Let's play spot the differences

Canada's Chief of Defence Staff, Gen Rick Hillier, announced his retirement yesterday. Some conflict about the announcements that came through by email today:

From the CDS' email to all DND and the CF (emphasis added):

"I have chosen to retire from the Canadian Forces and end my tenure as your Chief of the Defence Staff in July of this year. [...] I will continue to serve as your CDS until relieved of my duties by my successor, to be named in due course by our Prime Minister."

From the Prime Minister's [propaganda] Office (emphasis added):

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued the following statement on the planned retirement of General Rick Hillier as Chief of the Defence Staff:"

What's wrong with this? On the one hand, we have a surprise announcement (as far as timing goes, anyway) from the CDS, saying he has "chosen" to retire. On the other hand, we have the PM's communications office saying it was a "planned" retirement. But, if it was planned (at least by the PM's office), and the PM is responsible for naming the successor, shouldn't they already know who the successor will be? I suspect this is yet another example of the PMO (Propaganda Minister's Office) trying to colour the facts in their favour.

conservative secrets

Insightful response from a socio-political junkie law clerk friend of mine:

Sorry it took so long to get back to you.
In addition to everything else that "conservatives" have in common, one
strand is a belief in the need for secrecy. And this manifests in many
forms. Conservatives tend to be more religious, for example, and so tend to
believe in universal "mysteries." Conservatives tend to be stricter in
terms of crime and punishment (both at home and on the society-wide basis),
which includes as part of the approach a fundamental belief that authority
(god, state, or leadership) really should not be questioned. To me, there
is a direct relationship between this mindset and the themes discussed in
the article (which, I should say -- and I am sure you picked up on this --
is the same charge constantly leveled at the Bush administration). It
comes down to a belief that those in power have certain knowledge that is
special and out of reach except on a need-to-know basis.
I should also add that American conservatives (Republicans) have hit on a
very easy lever with which to deflect or diminish criticism of this
ultra-secrecy: simply claim that disclosing the information would either
directly undermine national security in a time of war, OR that disclosing
the information would be the equivalent of weakening the special powers of
the executive, which cannot be allowed to happen because this is a time of
war and the executive needs to be all-powerful to confront the "enemy of
the 21st century." In other words, we have power and we will be secretive,
and if you challenge that, you are undermining national security: you are a
traitor.
Can you say "slippery slope"?
My second point flows from the maxim that all politics is local. The
article mentions that the Harper government denied that a conversation
occurred between the prime minister and the president of Mexico, whereas
the Mexican government released a detailed summary of the conversation in
question. This merely reflects political considerations unique to each
country. My bet is that there was nothing to be gained by the Canadian
government admitting that the conversation happened, whereas the Mexican
authorities are always trying to convince Mexicans that they matter, that
their leaders are on an equal footing with foreign leaders, and so on. In
other words, it benefits Mexican politicians to "tell all" when it comes to
talking to foreign leaders. Not so, the reverse.
SPQR aeternum!

Subject: curious to know what you make of this:

PUBLICATION: The Toronto Star
DATE: 2008.04.07
EDITION: Ont
ILLUSTRATION: Allauddin Khan AP file photo Canadians have an
interest in what isgoing on in Afghanistan, says assistant federal
information commissioner Suzanne Legault. ;
BYLINE: Richard Brennan
SOURCE: Toronto Star
COPYRIGHT: © 2008 Torstar Corporation
Government keeps public in the dark, critics warn; Canadians denied
information to which they are entitled
Canadians are increasingly being kept in the dark by the federal government
and its agencies on matters ranging from the war in Afghanistan to the most
routine information, experts say.
Critics are alarmed at the growing trend to deny basic information that
Canadians are entitled to, especially in the two years since the
Conservative government came to power with a promise to be open and
accountable.
Suzanne Legault, assistant federal information commissioner, says that
government and its institutions have to "move from disclosing information
on a need-to-know basis to disclosing information on the right-to-know
basis."
Legault said the John Manley-led panel report into the Afghanistan mission
"hit the nail on the head when it said the government has to understand
that Canadians have an interest in what is going on in Afghanistan and
various issues that the government is tackling."
"The government has to do a better job at disclosing information," she told
the Star last week.
Former Ontario Liberal MPP Sean Conway, who spent 28 years in politics
before leaving in 2003, said the simple truth is that Canadians have a
right to know.
"It is one of the assumptions of a democratic society that its citizens are
going to be provided with timely, relevant and understandable information,"
said Conway, a former cabinet minister and now special adviser at Queen's
University.
Conway said when governments frustrate that flow of information "they are
doing something quite destructive to one of the key pillars of democratic
society."
During its more than two years in power, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's
Conservative government has often been criticized for being unnecessarily
secretive.
Just recently, Harper's aides refused to confirm whether the Prime Minister
talked with Mexican President Felipe Calderon. But Mexican officials
released a page-long news release not only confirming the two leaders spoke
but providing highlights of the topics they discussed.
Meanwhile, Legault said Canadian should not have to resort to using the
Access to Information Act to get information that should be readily
available.
"The Access to Information Act should only kick in as an exception. It
should not be the norm," Legault said.
"The norm should be that we proactively disclose information."
Legault noted that complaints filed under the Access to Information Act
have doubled in the past year, to 2,164 from 1,050. But she is quick to
point out that 70 institutions, including the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation, are now subject to the act, as a result of changes included in
the Conservative's Accountability Act.
Legault said the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada is
investigating additional layers of approval needed before information is
released that are creeping into the process, as well as the routine
applications for extensions.
Critics say the access to information act is also proving to be less and
less useful.
National security and other exemptions are cited to deny the release of
information. And even when Canadians are lucky enough to pierce the wall of
secrecy, the information is either so heavily edited that it is virtually
useless, or is so dated because of delays that it's no longer timely.
The Conservative government promised during the last election campaign that
it would be more accountable and transparent in the wake of the Liberal
sponsorship scandal.
Recent stories by The Canadian Press show the lengths the government or its
agencies will go to restrict information.
The national wire service found that government refused to release
information on compensation paid to Afghan civilians or their families for
accidental deaths or injuries.
The Canadian Press' access to information request was returned almost
entirely censored.
The agency also discovered through another access to information request
that the RCMP is now refusing to release information on the use of Tasers
that must be recorded each time an officer draws the electronic weapon.
The information - such as whether the person on whom the Taser was used was
armed or injured - used to be released, but the national police force
unilaterally decided to stop.
Taser report forms obtained under the Access to Information Act show the
Mounties have used the weapons more than 4,000 times since introducing them
seven years ago.
"In the last 15 years, as governments advertise great openness often
through legislated mandate like freedom of information and other such
policies, ... citizens get less information," Conway said.
On Parliament Hill, access to Harper and his cabinet has been so restricted
that it's a standing joke among reporters. The Hill Times recently carried
a story on how Harper goes to great lengths to avoid reporters by taking
the freight elevator and slipping out the back door.
Harper runs a very tightly controlled government where MPs are expected to
toe the line and where permission must be granted in many cases before they
are allowed to talk to reporters.
Conway said he has been struck by Harper's reluctance to make himself
available.
"Mr. Harper, now Prime Minister for over two years, has certainly made no
bones of his desire to run a highly centralized government and ... intends
to give the Canadian public such information as he thinks they should have
at that particular time."
With files from Bruce Campion-Smith and Tonda MacCharles

