10-15T01:52:00.382-06:00Why are Harper Cons So Nasty?During the course of this election, I have never read more negative comments by whiny nasty Harperites ever. Cons seem to open their mouths and venom comes out. They bash, they belittle they insult and pretty much outright slander anyone who opposes their god Stephen Harper. Wow!. Do none of you ever have anything positive to say? Facts stare you in the face but its water off a ducks back. Now that's indoctrination. We'll have more on that front in another post. At the same time you have proponents of the other two major candidates who seem to be rather civilized when compared to the Harper Cons. Has the Harper party been reduced to nothing but illiterate rednecks? Are Progressive thinking people more intelligent and less reactionary than the average Harper Con? Some studies seem to indicate that to be the case.<br /><br />This arose from Facebook comments regarding Justin Trudeau. The slagging was over Justin's proposal to run a deficit in order to fund infrastructure projects which would subsequently create an impressive number of jobs. To be honest I don't know what to think of young Justin, but his ideas aren't dumb by any stretch. <br /><br />Anyway my two cents worth: No one can deny that infrastructure across Canada is in dismal condition and in desperate need of rebuilding before more bridges fall on cars. We need roads that we don't have, we need flood control projects built (Calgary two years ago), we are in need of transportation projects so that people can get to work without spending four hours a day in idling autos. That might equate to high speed rail in Alberta since Rachel Notley is studying expansion of the QEII - why not a train instead? Schools need to be built. Hospitals need to be built. The list is long. <br /><br />The most interesting aspect of this is how similar this all is to the situation that FDR found himself in in 1933. Roosevelt's New Deal that was also opposed by the conservatives of the day. There is no denying that it created jobs, jobs that built projects that made the USA great. <br /><br />Harper's disciples can't figure this out. Harper will never put a dime into any of these things and somehow that makes them happy. I find it reminiscent the times I have driven through towns in the southern USA where they have dirt streets (not even gravel), no street lights, and everyone has their own septic tank and water deliveries. Asking about it at the local diner, I was told that no one would vote for the improvements to be made. It wasn't that it was a poor district, but no one wanted anyone else in town to benefit from their dollars. It has apparently been an impasse for over fifty years. <br />
<br />
Harper Cons are starting to look like those stingy stubborn folks who never wanted anyone else to have the benefit of a penny of their tax dollars. There is a comfortable middle point where we all get to enjoy the benefits of everyone giving a little to make things better for all. <br />
<br />
Trudeau is saying he will make the improvements that have been long needed. The deficit he is talking about is no worse than what Harper has already created during his ten years in office. After starting off with a surplus in 2007-08 of $9.6 billion, the Harper government delivered a deficit of $5.8 billion in 2008-09 during the global recession.<br /><br />In subsequent years, his Conservative governments generated shortfalls of $55.6 billion in 2009-10; $33.4 billion in 2010-11; $26.3 billion in 2011-12; $18.4 billion for 2012-13; and $5.2 billion for 2013-14.<br /><br />To summarize, Harper-led governments ran a string of six straight deficits between 2008-09 and 2013-14.<br /><br />But looking beyond 2013-14, the numbers have yet to be released, which means it’s difficult to predict the final results with absolute certainty.<br /><br />In July, the parliamentary budget officer crunched numbers based on the Bank of Canada’s downgraded economic growth forecast. It found the federal government was actually on track to run a $1-billion deficit in 2015-16.<br /><br />But with the 2015-16 fiscal year barely five months old, it’s still early to pin down what the final figure will be.<br /><br />In fact, Canadians won’t know whether their government delivered an eighth consecutive shortfall until about a year from now – or roughly 11 months past the Oct. 19 election date.<br /><br />Justin Trudeau says a Liberal government won't balance the books for three straight years but will double spending on infrastructure to jump-start economic growth.<br /><br />The Liberal fiscal plan would see "a modest short-term deficit" of less than $10 billion for each of the first three years and then a balanced budget by the 2019-2020 fiscal year.<br /><br />This is a very Keynsian approach and has its supporters and detractors. Stephen Harper defended his government’s 2010 economic stimulus package in response to a recent Fraser Institute report claiming the stimulus had no effect on GDP.<br /><br />"We’re not going to act on the basis of ideology, we’re going to act on the basis of what the economy needs. And that is what we have done." – Stephen Harper<br /><br />That indicates that Harper does believe in economic stimulus packages, but only when he does it. <br /><br />So how does it all happen? The places a government can get its money from are: taxes, debt, income (royalties on resources), fines, or inflation.<br /><br />Taxes are pretty obvious. The government demands money from every citizen who worked or earned money in any way during the previous year.<br /><br />Debt is money the government borrows. It is the favorite instrument of governments big and small to get money by promising to tax later to pay. Problem is by borrowing, they shrink the debt market. Thereby leaving less money for businesses and people to borrow for things like expanding their businesses or buying a house on credit.<br /><br />Income is money that government earns by participating in the free market. This can be anything from contracted services to royalties on natural resource exploitation. <br /><br />Fines are pretty self explanatory, being money collected as punishment for crimes committed by individuals or corporations. <br /><br />Inflation is the last way that government can raise money. This is what happens when government simply prints new money and issues it. The inflation is a sort of invisible tax. It’s a tax because it reduces the value of all the money everywhere at the same time. <br /><br />If government prints money at a rate that keeps the value of money constant, then they can raise money without hurting anyone. This is the “secret” that the US Founding Fathers discovered a couple of centuries ago. It’s why they didn’t want the banks to be allowed to expand the currency through fractional reserve banking. It’s why they resisted creating a Federal Central Bank until 1913. President Lincoln paid for the Civil War without collecting a single penny in taxes using this method. It’s how the Continental Congress paid the soldiers in the Revolutionary War without borrowing a penny. Inflation at a proper rate will create money without causing any harm to the people. This is the reason that governments push countries along in a constant state of inflation, except that now, they don't get the benefit of the currency expansion because both the US and Canada (as well as most of the world) have allowed the banks to be the key issuer of new currency. In Canada this happened in 1973. <br /><br />All this to say that I don't see Trudeau's spending plans as dumb or foolish. They are projects that we need, they have to be paid for sometime, somehow. We may as well do it now and make jobs out of it rather than give the top 1% of rich folks tax breaks that they will never spend to build anything or to hire anyone. <br /><br />Rich folks find places to hide their money, poor folks have to spend every dime to get though the month. <br />
<br />
At his inauguration in March 1933, Roosevelt declared in his lilting style, "Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is, fear itself — needless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." <br /><br />Harper is in full economic retreat.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-58672362951959030162013-01-03T00:08:00.000-07:002013-01-03T00:08:12.077-07:00Harper Launches Major First Nations Termination Plan<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>If other items in the constitution require all of the
provinces to agree on changes, why are the portions pertaining to aboriginal
rights allowed to be changed through convenient legislation?<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982<a href="http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-18.html#f80" title="Footnote 80"><sup><br />
</sup></a>1982, c. 11 (U.K.), Schedule B<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>PART II<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>RIGHTS OF THE ABORIGINAL PEOPLES OF CANADA<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Marginal note: Recognition of existing aboriginal and
treaty rights<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>35.</b> (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty
rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l8 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Definition of <i>“aboriginal peoples of
Canada”</i><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
(2) In this Act, <i>“aboriginal peoples of Canada”</i> includes
the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l8 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b>Marginal note: Land claims agreements<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
(3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) <i>“treaty
rights”</i> includes rights that now exist by way of land claims
agreements or may be so acquired.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l8 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b>Marginal note: Aboriginal and treaty rights are guaranteed
equally to both sexes</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are
guaranteed equally to male and female persons. <a href="http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-18.html#f96" title="Footnote 96">(96)</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<b><span style="font-size: 18.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Harper
Launches Major First Nations Termination Plan: As Negotiating Tables Legitimize
Canada’s Colonialism<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">BY <a href="http://intercontinentalcry.org/author/rdiabo/" title="Posts by Russell Diabo">RUSSELL DIABO</a> • NOV 9, 2012<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Harper Launches Major First Nations Termination Plan: As
Negotiating Tables Legitimize Canada’s Colonialism<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">BY <a href="http://intercontinentalcry.org/author/rdiabo/" title="Posts by Russell Diabo">RUSSELL DIABO</a> • NOV 9, 2012</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://intercontinentalcry.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/709px-Canada_flag_map_svg.png"><b><i>A
vision of the future? If there is no organized protest and resistance to the
Harper government’s termination plan, then yes.</i></b></a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>The following editorial was originally featured in the <b>First
Nations Strategic Bulletin</b> (FNSB), June-October 2012. You can
view/download this latest edition of the FNSB by clicking the following link: <a href="http://intercontinentalcry.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/FNSB-July-Oct-12.pdf">FNSB
June-October 2012</a></i><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On September 4th the Harper government clearly signaled its
intention to:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
1) Focus all its efforts to assimilate First Nations into
the existing federal and provincial orders of government of Canada;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
2) Terminate the constitutionally protected and internationally
recognized Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty rights of First Nations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Termination</b> in this context means the ending of
First Nations pre-existing sovereign status through federal coercion of First
Nations into Land Claims and Self-Government Final Agreements that convert
First Nations into municipalities, their reserves into fee simple lands and
extinguishment of their Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To do this the Harper government announced three new policy
measures:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><i>A “<b>results based</b></i>” approach to
negotiating Modern Treaties and Self-Government Agreements. This is an
assessment process of 93 negotiation tables across Canada to determine who will
and who won’t agree to terminate Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty rights under
the terms of Canada’s Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government policies. For
those tables who won’t agree, negotiations will end as the federal government
withdraws from the table and takes funding with them.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->First Nation regional and national political
organizations will have their core funding cut and capped. For regional First
Nation political organizations the core funding will be capped at $500,000
annually. For some regional organizations this will result in a funding cut of
$1 million or more annually. This will restrict the ability of Chiefs and
Executives of Provincial Territorial organization’s to organize and/or
advocate for First Nations rights and interests.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->First Nation Band and Tribal Council funding for
advisory services will be eliminated over the next two years further crippling
the ability of Chiefs and Councils and Tribal Council executives to analyze and
assess the impacts of federal and provincial policies and legislation on
Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty rights.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l6 level1 lfo2; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These three new policy measures are on top of the following
unilateral federal legislation the Harper government is imposing over First
Nations:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l7 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .25in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b>Bill C-27: First Nations Financial
Transparency Act</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l7 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b>Bill C-45: <i>Jobs and Growth Act, 2012</i> [Omnibus
Bill includes Indian Act amendments regarding voting on-reserve lands
surrenders/designations]</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l7 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--> <b>Bill S-2: Family Homes on Reserves and
Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l7 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--> <b>Bill S-6: <i>First Nations
Elections Act</i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l7 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--> <b>Bill S-8: Safe Drinking Water for First
Nations</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l7 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--> <b>Bill C-428: Indian Act Amendment and
Replacement Act [Private Conservative MP’s Bill, but supported by Harper
government]</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l7 level1 lfo3; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then there are the <b>Senate Public Bills</b>:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><b>Bill S-207: An Act to amend the Interpretation
Act (non derogation of aboriginal and treaty rights)</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--> <b>Bill S-212: First Nations
Self-Government Recognition Bill</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo4; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Harper government’s Bills listed above are designed to
undermine the collective rights of First Nations by focusing on individual rights.
This is the “<b><i>modern legislative framework</i></b>” the Conservatives
promised in 2006. The 2006 Conservative Platform promised to:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>Replace the Indian Act (and related legislation) with
a modern legislative framework which provides for the devolution of full legal
and democratic responsibility to aboriginal Canadians for their own affairs
within the Constitution, including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.</i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><br /></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course “<b><i>modern</i></b>” in Conservative terms means
assimilation of First Nations by termination of their collective rights and
off-loading federal responsibilities onto the First Nations themselves and the
provinces.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One Bill that hasn’t been introduced into Parliament yet,
but is still expected, is the <b>First Nations’ Private Ownership Act
(FNPOA)</b>. This private property concept for Indian Reserves—which has been
peddled by the likes of <b>Tom Flanagan</b> and tax proponent and
former Kamloops Chief <b>Manny Jules</b>—is also a core plank of the
Harper government’s 2006 electoral platform.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The 2006 Conservative Aboriginal Platform promised that if
elected a Harper government would:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>Support the development of individual property
ownership on reserves, to encourage lending for private housing and businesses.</i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><br /></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The long-term goals set out in the Harper government’s
policy and legislative initiatives listed above are not new; they are at least
as old as the <b>Indian Act</b> and were articulated in the federal <b>1969
White Paper on Indian Policy</b>, which set out a plan to terminate Indian
rights as the time.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Previous Termination Plans: 1969 White Paper & Buffalo
Jump of 1980’s<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The objectives of the 1969 White Paper on Indian Policy were
to:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Assimilate First Nations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Remove legislative recognition.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Neutralize constitutional status.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Impose taxation.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Encourage provincial encroachment.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Eliminate Reserve lands & extinguish
Aboriginal Title.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Economically underdevelop communities.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Dismantle Treaties.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 3pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As First Nations galvanized across Canada to fight the
Trudeau Liberal government’s proposed 1969 termination policy the federal
government was forced to consider a strategy on how to calm the Indian storm of
protest.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a memo dated April 1, 1970, <b>David Munro</b>, an
Assistant Deputy Minister of Indian Affairs on Indian Consultation and
Negotiations, advised his political masters <b>Jean Chrétien</b> and <b>Pierre
Trudeau</b>, as follows:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>. . . in our definition of objectives and goals, not
only as they appear in formal documents, but also as stated or even implied in
informal memoranda, draft planning papers, or causal conversation. We must stop
talking about having the objective or goal of phasing out in five years. . . We
can still believe with just as much strength and sincerity that the [White
Paper] policies we propose are the right ones. . .</i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><br /></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>The final [White Paper] proposal, which is for the
elimination of special status in legislation, must be relegated far into the
future. . . my conclusion is that we need not change the [White Paper] policy
content, but we should put varying degrees of emphasis on its several
components and we should try to discuss it in terms of its components rather
than as a whole. . . we should adopt somewhat different tactics in relation to
[the White Paper] policy, but that we should not depart from its essential
content. (Emphasis added)</i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><br /></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the early 1970’s, the Trudeau Liberal government did back
down publicly on implementing the <b>1969 White Paper on Indian Policy</b>,
but as we can see from Mr. Munro’s advice the federal bureaucracy changed the
timeline from five years to a long-term implementation of the 1969 White Paper
objectives of assimilation/termination.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the mid-1980’s the Mulroney Conservative government
resurrected the elements of the 1969 White Paper on Indian Policy, through a
Cabinet memo.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 1985, a secret federal Cabinet submission was leaked to
the media by a DIAND employee. The Report was nicknamed the “<b>Buffalo Jump of
the 1980’s</b>” by another federal official. The nickname referred to the
effect of the recommendations in the secret Cabinet document, which if adopted,
would lead Status Indians to a cultural death -- hence the metaphor.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Buffalo Jump Report proposed a management approach for
First Nations policy and<br />
programs, which had the following intent:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Limiting & eventually terminating the
federal trust obligations;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Reducing federal expenditures for First Nations,
under funding programs, and prohibiting deficit financing;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Shifting responsibility and costs for First
Nations services to provinces and "advanced bands" through
co-management, tri-partite, and community self-government agreements;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->"Downsizing" of the Department of
Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND) through a devolution of program
administration to "advanced bands" and transfer of programs to other
federal departments;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Negotiating municipal community self-government
agreements with First Nations which would result in the First Nation government
giving up their Constitutional status as a sovereign government and becoming a
municipality subject to provincial or territorial laws;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Extinguishing aboriginal title and rights in
exchange for fee simple title under provincial or territorial law while giving
the province or territory underlying title to First Nations lands.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Mulroney government’s “<b>Buffalo Jump</b>” plan was
temporarily derailed due the 1990 “Oka Crisis”. Mulroney responded to the “<b>Oka
Crisis</b>” with his “<b>Four Pillars</b>” of Native Policy:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Accelerating the settlement of land claims;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Improving the economic and social conditions on
Reserves;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Strengthening the relationships between
Aboriginal Peoples and governments;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Examining the concerns of Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples
in contemporary Canadian life.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 1991, <b>Prime Minister Brian Mulroney</b> also
announced the establishment of a <b>Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples</b>,
which began its work later that year; the establishment of an <b>Indian Claims
Commission</b> to review Specific Claims; the establishment of a <b>BC
Task Force on Claims</b>, which would form the basis for the <b>BC Treaty
Commission Process</b>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 1992, Aboriginal organizations and the federal government
agreed, as part of the <b>1992 Charlottetown Accord</b>, on amendments to
the <b>Constitution Act, 1982</b> that would have included
recognition of the inherent right of self-government for Aboriginal people. For
the first time, Aboriginal organizations had been full participants in the
talks; however, the Accord was rejected in a national referendum.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With the failure of Canadian constitutional reform in 1992,
for the last twenty years, the federal government—whether Liberal or
Conservative—has continued to develop policies and legislation based upon the
White Paper/Buffalo Jump objectives and many First Nations have regrettably
agreed to compromise their constitutional/international rights by negotiating
under Canada’s termination policies.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Canada’s Termination Policies Legitimized by Negotiation
Tables<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It has been thirty years since Aboriginal and Treaty rights
have been “<b><i>recognized and affirmed</i></b>” in section 35 of Canada’s
constitution. Why hasn’t the constitutional protection for First Nations’
Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty rights been implemented on the ground?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One answer to this question is, following the failure of the <b>First
Ministers’ Conferences on Aboriginal Matters in the 1980’s</b>, many First
Nations agreed to compromise their section 35 Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty
rights by entering into or negotiating Modern Treaties and/or Self-government
Agreements under Canada’s unilateral negotiation terms.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These Modern Treaties and Self-Government Agreements not
only contribute to emptying out section 35 of Canada’s constitution of any
significant legal, political or economic meaning. Final settlement agreements
are then used as precedents against other First Nations’ who are negotiating.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moreover, Canada’s Land Claims and Self-Government policies
are far below the international standards set out in the Articles of the <b>United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)</b>. Canada
publicly endorsed the <b>UNDRIP</b> in November 2010, but obviously
Canada’s interpretation of the <b>UNDRIP</b> is different than that of
most First Nations, considering their unilateral legislation and policy
approach.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Canada voted against <b>UNDRIP</b> on Sept. 13,
2007, stating that the <b>UNDRIP</b> was inconsistent with Canada’s
domestic policies, especially the Articles dealing with Indigenous Peoples’
Self-Determination, Land Rights and Free, Prior Informed Consent.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Canada’s position on <b>UNDRIP</b> now is that
they can interpret it as they please, although the principles in <b>UNDRIP</b> form
part of international not domestic law.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The federal strategy is to maintain the <b>Indian Act</b> (with
amendments) as the main federal law to control and manage First Nations. The
only way out of the <b>Indian Act</b> for First Nations is to
negotiate an agreement under Canada’s one-sided Land Claims and/or
Self-Government policies. These Land Claims/Self-Government Agreements all
require the termination of Indigenous rights for some land, cash and delegated
jurisdiction under the existing federal and provincial orders of government.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Canada has deemed that it will not recognize the
pre-existing sovereignty of First Nations or allow for a distinct First Nations
order of government based upon section 35 of Canada’s constitution.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Through blackmail, bribery or force, Canada is using the
poverty of First Nations to obtain concessions from First Nations who want out
of the <b>Indian Act</b> by way of Land Claims/Self- Government
Agreements. All of these Agreements conform to Canada’s interpretation of
section 35 of Canada’s constitution, which is to legally, politically and
economically convert First Nations into what are essentially ethnic
municipalities.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first groups in Canada who have agreed to compromise
their section 35 Inherent and Aboriginal rights through Modern Treaties have
created an organization called the <b>Land Claims Agreement Coalition</b>.
The Coalition Members are:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Council of Yukon First Nations (representing 9
land claim organizations in the Yukon)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Gwich’in Tribal Council<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Inuvialuit Regional Corporation<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kwanlin Dun First Nation<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Maa-nulth First Nations<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Makivik Corporation<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Naskapi Nation of Kawawachikamach<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Nisga’a Nation<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Nunatsiavut Government<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Sahtu Secretariat Inc.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Tlicho Government<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Tsawwassen First Nation<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 6pt 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The <b>Land Claims Agreement Coalition</b> Members
came together because the federal government wasn’t properly implementing any
of their Modern Treaties. So the Coalition essentially became a lobby group to
collectively pressure the federal government to respect their Modern Treaties.