Greenwashing exposed at Enbridge

Submitted a small rant to Enbridge today. They're our natural gas supplier, and they've been promoting their eBill service as "Easy. Convenient. Environmentally friendly." Pfah.

MAKE EBILLS ECOFRIENDLY
Your marketing people may claim that your new (since end of January) ebill format is more visually appealing, but it's anything but "environmentally friendly." In fact, it is unnecessarily wasteful of resources and abusive of my pocketbook.
-- Cut the eBill down to two pages so it can be printed on a single sheet, double-sided. I can save paper AND storage space in my filing cabinet that way.
-- Also, remove the colour backdrop - it looks fancy, but it burns through my ink like there's no tomorrow!
If not, I'm going to cancel eBill and have the fancy printing and mailing done at YOUR cost!

I think everybody should wake up from the matrix and take the time to call a spade a spade - and take back some control!

Drop the penny, support Bill C-531

Sent this to my MP, the Honourable Gordon O'Connor:

Sir,
I fully support the withdrawal of the one cent coin ("penny") from circulation. The good people in your department could calculate the exact numbers for you, but purchasing power of the dollar today is less than one-twentyfifth over the past 130 years or so; it therefore doesn't make any sense to continue squandering financial and environmental resources to support its production and distribution. No sense throwing good money after bad, so to speak.
The rounding method proposed for section 8 subsection 2 is reasonable. The resistance from the Royal Canadian Mint (and their spin doctors' attempts to control the damage the results of their November study inflicted upon them) is understandable, and the nostalgic value of the penny should be acknowledged, but as will all things, there comes a time when we must let go. The time has come to recognize that the penny has become obsolete, merely a heavy, expensive reminder of days gone by when you could actually buy something with it.
The only logical alternative would be to enact a "new canadian dollar" worth ten of today's dollars. Then the penny would be worth a dime, and worth fighting for.

Sincerely,

post-existence

In the end, nobody goes to a heaven or a hell except in the hearts and minds of those whose lives they've touched.

Heaven being that place in our hearts where we preserve the memories of loved ones who have moved on; hell is that place where we shackle our spirits to memories of those who have crossed us.

religion and the survival of mankind

Humanity is blessed with enough different religions, each effective to varying degrees against any particular threat, that, on the whole, allows it (humanity) to survive any and all threats to its existence. The power they (religions) will enjoy will ebb and flow over time in response to perceived threats. Meanwhile, the conflicts between them are necessary to keep mankind's skills, wits and swords sharp and groups cohesive; ready to fight for a common objective, if ill-aimed and (generally) misunderstood.

Religion, in that sense, is the ideological codification of knowledge and the ritualization of survival tips and tricks that have enabled the tribe/race/species to perpetuate itself thus far, and that, ultimately, allow it to carry its part of the greater Knowledge so that one day, It can all be put together again.

head shaker

ugh.
Dems vs Republicans today, ballers/crips tomorrow.
The future is in great hands alright!

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/15851207/detail.html

oil prices

mmm... is it time we adopt the gold standard again? or some other more stable commodity? apparently the authority of the US dollar is being threatened.

Iran to OPEC: Stop selling Oil in US Dollars
Monday, 2008-04-07

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is urging OPEC members to form a joint bank and stop pricing oil trades in U.S. dollars.

According to the Iranian government's Web site, Ahmadinejad told OPEC Secretary General Abdalla Salem el-Badri the cartel "should establish a joint bank as well as having joint currency."

Oil is priced in U.S. dollars on the world market, and the currency's depreciation has concerned producers because it has contributed to rising crude prices and eroded the value of their dollar reserves.