According to Members of the Coalition Modern Treaty implementation problems
persist today.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The fact that Canada has already broken the Modern Treaties shouldn't inspire confidence for those First Nations who are already lined up
at Canada’s Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government negotiation tables.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to the federal <b>Department of Aboriginal
Affairs</b> there are 93 Modern Treaty and/or Self-Government negotiation
tables across Canada </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/[http://www.aadncaandc.gc.ca/eng/1346782327802/1346782485058].">[http://www.aadncaandc.gc.ca/eng/1346782327802/1346782485058].</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Those First Nations who are negotiating at these 93 tables
are being used by the federal government (and the provinces/Territories) to
legitimize its Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government policies, which are
based upon extinguishment of Aboriginal Title and termination of Inherent,
Aboriginal and Treaty rights.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The First Nations who have been refusing to negotiate and
are resisting the federal Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government negotiating
policies are routinely ignored by the federal government and kept under control
and managed through the Indian Act (with amendments).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Attempts by non-negotiating First Nations to reform the
federal <b>Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government policies</b> aren't taken seriously by the federal government because there are so many First Nations
who have already compromised their Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty rights by
agreeing to negotiate under the terms and funding conditions of these
Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government policies.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For example, following the <b>1997 Supreme Court of
Canada Delgamuukw decision</b>, which recognized that Aboriginal Title exists
in Canada, the Assembly of First Nations tried to reform the Comprehensive
Claims policy to be consistent with the Supreme Court of Canada <b>Delgamuukw</b> decision.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, the then <b>Minister of Indian Affairs, Robert
Nault</b> on December 22, 2000, wrote a letter addressed to then <b>Chief
Arthur Manuel</b> that essentially said why should the federal government
change the Comprehensive Claims policy if First Nations are prepared to
negotiate under it as it is?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A fair question: why do First Nations remain at negotiation
tables that ultimately lead to the termination of their peoples Inherent and
Aboriginal rights, especially since it appears that Modern Treaties are
routinely broken after they are signed by the federal government?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Many of these negotiations are in British Columbia where
despite the past twenty years of negotiations the <b>B.C. Treaty process</b> has
produced two small Modern Treaties, <b>Tsawwassan</b> and <b>Maa’Nulth</b>.
The <b>Nisga’a Treaty</b> was concluded in 2000, outside of the <b>B.C.
Treaty process</b>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
All of these Modern Treaties have resulted in extinguishing
Aboriginal Title, converting reserve lands into fee simple, removing tax
exemptions, converting bands into municipalities, among other impacts on
Inherent and Aboriginal rights.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Harper Government’s Termination Plan<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Aside from the unilateral legislation being imposed, or the
funding cuts and caps to First Nation’s and their political organizations, the
September 4, 2012, announcement of a “<b><i>results based</i></b>” approach to
Modern Treaties and Self-Government negotiations amounts to a “<b><i>take it or
leave it</i></b>” declaration on the part of the Harper government to the
negotiating First Nations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Canada’s Comprehensive Claims Policy</b> requires
First Nations to borrow money from the federal government to negotiate their “<b><i>land
claims</i></b>”. According to the federal government:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i>To date, the total of outstanding loans to Aboriginal
groups from Canada to support their participation in negotiations is $711
million. This represents a significant financial liability for the Aboriginal
community. In addition, the government of Canada provides $60 million in grants
and contributions to Aboriginal groups every year for negotiations.</i></b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><br /></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is Canada’s policies that forced First Nations to borrow
money to negotiate their “<b><i>claims</i></b>”, so the “<b><i>financial
liability</i></b>” was a policy measure designed by the federal government to
pressure First Nations into settling their “<b><i>claims</i></b>” faster. As
the federal government puts it, the Comprehensive Claims negotiation process
has instead “<b><i>spawned a negotiation industry that has no incentive to
reach agreement</i></b>.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>This accumulated debt of $711 million</b> along with
the <b>$60 million annual in grants and contributions</b> have
compromised those negotiating First Nations and their leaders to the point that
they are unable or unwilling to seriously confront the Harper government’s
termination plan.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Over 50% of the Comprehensive Claims are located in B.C.</b>and
the <b>First Nations Summit</b> represents the negotiating First
Nations in B.C., although some negotiating First Nations have now joined the <b>Union
of B.C. Indian Chiefs (UBCIC)</b>, thus blurring the historic distinctions
between to two political organizations. The latter organization previously
vigorously opposed the <b>B.C. Treaty process</b>, but now the <b>UBCIC</b> remains
largely silent about it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These two main political organizations -- <b>the First
Nations Summit and the UBCIC</b> -- have now joined together into the <b>B.C.
First Nations Leadership Council</b>, further blending the rights and interests
of their respective member communities together, not taking into account
whether they are in or out of the <b>B.C. Treaty process</b>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This may partially explain why the Chiefs who are not in the <b>B.C.
Treaty process</b> also remain largely silent about the Harper
government’s “<b><i>results based</i></b>’ approach to Modern Treaties and
Self-Government negotiations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
First Nations in British Columbia are failing to capitalize
on that fact, that since the <b>Delgamuukw Decision</b>, the governments
have to list unresolved land claims and litigation as a contingent liability.
Such liabilities can affect Canada’s sovereign credit rating and provincial
credit ratings. To counter this outstanding liability, Canada points to the <b>British
Columbia Treaty Process</b> as the avenue how they are dealing with this
liability, pointing to the fact that First Nations are borrowing substantive
amounts to negotiate with the governments.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another recent example of how disconnected B.C. First
Nations and their organizations are on international versus domestic policy and
law, is the First Nations’ outcry over the recent <b>Canada-China Treaty</b>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The B.C. Chiefs and their organizations are publicly
denouncing the <b>Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection
Agreement</b> as adversely impacting on Aboriginal Title and Rights, yet
they say or do nothing about Harper’s accelerated termination plan. It seems
the negotiating First Nations are more worried about the <b>Canada-China
Treaty</b> blocking a future land claims deal under the <b>B.C.
Treaty process</b>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Chiefs and their organizations at the <b>B.C.
Treaty process </b>negotiation tables have had twenty years to negotiate the “<b><i>recognition
and affirmation</i></b>” of Aboriginal Title and Rights, but this continues to
be impossible under Canada’s policies aiming at the extinguishment of
collective rights. As a result only two extinguishment Treaties have resulted
from the process. Even <b>Sophie Pierre, Chair of the B.C. Treaty Commission</b> has
said “<b><i>If we can't do it, it's about time we faced the obvious - I guess
we don't have it, so shut her down</i></b>”.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By most accounts the twenty year old <b>B.C. Treaty
process</b> has been a failure. It has served the governments’ purpose of
countering their contingent liabilities regarding Indigenous land rights. Yet
it seems the negotiating First Nations are so compromised by their federal
loans and dependent on the negotiations funding stream that they are unable or
unwilling to withdraw from the tables en masse and make real on the demand that
the Harper government reform its Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government
policies to be consistent with the Articles of the <b>UNDRIP</b>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The same can also be said for the negotiating First Nations
in the Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic regions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Chiefs who are not in the B.C., Quebec or Atlantic
negotiating processes have not responded much, if at all, to Harper’s “<b><i>results
based</i></b>” approach to Modern Treaties and Self-Government. The
non-negotiating Chiefs seem to be more interested in managing programs and
services issues than their Aboriginal Title and Rights. As one federal official
put it, the Chiefs are involved in the elements of the <b>1969 White Paper
on Indian Policy</b> like economic and social development while ignoring
the main White Paper objective—termination of First Nations legal status.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Conclusion</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Given their silence over the Harper government’s “<b><i>results
based</i></b>” “<b><i>take it or leave it</i></b>” negotiations approach, it
seems many of the negotiating First Nations at the Comprehensive Claims and/or
Self-Government tables are still contemplating concluding Agreements under
Canada’s termination policies.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This can only lead to further division among First Nations
across Canada as more First Nations compromise their constitutional and
international rights by consenting to final settlement agreements under the
terms and conditions of Canada’s termination policies, while undermining the
political positions of the non-negotiating First Nations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the meantime, Harper’s government will continue pawning
off Indigenous lands and resources in the midst of a financial crisis though
free trade and foreign investment protection agreements, which will secure
foreign corporate access to lands and resources and undermine Indigenous
Rights.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some First Nation leaders and members have criticised <b>AFN
National Chief Shawn Atleo</b> for agreeing to a joint approach with the
Harper government, including the <b>Crown-First Nations Gathering (CFNG)</b>,
but to be fair, the Chiefs across Canada did nothing to pressure Prime Minister
Harper going into the <b>CFNG</b>. Instead, many Chiefs used the occasion
as a photo op posing with the Prime Minister.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The negotiating First Nations who are in joint processes
with Canada seem to be collectively heading to the cliff of the “<b><i>Buffalo
Jump</i></b>” as they enter termination agreements with Canada emptying out
section 35 in the process.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Much of the criticism of <b>AFN National Chief Atleo</b> has
come from the Prairie Treaty Chiefs. Interestingly, if one looks at the federal
chart of the 93 negotiation tables
[<a href="http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1346782327802/1346782485058">http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1346782327802/1346782485058</a>] not too many
First Nations from historic Treaty areas are involved in the Self-Government
tables, except for the Ontario region where the <b>Union of Ontario
Indians</b> and <b>Nisnawbe-Aski Nation</b> are negotiating
Self-Government agreements.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As a result of the September 4, 2012 announcements regarding
changes to Modern Treaties and Self-Government negotiations, cuts and caps to
funding First Nations political organizations and unilateral legislation
initiatives, it is obvious that Prime Minister Harper has tricked the AFN
National Chief and First Nations by showing that the <b>CFNG</b> “<b><i>outcomes</i></b>”
were largely meaningless.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One commitment that <b>Prime Minister Harper</b> made
at the <b>CFNG</b>—which he will probably keep—Is making a progress report in
January 2013. The Prime Minister will probably announce the progress being made
with all of the negotiating tables across Canada, along with his legislative
initiatives.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It appears First Nations are at the proverbial “<b><i>end of
the trail</i></b>” as the Chiefs seem to be either co-opted or afraid to
challenge the Harper government. Most grassroots peoples aren’t even fully
informed about the dangerous situation facing them and their future
generations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The only way to counter the Harper government is to:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->have all negotiating First Nations suspend their
talks; and<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->organize coordinated National Days of Action to
register First Nations opposition to the Harper government’s termination plan;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Demand Canada suspend all First Nations
legislation in Parliament, cease introducing new Bills and<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Change Canada’s Land Claims and Self-Government
Policies to “recognize and affirm” the Inherent, Aboriginal and Treaty Rights
of First Nations, including respect and implementation of the Historic
Treaties.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><b>If there is no organized protest and resistance to the
Harper government’s termination plan, First Nations should accept their place
at the bottom of all social, cultural and economic indicators in Canada, just
buy into Harper’s jobs and economic action plan—and be quiet about their
rights.</b><o:p></o:p></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><br /></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
*<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>The <b>First Nations Strategic Bulletin</b> is
a publication of the First Nations Strategic Policy Counsel, an informal group
of individuals who are practitioners in either First Nations policy or law. The
publication is a volunteer non-profit effort and is part of a series. For Back
Issues Go To: Canada Library & Archives - Electronic Collections.</i><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Russell Diabo is the Publisher and Editor of First Nations
Strategic Bulletin. He can be reached via E-mail: at rdiabo(at)rogers.com</span></i><span style="font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-15760184976946364712013-01-02T22:40:00.000-07:002013-01-02T22:40:03.213-07:00I AM CANADIAN!<br />
<div class="headline_area">
<span style="font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://activehistory.ca/2013/01/i-am-canadian-because-of-treaties-with-indigenous-nations/">http://activehistory.ca/2013/01/i-am-canadian-because-of-treaties-with-indigenous-nations/</a></span><br />
<h1 class="entry-title">
<span style="font-size: small; font-weight: normal;">This is a repost from the above website and represents my viewpoints regarding "Idle No More!"</span></h1>
<h1 class="entry-title">
I AM CANADIAN! (Because of treaties with Indigenous Nations)</h1>
<div class="headline_meta">
by <span class="author vcard"><a class="url fn" href="http://activehistory.ca/author/guest/">Guest</a></span> on <abbr class="published" title="2013-01-02">January 2, 2013</abbr></div>
</div>
<div class="format_text entry-content">
<em>By Tobold Rollo </em><br />
<em><br /></em>
[This post first appeared on Tobold Rollo's <a href="http://www.toboldrollo.com/2013/01/01/i-am-canadian-because-of-treaties-with-indigenous-nations/">website</a>.]<br />
<br />
As Chief Theresa Spence continues her hunger strike, her request that
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Governor General meet with Chiefs
to discuss treaties has many Canadians wondering what relevance
treaties could possibly hold today. Anticipating this uncertainty, I
wrote a <a href="http://getfile6.posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/temp-2012-12-20/nlpDsuuInlFIuzDpuiatgbugJxiJFxHpIeIsaFfldxitzfouovbxtGGlCgnj/idlenomore_handout.pdf">pamphlet</a>
with the Mohawk scholar, Taiaiake Alfred, which was widely distributed
both in the US and in Canada during recent ‘Idle No More’ events. The
pamphlet laid out in clear and concise language the concrete practical
and legislative steps necessary to advance the goal of reconciliation.
The outline was based on the recommendations laid out in the 1996 <a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb9924-e.htm"><i>Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples</i></a>.
This Royal Commission, the most comprehensive and expensive in Canada’s
history, determined that achieving the goal of reconciliation
necessarily entails the restoration of a ‘treaty relationship’.<br />
<br />
I recall being a bit confused but mostly just ambivalent the first
time I heard Indigenous peoples in Canada invoke the concept of a
‘treaty relationship’. I was twelve years old and it was the height of
what would come to be known as the <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categories/politics/civil-unrest/the-oka-crisis-1/topic-the-oka-crisis.html">Oka Crisis</a>.
To me, treaties were boring relics – artifacts excavated from Canadian
history – of interest to history teachers. As I grew older, I was fairly
certain that treaties were irrelevant to modern Canada and to modern
citizens like myself. What relevance they <i>might</i> hold did not seem
to bear on my life in the same way as did taxes or elections. That
youthful confusion and ambivalence was displaced over the years by a
realization in my adult life that if Canada was to claim legitimacy as a
<em>nation</em> as opposed to a complex colonial <em>encampment</em>,
that legitimacy must derive from the founding treaties that made Canada
possible. Accordingly, I recognized that my identity as a Canadian, as
opposed to a mere occupier or colonizer, was dependent on the status of
those treaties. The stakes couldn’t be higher.<br />
<span id="more-10047"></span><br />
I had always understood that agreements made before I was born formed
the conditions of my Canadian citizenship and identity. I am Canadian by
pure accident of birth, yet still I recognized that I was born into a
society constituted by certain historical events, acts, and agreements
that more or less structure the obligations we have to others. Take our
relationship to the United States and to Americans, for example. I
acknowledge that Canada has no right to impose any territorial,
political or cultural arrangement upon them. Likewise, they have no
right to impose theirs upon us. Why? Because of treaties and agreements,
some old and some new. Specifically, because of the <a href="http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/treaty-of-ghent">1814 Treaty of Ghent</a>, the <a href="http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/convention-of-1818">Convention of 1818</a>, the <a href="http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/websterashburton-treaty">Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842</a>, and the <a href="http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/oregon-treaty">Oregon Treaty of 1846</a>,
which established the territories and borders of Canada. Within this
context, Canada was constituted as a nation through various acts and
declarations, e.g., The <a href="http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/royal-proclamation-of-1763">Royal Proclamation of 1763</a>, the <a href="http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/constitution-act-1867">British North America Act of 1867</a>, and the <a href="http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/index.html">Constitution Act of 1982</a>.<br />
These treaties and constitutional events reflect historical compacts
between peoples – agreements that established our right to exist
autonomously as Canadians rather than as British subjects or Americans.
Of course, there are still a handful of disagreements over the details
of the treaties between the US and Canada (e.g. the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixon_Entrance">Dixon Entrance</a>),
but the lack of precise territorial borders, or cultural borders for
that matter, does not take away from the spirit of the agreement. A
number of international agreements detail our right to cultural
integrity as well. The US is obliged by virtue of being a signatory to
various international treaties and UN declarations not to organize any
political assault on other cultures. We are distinct nations – our
covenants are nation-to-nation. Our disagreements – including our very
borders – are not settled, even after centuries of dialogue. Yet we
respect each other as legitimate and autonomous in the absence of
perfect borders.<br />
<br />
The point I wish to make here is that the legitimacy of Canada and of
Canadians as a people is constituted by historical treaties and
agreements that contemporary citizens did not consent to but
nevertheless benefit from and are obligated to uphold. We recognize the
violation of such treaties as unjust. Imagine if citizens of Washington
State decided that because they did not <i>personally</i> sign the
Treaty of 1818 they could unilaterally assert ownership over the
majority of British Columbia. Ridiculous, right? Or imagine if the
United States decided to divest Canada of its traditional political
structures and impose its own, arguing that the treaties that safeguard
our borders and cultures were established in a distant past and so
cannot be taken seriously today. Imagine if the US effectively
interpreted our defining treaties like China’s so called ‘<a href="http://www.tibetjustice.org/materials/china/china3.html">Seventeen Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet</a>’, which most sane people recognize as China’s transparent attempt to justify the imperial, colonial <a href="http://www.friendsoftibet.org/articles/china.html">occupation of Tibet</a>.
Consider China’s claim that Tibet is unfit to govern itself, or that
something called “unity” is always preferable to divisiveness. Sound
familiar?<br />
<br />
I came to see that a similarly ridiculous and transparent disregard
for official treaties and more informal conventions is reflected in our
dealings with Indigenous nations, whom we once acknowledged as organized
and autonomous political nations. Understanding the <i>present</i>
means coming to terms with the fact that we stand today in violation of
these original agreements, in violation of the 1763 Royal Proclamation/<a href="http://www.canadiana.ca/citm/themes/aboriginals/aboriginals4_e.html#niagara">1764 Treaty at Niagara</a>; in violation of international agreements such as 2007 <a href="http://social.un.org/index/IndigenousPeoples.aspx">UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples</a>, and in violation of our own 1982 Constitution Act <a href="http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-16.html">sec. 35(1)</a>.
I was struck by the realization that you and I are involved in a
criminal neglect of the very treaty obligations undertaken in the course
of identifying ourselves as a people; if we ignore them we only exist
on this land as illegitimate occupiers.<br />
<br />
Instead of taking responsibility and recognizing the foundational
status of its treaties, Canada continues to enforce a form of colonial
rule over Indigenous peoples, most straightforwardly through legislation
contained in the archaic <a href="http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-5/">Indian Act</a>.
Problems abound in band politics defined by the Indian Act, a fact that
is entirely predictable and unsurprising. Is there any doubt that
Tibet, too, has problems with political corruption? Is there any doubt
that any demand for greater ‘accountability’ or ‘transparency’ in
Tibetan governance misses the point that Chinese interference in Tibet
is the problem?<br />
<br />
But lest you think the situation is too far gone – and before you
acquiesce to the permanence of injustice while shrugging your shoulders
at such seemingly vast and intractable problems – remember that the
research has already been done, the difficult conversations have already
taken place, and the solutions are in the books, waiting to be
instituted. They exist in the spirit of the original treaties and
agreements, and even in our Constitution, but they are also delineated
in concrete institutional terms in the four-year <a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb9924-e.htm"><i>Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples</i></a>.
The practical recommendations articulated in the RCAP offer a path
forward. It is not perfect, but then no agreement is. Just as current
disputes between Canada and the US are informed and constrained by an
old treaty relationship that defines us, the dialogue that will
necessarily go on between Canada and Indigenous nations in the future
must be informed and constrained by the treaties we have made – the very
treaties that establish the legitimacy of Canada and of being Canadian.<br />
<br />
<em><a href="http://www.toboldrollo.com/">Tobold Rollo</a> is a PhD
candidate in the department of political science at the University of
Toronto. He specializes in political theory, specifically democratic
theory, and Canadian politics. He co-authored the <a href="http://ipsmo.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/idle-no-more-pamphlet/">Resetting and Restoring the Relationship between Indigenous Peoples and Canada</a> Idle No More pamphlet with <a href="http://web.uvic.ca/igov/index.php/faculty">Taiaiake Alfred</a>.</em></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-66849132451728271032013-01-02T22:25:00.000-07:002013-01-02T22:25:28.653-07:00Idle No More: Hints of a Global Super-Movement <span class="arial_11 color_696969">This is important to me and to my fellow Canadians. I repost this article below.</span><br />
<span class="arial_11 color_696969"><br /></span>
<span class="arial_11 color_696969"><br /></span>
<span class="arial_11 color_696969">by Jacob Devaney Posted: 01/02/2013 4:34 pm Huffington Post </span><br />
<span class="arial_11 color_696969"><br /></span>
<span class="arial_11 color_696969"></span><br />
What started as a murmur in early October from First Nations People
in Canada in response to Bill C45 has become a movement that echoes the
sentiments of people all over the world, a battle cry of love for the
planet, "Idle No More." At first glance it might appear that this
movement is isolated and doesn't effect you if you are not native or if
you don't live in Canada, yet it does. It may appear that this
resistance is not related to The Occupy Movement, The Arab Spring, The
Unify Movement, Anonymous, or any of the other popular uprisings sparked
by social unrest, but it is. <br />
<br />
At its very core, all of these movements have very common threads and
are born from common issues facing people everywhere. Those who
represent financial interests that value money over life itself, that
are devoid of basic respect for human decency, and for nature have
dictated the future for too long and people everywhere are standing up
to say, "No more." This non-violent social uprising is viral in the
minds and hearts of everyone across the planet determined to bring
healing to our troubled communities, our planet, and the corruption that
is eroding the highest places of governments around the world.<br />
<br />
<img alt="2013-01-02-idlenomorehuffpo.png" height="400" src="http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2013-01-02-idlenomorehuffpo-thumb.png" width="400" /><br />
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">Image by <a href="http://www.andyeverson.com/" target="_hplink">Andy Everson</a></span><br />
<br />
<br />
Flashmobs with dancing and drumming at a malls in Olympia, Wash.