Iran has repeatedly urged OPEC members to shift sales away from dollar. But Iran's proposal to trade oil in a basket of currencies is not supported by enough OPEC members, which include staunch U.S. allies such as leading producer Saudi Arabia.

http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/693/52/

rights shmights

The thing that bothers me most, is that the public doesn't seem to care, that they almost seem relieved of being able to delegate their fundamental democratic authority to people working in some neogothic tower with secret passageways and exits. Meanwhile, people are busying themselves with meaningless stuff like redecorating, installing big screen HDTVs, bigger fancier cars, and Hollywood starlets leading the craze of self-destruction.

The Toronto Star, 2008.04.07, page A13
COPYRIGHT: 2008 Torstar Corporation
Government keeps public in the dark, critics warn; Canadians denied information to which they are entitled
Canadians are increasingly being kept in the dark by the federal government and its agencies on matters ranging from the war in Afghanistan to the most routine information, experts say.
Critics are alarmed at the growing trend to deny basic information that Canadians are entitled to, especially in the two years since the Conservative government came to power with a promise to be open and accountable.
Suzanne Legault, assistant federal information commissioner, says that government and its institutions have to “move from disclosing information on a need-to-know basis to disclosing information on the right-to-know basis.”
Legault said the John Manley-led panel report into the Afghanistan mission “hit the nail on the head when it said the government has to understand that Canadians have an interest in what is going on in Afghanistan and various issues that the government is tackling.”
“The government has to do a better job at disclosing information” she told the Star last week.
Former Ontario Liberal MPP Sean Conway, who spent 28 years in politics before leaving in 2003, said the simple truth is that Canadians have a right to know.
“It is one of the assumptions of a democratic society that its citizens are going to be provided with timely, relevant and understandable information” said Conway, a former cabinet minister and now special adviser at Queen’s University.
Conway said when governments frustrate that flow of information “they are doing something quite destructive to one of the key pillars of democratic society.”
During its more than two years in power, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government has often been criticized for being unnecessarily secretive.
Just recently, Harper’s aides refused to confirm whether the Prime Minister talked with Mexican President Felipe Calderon. But Mexican officials released a page-long news release not only confirming the two leaders spoke but providing highlights of the topics they discussed.
Meanwhile, Legault said Canadian should not have to resort to using the Access to Information Act to get information that should be readily available.
“The Access to Information Act should only kick in as an exception. It should not be the norm” Legault said.
“The norm should be that we proactively disclose information.”
Legault noted that complaints filed under the Access to Information Act have doubled in the past year, to 2,164 from 1,050. But she is quick to point out that 70 institutions, including the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, are now subject to the act, as a result of changes included in the Conservative’s Accountability Act.
Legault said the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada is investigating additional layers of approval needed before information is released that are creeping into the process, as well as the routine applications for extensions.
Critics say the access to information act is also proving to be less and less useful.
National security and other exemptions are cited to deny the release of information. And even when Canadians are lucky enough to pierce the wall of secrecy, the information is either so heavily edited that it is virtually useless, or is so dated because of delays that it’s no longer timely.
The Conservative government promised during the last election campaign that it would be more accountable and transparent in the wake of the Liberal sponsorship scandal.
Recent stories by The Canadian Press show the lengths the government or its agencies will go to restrict information.
The national wire service found that government refused to release information on compensation paid to Afghan civilians or their families for accidental deaths or injuries.
The Canadian Press’ access to information request was returned almost entirely censored.
The agency also discovered through another access to information request that the RCMP is now refusing to release information on the use of Tasers that must be recorded each time an officer draws the electronic weapon.
The information - such as whether the person on whom the Taser was used was armed or injured - used to be released, but the national police force unilaterally decided to stop.
Taser report forms obtained under the Access to Information Act show the Mounties have used the weapons more than 4,000 times since introducing them seven years ago.
“In the last 15 years, as governments advertise great openness often through legislated mandate like freedom of information and other such policies, ... citizens get less information” Conway said.
On Parliament Hill, access to Harper and his cabinet has been so restricted that it’s a standing joke among reporters. The Hill Times recently carried a story on how Harper goes to great lengths to avoid reporters by taking the freight elevator and slipping out the back door.
Harper runs a very tightly controlled government where MPs are expected to toe the line and where permission must be granted in many cases before they are allowed to talk to reporters.
Conway said he has been struck by Harper’s reluctance to make himself available.
“Mr. Harper, now Prime Minister for over two years, has certainly made no bones of his desire to run a highly centralized government and ... intends to give the Canadian public such information as he thinks they should have at that particular time.”
With files from Bruce Campion-Smith and Tonda MacCharles

Why should Canadians allow HIM (or anyone, for that matter) to decide when we're ready for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

getting to know him

link http://today.reuters.com/News/ArticleBlog.aspx?type=technologyNews&w1=B7ovpm21IaDoL40ZFnNfGe&w2=B82x9Ksc5UNVzDjpITcIrRbi&src=blogBurst_technologyNews&bbPostId=BziAjE8MY3PgCz2P2YKp38ce1B8Tb2JsJxBsYCz4lhZZqYUFsv&bbParentWidgetId=B9TtxIkobbLVBgDsLF1sak8
Could be an icebreaker, or simply a game of peekaboo with the USA prez.