Tempe, Ariz., Denver, Colo., a giant circle dance blocking a large
intersection in Winnipeg, rail blockades in Quebec, this movement is
using cultural expression combined with modern activism to get
attention, and it is working. From their website, <a href="http://idlenomore1.blogspot.com/" target="_hplink">"Idle No More</a>
calls on all people to join in a revolution which honors and fulfills
Indigenous sovereignty which protects the land and water. Colonization
continues through attacks to Indigenous rights and damage to the land
and water."<br />
<br />
Idle No More was started in October by four ladies; Nina Wilson,
Sylvia McAdam, Jessica Gordon & Sheelah McLean who felt it was
"urgent to act on current and upcoming legislation that not only affects
First Nations people but the rest of Canada's citizens, lands and
waters." On December 11 Attawapiskat Chief, Theresa Spence, launched a
hunger strike requesting a face-to-face meeting with Canadian Prime
Minister Stephen Harper to discuss broken treaties and protection of
natural resources. Spence is staying in a tipi on the frozen Ottawa
River facing Parliament Hill and has gained the support from many
natives and non-natives who are in solidarity with this movement.<br />
<br />
Chief Arvol Lookinghorse from South Dakota recently expressed his
support in a letter posted on Facebook that states, "As Keeper of our
Sacred White Buffalo Calf Pipe, I would like to send out support for the
efforts of Chief Theresa Spence of the Attawapiskat First Nation, for
giving of herself through fasting with prayers for the protection of
Mother Earth." He goes on to say, <br />
<blockquote>
This effort to protect
Mother Earth is all Humanity's responsibility, not just Aboriginal
People. Every human being has had Ancestors in their lineage that
understood their umbilical cord to the Earth, understanding the need to
always protect and thank her. Therefore, all Humanity has to re-connect
to their own Indigenous Roots of their lineage -- to heal their
connection and responsibility with Mother Earth and become a united
voice... All Nations, All Faiths, One Prayer.</blockquote>
<br />
Society and nature work in similar ways to our own body's immune
system. We are given a symptom that causes us to be aware that there is
an illness that needs to be addressed. We can try to suppress the
symptom, but that does not heal the illness. Popular uprisings with very
core commonalities are spreading all over the planet. Exploitation of
our environment, as well as the exploitation of people and cultures for
the sake of financial gain is immoral and must be stopped at the highest
levels of our governments. It is possible to have a thriving economy
and environmental ethics.<br />
<br />
Here in America, the response to Occupy is tucked into NDAA as
Washington prepares ways to suppress the symptoms of social discord.
Without addressing the illness at its root nothing will change. It is
like the mythical Many-Headed Hydra, if you cut one head off, two more
will grow back. Popular uprisings will continue here and all over the
world until leaders understand that people want real fundamental change
in policy. Governments should lead by example if they want to be
respected.<br />
<br />
With Twitter, Facebook and the internet, these separate movements are
finding solidarity with each other and converging as a global
super-movement for the planet and all people. The quote used at <a href="http://www.unify.org/" target="_hplink">Unify</a> is, "Everyone, Everywhere, Together" and it is beginning to resonate more than ever.<br />
<br />
Each of these movements share a commitment to non-violent revolution
in their call to end the exploitation of people and the exploitation of
natural resources. Sustainability can be applied to all aspects of
social rights, economics and the environment. Social, economic,
cultural, and environmental movements, resistance, civil disobedience,
flash mobs and more will continue until this is addressed at home and
abroad. Whether it is Anonymous and Wikileaks exposing the corruption of
governments, or Indians with drums dancing and chanting in a local
mall, people everywhere are awakening, speaking up, and acting for the
needed changes. It's time for politicians and religious leaders to get
the message everywhere.<br />
<br />
It is a simple choice: continue to be part of the cancer that slowly
destroys our water, our air and the resources that are the fabric of
life by staying unconscious, or become the conscious antidote that
slowly kills the cancerous disease which threatens the existence of life
on the planet? Is the disease capitalism, corruption, ignorance, greed,
The Illuminati, or some combination of all of these things spiraling out of control? It doesn't matter because it is becoming obvious that
there are people from all nationalities, religions, and cultural
backgrounds who are determined to resist the progression of imminent
destruction. A factory producing monkey wrenches for the gears of the
machine which is at the center of our collective demise.<br />
<br />
Will the leaders wake up to this in order to play the roles they have
sworn to uphold or will they further discredit their position, their
institutions, and help to destroy the very systems that they have been
entrusted to maintain? Every time Congress represents the will of a few
wealthy people over the interests and the well-being of the planet and
the people, they do more to subvert and destroy the state than ten
thousand people protesting in the streets. When leaders fail, they
destroy the trust that holds society together.<br />
<br />
Is Harper cold and callous enough to ignore a constituent on hunger
strike a short distance from his office? Can he afford to ignore these
issues? Can any of us afford to ignore this call to be idle no more?<br />
<br />
Take a moment and listen to the eloquent words of an 11-year-old girl
in the video below. If a child can understand this, how come world
leaders are still silent on making real changes to address these urgent
issues?<br />
<br />
Take a moment and listen to the eloquent words of an 11-year-old girl
in the video below. If a child can understand this, how come world
leaders are still silent on making real changes to address these urgent
issues?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/tH5Er9y4A4U?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
Please support Idle No More, learn more about the movement, how it effects all of us and get involved. All of our futures depend on it.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-22198400412203995322012-12-11T14:31:00.000-07:002012-12-11T14:31:17.461-07:00Stomach Cancer ScreeningOkay soapbox rant time again. Keep in mind that this is in Canada. Multiply this by 10 for approximate US figures. In the following story it relates that screening for H. Pylori (basically the bug that causes stomach ulcers and later cancer) is rejected because not enough people die from stomach cancer - the numbers being that 20% of the population is infected with H Pylori and only 2% will go on to full blown cancer resulting in about 2000 deaths per year. <br />
<br />
This is considered acceptable.<br />
<br />
Doing the numbers that I was able to dig up, it would cost about $13,000,000 just to treat the ones that die in the first year. (80% mortality rate for stomach cancer). Can't find figures to cover how many survive over ten years, but the stats suggest that it would cost about $70,000 per patient that survives the ten years.<br />
<br />
Now if all that could be solved by testing for H Pylori which can be easily treated with Antibiotics shouldn't we be looking at this? The initial test for H. Pylori is a breath test! I can't find the costs of doing that anywhere but the references are always that its cheap to administer. Reference to treatment is, that too is cheaply done with the administering of "a few pills". If followup is required it could have to be a biopsy which is accomplished by Gastrointestinal Endoscopy - basically they stuff a tube down your throat that has a fiber-optic viewer attached and they look at the stomach linings for damaged areas which they can biopsy with attached tools. I was allowed to be present and actually assist when my 85 year old father had to have this done. It was for me, quite fascinating. For father - it showed he had healthy stomach linings.<br />
<br />
Again all of this is far cheaper than the $37,000 per patient treatment for the first year of cancer treatments. Bottom line, what is a life worth? To government agencies that play with your life numbers every day, not very much!!!!! <br />
<br />
If you have had any kind of continuing stomach pains that you write off to just gas or whatever - get tested for H. Pylori! Demand it! <br />
<br />
If you have serious indigestion sometimes called GERD get tested for H. Pylori!! <br />
<br />
Its your life you're saving. <br />
<br />
Oh, H. Pylori can actually be passed around by kissing so if you have family members or friends that you get close to... chances are you have it and don't know it. <br />
<br />
On another front - Apparently any of us who were born between 1945 and 1965 should also be tested for Hepatitis C. You can have it for fifty years and show no symptoms until you have liver failure. It too can be treated if caught before liver damage occurs.<br />
<br />
The following article comes from CBC News:<br />
<br />
<br />
<div id="storyhead">
<div class="headline">
<h1>
Cancer screening</h1>
</div>
<h5 class="byline">
CBC News Posted:
May 10, 2012 11:59 AM ET</h5>
<h4 class="lastupdated">
Last Updated:
May 10, 2012 2:58 PM ET
</h4>
</div>
<div id="left">
<div id="leadmedia">
<div class="tpmedia video" id="video2232839521">
<h3 class="metanav">
Video Content</h3>
</div>
</div>
<div aria-labelledby="storyhead" id="storybody" role="main">
To be a health reporter, in many ways, is to also be a cancer
reporter. That's because much of what makes the medical news concerns
cancer — how to avoid getting it, and how to survive it when it strikes.
So, it's surprising to discover a potentially powerful tool against
cancer that's not being used.<br />
This week in The <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045%2812%2970137-7/abstract" target="_blank">Lancet Oncology</a>,
a study reports that every year 2 million people in the world develop
preventable cancers caused by infectious agents, bacteria and viruses,
that could be detected and treated. That’s if someone went looking for
them. It's called 'screening', the act of testing apparently healthy
people for the seeds of future cancer. <br />
"It is frustrating," Dr. Paul Moayyedi, told me. "I feel it's such a
missed opportunity." He's a gastroenterologist from McMaster University
in Hamilton, and he was talking about <em>Helicobacter pylori</em>, a
type of bacteria that causes most gastric cancer, the second-leading
cause of cancer death in the world. Half the world's population is
walking around with this potentially deadly pathogen in their gut. Not
everyone with H. pylori infection will develop cancer, but those
unfortunate few will develop a ferocious disease that kills with brutal
efficiency. Dr. Moayyedi said "if you are unlucky enough to get stomach
cancer roughly your chances of surviving 5 years are one in five, 20 per
cent, so most people sadly die and most within the first two years."<br />
<span class="photo left" style="width: 302px;"><img alt="A transmission electron micrograph of a section of the surface of a human stomach infected with Helicobacter pylori bacteria in red. " src="http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/topstories/2012/01/06/mi-hpylori-getty117451580.jpg" /><em>A
transmission electron micrograph of a section of the surface of a human
stomach infected with Helicobacter pylori bacteria in red. </em> <em class="credit">(Getty)</em></span>If
the H. pylori infection is treated early enough, scientists believe
those gastric cancer deaths could be prevented. So should Canadians be
screened for it?<br />
"I think they should," Dr. Moayyedi said. "That's the simple answer, although it's never as simple as that."<br />
The screening test seems simple enough. A blood test will show if
someone had been exposed, a follow-up breath test will tell if the
bacteria is active, and then a short course of antibiotics will clear it
up most of the time. Eliminating H. pylori would also reduce deaths
from bleeding ulcers. So why don't we test everybody? It's the kind of
naïve question a reporter gets to ask. Dr. Moayyedi said the idea has no
traction in Canada.<br />
"The benefits in cancer, in Canada, aren't as dramatic as they might
be for something, like colon cancer,” he said, "and maybe politically
it's not so exciting but still, every opportunity to save lives is a
good one."<br />
Ontario considered it back in 2004 when an expert committee agreed
that "screening for and treatment of H. pylori may represent a
significant opportunity for preventive oncology." In other words it
could prevent cancer. Still, in the end, the committee decided not to
recommend it. I had a chance to talk to University of Toronto health
policy professor Terence Sullivan who was head of Cancer Care Ontario at
the time and sat on that committee. He explained the thinking back
then.<br />
"At that stage we didn't feel that we had the justification to launch a mass screening program," he told me.<br />
In other words, the number of lives saved wouldn't justify the cost.
That's because, even though about 20 per cent of the Canadian population
is infected, less than 2 per cent will get stomach cancer, resulting in
fewer than 2,000 deaths a year in Canada.<br />
<h3>
Screening questions</h3>
Skeptics
might suggest that a cancer with so few survivors means there are fewer
people to lobby for testing. But there are other considerations too.
Sometimes screening actually causes harm. There's the problem of
over-treatment, finding and then invasively treating cancer that might
not be fatal, an aspect of prostate and breast cancer screening that has
been vigorously debated. In this case, experts speculate that treating
more people for H. pylori infection could increase antibiotic resistance
or create some other unanticipated health problem. <br />
And it turns out that screening is complicated. You need protocols. A
committee has to meet to write them. People need to be trained.
Decisions need to be made. When do you do the test/scan/screening thing?
What about follow up? Do you need a second test to make sure the first
test/treatment really worked? Who pays for all of that? And where is the
evidence that screening for the thing will actually save lives? For
that, you need large randomized controlled trials. Who's going to pay
for them? And how long do you wait? It takes time to follow a population
to see who lives and who dies.<br />
And that's why people are walking around right now, here in Canada,
with cancer causing pathogens that could be treated, if they only knew
they were infected. It’s not just H. pylori. Another cancer causing
virus is hepatitis C. It quietly attacks the liver, leading to cirrhosis
and cancer. A recent <a href="http://www.annals.org/content/156/4/271.abstract">study</a>
showed hepatitis C kills more Americans than HIV and that's why one
Canadian doctor thinks all baby boomers should be screened for the
virus. <br />
<h3>
Hepatitis C in baby boomers</h3>
Dr. David Wong, the
clinical director at Toronto Western Hospital's Liver Centre told me "if
you're born between 1945 and 1965, a baby boomer, you actually have a
reasonable chance of having hep C in North America. And all those people
should routinely get hep C testing at least once."<br />
"These infections cause close to zero symptoms," he said, "and you
have these infections for 30, 40 years. And now someone might be 50 or
60 yrs old and they still may not know about it. You don't have symptoms
until you have liver failure."<br />
The treatment for hep C is expensive, with unpleasant side effects,
but new drugs are raising the question of whether it’s time to start
screening. A recent study in the <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22056542" target="_blank">Annals of Internal Medicine</a>
suggests it would be cost effective to screen baby boomers for hep C.
As for H pylori, Dr. Moayyedi told me family doctors don't routinely
check for it, even when someone complains of stomach pain.<br />
"Probably about 5 to 10 per cent of family doctors will test for it
routinely in someone with indigestion and I don't think anyone is
testing for it just as a screening tool," he told me.<br />
Preventable infections are causing 1.5 million cancer deaths
worldwide, The Lancet Oncology study reports. That’s roughly one in five
deaths due to cancer worldwide.<br />
"Sadly most places where stomach cancer is common, they’re quite poor
countries so they can’t afford to have screening programs," Dr.
Moayyedi said. "But in Canada we can, so it would be good to do it."
Will it ever happen? An official involved with cancer screening programs
in Ontario said the question hasn’t come up lately, but that might
change now that the issue of cancers caused by infections is making
headlines.</div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
Thank you to the CBC for the above article<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-80072268367825675582012-08-14T13:06:00.001-06:002012-08-14T13:12:10.123-06:0010 Things Hollywood Won't Tell You<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size: large;">"The real nail-biter? Our balance sheet."</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">By CHARLES PASSY - Smart Money - MAY 16, 2012</span></div>
<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;">
Picture it: captains of industry struggling to stay relevant in a world they no longer understand. It may sound like a Citizen Kane-esque cinematic saga, but it's actually the story of today's studio executives, say film-industry watchers.<br />
<br />
The U.S. box office take dropped almost 4 percent in 2011, to $10.2 billion, marking the second straight year of decline. The root of the problem, of course, is the growing popularity of home viewing via Netflix and other video-on-demand outlets.<br />
<br />
Last year, consumer spending on video streaming jumped 50 percent, to $3.4 billion, reports the Digital Entertainment Group. The change has as many implications for the movie business as digital downloading did for the music industry.<br />
<br />
<br />
Granted, Hollywood makes some money from streaming sales. But those digital dimes aren't enough. Add it up and you have a potential crisis, says Christopher Sharrett, a professor of communication and film studies at Seton Hall University: "We could well be seeing the end of motion pictures in theaters."<br />
<br />
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br />
<br />
Joe's Comments: You'd think that these wunderkind executives would figure out that now is the time to look at volume marketing. Years ago all of the Hollywood studios produced several hundred movies per year. Now its down to six or seven major blockbusters with 200 million dollar budgets. <br />
<br />
They pump a minimum of 30 million into promotional campaigns for each of those mega projects so that you will all rush out and see the latest and greatest on the first weekend. What happened to the era of slow build? When a movie would be released on one coast and played across the country with the promotional costs being minimal due to word of mouth by the time it reached the larger markets. Of course a true turkey would never make to New York in those days and mercifully the audiences would be spared.<br />
<br />
The new model is supposed to combat piracy... you buy that? Neither do I. Its the model they were taught in business school and is the mass marketing blitz approach. <br />
<br />
Charleton Heston made the statement that "Film as a business is an art, and film as an art is a business." Unfortunately the current purveyors have ignored the art aspect of the balance. People want stories that satisfy a need whether it be love or success.<br />
<br />
Roger Corman, over his career, now counts over 385 produced films. His Autobiography is titled: " How I made a Hundred Movies and Never Lost a Dime". The title alone should give someone a clue. Half of Hollywood's elite film makers came through the Roger Corman machine.<br />
<br />
About two years ago George Lucas stated that he was leaving the blockbusters behind to focus on doing a lot of smaller movies for digital release.<br />
<br />
Don't these guys get it? Start putting money back into smaller lower budget projects. Stop spending 30 million dollars on promotion and put that money into three films. Market it through internet chat rooms and so on. Get a buzz going - oh I forgot... someone would actually have to work to do that. <br />
<br />
Because the similarities between streaming video and TV is a natural lets drift into TV land a little: The AMC TV model is a mystery to most network executives. You sink money into a quality series - yes! Something that someone might actually want to watch! Then you run those episodes several times during the week in varying time slots - its not quite VOD but its the next best thing. AMC is never up against the competition and they cumulatively get the viewers for the advertising count. Throws the whole model on its ear! Methinks this is the way of the future for TV, where the dial is crawling with unwatchable drek! In Canada where three mega broadcasters control dozens of channels they are doing one media buy and replaying on numerous channels - again in different time slots. Producers have got to get better deals on the rebroadcast clauses. Right now they aren't getting any extra revenue in many cases.<br />
<br />
Getting to VOD and streaming movies, the advantage truly is that one can watch at ones leisure and not be pressured by Madison Avenue advertising hucksters into their time slots and agendas. Again, they are now having to work for their money in a way that they haven't since the sixties. <br />
<br />
There... enough for today.<br />
<br />
Joe<br />
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-38789221598956742602012-04-23T01:05:00.000-06:002012-04-23T01:05:30.010-06:00<h1>
Insight: Oil industry sees no threat from electric car</h1>
<div class="facebookRec">
</div>
<br /><div class="columnRight">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2">
</div>
</div>
<div id="slideshowInlineLarge" style="width: 460px;">
<div class="photoControls" id="photoControls">
<div class="photoNav">
<div class="photoControls_inner">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-displayer" id="displayFrame" style="height: 300px; width: 460px;">
<div class="yui-sldshw-active yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic0">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic1">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic2">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic3">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic4">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic5">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic6">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic7">
</div>
</div>
<div class="yui-sldshw-cached yui-sldshw-frame" id="frame_fd1fade">
<div class="image-container" id="ic8">
<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/slideshow/idUSTRE81011820120201#a=9" target="_top"><img alt="Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk drives a Model S, the company's first full-size electric sedan, at the Tesla factory in Fremont, California October 1, 2011. REUTERS-Stephen Lam" id="image8" src="http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20120201&t=2&i=565411916&w=&fh=&fw=&ll=700&pl=300&r=BTRE81016MS00" /></a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<span id="articleText">
<span id="midArticle_start"></span>
<div id="articleInfo">
<div class="byline">
<br /></div>
<div class="byline">
<b><i>By Tom Bergin</i></b></div>
<div class="byline">
<br /></div>
<span class="location">LONDON</span> |
<span class="timestamp">Wed Feb 1, 2012 10:20am EST</span>
<br />
</div>
<span id="midArticle_0"></span><span class="focusParagraph">
(Reuters) - The biggest oil companies in the world have calculated that
few, if any, of today's drivers will see electric cars outnumber
gasoline and diesel models in their lifetimes.<br />
</span><span id="midArticle_1"></span>While politicians and green
lobby groups insist the future of transport is electric, in the past two
months BP and Exxon have released data which points to electric cars
making up only 4-5 percent of all cars globally in 20-30 years.<br />
<span id="midArticle_2"></span>Meanwhile some governments are targeting as much as a 60 percent market share for electric vehicles over a similar period.<br />
<span id="midArticle_3"></span>The
oil company forecasts may appear self-serving, but if they are widely
accepted could provoke a policy shift that offers greater incentives for
electric cars to end our addiction to oil.<br />
<span id="midArticle_4"></span>And
unlike more optimistic predictions from consultants like McKinsey,
these forecast are backed by cash. They guide tens of billions of
dollars in long-term investment in oil production and refining and it is
oil that stands to lose if they get it wrong.<br />
<span id="midArticle_5"></span>They
don't, of course, take into account a major breakthrough in battery
technology that could give electric cars a cost and performance edge
over the internal combustion engine.<br />
<span id="midArticle_6"></span>In
its Energy Outlook for 2030, released earlier this month, BP predicted
that electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids, will make up only 4 percent
of the global fleet of 1.6 billion commercial and passenger vehicles in
2030.<br />
<span id="midArticle_7"></span>"Oil will remain the dominant
transport fuel and we expect 87 percent of transport fuel in 2030 will
still be petroleum based," BP Chief Executive Bob Dudley said as he
unveiled the BP statistics on January 18.<br />
<span id="midArticle_8"></span>The balance is seen coming from biofuels, natural gas and electricity.<br />
<span id="midArticle_9"></span>Plug-in hybrids can be powered from the mains and only rely on their small gasoline engines when the battery dies.<br />
<span id="midArticle_10"></span>Standard
hybrids are principally driven by an internal combustion engine whose
efficiency is boosted by the recycling of energy generated from braking.<br />
<span id="midArticle_11"></span>Exxon
Mobil, the biggest oil and gas company in the world, says the continued
high cost of electric vehicles compared to petroleum cars, means
take-up won't even increase much during the 2030s.<br />
<span id="midArticle_12"></span>In
its 2040 Energy Outlook, released in December, the Texas-based company
said electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids and vehicles that run on natural
gas would make up only 5 percent of the fleet by 2040.<br />
<span id="midArticle_13"></span>Peter
Voser, Chief Executive of Royal Dutch Shell, the industry number two,
sees a rosier future for electric vehicles. He predicts they will
account for up to 40 percent of the worldwide car fleet, although only
by 2050.<br />
<span id="midArticle_14"></span>A $50 BILLION-A-YEAR OPINION<br />
<span id="midArticle_15"></span>The
statistics published by Exxon and BP, Europe's second-largest oil
company by market value, are perhaps the most detailed long-term
forecasts on electric vehicle take-up.<br />
<span id="midArticle_0"></span>These
Energy Outlooks guide how the oil groups allocate their annual
investment budgets - among the biggest in the world, at over $50 billion
combined for BP and Exxon.<br />
<span id="midArticle_1"></span>The
expected continued dominance of petroleum partly explains the scaling
back in BP and Shell's solar, hydrogen and wind power ambitions in
recent years, and Exxon's continued reluctance to get involved in
renewable energy.<br />
<span id="midArticle_2"></span>Insofar as the
companies are active in green energy, it is mainly in the production and
blending of biofuels. This is driven by U.S. and European governments'
insistence that a percentage of motor fuels sold must come from
plant-based sources.<br />
<span id="midArticle_3"></span>If the oil
companies are wrong about electric cars they will find their investments
in big and expensive new oil production projects, which increasingly
need crude prices around $80 per barrel to be profitable, not paying
off.<br />
<span id="midArticle_4"></span>The companies do see an easing in the addiction to oil, though.<br />
<span id="midArticle_5"></span>Despite increased car ownership in <a href="http://www.reuters.com/places/china" title="Full coverage of China">China</a>
and India, Exxon predicts "global demand for fuel for personal vehicles
will soon peak" due to an increase in average fuel efficiency.<br />
<span id="midArticle_6"></span>BP expects the efficiency of combustion engines to double by 2030, with a third of vehicles on the road being hybrids.<br />
<span id="midArticle_7"></span>This
trend will be driven by more stringent fuel economy standards in the
U.S., CO2 reduction legislation in Europe and an end to oil subsidies in
developing countries.<br />
<span id="midArticle_8"></span>Increased
airline and commercial vehicle traffic will counterbalance some of the
efficiency gains from cars but BP predicts that, helped by increased use
of biofuels, demand for oil for transport overall will plateau in the
mid-2020s.<br />
<span id="midArticle_9"></span>GREENS FUME, POLITICIANS SEE QUICKER ADOPTION<br />
<span id="midArticle_10"></span>Green groups reacted with suspicion to the oil industry forecasts.<br />
<span id="midArticle_11"></span>"Exxon
would say that, wouldn't they. A big take-up of electric cars is not
something they would like to see," said Jos Dings, director of
Brussels-based sustainable transport campaign group, Transport and
Environment.<br />
<span id="midArticle_12"></span>"The future for petrol and diesel doesn't look good," he countered.<br />
<span id="midArticle_13"></span>Nonetheless,
environmentalists like Dings fear political complacency about improving
vehicle efficiency could prompt governments to ease targets to cut
vehicle emissions, which could in turn delay the electrification of
transport.<br />
<span id="midArticle_14"></span>Big Oil's pessimistic outlook for electric cars is at odds with many governments' plans.<br />
<span id="midArticle_15"></span>Electric
vehicles barely register on the statistics of car sales at the moment.