bubbles speak

How to stir things up a bit - reclaim the corporate advertising space for our own collective benefit!
(disclaimer: i do not endorse vandalism, so don't do it. but if you already see an ad desecrated with a blank bubble, the ice has obviously been broken already so no foul if you add to it!)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
There was a Canadian documentary about this on TV a long time ago, but recently I read that a guy in NYC is also doing it. He just puts blank stickers on advertisements and lets people write in their own comments. I like the "street bubbles" ones in the politics & social commentary.
http://www.thebubbleproject.com/01.Bubbles/BubblesFrameset.htm

morning poetry

was talking about raelians with a colleague this morning. he asked if they were the ones that committed mass suicide a few years ago - i said, no those were the sun cultists (temple of the sun?), or some other group of lemmings blindly following a self-ordained leader into annihilation.
i don't know what inspired that particular bit of prose... maybe the lecture about creationist "science" and biblical "facts" in my carpool this morning? Universe only knows.

convenience or democracy?

given that a truly democratic society needs a well-informed and empowered electorate;

given that, when one has too many choices in front of them, they cannot easily commit to a particular option confident that they will be satisfied with it ("embarras du choix");

knowing that humans, as investors and consumers, will wait until the dust has settled and a clear winner can be announced (or at least confidently predicted) (examples beta vs VHS, blu-ray vs hd-dvd) before investing heavily in a particular technology and/or buying that equipment;

knowing that once investors and consumers converge on a particular technology, it becomes the de facto standard and the people behind it are propelled into high financial/social/political status (which enables them to suppress/oppress the competition even more);

I am starting to understand that entrenching freedoms of speech, religion, etc were deliberately applied in the constitutions of our fine countries to ensure that no one interest group could gain a power advantage over another. with so many groups competing for our interests, our support and/or our allegiance, we generally ignore them and carry on with our own merry ways, content in waiting for the dust to settle before having to choose sides (at which point it may be a matter of life or death). the multitude of social options protected by our laws have effectively been a societal paralyzer (we have no single-recognized system of lords, kings, princes, marshals, bishops, etc in our society). This paralysis is fundamental to an effective democracy where all can thrive side by side as equals, without fear of retribution, competition nor profound compromise.

Bill C-10, currently before the Senate, threatens that social harmony.

Bill C-10 originated years ago under the Liberals and was carried forward by the Conservatives. It will allow the Heritage minister and/or a secret group of political appointees (unknown to, and with no accountability to, the people) to withdraw eligibility for tax credits for a television or movie production deemed "against the public interest" at any time, without justification. Examples cited in its defence are extreme violence, pedophilia, or other such "senseless" content that is not educational and threatens "our good tastes."

Seemingly harmless at first glance. But what are the ramifications on the entertainment industry? Producers need private investment, and private investors need a certain degree of confidence in the projected numbers before parting with their money. Bill C-10 puts those projections, and therefore private funding, at risk. Removing that lever will oblige producers to rely a lot more heavily on ticket sales. Resulting productions will therefore be lower-budget, less appealing, and a whole lot more conventional. (just look at what happened when the evening news, which the networks once provided as a public service, were forced to be at least revenue-neutral: they had to cater to an disinterested public in order to generate the required advertising revenue, and voila, today's info-tainment industry).

Bill C-10 will have a similar effect: anything even perceived to be controversial (at least the kind of controversial that encourages consideration of alternate viewpoints, intelligent debate and generates informed discussion) or even potentially inconvenient politically, will be avoided, and democracy will be starved of yet another pillar.

Social paralysis resulting from an excess of available philosophical options is a threat - but only to groups with delusions of grandeur, private agendas and an insatiable appetite for power. To the ordinary people like you and I who want to live and let live, there is no greater ally. The arts industry should not be subservient to government pollsters. C-10 must be amended to reflect that.

People get what they are willing to pay for, and ultimately, what they deserve.

Those who give up freedom in favour of security deserve neither and lose both.

parking like an a-hole

print and pack your own parking notices:
http://youparklikeanasshole.com

in case you see others like these:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/93742085@N00/pool/

(edited to add hyperlinks to please some people)

more Neo-Con rhetoric exposed

IN RECENT MONTHS, the standard mantra of Canadian defence analysts has been that NATO is not "stepping up to the plate" in southern Afghanistan. As most European countries are unfamiliar with the rules of North American baseball, this phrase has undoubtedly left our maligned allies somewhat confused.

What would leave our NATO partners even more perplexed would be Canada's claim that as a nation, we are "punching above our weight" in the international defence ring. This assessment has been so oft espoused by retired generals and tub-thumping historians that even the esteemed former Liberal deputy prime minister John Manley has begun to believe this mantra.
Included in Manley's independent report on extending Canada's commitment to Afghanistan was the caveat that NATO needed to furnish another 1,000 combat troops to reinforce our contingent in Kandahar. While most other NATO countries have declined Manley's request as though Canada were offering them the Ebola virus, France has hinted that it may provide an additional 700 soldiers.

Although this reinforcement has yet to be officially announced, the minute the rumour began circulating that the French troops would be heading into the less volatile eastern provinces and not Kandahar, the tub-thumpers hastily renewed their "bash France" chorus. "Shirkers!" shouted the chest-beating Colonel Blimps, while other commentators pointed at the massive manpower of France's armed forces as further proof that they should be doing more to help us.
One enraged reader wrote to me recently to opine that after more than 100,000 Canadians lost their lives in two world wars fighting for France, "we shouldn't have to beg them for support."
As this whole issue has obviously touched a nerve within our defence community, perhaps it is time to take a little of the emotion out of the debate and replace it with rational argument.