Nonetheless, China is targeting 5 million electric vehicles on its roads
by 2020, according to media reports. This would represent around 3
percent of its predicted fleet.<br />
<span id="midArticle_0"></span>The
Australian government's main energy adviser, the Australian Energy
Market Commission, has predicted electric vehicles will make up 20 per
cent of new car sales in <a href="http://www.reuters.com/places/australia" title="Full coverage of Australia">Australia</a> by 2020 and 45 per cent by 2030.<br />
<span id="midArticle_1"></span>The
UK's Committee on Climate, which advises the government, has predicted
electric vehicles will reach around 60 percent of new cars and vans by
2030. And New Zealand hopes to get to 60 percent by 2040.<br />
<span id="midArticle_2"></span>The
U.S. has more muted ambitions. President Barack Obama said he wants to
put 1 million electric vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015, a figure that
would represent less than half of one percent of the total fleet.<br />
<span id="midArticle_3"></span>Many
U.S. experts and officials predict a tipping point in the uptake in
electric vehicles in the latter part of this decade, as technology
improves, economies of scale kick in and consumer fears about being
stranded when their batteries run flat, or "range anxiety," eases.<br />
<span id="midArticle_4"></span>However,
data compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration may explain
the lack of an official U.S. target. Last week, the agency released an
'abridged version' of its Annual Energy Outlook 2012, due to be released
in full in the Spring.<br />
<span id="midArticle_5"></span>Tables used
in formulating the outlook show electric vehicles and plug in hybrids
are expected to account for only 1.3 percent of the U.S. fleet in 2030.<br />
<span id="midArticle_6"></span>Furthermore,
the agency predicts that neither consumers, nor carmakers, will get
over 'range anxiety'. By 2035, the agency sees few, if any, electric
vehicles on U.S. roads that can travel for 200 miles without recharging.<br />
<span id="midArticle_7"></span>CARMAKER ENTHUSIASM COOLS<br />
<span id="midArticle_8"></span>Many
of the headlines out of autoshows in the past couple of years have been
captured by the launch of electric cars such as Nissan's Leaf, the
Tesla sports car, plug-ins like General Motors' Chevrolet Volt, and the
latest incarnation of the Toyota Prius.<br />
<span id="midArticle_9"></span>Other manufacturers including BMW, Rolls-Royce and Porsche have presented electric-powered prototypes.<br />
<span id="midArticle_10"></span>On the basis of this, one could be forgiven for thinking the auto industry is betting big on electric power.<br />
<span id="midArticle_11"></span>Yet
few auto executives share the optimism of Renault and Nissan chief
executive Carlos Ghosn who has repeatedly said he sees electric vehicles
making up 10 percent of all sales in 2020.<br />
<span id="midArticle_12"></span>A
survey of 200 auto industry executives conducted by KPMG released
earlier this month gave an average forecast for electric vehicles to
account for 6-10 percent of global auto sales in 2025 - more bullish
than Exxon and BP but hardly a revolution.<br />
<span id="midArticle_13"></span>"Certainly
a year ago or so, you could have gotten the impression from reading the
press that everyone is driving electric cars in two years time,"
Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche said at a roundtable at the sidelines of the
Detroit auto show last month.<br />
<span id="midArticle_14"></span>Zetsche said he did not see "an explosion of demand for this product."<br />
<span id="midArticle_15"></span>Echoing
comments from the oil companies, Gerd Kleinert, CEO of KSPG, the
automotive parts business belonging to German group Rheinmetall, says
take-up of electric cars will be curtailed until batteries can store
energy using as little weight as gasoline does, and can be recharged as
quickly as refilling a fuel tank.<br />
<span id="midArticle_0"></span>"When
that world exists, then we will all be driving electric cars starting
tomorrow. But I personally don't see that happening, not even a hundred
years from now."<br />
<span id="midArticle_1"></span>(Additional reporting by <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=christiaan.hetzner&">Christiaan Hetzner</a> in Frankfurt; Editing by <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=chris.wickham&">Chris Wickham</a>)<br />
<br />
Thank you Reuters </span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-6463431644059915112012-03-26T15:36:00.000-06:002012-03-26T15:36:29.123-06:00<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: yellow;">Cultural cringe is crippling contemporary Canadian cinema</span> </span>
<br />
<table class="contentpaneopen">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" style="width: 100%;" valign="middle">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Friday, 17 February 2012 </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><strong>By Christine Sirois</strong></span> </td>
<td class="buttonheading">
<a href="http://www.centretownnews.ca/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=2976" target="_blank" title="PDF">
</a>
</td>
<td align="right" class="buttonheading" width="100%">
<a href="http://www.centretownnews.ca/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2976&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=97" target="_blank" title="Print">
</a>
</td>
<td class="buttonheading">
<a href="http://www.centretownnews.ca/index2.php?option=com_content&task=emailform&id=2976&itemid=97" target="_blank" title="E-mail">
</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<table class="contentpaneopen"><tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" valign="top">
For the second year in a row, a Quebec film is putting Canada on
the Oscar nomination list. This year, the buzz is for Gatineau-born
director Philip Falardeau’s movie Monsieur Lazhar, which is nominated
for Best Foreign Language Film category.<br />
<br />
Despite the critical praise for Monsieur Lazhar, it is unlikely that
many Canadians will have seen it before the awards are handed out on Feb
26. The reason? <u style="color: blue;"><span style="color: red;"><b><span style="font-size: small;">There’s no incentive for theatre owners to show
Canadian films. </span></b></span><b><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></b></u><br />
<br />
<b>[<span style="color: #ffd966;">Note: 98% of all films shown in Canada originate from the USA. (The other 2% are generally from European countries) The American movies are studio driven and pressure is brought to bear on the Canadian theatre chains to show the studio content over anything else available or they won't get the next big blockbuster movie. For those who go on about "If Canadian movies were worth watching people would be watching them" just isn't true. Truth is they can't get onto the screens for people to decide if they are worth watching or not. As a result when Canadian movies do get made it is usually for 1/10th or less of the budget most US movies get for even their low budget movies. Put Canadian projects on par with US projects and you will see that we make better movies than they do! ~ Joe Thornton</span>]</b><br />
<br />
<br />
The nod highlights the divide between French and
English cinema in Canada. It is a gap that is created by the structure
of the Canadian film industry and reinforced by the reputation of
domestic films across the country.<br />
<br />
Theatres in Quebec show many French-Canadian-produced films and English films dubbed into French.<br />
<br />
However,
the language that all but guarantees these home-grown films an audience
in Quebec is what also keeps the marketability of these films low in
the rest of the country.<br />
<br />
Outside of Quebec, there isn’t much
money to be made with these movies. French-language films are shown at
festivals and in art house cinemas, but for very few screenings to niche
audiences. <br />
In English Canada, the phenomenon of “cultural
cringe” is what plagues the film industry. Although it is not
necessarily true, Canadians reflexively dismiss movies produced here as
simply inferior to ones produced by Hollywood studios.<br />
<br />
Canadian
film means either a hokey character-driven drama or quirky comedy. Think
Ivan Reitman’s Meatballs or Atom Egoyan’s The Sweet Hereafter.<br />
<br />
In both languages, domestic films are relegated to niche and art-house cinemas for limited runs without much pronouncement.<br />
<br />
The negative view of Canadian movies by the public is perpetuated by the movie industry at large. <br />
Unlike radio and television, which both have strict Canadian content regulation, there are no Cancon rules for movie theatres.<br />
<br />
The
booking system for theatres is controlled by the Hollywood studio
system and Canada is considered part of the American domestic market.<br />
<br />
By
not showing Canadian-made movies in multiplexes, the film industry
communicates to the public that these films aren’t worth your time or
money when, quite frankly, they are worth it.<br />
Take the case of
Monsieur Lazhar. The film is a gripping story about Bachir Lazhar, an
Algerian refugee in Montreal. He is working in a Montreal elementary
school as a substitute teacher, following the suicide of his
predecessor. Cultural divisions separate him from the students from the
start and no one is aware that Lazhar could be deported back to Algeria
at any time.<br />
<br />
Good cinema is based on emotion, on how and what the
audience feels. It has meaning and reflects the values or issues of a
certain time. Falardeau’s film does just that.<br />
<br />
What it means to
be a Canadian is hazy. Movies have always been a tool for
self-identification and for cultural definition, but Canada is
neglecting this.<br />
<br />
One way the country can get a better idea of
itself and what it stands for is by looking at itself through the
camera’s lens at the stories of its filmmakers.<br />
<br />
Falardeau’s Lazhar is a good place to start.<br />
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" class="modifydate" colspan="2">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Last Updated ( Thursday, 08 March 2012 )
</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-7076747746367070812012-03-01T14:28:00.001-07:002012-03-01T14:43:48.193-07:00<h1 style="color: orange;">
The Founding Liberals</h1>
<div class="meta">
<div class="date">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><b> [ An interesting perspective on how roles have changed within the American political system - Joe Thornton]</b></span></div>
<div class="date">
</div>
<div class="date">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">February 19, 2012</span></div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">By Stephen D. Foster Jr.</span></div>
<div style="padding-bottom: 5px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 5px;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/founding-fathers-declaration-of-independence.jpg"><img alt="" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-5758" height="272" src="http://addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/founding-fathers-declaration-of-independence.jpg" title="founding-fathers-declaration-of-independence" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Today is the Fourth of July, a time when we as Americans celebrate
our nations independence. Conservatives across the country are
pretending to be patriotic. Liberals on the other hand are celebrating
the biggest achievement that appears on their resume’: the founding of
America and its government. <b>You see, the Founding Fathers were, and
always will be, liberals.</b> And here are seven reasons why.<br />
<br />
1. Although Thomas Jefferson didn’t know it at the time, when he
wrote the Declaration of Independence, he created the document that
would be used as the basis for universal human rights, which liberals
wholeheartedly support. Today’s conservatives are more interested in
stripping away human rights, and have fought relentlessly to repeal
rights from women, religious groups, and minorities. I understand that
the Founding Fathers owned slaves, but I never said they were perfect
either. The Founders, however, did believe that slavery had to end at
some point and they knew that progress could not happen all at once,
especially when they were just trying to keep the new nation afloat, but
they intended us to progress. It would take another liberal to end
slavery almost 100 years later, and yet another liberal would grant
women the vote in the early 20th century.<br />
<br />
2. Conservatives always claim that liberals are the supporters of big
government. Well, the Founding Fathers also supported big government.
Oh sure, they tried small government at one point but The Articles of
Confederation didn’t cut it. The Federal Government under that document
was useless and powerless. General chaos reigned among the states.
Revenue couldn’t be raised. Laws conflicted between the states. Small
government had failed. So, the Founders had an idea. They met in secret
in 1787 and wrote the Constitution which created a bigger, stronger
central government. Conservatives would call that growing the
government.<br />
<br />
3. Within the Constitution, the Founders gave power to the Congress
to levy taxes as necessary. The Founding Fathers never had an issue with
taxes. On the contrary, the founding generation waged the American
Revolution because they felt that they were not properly represented in
the British Parliament. The legislative branch established in the
Constitution, however, properly represents every American. We vote for
who represents us. Therefore when Congress raises taxes, they are doing
the job we voted for them to do. Conservatives today consistently
associate tax hikes with liberal policies. So, according to Republicans,
the Founders are liberals. James Monroe, our fifth President, once
said, “To impose taxes when the public exigencies require them is an
obligation of the most sacred character, especially with a free people.”
It most certainly applies today.<br />
<br />
4. The Founding Fathers made it possible for us to change the
Constitution when necessary. That is the beauty of the document. But
Republicans are only lobbying to change the Constitution so that only
the original document applies. They would repeal most of the amendments
and many of the rights. Liberals on the other hand are all about change
for the better and seek to perfect the Constitution which is what the
Founders intended.<br />
<br />
5. Republicans have claimed time and time again that health care
mandates and government run health care is unconstitutional. They have
also consistently slammed liberals for being the ones that introduce
such programs and laws. What they fail to recognize is that health care
mandates and government run health care dates all the way back to the
Founding Fathers. <b>In 1798, John Adams signed the very first health care
mandate into law.</b> The law required sailors to pay a tax to the United
States government which in turn would provide medical care to them. The
next President, Thomas Jefferson, apparently approved of this program as
well, since he never challenged it, nor did he ever try to repeal it.
According to Republican logic, Adams and Jefferson are a couple big
government liberals.<br />
<br />
6. Republicans are currently owned by corporations. They have not
only defended corporations but have worked tirelessly to push corporate
sponsored legislation through Congress. The Founding Fathers feared this
kind of relationship and viewed corporations with suspicion and largely
kept them at arms length. In fact, one reason the founding generation
went to war with Britain is because of the influence that the East India
Trading Company had on the British Parliament. A corporation even once
governed Massachusetts on behalf of England. The Revolutionary War ended
this practice. After the nation’s founding, corporations were granted
charters by the state as they are today. Unlike today, however,
corporations were only permitted to exist 20 or 30 years and could only
deal in one commodity, could not hold stock in other companies, and
their property holdings were limited to what they needed to accomplish
their business goals. <b>And perhaps the most important facet of all this
is that most states in the early days of the nation had laws on the
books that made any political contribution by corporations a criminal
offense. </b>When you think about it, the regulations imposed on
corporations in the early days of America were far harsher than they are
now.<br />
<br />
Still not convinced? Here is some advice from Thomas Jefferson
that all Americans should take to heart.<br />
<br />
<i>“I hope that we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our
monied corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a
trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”</i><br />
<br />
7. Separation of church and state is not just a liberal concept, the
Founding Fathers made it part of America’s sacred foundation. Freedom of
Religion was not included in the Constitution just to protect
Christianity. Freedom of Religion protects ALL religions, even if you do
not practice any religion at all. The idea that a wall between church
and state doesn’t exist is absurd and the idea that the Founders meant
America to be a Christian state is equally absurd. Nowhere in the
Constitution can you find God, Jesus, or any mention of a specific
religion whatsoever. The only mention of religion is that we all have
the freedom to practice whatever religion we want and that government
cannot make any law that puts one religion over the other, even
Christianity.<br />
<br />
<i>“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”</i><br />
<br />
~First Amendment, Bill of Rights of the Constitution<br />
<br />
Even our Founding Fathers interpreted Freedom of Religion as being
the wall between church and state. Take these quotes for instance.<br />
<br />
<i>“The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever
from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of
Europe with blood for centuries.”</i><br />
~James Madison<br />
<br />
<i>“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole
American people which declared that their legislature should make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise
thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”</i><br />
<br />
~Thomas Jefferson, as President, <span style="font-size: x-small;">in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802</span><br />
<br />
In the present day, Republicans are heavily allied with Christian
right wing extremists that would require Bible studies in every school
across the country. Considering how diverse America is today, even the
Founders would reject that. Christianity is a dying religion and the
extremists have only themselves to blame for that. Their hard line
stance is disgusting and un-American. It goes against everything the
framers of the Constitution envisioned when they wrote the first
amendment. If these fundamentalist Christians want to teach the Bible in
private schools, let them. But stay out of public schools. People do
not pay school taxes so that their child can be indoctrinated into
barbaric and outdated religions. Religion is not what our children need
to be learning. Our country needs more men and women of science,
mathematics, and history. Not Bible thumpers.<br />
<br />
Each of these seven items represent precedents set by the Founders.
Their vision has carried us forward and we owe it to them to not let
that vision die.<br />
<br />
The Founding Fathers were not conservatives as Republicans would have us
believe. Not even Republicans began as conservatives. Early Republicans
believed that they were doing what the Founders would have done. That
is precisely why they fought against slavery and fought for women’s
rights. In the ever continuing quest to perfect the American experiment,
the liberal Republicans of the 1850′s and 1860′s took over the torch
that the Founders lit and carried it forward to brighten the future.
Liberals have carried the torch forward ever since and now are under the
Democratic Party banner.<b> If the Founders had been conservatives, that
torch would have remained unlit and we would still be under British
rule.</b> So as you celebrate America’s independence, remember that it was a
bunch of liberals that gave us freedom and the ability to change and
perfect our nation. The very word “liberal” means favorable to or in
accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially
as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil
liberties. Conservatives certainly have no interest in concepts of
maximum freedom. They only seek to strip freedom and rights away.
Liberals have not changed much since the founding era. Liberals still
believe in the power of government to help and care for its people. They
still strive to increase civil rights and still believe in bringing the
American Dream to every man, woman, and child living in this country.