First of all, for comparison purposes, I think it is necessary to establish some common groundwork. France has a population of roughly 64 million people, while there are just over 33 million residents in Canada. Although not exactly scientific, if collective defence is to be borne by nations' citizens on an equal basis, France would be required to roughly double Canada's contribution to international security.

So let's have a look at how we actually stack up against those "shirking Frenchies." First of all, France maintains a standing regular force of 348,000. To match that output, Canada should field 174,000 full-time troops instead of the paltry 62,000 we have enrolled.

In 2007, France spent US$59.6 billion on their defence budget. Half of that would be $28.8 billion, but Canada only spent 50 per cent of that total (roughly $15 billion) on our military last year.

France spends 2.4 per cent of its GDP on its military. Canada has a faster growing economy and one-third of France's international public debt, yet we spend just 1.2 per cent of our GDP on national defence.
Based on these numbers, as a nation, we are, in fact, punching well below our weight.

So let's narrow the focus down to our admittedly much under-sized military. Given the fact that we have 2,900 troops deployed overseas on international missions, this must put those "shirking Frenchies" to shame. With all those retired Canadian officers pointing the finger of guilt at France, surely our troops can take pride in the fact that they are shouldering a bigger burden of responsibility than their French counterparts.

Once again, we need to examine the numbers. Given their former colonial responsibilities in the Caribbean, Africa and Middle East, France has more than 33,000 troops deployed abroad at all times. While the tub-thumpers will be quick to point out that some of France's missions are not currently considered "hot," at least 11,000 of those troops are in fact engaged in stabilization missions. France also maintains a surge capability to manage unforeseen crises such as the one that erupted in Lebanon in 2006.
By contrast, Canada has all of its deployable military eggs in one basket labelled Afghanistan.
As Defence Minister Peter MacKay heads to the NATO summit next month, he needs to remember that the self-inflating propaganda and rhetoric that plays out so well at home is not substantiated by fact.
Canada has been a lightweight within the NATO alliance for decades. That, coupled with the fact that we didn't just ask for Kandahar but demanded it, makes us look even more foolish now that we're in over our heads and demanding support. )
Scott Taylor, editor-in-chief of Espirit de Corps magazine

city never sleeps, but time does stop in New York

I love it - wish I had the time (and genius) to do that kind of stunt here too.

What greater gift can we offer, but to break people's routines and make them wonder?

> http://current.com/items/88830919_time_stops_at_grand_central

mint madness

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/10/05/canadian-mint-we-own.html
that's just plain stupid. I sincerely hope that's made up.
Anyway, 2008 marks the 150th year of the penny in Canada, you might have seen the posters at bus stops and such. From wikipedia: "The first Canadian cents were struck in 1858..."
The penny, strike that, the "one cent piece," SHOULD BE ABOLISHED.
Why are people still attached to this shinny copper (coloured) coin? Is it because they think they'll get ripped off by vendors who round up? Well, let them read the following about inflation and Canadian history:

While consumer price data prior to 1914 are unavailable, a broader measure of inflation, the gross domestic product (GDP) deflator, is available back to 1870 (Leacy 1983). While the CPI and GDP
deflator can diverge, they tend to move together over time. Since 1870, with annual GDP inflation averaging 3.6 per cent, the Canadian dollar has lost more than 96 per cent of its value. Again, this is equivalent to saying one Canadian dollar in 1870 would have the purchasing power of roughly $26.70 in today’s money.

So, for those who are attached to the penny, don't understand inflation, and can't do math quickly, let me paraphrase that to say that in today's prices, the smallest coin back in 1870 was worth more than the 25c piece today. Working it the other way around, today's penny was worth about .04cents back then. They obviously didn't feel anything that insignificant was necessary back then, so why should we?
Meanwhile, taxpayers are payrolling the lawyers suing the city of Toronto, and the advertising campaign for the 150th year of the coin. And you're worried about being shortchanged at the till for the rare cash transaction? ha! literally penny-wise pound stupid.

telephone number conventions

with 10-digit dialing, why do people/business still write the area code in brackets? the reason why it was put in parentheses is because it was optional. Guess what? NOT ANY MORE. sheesh. use a hyphen (or even a dot if you insist) but fergoshsakes, drop the parentheses already!

Open letter to my employer

frustrate[1,transitive verb]

Pronunciation:

\ˈfrəs-ˌtrāt\

Etymology:

Middle English, from Latin frustratus, past participle of frustrare to deceive, frustrate, from frustra in error, in vain

(1): to make ineffectual : bring to nothing (2): impede, obstruct b: to make invalid or of no effect

Thanks, Mr. Employer, for your gross negligence in submitting an old, non-compliant resumé on a bid to extend my current position, instead of the up to date one that I tailored specifically for this purpose. If you wish to contact me, I'll either be in the unemployment line or begging at the heals of your competition.

things that make you go hmmm...

If knowledge is the key to freedom, why is thinking also called "de-liberation" ?

economic or gag stimulus?

You wouldn't have seen this type of spin vs reality journalism when the Cons first took power:

[When asked if he would match the $130-billion US stimulus package being adopted in the United States,] Flaherty said the government has already done enough to stimulate the economy. He said tax measures introduced by the Conservatives since coming to office in January 2006 - estimated to be worth $190 billion by 2012 - [... are ] "a huge stimulus to the Canadian economy, much more than what our American colleagues are thinking of doing in the United States. We've already done it in Canada."
The two initiatives are difficult to compare, however, because the Canadian measures include tax reductions and other initiatives already in place and some that will come into effect as late as 2012, while the U.S. package is targeted for immediate relief.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/02/06/flaherty-budget.html

Glad to see the media are overcoming their fear/awe/courtship with the neoCons.

PS. a $130-billion stimulus package for the US economy? seriously? I wonder if that contravenes NAFTA and other trade agreements... even if it is I doubt the Harper government will challenge it...

haute politics

Like in haute cuisine, O'Brien seems to be big on presentation but short on substance.
Urging business leaders to turn out the lights Saturday from 8 to 9pm is a great statement, but really, what effect will it have on compliance? most businesses (whom I expect already shut off most of their lights during non-business hours) are closed during that time, except for retail where utter darkness doesn't really encourage consumer spending or deter crime that well. If the city was really serious about climate change and the environment, he would encourage higher electricity prices. THAT would balance out the cost-benefit ratio of energy saving initiatives a whole lot more effectively!

Mayor O'Brien joins chorus of cities turning out lights
Jake Rupert, Ottawa Citizen
Published: Thursday, January 31, 2008

The City of Ottawa has joined a world-wide initiative aimed a bringing attention to climate change, and municipal officials want all businesses and residents to get behind the cause.

The initiative, called Earth Hour, is sponsored by the World Wildlife Fund. It will see people from around the world in cities from Copenhagen to Sydney turn off all their lights from 8 p.m. to 9 p.m. on Saturday, March 29.

Thursday morning, during a speech to members of the Greater Ottawa Chamber of Commerce, Mayor Larry O'Brien urged the city's business leaders to get behind the event and pledge to shut off the lights in their buildings.

"I'm calling on you to pledge support for this," he said. "It will show the City of Ottawa, its business leaders, and its people are serious about climate change and the environment. I'm proud of our accomplishments in these areas, but there's a lot more work to be done and this will show our commitment."

Science, Evolution, and Creationism

Downloaded this book from
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11876.
total of 89 pages, with lots of pretty pictures. I look forward to reading it in my "free time."

deep thoughts

Education is the key to freedom but for the burden of awareness it brings.

not out of the woods yet

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/01/22/afghan-journalist.html

The drug of combat

I have never actually been there, but this rings instantly true to me:

Dr Kevin Patterson is a critical care specialist from Nanaimo, B.C. who served (as a civilian) with our Multinational Medical Facility at Kandahar Airfield in February and March of 2007. He has written a book on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan entitled "Outside the Wire." LGen (ret'd) Romeo Dallaire, a Canadian senator, has written a foreword to the book which is excerpted below.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=238274

The drug of combat
In a new book, Canadian soldiers and aid workers deliver eyewitness tales from Afghanistan. In its forward, excerpted below, Romeo A. Dallaire explains how their experiences will change them - in good ways, and bad Romeo A. Dallaire, Special to the National Post Published: Tuesday, January 15, 2008.
In account after account from the trenches of Vimy, the front lines of the liberation of Holland and outside the wire in Afghanistan, we struggle -- soldiers struggle -- with how to convey the real reality. Sometimes even with what is the real reality.
In Afghanistan, experiencing the intensity of battle; being the cause of the destruction of villages; being able to do little to address the extreme poverty and deprivation of the children; witnessing the burden and abuse of women in this male-dominated social order; hearing the suffering and cries of the wounded, civilian and military alike; seeing the cold and cruel face of death on your enemy as well as on your comrade: These are some of the realities veterans carry back to Canada.
When they arrive home, other realities may shock them: the unseemly opulence of our country; the debates and posturing of politicians wanting to grab the next headline without knowing much about the war; the air of security that envelops civilians as they go so earnestly about their daily routines, detached from any sense of the threat encountered daily by their nation's representatives abroad; the consuming fervour and stress generated by our keen work ethic in this industrialized society; being able to hit the off switch on the remote when the tube projects too much hurt and agony. Is this the mindset the veterans of Afghanistan, and so many of their predecessors, are expected to slip into once again?
The reality of combat in Afghanistan or the reality of life back home -- which one does the young warrior most have to grapple with? Which actually comforts him most? Which one does the doctor cling to as she faces the passage of wounded through the Kandahar military hospital? Which does the battlefield humanitarian clutch to his breast to weather the moral and ethical dilemmas of service?
As the adrenalin high of the war zone recedes ever so slowly, the hurt rises in your stomach and buckles your shoulders under the weight of grief and sorrow. You're surprised to feel the deep ache of lonesomeness as you sit once again at your family dinner table -- where you longed to be. Though you deny it to the people who love you, the people in your home life who rely on you, you long for extreme emotions: the pounding of your heart in your throat so strong you nearly choke; the perverse exhilaration of defying death time and time again; the intoxicating spasm of raw power you experience among the explosive lights of bursting projectiles, with their
acrid smell and deafening blasts; the climax of battle, which leaves you drowning in sweat and relieved to be alive.
How can we -- how can they -- stay off that drug of combat, that rush into temporary oblivion that has absolutely no equal in the human experience? I can think of no civilian equivalent where one's job is to offer up life and limb for a mission, a cause, a buddy, another human being who is just as human and vulnerable as you. In the aftermath of combat, forever burnt into the wiring of a combatant's brain is another reality, which invades everyday life with a clarity and speed that can surprise, disillusion, depress and elate all at once. In my experience, no amount of time can dampen this impact on a soldier's psyche.
Aptly, some of the writings in this revealing explode and pierce the reader with an unbridled energy and clarity that pulls at the heart and drives right to the soul. Reading these pages is like hearing voices from the beyond, like seeing ghosts wandering the recesses of all the world's battlefields.
A reader will also encounter the kind of soldiers' stories that wars always produce but that often remain unheard, unread: statements that come out so spontaneously and so to the point. In the field hospital at Kandahar airbase, young Corporal Ryan Pagnacco, having been severely wounded in action, wakes up from his drug-induced torpor to the sound of rocket and mortar fire nearby. As he lies helpless in his bed, the nurse throws a blast blanket over him, and he asks: "Are we being attacked?" The reply comes immediately with calm and serious intent: "Yes ... go back to sleep." Can one imagine a more suitable response from a caregiver to an anxious patient
fresh from the front?
Many serve and so few are recognized or even receive a word of thanks. Often
the intensity of the battle prevents its leaders from noticing a fait d'armes of heroic proportions. At other times, the leaders themselves are wounded or killed and are not there to pass word up the line of a warrior's feat committed by a private. At other times, the cohesiveness of the group brings about a victorious outcome or a disciplined withdrawal under fire: All are truly heroes, yet all simply feel that they just did their jobs.
It is only when the tired, dirty, hungry and thirsty combatants find a moment of rest that the vividness, the adrenalin rush and the steady vise-grip on their stomachs catches them by surprise, replaying in slow motion the rage, fear, sorrow and extraordinary high of facing death head-on and surviving.
The anecdotes and jokes, the technical and emotional descriptions, the blood-curdling and sad exposes: All are present in these letters home from the battlefield in a far-off land. The human dignity and sorrow, as well as the elation of victory and the emptiness of loss, are laid out in the participants' own innocent, lively and clear prose -- the richness of which is incalculable.
-Romeo Alain Dallaire is a Canadian senator. In 1993 and 1994, he served as
Force Commander for the UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda. Excerpted from
Outside the Wire. Copyright C 2007 Kevin Patterson and Jane Warren.
Reproduced by arrangement with Random House Canada. All rights reserved.
This foreword copyright C 2007 Romeo A. Dallaire.