Liberalism is the embodiment of what makes America great and is
something we should all celebrate and cherish with our lives today.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Thank you to Addicting Info. </span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-547207020330939492012-02-29T15:43:00.000-07:002012-02-29T15:43:41.212-07:00<h1>
<span style="color: orange;">Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter</span><span class="screenonly"><br />
</span>
</h1>
<hr title="Background" />
Thomas Jefferson was a man of deep religious conviction — his
conviction was that religion was a very personal matter, one which the
government had no business getting involved in. He was vilified by his
political opponents for his role in the passage of the 1786 Virginia Statute
for Religious Freedom and for his criticism of such biblical events as the
Great Flood and the theological age of the Earth. As president, he discontinued
the practice started by his predecessors George Washington and John Adams of
proclaiming days of fasting and thanksgiving. He was a staunch believer in the
separation of church and state.<br />
<br />
Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 to
answer a letter from them written in October 1801. A copy of the Danbury letter
is available <a href="http://members.tripod.com/%7Ecandst/tnppage/baptist.htm">here</a>. The
Danbury Baptists were a religious minority in Connecticut, and they complained
that in their state, the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as
immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature — as
"favors granted." Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about
problems with <i>state</i> establishment of religion — only of
establishment on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of
separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the <a href="http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am1.html">Establishment Clause</a> that we use today: "Separation
of church and state."<br />
<br />
The letter was the subject of intense scrutiny by Jefferson, and he consulted
a couple of New England politicians to assure that his words would not offend
while still conveying his message: it was not the place of the Congress or the
Executive to do anything that might be misconstrued as the establishment of
religion.<br />
<br />
Note: The bracketed section in the second paragraph had been blocked off for
deletion in the final draft of the letter sent to the Danbury Baptists, though
it was not actually deleted in Jefferson's draft of the letter. It is included
here for completeness. Reflecting upon his knowledge that the letter was far
from a mere personal correspondence, Jefferson deleted the block, he noted in
the margin, to avoid offending members of his party in the eastern states.<br />
<br />
This is a transcript of the final letter as stored online at the <a href="http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html">Library of Congress</a>,
and reflects Jefferson's spelling and punctuation.<br />
<br />
<hr title="Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter" />
<br />
Mr. President<br />
<br />
To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a
committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.<br />
<br />
Gentlemen<br />
<br />
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so
good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association,
give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous
pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are
persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more
and more pleasing.<br />
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man
& his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship,
that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not
opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American
people which declared that <u>their</u> legislature should "make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
[<i>Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive
authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even
those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of
another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious
exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective
sect.</i>] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in
behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the
progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural
rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social
duties.<br />
<br />
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the
common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your
religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem.<br />
<br />
(signed) Thomas Jefferson<br />
Jan.1.1802.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-82354784288026460612012-02-29T15:25:00.000-07:002012-02-29T15:28:27.562-07:00<h1 style="color: orange;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The March of Christian Dominionism 4: How Dominionists Are Trying To Undermine Our Country</span></h1>
<div class="meta">
<div class="date">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">July 7, 2011</span></div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">By Justin "Filthy Liberal Scum" Rosario</span></div>
<div style="padding-bottom: 5px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 5px;">
</div>
<a href="http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/07/07/the-march-of-christian-dominionism-4-how-dominionists-are-trying-to-undermine-our-country/christian_nationalism/" rel="attachment wp-att-6143"><img alt="" class="alignleft size-full wp-image-6143" height="113" src="http://addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/christian_nationalism.jpg" width="200" /></a><br />
Or “So THAT’S why the GOP has been doing that!!”<br />
<br />
We know what Christian Dominionism is (if you don’t, go back and read parts<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: orange;"> </span><span style="color: yellow;"><span style="color: orange;">one, two and three</span>.</span></span>
No skipping!). We know what they want and we know why they want it. Now
the question becomes: how are they doing it and what are the signs of
their influence in politics?<br />
<br />
Again, we find there to be some overlap between your standard Right
Wing, anti-government rhetoric and the goals of Christian Dominionists.
But some of it is purely a creature of religious zealotry.<br />
<br />
There are many fronts to the Dominionist attack on our way of life;
one of them is the ongoing assault on the social safety nets that have
been in place for decades.<br />
<br />
Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare are
under constant threat of being extinguished so we’ll start there:<br />
<b>Social Security</b>: Technically, the Right <i>hates</i> Social
Security because it’s “Big Government” and costs too much money. That
is, of course, garbage. The amount of money and resources consumed by
our bloated military dwarfs SS but <i>that’s</i> never an issue. No.
The “problem” with Social Security is that it represents the country
pulling together (the “social”) to ensure that no one is left to die in
poverty and hunger (the “security”). This reliance on others goes
against the Right’s creed of “personal responsibility” which is code for
“everyone for themselves.”<br />
The Dominionists, however, have a slightly different take on SS. This
collective pooling of resources for the betterment of all means that
fewer people have to turn to them for their needs. Thus, Social Security
deprives religious organizations of power in the form of less desperate
people. Privatization is a good way to end it (and make Wall St. untold
billions in profit in the process) but for Dominionists, the goal is
simply to make it go away altogether.<br />
<br />
<b>Medicare and Medicaid</b>: The objection to these
stunningly popular and useful programs is similar to the objections
against Social Security but the attack against them is far more
insidious.<br />
Instead of dismantling the entire program the goal is vouchers. But
why vouchers? The GOP seems to be quite taken with them. They want them
for Medicare, Medicaid and schools. This is a clear sign of Dominionist
influence on the GOP because vouchers are an end run around the
Establishment clause of the First Amendment.<br />
<br />
The Establishment Clause forbids government money to be used to by an
organization to evangelize as part of the disbursement of those funds.
In other words, if you take government money to feed the hungry, you
cannot promote your religion while doing so. Also, under no
circumstances, can you <i>withhold </i>services based on your
religious beliefs. So if the Westboro Baptist Church took government
money to shelter the homeless, they could not turn away a homosexual.<br />
<br />
Vouchers, on the other hand, eliminate this prickly proselytization
problem. The legal argument goes like this: Since the money is not
coming <i>directly</i> from the government, all bets are off. By
giving the voucher to the “consumer,” the choice of where to spend that
money is solely up to them. The Establishment Clause does not apply. In
this scenario, a church can turn away any “undesirables” while still
providing services. In addition, they can also pressure the sick, the
elderly and the desperate to embrace their particular worldview. These
groups are already susceptible to manipulation and vouchers leave them
all the more vulnerable to the depredations of Dominionists.<br />
School vouchers are even more easily abused as the schools will be
free to teach Creationism and the Christian Dominionist worldview. Your
tax dollars ALREADY get abused this way illegally as many schools
corrupt the regular curriculum with religion until someone reports it.
Imagine how widespread it would be if it was <i>legal</i> to teach our children that the world is only 6000 years old?<br />
<br />
Grants work the same way. The government gives money to an umbrella
organization, say, the Salvation Army, (a group that will no longer
employee homosexuals) due to their “charity” work, and the organization
disperses the money to smaller groups. Those groups are now free of the
Establishment Clause to push their religious agenda, all the while using
tax payer dollars.<br />
When you hear the word “voucher” or “grant” in any discussion of
entitlements or schools, what you are really witnessing is the Religious
Right attempting to bypass the Constitution. If you take away one thing
from this article, let it be that.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
—</div>
But the Dominionists’ agenda goes far beyond just undermining the
social safety net or subverting it for their own purposes. Dominionists
are hard at work undermining the very concept of America as a democracy.<br />
<br />
<b>Tax cuts & deregulation</b>: Totalitarian regimes
exist with an extreme concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a
very select few. Christian Dominionism is no different. To the
Dominionist, there can be no such thing as democracy. The masses cannot
be allowed self-rule; only those “chosen” by God (i.e., the Aristocracy)
are worthy enough to divine “His” intent.<br />
<br />
And exactly what is “His” intent? Why, that the rich should get
richer, of course! “God” hates taxes on the wealthy and massive
corporationd. This is why Big Business so readily gets into bed with
Dominionists. They are very aware of the desire of Dominionism to
concentrate all the wealth and power of the United States at the top of
the economic food chain. In the schizophrenic world of the Dominionist,
pollution is no big deal and natural resources are self-replenishing,
even oil. Any toxins leaked into the environment are no difficulty to
the faithful because “God” smiles upon those engines of enterprise,
corporations. Therefore, government regulation is not just unnecessary;
it’s against the will of “God.” Of course, the fact that deregulation
only benefits an extremely small group of people while causing untold
misery for the rest is just a coincidence and is probably punishment for
our blasphemous ways.<br />
<br />
When you hear a religious leader proclaiming that the government is
seeking to punish others through taxes and regulation, that’s a
Dominionist speaking.<br />
<br />
Have you ever wondered why it is that Republicans, who seem to
utterly despise the Government, seek to be in charge of it by any
immoral, unethical and borderline illegal means necessary? Have you
noticed how, when they ARE in charge, they do everything they claim to
be against? Run up deficits. Explode the national debt. Massively expand
government. And then complain about all of those things when a Democrat
takes the White house? There’s a very clear pattern of deliberate
sabotage of the country by the Right. Part of it is simple cronyism.
When your political philosophy is “less regulation” you do not put an
unfriendly expert in charge of the regulatory agency of a particular
industry, you put in an industry friend who will do what you want;
Specifically, not regulate. Later, when the corruption is exposed and
the damage is done, for instance, FEMA leaving thousands stranded for
days in a football stadium after a hurricane, you can point to the utter
failure and proudly state that “Government IS the problem!” This is,
essentially, the same tactic used against public schools. Break the
system, use the resulting failure as proof that the system doesn’t work,
rinse, repeat until you can privatize everything.<br />
<br />
Part of it may be cronyism, but the main part objective is to tarnish
the concept “of the people, by the people, for the people.”<br />
<br />
When the Right is in control of the country they do everything they
can to make the government look bad. When they’re in the minority, the
chant of “Government is bad” is nonstop. No expense is spared, no
boundary is left uncrossed, no taboo is considered too great in their
quest to convince the populace that their Government is the worst thing
to ever happen to them. But what’s the endgame? For a Dominionist, the
goal is not to eradicate Government outright but to first subvert it and
infect it with religious extremism. As the rot of extremism permeates
and becomes the norm, it will become easier and easier to erect the
Theocracy that is the ultimate goal.<br />
<br />
When you hear a politician demand a smaller government and more
“freedom” while simultaneously demanding that the government legislate
who you can marry, what kind of sex you can have, who you can have sex
with and what kinds of services your doctor can offer, they are not
describing “freedom” as you and I understand it. They are describing
“freedom” from sin and vice, or, in other words, the “freedom” to not be
tempted by supposedly immoral behavior by making that behavior illegal.
The louder the call for “freedom” while the greater the demand that
restrictions be placed on your personal life, the clearer it is that a
Dominionist is speaking.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
—</div>
The final aspect of Dominionist behavior that we will be taking a
look at is the misogyny inherent in the movement. It’s never been more
apparent that the Religious Right has some serious issues with women.
The Religious Right is attacking Planned Parenthood, which provides
affordable health care to millions of women across the country. They
consistently blame the victim in cases of rape (although this is not
strictly a Right Wing phenomena, they <i>are</i> the most vocal about
it). They have started to speak, openly, about how women should not be
allowed to vote because they are “too emotional”. This is 1950’s code
for “too stupid.” The Religious Right wants to ban all contraception,
taking away all reproductive options for women. <span style="color: black;"><a href="http://thepillkills.org/" target="_blank" title="Somehow, I seriously doubt the science backs this up."><span style="color: yellow;">Including the pill</span></a></span>. Some have even gone so far as to enact <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/24/america-pregnant-women-murder-charges" target="_blank">laws</a> that would place women that miscarry under criminal suspicion unless they can prove it was a natural occurrence. Women are already being <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-m-appel/medical-kidnapping-rogue_b_434497.html?">held</a> against their will if they so much as <a href="http://news.change.org/stories/pregnant-iowa-woman-arrested-for-falling-down">hint </a>that they want to terminate a pregnancy.<br />
<br />
The flood of anti-woman sentiment that has spilled across the country
is unprecedented in my life time. It also makes no sense unless you
look at it from a religious angle. Women have proven themselves just as
capable as men in the workplace, in politics, in the military and in the
classroom. Despite the setbacks of Paris Hilton and the Kardashians,
women have easily earned a seat at the table and have made no small
contribution to the country.<br />
<br />
Yet they are under attack. Why?<br />
<br />
It’s about control. Dominionism is <i>always</i> about control and
in Extremist Chistianity, just as in Extremist Islam, the woman MUST
submit to the man. It’s the “natural order” of things. A woman must
dress modestly. A woman must defer to a man’s judgment. A woman should
remain in the home, raising the children. To do otherwise is to
challenge the male-dominated establishment.<br />
Partly, the need to exert authority over women stems from the
overwhelming insecurities of the Dominionist movement. Remember, the
entire movement is built on the concept that they are under attack from
all sides by enemies who would destroy them in a heartbeat. The role
they have cast for themselves is one of perpetual victimhood and
powerlessness. This is not a sustainable role for a man to be in that is
engulfed by the machismo paradigm.
You know what I’m talking about: I am a man! Master of my castle! I
wear the pants in my family! I am the provider! Grrrr! Arrrggg! Blah,
blah, blah.<br />
<br />
How could such a walking stereotype NOT be threatened by a strong woman? Or even a mildly <i>assertive </i>one?
And so, these manly men of the Christian Dominionist movement lord over
(pun much intended) “their” women and try to reduce them to the
cardboard cutout that was June Cleaver.<br />
<br />
To this end, women are denied reproductive rights wherever and
whenever possible under the guise of “protecting the unborn.” Somehow,
though, <i>all</i> contraceptives are evil in the eyes of the
Dominionist, even the ones that prevent fertilization, thus, exposing
the lie of their opposition. A woman that has control over when she gets
pregnant is free to live her life as she pleases. Unthinkable to the
extremist.<br />
Says Janice Crouse, of the anti-choice Concerned Women for America:<br />
<blockquote>
“…Radical feminists <b>accurately see abortion as a woman’s ultimate weapon in the battle to escape the control of men.</b> The issue is of power, of having the power to call the shots. With abortion as an option, a woman <b>can escape pregnancy.</b>..” (emphasis mine)</blockquote>
Could that be <i>any</i> more clear?<br />
<br />
When you hear a politician rail against abortion mills and the decay
of morals among women, you’re hearing a Dominionist tell you that a
woman must be put in her place.<br />
<br />
If this series of articles has done anything for you, it should have
helped you understand just what it is that is going on in this country
and why. There IS a method to the madness of the GOP. It is not just
conservative politics that are driving us to ruin, but a concerted
effort from a group of deeply disturbed fanatics. Will they succeed in
instituting Biblical law? Of course not, but they will do incalculable
damage in the meantime. They will squander billions of dollars in tax
payer money and resources and ruin the lives of millions with their
radical agenda. For that alone, they need to be understood and stopped.<br />
<br />
edited by Sherri YarbroughUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-63011347031898926282012-02-29T15:02:00.000-07:002012-02-29T15:29:27.944-07:00<h1 style="color: yellow;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The March of Christian Dominionism 3: How Christian Dominionists Combat Reality</span></h1>
<div class="meta">
<div class="date">
June 29, 2011</div>
By Justin "Filthy Liberal Scum" Rosario</div>
<div style="padding-bottom: 5px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 5px;">
</div>
<a href="http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/06/29/the-march-of-christian-dominionism-3-how-christian-dominionists-combat-reality/prayer-in-school/" rel="attachment wp-att-5546"><img alt="" class="alignleft size-full wp-image-5546" height="255" src="http://addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/prayer-in-school.jpg" title="prayer in school" width="198" /></a><br />
Or “Take your stinking evolution off my kids you damn, dirty liberal!”<br />
<br />
So how is the Christian Dominionist movement different than the
regular old Religious Right? On the surface they seem pretty much
identical: both pursue social politics, both proclaim that family values
are of prime importance, both encourage divisive bigotry of one form or
another and both raise millions by appealing to the baser instincts of
their followers. It is not easy to discern where they separate because
Dominionists are not very vocal about their deeper plans for the country
with outsiders.<br />
<br />
The Religious Right is many things, but they do not actively work
towards the destruction and replacement of the government with a
Theocracy. Of course, this is exactly what Christian Dominionists want
and the Religious Right is complicit in their drive to obtain it. These
last two sentences might seem to be actively at odds with one another.
They are not. The Religious Right is more than willing to make nice with
groups they would ordinarily despise to further their agenda. One need
look no further than the pro-Israel stance of the GOP for evidence of
this. The vigor with which the Right defends Israel is a wonder to
behold until you realize that the whole point of supporting Israel is so
that the Israelis can rebuild the temple of Solomon and fulfill one of
the key requirements of the end time prophecies. By the way, these
prophecies also clearly state that most of the Jewish race will be
exterminated at that time. I’m guessing the Religious Right doesn’t
discuss that part too much with the Israelis.<br />
<br />
In any event, Christian Dominionism is very much like the dreaded
threat of “creeping Sharia” that has so many on the Right supposedly
scared silly. A way of life that is antithetical to a secular democracy
is slowly being enacted throughout the country. We shouldn’t even give a
second glance to the “threat” of Sharia in this country when a much
clearer and more present danger is among us. This is not to say that
there aren’t people who would love to see Sharia law implemented in the
United States. There certainly are. They simply don’t have a snowball’s
chance in hell of making it happen. Even in the dreaded Dearborn,
Michigan. These religious fanatics do, however, make an excellent
boogeyman for all manner of unscrupulous people. To the Dominionist, it
is a way of forcing people to make a false “choice”: Will you allow
Sharia to overrun the country or will you embrace God’s Law like all
good Christians do?<br />
<br />
This is, of course, ridiculous. One simply needs only embrace the Constitution to ward off the <i>eeeeevils</i>
of Sharia. That doesn’t work well for Christian Dominionists for
reasons that should be self-evident at this point. The Constitution
explicitly states that religion and government are not to be mixed, and
so it has become a Crusade among Dominionists to rewrite history. This
is, perhaps, the single most dangerous aspect of their agenda, the
wholesale erasure and replacement of reality and history with a more,
shall we say, <i>divine </i>interpretation.<br />
<br />
There are a number of reasons history and, to an almost equal extent,
science are a threat to the “Christian” future. History tells us who we
are and where we came from. George Orwell was entirely too aware of the
need tyrants have to control over this information. In his seminal
work, “1984,” Orwell called the apparatus put in place to accomplish
this task the “Ministry of Truth.” They were in charge of making sure
“history” reflected whatever current day agenda was in effect. With a
push of a button, a war that had been raging for years with one enemy
becomes a war that had been raging for all that same time with a
completely different one. The State must be infallible.<br />
<br />
In the same fashion, after centuries of understanding the First
Amendment, specifically the Establishment Clause, of the Constitution in
a very specific manner based on the words and intent of the founding
Fathers, there are now questions. Despite <a href="http://www.earlyamericanhistory.net/quotes.htm"><span style="color: blue;">numerous examples</span></a>
of most of the Fathers being Deists (not ascribing to a particular
organized religion or even, necessarily, a supernatural force) or even
actively derisive of Christianity, Dominionists insist that not only was
the country founded on Judeo-Christian principles but that the
Constitution is expressly a religious document despite it not containing
a single word to that effect.<br />
<br />
Once sufficient doubt is cast upon the secular nature of our
country’s founding document, everything and anything becomes malleable.
Please note that I use the word “sufficient” instead of “legitimate.”
“Legitimate” would mean that there is a real debate over the facts.
There is not. We have handwritten letters that <a href="http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html"><span style="color: blue;">explicitly state the original intent</span></a>
(there’s a reason Texas is trying to remove Jefferson from history text
books) and they leave no room for doubt about their intent towards
government and religion. But this is beside the point. Dominionists are
more than happy to tell their flock whatever they want, secure in the
knowledge that they will not question. To question is to lack faith.
Ignorance is strength.<br />
<br />
This is the genius of politicized religion. Once a person is a true “believer,” regardless of whether they <i>actually</i>
believe or are too terrified of expulsion to admit they do not, they
will consequently accept any lie they are fed. This serves the dual
purpose of making any claim about how the country should be run seem
perfectly normal and also of further isolating the flock: Of course the
United States should be run according to Biblical law, the Constitution
was divinely inspired, and who could possibly doubt that? Anyone that
says otherwise is a liar and probably an atheist Communist Marxist
unpatriotic traitor. It doesn’t matter <b>how</b> much evidence they provide or how solid their argument.<br />
<br />
They MUST be lying.<br />
<br />
This artificial schizophrenia extends to the realm of science as
well. I say “artificial schizophrenia” because, in the phantasmagorical
world of the Dominionist, everyday life is completely divorced from
empirical reality. Miracles and prayer will solve all problems and if
your particular problem is not solved in this way, the fault lies with
your lack of faith. Again, some of the less religiously inclined are
snickering that all religious people think this way. Don’t make me hit
you with a rolled up newspaper! Those thoroughly ensnared in the corrupt
mythology of Dominionism have no <i>choice</i> but to believe that every aspect of their life is being directly controlled. Cause and effect are as illusory as free will.<br />
<br />
Now is when the massive assaults on science and education come into play. I’ve written about this before as well (<a href="http://www.addictinginfo.org/questions/%E2%80%9Cwhy-do-conservatives-hate-science-so-much%E2%80%9D-or-%E2%80%9Chow-i-learned-not-to-learn-and-trust-my-beer-gut-instead-%E2%80%9D/"><span style="color: blue;">Why do conservatives hate science so much? Or “How I learned not to learn and trust my beer gut instead”</span>)</a>
but it bears a re-examination in the light of Dominionism. Science is
the natural enemy of Fundamentalism and, by extension, Dominionism.
Science encourages critical thinking and free inquiry, concepts that are
pure anathema to a totalitarian religious philosophy. Science also
reduces mankind from a divine creature, put on the earth to rule, to a
not exactly random result of natural processes. We’re still the top of
the food chain but only due to our unique and innate intellect, not
because we were “meant” to be.<br />
<br />
Without the divine origins of man, Dominionism loses much of its
self-granted authority. If the Bible is not literally true, then
religion becomes merely a guide for living a moral life and not the
source of all morality and knowledge as Dominionists claim. To combat
this, there has been a war waged against science in general and public
education in specific for decades.<br />
<br />
As I’ve said before, an uneducated population is far easier to
manipulate and control. It’s hard to think of how to make the world a
better place when you don’t know HOW to think. When you’ve been raised
to believe that there is ALWAYS a Biblical answer to every question, it
becomes so easy to dismiss actual experts and only listen to the side
that says what you want to hear. It doesn’t matter that the religious
argument can provide no solid evidence or facts, you don’t know how to
judge for yourself anyway. This is the point of the Right Wing’s war on
education and it’s all about defunding schools and colleges.<br />
<br />
The Right wants to divert tax dollars to for-profit charter schools
that have not proven to be any more effective than public schools (and
that are far less accountable). Not only does this starve public schools
of vital funds, but it enables the Right to complain how terrible
public education is. It’s an awesome racket: make schools dysfunctional
by underpaying teachers and ensuring the schools are run down and then
use this dysfunction as proof that public education is unworkable.<br />
<br />
The assault on colleges is different. The goal here is to raise
tuitions so high that the choice is either to not go at all or spend the
next 20 years paying off loans. Why do you think Republicans howled in
pain when Obama did away with subsidized loans and cut out the extremely
unnecessary middle man? It was a one-two punch for the Right. Not only
did banks lose billions in revenue they did nothing to earn, it made
school loans less painful for those who need it the most. Notice that
this was not important enough to make any real news. Most of you reading
this didn’t even know it was part of the Health Care Reform package.
Obama tacked it on so the GOP couldn’t block it. Yet, you know all about
Anthony Weiner’s weiner. This should tell you something about the state
of the country.<br />
So, to wit: make public schools function as poorly as possible,
especially in low income areas. Make college too expensive for most to
obtain a degree and then use the resulting failure to justify further
cuts and convince people that home schooling is the best option. When
you break the system of public education, the public will look elsewhere
to educate their children and home schooling is the “answer.”<br />
<br />
Home schooling is a rapidly expanding movement among the Religious
Right. And it is a huge part of their war on science and history. Over
one million children are currently being educated outside of the public
school system; many of them being indoctrinated into the world of
religious fanaticism. Do I sound alarmist? How does an entire generation
raised to believe “<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xKDKq_PPbk"><span style="color: blue;">God said it. I believe it. That settles it</span></a>”
sound to you? Does that sound like a group of people capable of
objectively assessing the challenges facing the country and the world?
Do you think they will be capable of overcoming their conditioning to
embrace any solution that is not fully “Christian?” Neither do I.<br />
<br />
This kind of parallel education has reached frightening heights as
(former) candidates like Michele Bachmann, and
maybe-maybe-not-but-who-can-really-tell-if-she’s-running Sarah Palin
spit out gems like ““<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51179.html#ixzz1QZmSesva">The very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States</a>,” and “<a href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/palin-and-history/"><span style="color: blue;">He who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells…</span></a>” on a regular basis. Mike Huckabee, another powerful voice in conservative politics even has his own <a href="http://learnourhistory.com/go.cfm?do=Video.Play&vid=2"><span style="color: blue;">cartoon series for home schooled children</span></a>.
In it, a group of plucky time travelling kids can be found saying “What
we see and hear isn’t always the same as what we read in books or see
on TV. So what? We know the truth and that’s good enough for us!”<br />
God said it. I believe it. That settles it!<br />
<br />
So we have an “army” of Christian Soldiers whose main weapons will be
pure ignorance, rigid, uncritical thought and blind obedience.
Dominionists have built an entire culture that is separated from the
rest of the world by a shield of dogma. They know how to insinuate
themselves into the government at some of the highest positions and they
know how to influence elections to their benefit. They have massive
financial backing from both their followers as well as corporations that
may not be interested in Dominionists’ social agenda but are very
supportive of their economic goals.<br />
But how will you know if a particular policy from the GOP is simple
conservative greed or something darker and more sinister? How will you
recognize the Dominionist agenda? That’s the question I will attempt to
answer in last part of this series of liberal slander: <span style="color: black;">How Dominionists are trying to undermine our country Or “So THAT’S why the GOP’s been doing that!!”</span><br />
<br />
Edited by Sherri YarbroughUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-9721955411886572602012-02-29T14:45:00.000-07:002012-02-29T15:30:32.516-07:00<br />
<h1 style="color: orange;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The March of Christian Dominionism 2: Where Did It Come From and How Does It Work?</span></h1>
<div class="meta">
<div class="date">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">June 24, 2011</span></div>
<span style="font-size: x-small;">By Justin "Filthy Liberal Scum" Rosario</span></div>
<br />
<div class="wp-caption alignleft" id="attachment_5338" style="width: 270px;">
<a href="http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/06/24/the-cult-of-christian-dominionism-or-its-not-a-cult-my-beloved-leader-and-all-of-his-followers-tell-me-so/christian-nation-large/" rel="attachment wp-att-5338"><img alt="" class="size-full wp-image-5338" height="190" src="http://addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/CHRISTIAN-NATION-large.jpg" title="CHRISTIAN-NATION-large" width="260" /></a><br />
<div class="wp-caption-text">
<br /></div>
<div class="wp-caption-text">
The Statue of Obedience</div>
<div class="wp-caption-text">
<br /></div>
</div>
Or “It’s NOT a cult! My beloved leader and all of his followers tell me so!”<br />
Now that you’ve read <span style="color: blue;">“The March of Christian Dominionism 1″</span> and have a basic understanding of what Christian Dominionism is, let’s take a look at its history and methodology.<br />
<br />
Dominionism is an offshoot of Christian Reconstruction, a radical
philosophy made famous by R.J. Rushdoony early last century.
Reconstruction calls for the replacement of man’s law with Biblical law
with all that it entails. Rushdoony was a great believer in the death
penalty for blasphemy (such as my poor, hypothetical rape victim from
the first piece of this series), homosexuality, infidelity and other
transgressions that would make an al Qaeda fanatic feel right at home.
He popularized the concept that America was originally a Christian
nation founded explicitly on Judeo-Christian principles and that we have
strayed from that original, righteous path. Hence, the needed
“reconstruction” of America.<br />
<br />
Reconstructionism (and, by extension, Dominionism) is a
postmillennial theology. Postmillennialists believe that the way must be
paved for the return of Christ by building the Kingdom on Earth, here
and now. By way of comparison, <i>Pre</i>millennialists believe that
Christ will return and take the faithful up into heaven, regardless of
the state of the world or even believe that the worse things are, the
sooner he will return (this does not lend itself well to a political
philosophy of making the world a better place). Postmillennialists view
this as a somewhat lazy way to get into heaven and believe they are
mandated, by God, to take possession of the Earth and implement Biblical
law in order to fulfill the prophecy of the end times. This seems
particularly odd to me since being successful in this endeavor SHOULD
mean that the Earth is a paradise (according to a very narrow and
disturbing worldview). Where, then, does Armageddon fit in? God looks
down, sees the world being run according his rules just the way he likes
it and says, “Good job! Now I’m going to destroy it!”? But then, I’m
just an ignorant atheist, so who cares what I think?<br />
<br />
Moving forward from Rushdoony to the 1960s, Francis Schaeffer picked
up the torch. While not a theocrat in the same way Rushdoony and
Dominionists are, Schaeffer was very much invested in the “America as
Christian nation” concept even as he shied away from equating faith with
patriotism. It was fairly clear to him (as it is to liberals) that
attaching one to the other denigrates both. He was, however, one of
first evangelicals to make a concerted assault on legalized abortion. He
set the stage for the Dominionists’ take on secular law: “It is time we
consciously realize that when <i>any office </i>commands what is
contrary to God’s Law it abrogates its authority” Sound familiar? It’s a
religious version of “nullification” in which the law can be
ignored but only when it was written by a Democrat.<br />
<br />
As the movement solidified into a cohesive philosophy,
Reconstructionist found that Premillennialists were beginning to embrace
the idea of dominionism (obviously for different reasons but still…)
and so they began to work together. This partnership was formalized with
the establishment of the Coalition on Revival (COR). Formed in 1984,
COR spent two years working out <a href="http://65.175.91.69/Reformation_net/default.htm">a literal blueprint of how life is to be lived under proper Christian guidance.</a>
Think of it as a Christian version of Sharia law (and that is exactly
what it is). It dictates rules for law, government, education, science
(no evolution, of course and Noah’s Flood was real), family – even rules
for helping the poor and disabled.<br />
<br />
Over the following years a number of “schools” have been set up to
teach this singular worldview, and how to hide it from those who might
recognize it for the extremism that it is. It’s not just a way to live;
it teaches one how to think. Seminars are regularly held for activists
to learn the proper way to disseminate these teachings among future
political leaders to great effect. Tom Delay stood up before a crowd
attending a “Worldview Weekend” in 2003 and said the following: “Only
Christianity offers a comprehensive worldview that covers all areas of
life and thought, every aspect of creation. Only Christianity offers a
way to live in response to the realities that we find in this world.
Only Christianity.” These are the people that are infesting and
corrupting the GOP.<br />
<br />
This is a bare bones history of the movement; there are many more
important figures in the rise of the Dominionist movement such as Tim
Lahaye, author of the fantastically popular and seriously disturbing <i>Left Behind</i> series. Lahaye is also a founding member of the highly secretive <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_for_National_Policy"><span style="color: blue;">Council for National Policy</span></a><span style="color: blue;">,</span>
an organization that I only recommend you read up on if you don’t mind
losing sleep for a few weeks. Or months. Another leading figure in the
movement is widely cited “historian” David Barton. David Barton is a
favorite of Glenn Beck’s which, frankly, should tell you <i>everything</i> you need to know about his credentials. I strongly encourage you to read more about this troubling philosophy. Chris Hedges’ <b><i>American Fascists</i></b> and Michelle Goldberg’s <i><b>Kingdom Coming</b></i> are an excellent start. Have some antacid on hand. You’ve been duly warned.<br />
<b> </b><br />
<b>Fear and Anger lead to the Dark Side of Religion</b><br />
<br />
Despite being ostensibly “Christian”, Dominionists act more like a
cult then a church. I know there are some irreligious people out there
snickering that “all religions are a cult.” Stop that!! Don’t make the
mistake of lumping Dominionists in with regular church-goers. They are
radically different. They prey (pun very much intended) upon those who
have little to lose or are lacking in a strong sense of self or have
simply fallen into despair.<br />
<br />
Just like a “traditional” cult, these “churches” teach their
followers how to gain the trust of others by forging a bond (sometimes
real, sometimes false) over a shared tragedy or hardship. This trust is
then used to pull the mark into the social circle of the church. As time
passes, church activities, picnics, concerts, meetings, etc. become all
consuming. Coincidentally (but not really), previous social contacts
are severed and atrophy. This is how a cult isolates the convert.<br />
<br />
Once the isolation sets in, demands are made of the convert: You must
stop listening to rock ‘n’ roll. No, you mustn’t read Stephen King’s
books. Yes, you can go to the movies but only those that are church
sanctioned, other films are degenerate. Sure, you can go to your
friends’ wedding but your friend isn’t “saved” like we are and that
would disappoint us. You don’t want to disappoint us do you? We’re your
family! You mustn’t EVER disappoint your family!<br />
<br />
It’s a bit more complicated than this but you get the gist. The
convert is separated from friends and relatives. Perhaps not physically
but certainly emotionally. This creates a psychological dependence while
providing a constant threat of being expelled from the new “family.”
For the kind of people that are susceptible to this kind of
manipulation, expulsion from what they consider a safe harbor from the
cold harshness of the real world is tantamount to a death sentence. In
reality, it’s nowhere nearly that terrible but you wouldn’t know it from
the blind obedience such a threat instills in these poor bastards.<br />
<br />
But fear of expulsion only takes you so far. In order to form a
cohesive group that will think and act as one (specifically, by
following orders without question) there must be an external pressure.
For Christian Dominionists, this pressure takes the form of a vast
conspiracy arrayed against them.<br />
Stop me if this sounds familiar: “Homosexuals are destroying this
country! Radical, Godless liberals are assaulting Christianity! If we
don’t stop these Socialists they will round you up and put you into
camps just like the Nazis!” If you need more of this, just turn on Fox,
go to a Tea Party or listen to AM talk radio. It will become very clear,
very quickly, that, to the Right, there is a literal war going on and
the Left is, literally, trying to destroy them, the country and
everything that is good and decent in the world.<br />
<br />
<b>We have met the enemy and they are completely made up.</b><br />
<br />
This siege mentality is incredibly dangerous to democracy. The threat
of invasion or attack can weaken the knees of even the staunchest
Liberal and the need for revenge can be all-consuming. One needs to look
no further than the months and years after 9/11. In response to this
attack we curtailed our civil liberties, decimated the Constitution,
quashed legal (and perfectly legitimate) dissention, invaded two
countries, pissed away our moral high ground, angered the entire planet…
the list goes on and on and on. All in response to the threat of a few
hundred or thousand religious fanatics hiding in caves (and one very
comfortable compound but now just caves again). If we were willing to go
that far to counter a threat from that small of a group, how far do you
think Dominionists can get their followers to go to combat the shadowy
forces of a vast secular, gay conspiracy?<br />
<br />
While fear binds them together, anger is the force that drives them. A
constant thread of violence and warfare runs throughout the movement.
They are not just Christians but “Christian Soldiers” in battle against
Satan and his minions, Liberals. These “soldiers” are inundated with
images of the Apocalypse and how the sinners will be destroyed even as
they themselves are saved from the horrors to be unleashed. Anyone that
opposes the “will of God” is an enemy. Suspiciously, the “will of God”
is strikingly similar to the will of the Right Wing and, even more
suspiciously, extremely <i>dissimilar</i> to what the Bible actually says.<br />
<br />
But that doesn’t matter. Dominionists MUST have an enemy to focus on
to motivate the troops. For the moment, it’s homosexuals, abortion and
Sharia law. In 2004, there was a massive effort by the Religious Right
to paint gay marriage as THE defining issue of the election and it
worked. During a time of war and an economic downturn, millions of
conservative voters were somehow convinced that the terrible threat of
gay marriage was far more important than the bungling job Bush and the
Republican Congress were doing. Where was this idea planted? Christian
Dominionist churches (as well as plenty of other, non-Dominionist but
still conservative ones).<br />
<br />
This may sound like a big old conspiracy but what would you call it
when pastors from all over the country have a monthly teleconference to
discuss strategies and issues of a decidedly political nature? Not sure?
Ask Tony Perkins and his Family Research Council. They’re one of many
Religious Right Wing groups that organize churches nationwide and
essentially hand them marching orders. The politicization of houses of
worship is a deeply disturbing trend. It is in these sanctuaries that
people are most vulnerable and the most easily swayed. Millions are
organized to support whatever agenda a select few at the top have
crafted. The irony that the Gospels of Jesus are used to rally the
unwitting faithful to oppose aid to the sick and the poor and to further
the goal of Dominionism is lost only on these abused worshipers.
Despite the restrictions supposedly placed on churches by the IRS, these
bastions of Right Wing politics preach a very specific message of how
the congregation should vote. Their growing numbers and fervor make them
a powerful voice in politics.<br />
And Bush’s “Faith Based Initiative” gave these groups quite the boost.<br />
<br />
Imagine a lobbying group that had unrestricted access to the
President and his staff, played a key role in crafting policy, and
received billions of taxpayers’ dollars to further their work of
undermining the framework of democracy. Your blood would boil if just a
regular lobbying group, say Big Oil, engaged in such borderline illegal
activities. Now imagine that it was a group that is expressly separated
by the very Constitution the President is sworn to uphold from
intermingling too closely with the government. That was life under the
Bush administration and the damage continues to unfold today.<br />
<br />
Supposedly, the Faith Based Initiative was to provide billions to
religious organizations in order to help the homeless and hungry. In
reality, it funneled all of that taxpayer money to sympathetic churches
that were then empowered to spread the Good Word about religious
conservatism. How do we know this? Because one of the more vocal critics
of this scheme was the late Jerry Falwell. Oddly enough, Falwell seemed
to be one of the few conservatives aware of the fact that the
Presidency might not always BE occupied by a Dominionist. What happens
when a centrist or, God forbid, an actual liberal takes office? That
money won’t go to just good and decent Christian churches, but might end
up in the hands of Jews and Muslims! This very real concern (Obama did
exactly this when he took office) gives the lie to the philanthropic
conceit of the original program. If the true goal is to feed the hungry
and shelter the homeless, who cares what religion takes up the task?
But, of course, that was never the intent. The Bush Administration,
(deeply steeped in Dominionism or did you think their Crusade against
Islam was a coincidence?), abused its power to erode the barriers
between Church and State and fatten the purse of the Dominionist
movement at the same time.<br />
<br />
Since then, Dominionists have lost their hold on the White House, so
they have turned their focus towards Congress and the State
legislatures. Now, conservatives are ANGRY! Republicans are OUTRAGED!
The supposedly “grassroots” Tea Party is FURIOUS! Why? GAY MARRIAGE and
ABORTION and SHARIA LAW!!! Just as in 2004, a flailing economy and two
wars (and two half-wars) just aren’t as important as stopping these
supposed engines of social destruction. Yes, these issues took a back
seat to the economy for the 2010 elections but what did the newly
triumphant GOP House majority tackle once it took power? Did they
immediately focus on the economy and create millions of jobs? No. They
attacked gay and reproductive rights and held hearings
on encroaching Sharia.<br />
<br />
The Religious Right has lapped it up. Their anger at these sinful
activities is undiminished. Gays want to make their children into sex
slaves. Abortionists want to wipe out black people. Never mind that 60
years ago, these were the same people declaring that mixed race
marriages were the devil’s work, now THEY are the defenders of the black
race against the depredations of secular liberals. Consistency is not a
strong point for Dominionists and it doesn’t need to be. As long as
they keep their flock angry and afraid, there is no limit to the lies
they can sell. A prime example of this is, again, none other than Jerry
Falwell who, during the Civil Rights movement, often championed the
cause of George “segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation
forever” Wallace. After 1970, when blatant racism became a liability,
Falwell dropped his public bigotry. Instead of standing up and
announcing his “change of heart”, Falwell quietly had copies of
his old speeches destroyed. He moved forward as if he had never
supported the Segregation movement. Down <a href="http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/01/19/down-the-conservative-memory-hole-or-how-i-learned-to-only-remember-how-awesome-america-is/"><span style="color: blue;">the memory hole</span></a> it went and the Religious Right played right along with the lie.<br />
<br />
Fear and Anger, the very core of the Dominionism movement. Is it any
wonder they are impossible to engage in rational debate or compromise?
We’ll look at this parallel world where science is bad, women are
obedient, the Founding Fathers were all Christian and home is where the
school is in my next frothing liberal lament.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-43804335404194911252012-02-28T19:44:00.000-07:002012-02-29T15:28:45.135-07:00<h1 style="color: orange;">
<span style="font-size: large;">The March of Christian Dominionism 1: What Is Christian Dominionism?</span></h1>
<div class="meta">
<div class="date">
February 27, 2012</div>
By Justin "Filthy Liberal Scum" Rosario</div>
<div class="wp-caption alignleft" id="attachment_5208" style="width: 211px;">
<a href="http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/02/27/christian-dominionism/christian-america/" rel="attachment wp-att-5208"><img alt="" class="size-full wp-image-5208" height="201" src="http://addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/christian-america.jpg" title="christian america" width="201" /></a><br />
<div class="wp-caption-text">
No. It's not. And it never was.</div>
<div class="wp-caption-text">
<br /></div>
</div>
Or “Welcome to the Theocratic States of America”<br />
<br />
Thirty years from now, a protestor stands alone on a corner. She is
visibly pregnant. Her sign, written in blood red marker, says “I’m
carrying my rapist’s baby! Thanks a lot, Jesus!” She has only been there
for five minutes but has been called “slut” and “whore” by several
passersby. One elderly woman stops long enough to tell her she deserved
to be raped for not loving Jesus enough. Others look at her with sad
eyes but quickly avert their gaze lest one of their neighbors notice.<br />
<br />
Finally the police arrive to take the woman into custody. She has not
spoken a word. She has no bullhorn. She has not accosted a single
person on the street. Yet she is still arrested by men who barely
contain their contempt for her. She has broken no laws that we would
recognize but still, she is roughly handcuffed and placed in the back of
a police cruiser. Of course, they take great care not to harm the baby
she is carrying; the bruises she’ll have later won’t be anywhere near
life-threatening. In this, she is lucky to be pregnant; others do not
fare as well.<br />
<br />
She is not read her rights because she has none. She is a blasphemer
against the Lord and has been stripped of all legal protections. Her
pregnancy will ensure that she survives long enough to perhaps repent
and beg forgiveness. If not, she will be stoned to death in a public
square by devout followers. Her child will be raised by the State to be a
patriotic, loyal and, above all, God fearing citizen.<br />
Welcome to the Theocratic States of America.<br />
<br />
This may seem like a scenario out of a bad science fiction film but
you would be wrong. This is what the world should be according to
Christian Dominionism.<br />
<br />
What is Christian Dominionism? It’s exactly what it sounds like: a
world dominated by Christianity. Not just under the control of
Christianity but completely and utterly <i>dominated</i> by it.