Night Shot

This isn't my typical post - there's no rant.
Here's a pic that I took in Florida last month; I'm particularly pleased with its serenity.
(well ok, maybe just a little rant: there's a plastic water bottle on the beach bottom centre - What in the world would possess people to toss garbage into such an otherwise pristine environment? sheesh!)

leader of the free world

..but for how long? (the "free" part, that is)

>
> Comedian or just NTB???
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijz1CdUj5fg
>
>
>
> Caught off guard?
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCvqXXnxLZw
>

pay now, pay later to a whole new level

zero tax increases --> city cutting back its social presence --> religions fill the social vacuum and before you know it, sharia is alive and well here too. taxes and the city services they fund are the only weapons we have to defend ourselves against people with whom you can't debate because they do things in the name of some supreme deity, who conveniently delegates authority only to a few "chosen" individuals.

This is how you get courts sentencing women to 200 lashes and six months in prison after being abducted and gang-raped by seven men.
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2007/11/28/4691235.php

CMAJ accuses drugstore chain of 'poaching' African pharmacists

Shoppers Drugmart is getting a little greedy... bad on them.

TORONTO - Canada's top medical journal is calling for a boycott of the country's largest chain of drugstores over the "unethical" practice of "poaching" pharmacists from South Africa.
In an editorial titled "Shoppers Drug Mart or Poachers Drug Mart?" the Canadian Medical Association Journal accuses the national chain of contributing to a health disaster by luring workers from the AIDS-ravaged country, a scheme it describes as "foreign aid in reverse."
"Those who poach deserve to lose business," the editorial says, citing figures from the KwaZulu-Natal province, in which three-quarters of government-funded pharmacist positions were unfilled.
The editorial suggests Shoppers should fund pharmacist training programs in South Africa, rather than exploiting the education system of a poverty stricken state.
"Shoppers has a legitimate need for workers, but it's not solving that need by bearing the cost in some way, by sharing the cost of training those workers," said Amir Attaran, Canada Research Chair in law, Population Health, and Global Development Policy at the University of Ottawa, who co-wrote the editorial.
"The South African taxpayer bears the cost in large part, and the worker is pulled away to Canada, where Canadians get the benefit. The lack of equity is obvious."
John Caplice, the company's senior vice-president, treasurer, investor relations and corporate affairs, refused to be interviewed yesterday, but said in an e-mail: "We are familiar with the editorial ... and strongly disagree with what is implied by its contents. Shoppers Drug Mart has in the past recruited a select few pharmacists from South Africa, as well as from other English-speaking nations. It is not our intention to 'poach' or damage the health care system of any other country."
The editorial, to be published in the forthcoming issue, contrasts the fair practice of "passive enticement," such as advertisements, with unfair, active "poaching." Mr. Attaran said Shoppers crossed the line by actually going to Africa and making company lawyers available to help with immigration hurdles. The company also pledges to reimburse the cost of Canadian licensing exams for successful recruits.
"In other words, they're facilitating the decision, not simply offering the option. It's the facilitation that is the problem," Mr. Attaran said. "I think we would feel very hard done by if American corporations were actively poaching away our graduates, and yet that's what a Canadian corporation is doing. And bear in mind, we don't have 19 per cent of adults with HIV; the South Africans do."
The editorial was prompted late last month when Wendy Lack, manager of associate recruitment for Shoppers, contacted Roderick Walker, dean elect of the faculty of pharmacy at Rhodes University in Grahamstown, South Africa, with a personal invitation to a recruiting drive that began yesterday.
Mr. Walker spread the word to colleagues, and co-wrote the editorial, which represents the views of the entire CMAJ board.
Ms. Lack was in Pretoria yesterday for the recruiting drive, which continues Thursday in Johannesburg, and next week in Durban and Cape Town. She did not respond to requests for comment.
For individual South African pharmacists, the question of emigration is often a dilemma that pits the welfare of their homeland against that of their families, with predictable outcomes.
"It's a good opportunity for Shoppers to be there because of the bad situation for pharmacists at the moment. ... The whole profession is under threat," said Wilhelm Venter, 40, a pharmacist who left South Africa five years ago and now owns and manages a Shoppers Drug Mart in Toronto's financial district.
He said his profession is poorly supported in South Africa because, unlike in Canada, doctors can dispense drugs as well as prescribe them. He said legislation has been changed for the worse in the last couple of years, with the effect of "bankrupting a lot of pharmacists," and so the interest in emigration is now at a peak. But he said a lack of doctors and facilities, and the high cost of medication, are far worse problems.
"Unless you have an actual private drug plan, which very few people can afford, most people can't even afford to buy medications from a pharmacy, so the pharmacist's role is pretty limited," he said. "They're going out of business. That's why they're leaving."