According to Dominionists, every aspect of our lives is subject to the
strictures of the Bible. Our personal lives and social lives must be
lived in accordance with the word of God. Economics, politics, science,
the arts and the law are all to be placed under the auspices of
Christianity. It is, in essence, exactly what people claim Sharia law
is. Minus Islam.<br />
<br />
Such a system is, by its very nature, a totalitarian one. There can
be no freedom of expression. There can be no free press. There can be no
freedoms of any kind except the freedom to obey the Word. This is a
very appealing concept to those interested in power for its own sake.
Such a concentration of power would be free of morality, ethics, decency
or accountability of any kind. The ability to shape the world at will
is very alluring and the perversion of religion is a powerful tool to
reach that goal.<br />
<br />
At the same time, to those without power or hope, the idea of
surrendering to such total control is more than a soothing balm; it is
something to be craved. The world remains cold and indifferent to the
struggles and pain we all go through. Self-direction can be hard and
messy. Deciding what is right and what is wrong by relying on your own
moral compass can be exhausting. In an environment where a steady diet
of pious, theocratic messaging can make it seem a virtue to let someone
else tell you how to live and what to believe it is easy to surrender
control. At that point, the absolute moral certainty of Dominionists
becomes an anesthetic for the confusion and doubt of the everyday world.
Is it any wonder the desperate seek it like an oasis in the desert?<br />
<br />
Let us clear up two possible misconceptions; while I am an atheist,
this article is not an “ATTACK ON CHRISTIANITY!!” as many on the Right,
and no small amount on the Left, will claim. This is NOT about religion
at all, that is, beyond its use as a means to an end. Dominionists do
not care about the teachings of Jesus. They care about the control those
teachings will provide over the desperate, the lost and the wounded.
Their cries of persecution by evil liberal God-hating heathens like me
are camouflage. By wrapping themselves in the trappings of piety, they
deflect, successfully if you allow it, any direct critique of their
agenda.<br />
<br />
This creates an obstacle on both ends of the political spectrum.
First, while Dominionists are always found among conservatives, not all
conservatives are even remotely Dominionists. The problem is that many
on the Right use religion in much the same way: as a prop to claim a
moral high ground they have laughably failed to reach. This makes it
difficult for Right Wing opportunists to separate themselves from the
Christian Dominionism movement. In fact, it is nigh impossible to reveal
Dominionists for the power hungry hypocrites they are without leaving
themselves open to the very same charge. How does the wolf in sheep’s
clothing denounce the other wolf hunting the same flock and stay hidden?<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the Left does what is ALWAYS does refuse to make
judgments. Oh sure, they’ll cluck their tongues and shake their heads
but they won’t meet the threat because they are afraid of being accused
of secularism or not being “tolerant” of diverse viewpoints. Excuse me,
but that is load of bull puckey! Should we “tolerate” the Taliban? Or
Eugenicists? Better yet, <b><i>WHY</i></b>
should we “tolerate” a group that seeks to install a theocracy where
democracy now flourishes? It is madness to think otherwise but that is
exactly what liberals do. Terrified of offending someone, somewhere,
many stand impotently by and wring their hands when faced with anything
that falsely cloaks itself in piety.<br />
<br />
Of course, we’re not ALL afraid of our shadow. Some of us are proud to be filthy liberal scum and we don’t give a sack of beans about hurting someone’s feelings. Sometimes it really is OK to yell “FIRE!” in a crowded theater. Particularly when the theater really is on fire!<br />
<br />
The other most likely misconception is that this is a full on assault
against the Right.<br />
<br />
Well, yes and no. Don’t get me wrong, I despise the
Right Wing of this country and take pretty much every opportunity to
knock the GOP as the greedy, selfish, corporate whores that they are,
but this is less about the conservative movement than it is about a
specific subset of it. You could write an entire book about how much
you hate Catholics or Mormons and still not have anything negative to
say about Christianity itself. In fact, Christians do this all the time.
Dominionists, however, naturally gravitate to the Right because, among
other things, that is where the anger and fear is. Christian Dominionism
relies heavily on these two emotions to attract, shape and, ultimately,
control their followers.<br />
<br />
You may be thinking that such a small, radical group (and they <i>are</i>
a small group in comparison to the overall conservative movement) would
be marginalized and ineffective. Not a threat at all. Yet, somehow, in
2004, seven of the Bush White House’s interns were students from Patrick
Henry College. Sound like a small number? It sure does! Until you
consider the total number of interns was 100 and they can be picked from
any of the thousands of colleges in the country. Also consider that
Patrick Henry College accepts less than 100 students per year and
specifically caters to homeschooled evangelicals. Suddenly, seven
percent seems to be a remarkably high number for a college you’ve never
heard of with such an incredibly small student body. Just to make you
more uneasy, over twenty conservative Congressmen have had one or more
Patrick Henry interns on their staff. And here’s the icing on the spooky
cake: Patrick Henry College was only founded in 2000! So many interns
attached to high powered conservatives is <b><i>quite</i></b> the achievement in so short a time.<br />
<br />
In the same vein, caucuses are flooded with the furthest of the Far
Right Wing ideologues. This forces would-be Republican candidates to
veer wildly to the Right, usually on social issues, in order to even be
nominated. This, in turn, drags the entire GOP to the right, not always
willingly. We’ve seen a sharply accelerated version of this with the Tea
Party but Dominionists have been at it much longer. You may recall the
days when Jerry Falwell and his so-called “Moral Majority” exerted a
tremendous amount of influence despite being, in reality, a small,
widely dispersed group that merely made a lot of noise.<br />
<br />
This is how a small, but highly organized and extremely well-funded,
group of fringe radicals can control the entire process. Put the right
pressure on the right spot at the right time and you elect Congressmen
and women who do not believe in science and wholeheartedly support
turning the country into one nation under a very specific God.<br />
<br />
This concludes our short introduction to the concept of Christian
Dominionism. Next we will examine how they capture and hold their
followers<span style="color: blue;">.</span><br />
<br />
Edited by Sherri YarbroughUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-63290227444455969382012-02-28T13:39:00.000-07:002012-02-28T13:39:48.639-07:00<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="color: orange;">Why Are We So Afraid of Creativity?</span></span></span><br /><span style="font-size: x-small;">By Maria Konnikova | February 26, 2012</span><br />
<br />
<div id="singleBlogPost">
Creativity: now there’s a word I thought I wouldn’t see under
attack. Don’t we live in a society that thrives on the idea of
innovation and creative thought? The age of the entrepreneur, of the man
of ideas, of Steve Jobs and the <em>think different</em> motto? Well,
yes and no. That is, indisputably yes on the surface. But no in a way
that you might not expect: we may say we value creativity, we may
glorify the most imaginative among us, but in our heart of hearts,
imagination can scare us.<br />
<br />
<div class="wp-caption aligncenter" id="attachment_1724" style="width: 1034px;">
<img alt="" class="size-large wp-image-1724 " height="260" src="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/files/2012/02/innovation-1024x666.jpg" title="innovation" width="400" /><div class="wp-caption-text">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">We're not always willing to take the risks that come with innovation. Image Credit: Creative Commons license.</span></div>
</div>
As a general rule, we dislike uncertainty. It makes us uneasy. A
certain world is a much friendlier place. And so, we work hard to reduce
whatever uncertainty we can, often by making habitual, practical
choices, choices that protect the status quo. You know the saying,
better the devil you know? That about sums it up.<br />
Creativity, on the other hand, requires novelty. Imagination is all
about new possibilities, eventualities that don’t exit, counterfactuals,
a recombination of elements in new ways. In other words, it is about
the untested. And the untested is uncertain. It is frightening—even if
we aren’t aware of just how much it frightens us personally. It is also
potentially embarrassing (after all, there’s never a guarantee of
success).<br />
Consider a common paradox: organizations, institutions, and
individual decision makers often reject creative ideas even as they
state openly that creativity is, to them, an important and sometimes
even central goal. Or another one: teachers have repeatedly been found to dislike students who show curiosity and creative thought, even though creativity is held as an important goal of education.<br />
As Matthew Pearl reminds us in his new historical thriller, <em>The Technologists </em>(out
this week), this general distrust of innovation is nothing new. The
story, set in the Boston of 1868, follows students from M.I.T.’s first
graduating class as they try to unravel a series of disasters that
threaten the city (compasses going berserk in Boston Harbor, glass
melting from the windows of the Financial District).<br />
<div class="wp-caption alignleft" id="attachment_1727" style="width: 298px;">
<a href="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/files/2012/02/William_Barton_Rogers.jpg"><img alt="" class="size-full wp-image-1727" height="640" src="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/files/2012/02/William_Barton_Rogers.jpg" title="William_Barton_Rogers" width="425" /></a><div class="wp-caption-text">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">William Barton Rogers, the founder and first president of MIT. Image credit: Wikimedia Commons.</span></div>
<div class="wp-caption-text">
<br /></div>
</div>
And while the disasters themselves are products of Pearl’s imagination, the extreme distrust of the fledgling technological college—Tech, as its students call it—is not. The school’s incorporation was resisted
by the Massachusetts Board of Education. Funding was perpetually hard
to come by (the more established Lawrence Scientific School at Harvard
received the majority of donations from scientifically-minded patrons).
And the Institute faced a steady stream of threats to its existence,
from the possibility of being incorporated into Harvard to dissolution
from lack of money and leadership.<br />
Luckily, we know how this particular story ends. M.I.T. remains one
of the most respected institutes of higher education in the world. But
not everything works out so smoothly. If you’re a student whose teacher
constantly thwarts you when you try to do something your own way, you
may not have the stamina of M.I.T.’s founders—especially if you come
across such resistance at an early age. Instead, you may find yourself
trained to stop your creative thoughts before they are fully formed,
lest you get in trouble for voicing something that is “wrong.” And
before long, you may form a bias against creativity in all its
forms—even though you will likely remain unaware of your negative views
(after all, don’t we live in a society that values creative thought?).<br />
While that chain of events is hypothetical, the final step is not. New research suggests that we may hold an unconscious bias against creative ideas much like we do in cases of racism or phobias.<br />
The Implicit Association Test (IAT)
is a tool that was created to look for discrepancies between
consciously held beliefs (i.e., a belief in racial equality) and
unconscious biases (i.e., a faster reaction time when pairing white with
positive concepts and black with negative ones than vice versa). The
measure can test for implicit bias toward any number of groups (though
the most common one tests racial biases) by looking at reaction times
for associations between positive and negative attributes and pictures
of group representatives. Sometimes, the stereotypical positives are
represented by the same key; sometimes, by different ones. Ditto the
negatives. And your speed of categorization in each of these
circumstances determines your implicit bias. To take the racial example,
if you are faster to categorize when “European American” and “good”
share a key and “African American” and “bad” share a key, it is taken as
evidence of an implicit race bias.<br />
Over the years, the IAT has shown a prevalence of unconscious biases
in areas such as race, gender, sexual orientation, age, mental disease,
and disability. Now, it has been expanded to something that had never
appeared in need of testing: creativity.<br />
In a series of studies, participants had to complete the same
good-bad category pairing as in the standard IAT, only this time, with
two words that expressed an attitude that was either practical (such as <em>functional</em>, <em>constructive</em>, or <em>useful</em>) or creative (<em>novel, inventive, original, </em>etc.).
The result: even those people who had explicitly ranked creativity as
high on their list of positive attributes showed an implicit bias
against it relative to practicality under conditions of uncertainty.<br />
<br />
<div class="wp-caption alignright" id="attachment_1725" style="width: 340px;">
<img alt="" class="size-full wp-image-1725" height="640" src="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/files/2012/02/Galileo.jpg" title="Galileo" width="520" /><div class="wp-caption-text">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">Innovation
has never been altogether welcomed by society. Image credit: Portrait
of Galileo Galilei, Justus Sustermans, 1636. Wikimedia Commons.</span></div>
<div class="wp-caption-text">
<br /></div>
</div>
And what’s more, they also rated an idea that had been pre-tested as
creative (a running shoe that uses nanotechnology to adjust fabric
thickness to cool the foot and reduce blisters) as <em>less</em>
creative than their more certain counterparts. So, not only were they
implicitly biased, but they then exhibited a failure to see creativity
for what it was when directly faced with it.<br />
True, that effect was only seen in uncertain conditions—but doesn’t
that describe most decision environments? I’m finding it hard to think
of a time when we have to make actual judgments or choices or form real
opinions that doesn’t involve some degree of the unknown.<br />
I still find myself surprised at Mueller’s findings. Not surprised,
necessarily, so much as disappointed. And yet, if you consider the
evidence, they do make perfect sense. As Albert Einstein put it, “The
intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful
servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has
forgotten the gift.” I guess I’d just hoped that society as a whole had
left such bias behind it sometime circa 1868.<br />
<br />
</div>
<span id="authorImage">
<img alt="Maria Konnikova" class="photo" height="60" src="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/wp-content/uploads/userphoto/314.thumbnail.jpg" width="60" /></span><strong> </strong><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><strong>About the Author:</strong>
Maria Konnikova, a writer living in New York City, is a doctoral
candidate in Psychology at Columbia University. Her first book will be
published by Viking in 2013. Follow on Twitter <a href="http://twitter.com/mkonnikova">@mkonnikova</a>.</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-82328145047018628462012-02-28T12:29:00.000-07:002012-02-28T12:29:54.998-07:00<div id="contentMain">
<h1 style="color: orange;">
<span style="font-size: large;">Piracy Doesn't Impact US Box Office</span></h1>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">By BRIAN BROOKS<br /><span style="font-size: xx-small;"> Deadline Hollywood</span></span></span></h3>
Film
piracy has a very little impact on box office results in the U.S. but
likely cuts into studio profits overseas depending on the time lag
between a film’s American debut and rollout overseas. Those are the
surprising conclusions of an extensive <a href="http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Piracy_Study__120217222412.pdf" rel="nofollow">study</a> titled
“Reel Piracy: The Effect of Online Film Piracy on International Box
Office Sales,” spearheaded by Brett Danaher of Wellesley College and
Joel Waldfogel at the University of Minnesota and the National Bureau of
Economic Research.<br />
While researchers in the study acknowledge an increase in piracy —
especially for genres such as science fiction and action films — U.S.
audiences still prefer the theatrical experience. The study found that
Americans are heading to theaters in about the same numbers they would
have otherwise in the absence of piracy, suggesting that perhaps people
opt to see a film in a theater despite an initial pass online, or word
of mouth from a pirated copy of a film may push others to the multiplex.<br />
The study also concludes that since the advent of piracy software
BitTorrent in 2003, the longer the lag time between a film’s release
abroad compared to its U.S. opening, the greater the depression in box
office receipts. Generally, the study found international returns were
7% lower in the sample set than they would have been had piracy not
existed. Hollywood films normally bow in the U.S. before heading abroad,
with opening dates varying by country; countries like Denmark, Finland,
Italy, Poland, and Turkey generally have longer lag times than the UK,
Switzerland and Australia.<br />
Researchers found that in 2003-2004 a movie released overseas eight
weeks after its U.S. premiere had lower returns by about 22% in a given
country. That figure shot up to nearly 40% in 2005-2006 as each
additional week of lag time decreased returns for science fiction and
action titles by an extra 1.3% compared with other genres.<br />
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-10460647272290073792012-02-22T21:04:00.000-07:002012-02-22T21:04:00.649-07:00<div class="post-71985 post type-post status-publish format-standard hentry category-phys-ed tag-brain tag-phys-ed tag-physed entry " id="entry-71985">
<span class="timestamp published" title="2012-02-22T00:01:37+00:00"><span class="date"></span></span><h1 class="entry-title" style="color: orange;">
How Exercise Fuels the Brain</h1>
<address class="byline author vcard">
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> </span><span class="timestamp published" title="2012-02-22T00:01:37+00:00"><span class="date">February 22, 2012, <em>12:01 am</em></span></span></address>
<address class="byline author vcard">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">By <a class="url fn" href="http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/author/gretchen-reynolds/" title="See all posts by GRETCHEN REYNOLDS">GRETCHEN REYNOLDS</a></span></address>
<div class="entry-content">
<div class="w480">
<img alt="Does exercise keep your brain running?" height="316" id="100000001375068" src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/02/22/health/22well_physed/22well_physed-blog480.jpg" width="480" /><span class="credit"> </span></div>
<div class="w480">
<b><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="credit">Shannon Stapleton/Reuters</span><span class="caption">Does exercise keep your brain running?</span></span></b></div>
<div class="w75 left">
<a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/gretchen_reynolds/index.html"><br /></a></div>
Moving
the body demands a lot from the brain. Exercise activates countless
neurons, which generate, receive and interpret repeated, rapid-fire
messages from the nervous system, coordinating muscle contractions,
vision, balance, organ function and all of the complex interactions of
bodily systems that allow you to take one step, then another.<br />
<br />
This
increase in brain activity naturally increases the brain’s need for
nutrients, but until recently, scientists hadn’t fully understood how
neurons fuel themselves during exercise. Now a series of animal studies
from Japan suggest that the exercising brain has unique methods of
keeping itself fueled. What’s more, the finely honed energy balance that
occurs in the brain appears to have implications not only for how well
the brain functions during exercise, but also for how well our thinking
and memory work the rest of the time.<br />
<br />
For many years, scientists
had believed that the brain, which is a very hungry organ, subsisted
only on glucose, or blood sugar, which it absorbed from the passing
bloodstream. But about 10 years ago, some neuroscientists found that
specialized cells in the brain, known as astrocytes, that act as support
cells for neurons actually contained small stores of glycogen, or
stored carbohydrates. And glycogen, as it turns out, is critical for the
health of cells throughout the brain.<span id="more-71985"></span><br />
<div class="w190 right module">
<div class="entry">
<br /></div>
</div>
In
petri dishes, when neurons, which do not have energy stores of their
own, are starved of blood sugar, their neighboring astrocytes undergo a
complex physiological process that results in those cells’ stores of
glycogen being broken down into a form easily burned by neurons. This
substance is released into the space between the cells and the neurons
swallow it, maintaining their energy levels.<br />
But while scientists
knew that the brain had and could access these energy stores, they had
been unable to study when the brain’s stored energy was being used in
actual live conditions, outside of petri dishes, because brain glycogen
is metabolized or burned away very rapidly after death; it’s gone before
it can be measured.<br />
<br />
That’s where the Japanese researchers came
in. They had developed a new method of using high-powered microwave
irradiation to instantly freeze glycogen levels at death, so that the
scientists could accurately assess just how much brain glycogen remained
in the astrocytes or had recently been used.<br />
<br />
In the first of their new experiments, <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21521757">published last year in The Journal of Physiology</a>,
scientists at the Laboratory of Biochemistry and Neuroscience at the
University of Tsukuba gathered two groups of adult male rats and had one
group start a treadmill running program, while the other group sat for
the same period of time each day on unmoving treadmills. The
researchers’ aim was to determine how much the level of brain glycogen
changed during and after exercise.<br />
Using their glycogen detection
method, they discovered that prolonged exercise significantly lowered
the brain’s stores of energy, and that the losses were especially
noticeable in certain areas of the brain, like the frontal cortex and
the hippocampus, that are involved in thinking and memory, as well as in
the mechanics of moving.<br />
<br />
The findings of their subsequent
follow-up experiment, however, were even more intriguing and
consequential. In that study, which <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21521757">appears in this month’s issue of The Journal of Physiology</a>,
the researchers studied animals after a single bout of exercise and
also after four weeks of regular, moderate-intensity running.<br />
<br />
After
the single session on the treadmill, the animals were allowed to rest
and feed, and then their brain glycogen levels were studied. The food,
it appeared, had gone directly to their heads; their brain levels of
glycogen not only had been restored to what they had been before the
workout, but had soared past that point, increasing by as much as a 60
percent in the frontal cortex and hippocampus and slightly less in other
parts of the brain. The astrocytes had “overcompensated,” resulting in a
kind of brain carbo-loading.<br />
<br />
The levels, however, had dropped back to normal within about 24 hours.<br />
<br />
That
was not the case, though, if the animals continued to exercise. In
those rats that ran for four weeks, the “supercompensation” became the
new normal, with their baseline levels of glycogen showing substantial
increases compared with the sedentary animals. The increases were
especially notable in, again, those portions of the brain critical to
learning and memory formation — the cortex and the hippocampus.<br />
<br />
Which is why the findings are potentially so meaningful – and not just for rats.<br />
<br />
While
a brain with more fuel reserves is potentially a brain that can sustain
and direct movement longer, it also “may be a key mechanism underlying
exercise-enhanced cognitive function,” says Hideaki Soya, a professor of
exercise biochemistry at the University of Tsukuba and senior author of
the studies, since supercompensation occurs most strikingly in the
parts of the brain that allow us better to think and to remember. As a
result, Dr. Soya says, “it is tempting to suggest that increased storage
and utility of brain glycogen in the cortex and hippocampus might be
involved in the development” of a better, sharper brain.<br />
<br />
Given the
limits of current technologies, brain glycogen metabolism cannot be
studied in people. But even so, the studies’ findings make D.I.Y.
brain-fuel supercompensation efforts seem like an attractive
possibility. And, according to unpublished data from Dr. Soya’s lab, the
process may even be easy.<br />
<br />
He and his colleagues have found that
“glycogen supercompensation in some brain loci” is “enhanced in rats
receiving carbohydrates immediately after exhaustive exercise.” So for
people, that might mean that after a run or other exercise that is
prolonged or strenuous enough to leave you tired, a bottle of chocolate
milk or a banana might be just the thing your brain is needing.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Thank you New York Times </span></div>
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-78854962744790865362012-02-11T16:34:00.000-07:002012-02-11T16:34:05.254-07:00<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: orange;">Generational angst</span></span><br /><br />Pop demographers would have us believe we're all card-carrying members of various birth cohorts - leading to clashes, of late, between boomers and millennials. But is that really the case?<br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;">By Robert Wright, For Postmedia News February 11, 2012 </span><br /><br />
Members of the Occupy movement in Vancouver and around the world were looking for a redistribution of wealth.<br /><br />Photograph by: Nick Procaylo, PNG Files, For Postmedia News<br />The Occupy Movement that swept across North America this fall was widely criticized for lacking focus, for having no firm demands, and for its refusal to coalesce into a structured political organization. As a result, the various encampments attracted all manner of protesters, objectors and social outsiders.<br /><br />But one constantly recurring sentiment has been the feeling of intergenerational grievance: that youth unemployment is at record levels, that student debt is skyrocketing, and that this generation of kids will be "the first generation to do worse than its parents."<br /><br />It has been more than a decade since North American educators and other sympathetic observers began sounding the alarm on the chronic downward mobility of youth and young adults.<br /><br />In those days, the plight of marginalized, impoverished and debt-ridden kids was exacerbated by the propensity of older citizens to blame the mess on the kids themselves.<br /><br />When Canadian pollster Michael Adams dismissed 1.9 million Canadian youth as "aimless dependents" and "slackers without a cause" in his celebrated 1997 bestseller Sex in the Snow, he captured the '90s zeitgeist.<br /><br />That was before the Great Recession and Occupy Wall Street. Now, instead of slackers, we have a new pop-demography zeitgeist: boomers versus "generation debt" or "the screwed generation."<br /><br />But here's a news flash: How-ever appealing this model of Canadian society may be to tabloid journalists, opportunistic cool-hunters, overpaid cyber-gurus and angry young job-seekers, it is a complete fiction.<br /><br />Thanks to pop demographers like David Foot (remember Boom, Bust and Echo?), we have been fully conditioned to think of ourselves as card-carrying members of various birth cohorts - boomers, Gen-X-ers, millennials.<br /><br />For Foot and his count-less imitators, the only social dynamic that matters is generational competition, where each cohort occupies a distinct social, cultural and especially economic space that must continually be staked out and defended vis-a-vis the others.<br /><br />Generational conflict displaces all other forms of social struggle, pitting parents against children, middle-aged boomers against both the elderly and the young, even the living against the unborn.<br /><br />In this brave new world, Canadians have vested interests rather than traditions. Far from having anything of value to teach each other, each cohort lives in a world of its own making, deeply suspicious of the others and concerned only to prevail in a world of shrinking resources and growing demand for them.<br /><br />There are two main problems with this way of looking at the world. The first is that pop demographers get it wrong - sometimes really wrong.<br /><br />Foot once singled out 1961 as the worst year in which to be born in North America because "you're one of a huge crowd of late baby boomers."<br /><br />Really? Canadians born in 1961 include Jim Balsillie, Tony Clement, Douglas Coup-land, Wayne Gretzky and k.d. lang. Barack Obama was born in 1961, and he seems to be doing fairly well. Ditto George Clooney, Sarah Brightman and Wynton Marsalis.<br /><br />One of the most notorious books in the pop demography oeuvre is The Big Generation, written by Canadian business consultant John Kettle in 1980. Never heard of it? That's because the ink had barely dried on the page before Kettle's scathing attack on baby boomers had become completely anachronistic.<br /><br />According to Kettle, self-absorbed boomers had conspired to turn Western Civilization on its head, abandoning the Protestant work ethic along with earlier generations' noble willingness to "live vicariously on future hopes and their children's prospects."<br />Patriotism? Forget it. Boomers could never "identify them-selves and their interests with national interests."<br /><br />Law and order? Same. The boomers' "capacity for hostility and violence is enormous."<br /><br />Seen from Kettle's pre-boomer, pro-business, civic engagement perspective, the future was a nightmare. Lazy, unambitious and cynical about power, the boomers would elevate the NDP to official Opposition by the end of the 1980s, Kettle predicted, and elect it the Government of Canada before the end of the 20th century.<br />Of course, things did not turn out this way. Most of the political watersheds in recent Canadian history - Pierre Elliott Trudeau's Charter federalism, Rene Levesque's sovereignty-association, Jacques Parizeau's separatist gambit, Preston Manning's neo-conservatism - were pioneered by pre-boomers.<br /><br />Exempting Kim Campbell's brief (and unelected) tenure as prime minister in 1993, the first boomer PM is Stephen Harper, the man credited not only with obliterating Canadian socialists, Red Tories and natural-governing Liberals, but with fundamentally redrawing the Canadian political map and catalyzing a new form of right-wing Canadian nationalism.<br /><br />In the hyper-caffeinated late 1980s, somebody predicted that the 1990s would be the "leisure decade."<br /><br />But as we all know, life in the wired, globalized, 24/7 world grows more and more frantic, and less and less human, with each passing year; futurologist Jeremy Rifkin's 1996 book The End of Work was obsolete before it was even published.<br /><br />Anyone who believed the boomers would usher in a Jimmy Buffett world of unencumbered hedonism must still be reeling from the frenetic, real-time, on-demand world that boomers like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Michael Dell actually gave us.<br /><br />The only thing that appears not to have changed is the timeless refrain of intergenerational warfare: kids these days are all ungrateful, self-absorbed slackers, while their elders are the bloated beneficiaries of a demographic lottery.<br /><br />"Occupy a job," shouted the signs of the thirtysomething stockbrokers on their way past the Occupy Toronto protests.<br /><br />IT IS ALL ABOUT THE FAMILY<br /><br />The second problem with pop demography is less obvious, but more pernicious.<br /><br />The basic social unit in Canada is not the birth cohort. It is the family. This is not the fabled "working family" invoked by our politicians' cynical sound bites, but real, actual Canadian families, in all of their intergenerational complexity, working quietly to do the best they can with the hands they have been dealt. In most Canadian families, "generations" are not at war.<br /><br />They work together. And in most boomer-headed house-holds, parents are not "committing younger generations to a fate of austerity and stagnancy," as one newspaper article so elegantly put it. They are supporting their children and even their grandchildren well into adulthood.<br /><br />To begin with the obvious, not all boomers are the leisured, jogging beauties of the "Freedom 55" commercials. They are as varied by class, ethnicity and gender as other Canadians. Their wealth mostly takes the form of real estate equity - the one advantage of being part of a large "pig in the python" demographic.<br />Big cohorts like the baby boom may have had to compete tooth and nail for jobs, but the same competition also drove real estate values into the stratosphere.<br /><br />Inflated housing values not-withstanding, not all boomers are wealthy, and many never will be.<br /><br />Some, like female boomer divorcees, face a bleak future. According to research sponsored by the Salvation Army, the number of "financially vulnerable older women" in Canada is about to jump dramatically.<br /><br />Financial planners also report a statistically significant number of boomer women leaving the workforce to care for elderly parents and young grandchildren - evidence, as if any were needed, that social services, once underwritten by the state, are quietly being privatized within families.<br /><br />DELAYED RETIREMENT<br /><br />One of the enduring myths of our time - you can read it practically daily in the financial pages - is that boomers who have been hammered by declining investment returns since 2008 have decided to "cling" to high-paying jobs that would otherwise fall to young Canadians.<br /><br />The reality is that older Canadians are delaying retirement as part of a family-based strategy for economic survival, and they have been doing so since the mid-1990s. They are keeping their well-paying jobs precisely because their own kids do not have access to them.<br /><br />The labour market is, after all, the labour market. Com-plain all you like about boomers clogging it up but, to state the obvious, there is no way for older workers to hand-pick their successors.<br />Boomer entrepreneurs may leave their businesses to their children, but for the rest, in this dog-eat-dog economy, where is the material incentive to hand a lucrative and rewarding job to somebody else's kid? In the academic world, for example, faculty renewal would be a growth industry if professors could hand-pick their replacements from their favourite graduate students.<br />Boomers are also pilloried for adopting a careless "work till you drop" attitude toward their poorly planned retirements, but this, too, is a myth.<br /><br />The overwhelming threat to boomers' quality of life in retirement is longevity, itself the product of medical advances and healthier living. Thus, while it is true that Canadians are retiring later than earlier cohorts, what is less well known is that the length of time they will live in retirement is not changing.<br /><br />Male boomers retiring in 2008 could expect to live 15 years in retirement, females boomers, 18 years. Boomers may be the first generation to live decades past the conventional retirement age of 65, but they won't be the last. By 2100, Canadian life expectancy is likely to exceed 90.<br /><br />Academic studies show that older working boomers still con-tribute massively to the national tax base, and also that Canadian productivity would drop if their expertise were to disappear from the economy en masse.<br /><br />One Canadian pundit who has begun thinking seriously about Canada's aging population, Jeffrey Simpson, acknowledges that the government should be encouraging boomers to retire later - to fatten government revenues and to reduce the bur-den on public pensions.<br /><br />INHERITANCE TAX PLANNING<br /><br />What about "skiing," an acronym for "spending the kids' inheritance"?<br /><br />Contrary to prevailing stereotypes, financial planners report that boomers are keenly interested in inheritance tax planning. Why? Because many know that young Canadians' best shot at a decent start in life begins with a leg up from their parents and grandparents.<br />A recent TD Canada Trust "boomer buyers report" reveals that the adult children of boomers are directly affecting their parents' retirement and investing decisions. Seventeen per cent of boomers who expressed a desire to "downsize" their residences (i.e. move to smaller homes or condos) added that they were postponing such plans in order to accommodate their adult children and grandchildren.<br /><br />Have boomers conspired throughout their lives to vote their generational interests in a selfish and ultimately socially destructive way? Iain Reeve, a grad-student contributor to the Queen's University Journal, believes so.<br /><br />"After benefiting in their youth from the most permissive social welfare state ever," says Reeve, "the baby boomers moved into career employment and the years where most people's dependence on government ser-vices declines. The result was a gutting of the welfare state, lower taxes and a greater reliance on the private sector."<br /><br />But the myth of baby boomers as the most politicized generation, capable of mobilizing their electoral clout to advance their own selfish agenda, is simply wrong. Academic studies of the famed political disengagement of youth show that it started with the boomers.<br /><br />The "generation" the politicians have been courting shamelessly since the 1970s are not boomers but today's seniors - roughly 90 per cent of whom can still be counted upon to cast a vote.<br /><br />The greatest triumph in late 20th-century social policy was not the fattening of middle-aged boomers: it was the virtual eradication of elder poverty. As The Economist pointed out in December 2010, it is the over-65 crowd that self-identifies as conservative and votes accordingly.<br /><br />In truth, far from rapaciously exploiting the ever-widening social safety net in the Canada of their youth, many boomers today concede that they completely missed the boat. Take university education. By the late 1970s, tuition was virtually free, and government grants and loans were extraordinarily generous. Nobody knew the party would not go on forever. Boomers who misread the tea leaves and opted not to go to university have been kicking themselves ever since.<br /><br />Their regrets extend to their debt-burdened children. The best evidence that nobody thought much about saving for their kids' education is that there was no government-subsidized Registered Educational Savings Plan nor any demand for one. Boomers can hardly be blamed for failing to save for their kids' education when everyone believed it would remain a bargain.<br /><br />SHELTERED YOUTH<br /><br />Finally, where do Canadian kids themselves stand, those who ostensibly camped out in the nation's parks as part of the Occupy movement's 99 per cent?<br /><br />Last month, the B.C. Securities Commission published the results of a remarkable poll. Three thousand recent Canadian high school graduates en route to post-secondary education were asked about their financial futures. They told pollsters they believe they will be earning $91,000 per year within a decade, that they will own their own homes within the same period, and they will have their student loans paid off in half that time.<br /><br />Groping for an explanation for why young Canadians appear to be so utterly deluded, the authors of the report concluded bluntly that they must be financially illiterate.<br /><br />Maybe. But there is another explanation. Maybe these kids have been so well sheltered by their parents' largesse and generosity that they expect it to continue indefinitely. Maybe boomer parents will continue to provide their children with free room and board, child care and a sympathetic ear, as well as money for tuition, tuition debt, home purchases, car payments, insurance, transit, grad school, start-up business costs, cellphones, whatever.<br /><br />In the past, when youth problems were perceived to be "out of control" - delinquency, crime, unemployment, social tensions, drug problems - governments stepped in to restore stability.<br />This time, although young Canadians are obviously facing enormous challenges, the indicators of social tensions, particularly violent crime, are actually receding.<br /><br />Is it possible that the net effect of Canadians' family survival strategies are creating a more conservative society overall? Is it possible that young Canadians' identification with their parents' economic interests, combined with a lifetime of deferred gratification, explains why they are less rebellious than their parents?<br /><br />It does not have to be this way, of course. No one wants a lost generation of young adults delaying house-buying and child-bearing into their 30s and 40s.<br /><br />As Paul Kershaw of UBC has said repeatedly, many of the challenges confronting young Canadians, particularly young parents, can and ought to be addressed politically, as matters of public policy.<br />Kershaw wants government to help out young families by introducing a $22-billion "New Deal" that would include a national child care strategy and more generous federally funded parental leave provisions.<br /><br />He is right. These are things a rich country like Canada can and should do. We could also make tuition affordable and tuition debt manageable.<br /><br />We could make more of an effort to redistribute wealth on a national scale and to redress the trend of worsening wealth polarization - priorities the Occupy movement has put squarely on the national agenda.<br /><br />We could also find some creative financial mechanisms for redistributing wealth within families, so those with big homes full of adult children can "downsize" while providing their kids entrée into the real estate market.<br />We could do what we said we would do almost two decades ago and end child poverty.<br /><br />The next decade is going to be difficult, everyone agrees on that.<br />Austerity is once again the watchword in the industrialized West, as we wrestle our deficits and debts to the ground and try to rebuild our floundering economies.<br /><br />Now is not the time to engage in silly pseudo-demography about competing generations, as if this alone accounts for the myriad problems facing young Canadians. It is time for serious people to start thinking about serious solutions, and the kids themselves know it.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-small;">Robert Wright is a professor of history at Trent University in Oshawa, Ont.<br /><br />Thank you to The Vancouver Sun</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-7615797840685061612012-02-09T09:58:00.002-07:002012-02-09T09:58:39.226-07:00<h2 style="background-color: white; color: orange; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 1.4em; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: bold; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 30px 0px 0px; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">
Telomere Science</h2>
<div class="entry" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 1.4em; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br />
There are trillions of cells in our body and at any given time a great number are dividing furiously to keep us alive and well. The process is directed by genes sitting on the 23 pairs of chromosomes found in the nucleus of each and every cell. The chromosomes are long sequences of DNA that contain all our genetic material. Each pair of chromosomes consists of one from your mother and one from your father and they are twisted around each other to form a structure called the double helix.<br />
<img alt="Telomere Diagram" src="http://tasciences.com/images/image1.jpg" style="max-width: 100%; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" /><br />
Of particular interest to the scientists at T.A. Sciences are the ends of each chromosome known as telomeres. Telomeres have no genetic function; they are simply stretches of DNA (repeats of base pairs) that protect the rest of the chromosome. These little bits of DNA are critical to healthy cell function and have been likened to the plastic tips on shoelaces because they prevent the chromosome from “fraying.”<br />
However, telomeres become progressively shorter each time the cell divides. When they get too short, cells reach replicative senescence and can no longer divide. The result can be the various conditions associated with old age.<br /><img alt="" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-63" height="252" src="http://www.tasciences.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/what-we-lose-with-age3.png" style="max-width: 100%; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;" title="what-we-lose-with-age3" width="535" /><br />
Scientists have only recently begun to understand the critical importance of shortened telomeres. Research has shown that people over sixty who have long telomeres experience greater heart and immune system health than their age-matched counterparts with shorter telomeres. Thus, it is becoming well-understood that maintaining telomere length is preventing age-related decline.<br />
The phenomenon of cellular aging was first noted by Professor Lenhard Hayflick in 1961. He discovered that cells cannot divide beyond a specific number of times. This is called the Hayflick Limit. Cells reaching this limit become old. Although Professor Hayflick discovered this important scientific principle, he had no idea what caused it.<br />
It took almost thirty more years before the role telomeres play in cellular aging was finally understood. In 1990, Calvin Harley at McMaster University in Canada and Carol Greider at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in the USA discovered that telomere shortening goes hand-in-hand with the aging process and is the direct cause of cells reaching the Hayflick Limit.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-81751146024341380012012-01-29T15:57:00.002-07:002012-01-29T15:57:52.399-07:00<div style="color: orange;">
<span style="font-size: large;">New device will detect infection, cancer in minutes</span></div>
<br /><span style="font-size: x-small;">26/01/2012 8:02:29 PM<br />CBC News </span><br />
<br /><b>Toronto's medical community is buzzing about an invention that could change the way health professionals screen for infectious disease and cancer.</b><br /><br />"We've been working on this, really, for about a decade," said Dr. Shana Kelley, a scientist at the University of Toronto.<br />Kelley spoke as she held a small black device her hand, shaped like a smartphone but bulkier, with a microchip inside that Kelley says can determine in 15 minutes if you have cancer or an infectious disease.<br /><br />The device works with a blood sample or swab placed on a microchip. It then reads - and recognizes - certain types of cells.<br />
<br />Kelley says eventually there will be a disposable cartridge that contains the sample. Instead of days, or sometimes weeks, before patients get their results, with the new machine they're ready in minutes.<br />For those on health care's front-lines, the promise of an early diagnosis means more lives can be saved.<br />
<br />"Infectious disease is the medical condition where rapid turnaround is maybe most critical and our chip, coupled with portable instrumentation, are good at providing very fast answers," Kelley said.<br />It could also save the health care system millions. In the case of detecting prostate cancer it means no more lengthy, costly and uncomfortable biopsies.<br />
<br />"I think it's superb and very exciting," said Dr. Robert Nam, an uro-oncologist at Sunnybrook Hospital, who believes Kelley and her team's invention will transform the medical community in Canada and abroad.<br />
<br />"We can identify patients with most lethal cancer...and, secondly, how about avoiding a biopsy?" he said.<br />
<br />Canada and the United States have invested millions and there's a European company that's jumped on board with more cash for this invention, which they hope will be in use in a couple of years.<br />Expectations are high.<br />
<br />"It will allow physicians out in the field, and I'm thinking public health physicians, to be able to assess patients right then and there," said Dr. Frances Jamieson, a medical microbiologist with Public Health Ontario. She highlighted tuberculosis as one possible disease the new device could diagnose faster.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6071260.post-44712859569860178972012-01-29T15:14:00.000-07:002012-01-29T15:15:37.798-07:00<div style="color: orange;">
<span style="font-size: large;">PRODUCERS PROTEST ALLEGED ANTI-CONSERVATIVE DISCRIMINATION</span></div>
<br />
[<i> A little off the beaten path on this one, but regardless of where its coming from, discrimination serves no constructive purpose whether it comes from the right or the left. - Joe Thornton</i>] Here's a prime example:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">June 6, 2011 by admin - Studio Briefing http://www.studiobriefing.net</span><br />
<br />
TV executives <b style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS",sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Lionel Chetwynd</span></b> and <b style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS",sans-serif;">Norman Powell</b> have quit the Caucus for Producers, Writers & Directors over remarks about conservatives made by several of the organizations leaders. The remarks were originally made public in the recently published book <span style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS",sans-serif; font-size: large;">Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV</span> by Ben Shapiro. In the book several liberal producers, directors, writers and actors boast how they have injected their political beliefs into programs and have ostracized conservatives.<br />
<br />
Famed writer-director Nicholas Meyer reportedly told Shapiro that he “hoped” conservatives were discriminated against.<br />
<br />
In a letter to the Hollywood Reporter, Powell said that the interviews in Shapiro’s book and video clips from them posted online seem to demonstrate that “discrimination [against conservatives] is an acceptable practice to stifle divergent opinions” in Hollywood. He noted that the stated mission of the Caucus is “promoting the artistic rights of the creative community.”<br />
<br />
In 2002 Chetwynd and Powell collaborated on a PBS documentary, Darkness at “High Noon,” condemning the blacklisting of the film’s producer-writer, Carl Foreman, after he was subpoenaed to appear before the House Committee on Un-American Activities to testify about his onetime membership in the Communist Party.<br />
<br />
In his letter of resignation, Chetwynd remarked that he himself had “experienced overt blacklisting for my views as a conservative, at the very hands of those who piously deplore the blacklisting of Communists in a former day. "<br />
<br />
"As 1950s victim Carl Foreman warned me when I told him I was moving to Hollywood: ‘Beware the fearless defenders of the safely contentious.’”<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0