battlefield deciders

"Some of the best weapons for counterinsurgency do not shoot," Nagl's counterinsurgency manual says. Instead, it advises troops to get to know the locals — both individually and as groups — and gain their trust. The locals generally know which of their neighbors are insurgents and which aren't; they're already plugged into the communal network. "Arguably," the manual says, "the decisive battle is for the people's minds."

From Wired.com, ironically enough. I believe this is as important in a city like Ottawa, struggling for public confidence in its ability to provide effective and efficient needs. Retreating into service-cutting "0% tax increase" modes is counterproductive. Instead, the city should be an integral part of the community - if not, you leave the door open for other organizations to fill the void, organizations that you typically can't discuss with rationally because [god] is on their side.

the mayor speaks

There's no way in a hundred million years that the (1500?) staff at City Hall can match the intellectual capacity of the 877,000 people of the City of Ottawa.

-Larry O'Brien on a telephone interview with BOB FM this morning (26 Nov 07 around 6:20am) on municipal budget consultations.
Wow.
Akin to the 2004-11-20 Dilbert where Alice is outwitted by PHM during a performance review ("inability to handle criticism ... and you argue with people much smarter than yourself.")
Evidently, in this first-past-the-post election system, his conscience is guided by a public opinion weathervane.
Personally, I think dissing your staff in order to flatter the electorate and gain public support for overriding staff recommendations is a cheap trick. I guess he also considers having the guts to say and do stupid things that nobody else would dare as "leadership."
My only consolation is that, as time goes on, the backward slides into conservativism, the reactionary shifts between left and right, are getting shorter-lived as people start realizing neither is the panacea for public ills. Part of me is beginning to look forward to the next quantum change that resets the public's frame of reference. Isn't 2012 the year the Mayans think this (particular iteration of the) world ends?

lost in a golden age?

This is stupid. Why remove a book because it is controversial? Better thing to do is take your heads out of the sand and ask the students to discuss what they think makes it controversial. Oh but wait, that would lead to free thought...
shortlink
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071123/compass_books_071123/20071123?hub=Canada

"The trouble is that all too often in human history, churches and priesthoods have set themselves up to rule people's lives in the name of some invisible god (and they're all invisible, because they don't exist) -- and done terrible damage," Pullman writes on his website.

"In the name of their god, they have burned, hanged, tortured, maimed, robbed, violated, and enslaved millions of their fellow creatures, and done so with the happy conviction that they were doing the will of God, and they would go to Heaven for it."

honorary titles

interesting factoid:
"In the United States, the form "Excellency" was specifically denied to the President"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excellency

well, interesting from a historical p.o.v: this obviously stems from an anti-british monarchy/peerage system sentiment, which is interesting to me because the best definition for Canadian is "not american."

A friend of mine suggested Dubya would prefer "Your Omnipotency." If we were to use "Your Inepotency" instead, would the spelling error distract him from the thinly-veiled attack?

Why exactly is Hollywood on Washington's radar?

I never imagined that the American government would concern itself over leftist Hollywood, that persistent thorn in the side of absolutist intentions, other than, perhaps, to serve as a convenient catchment area for social laxism and vice. Is Washington then afraid that such an attack might allow the communist "disease" to break out and infect the rest of the country? Or are they afraid that without Nicole and Britney and the anorexic twins, the media will have to start talking about the real world again and people will start paying attention to Washington and the rest of the world again?

EXPERTS FAULT U.S. PREPARATION FOR ANTHRAX ATTACK
Will Dunham
November 14, 2007

WASHINGTON, Nov 14 (Reuters) - The United States has done too little to prepare for another potential domestic anthrax attack six years after spore-laden mail killed five people, a former CIA director and other experts said on Wednesday.
[...]
The report illustrated the threat by laying out three scenarios involving an anthrax attack: spreading spores on New York's subway system, killing thousands; dispersing a smaller amount of the spores in a Minneapolis movie theater, Las Vegas casino and California theme park, killing hundreds; and an attack at the Academy Awards ceremony, killing famous actors.
"Congress needs to get much more involved right now. The administration needs to put this on the front burner," Livingstone said.
[...]

no words can describe this

somebody's spending not enough time with the rest of society (which in this case might be a good thing for the rest of us):
http://www.churchofmoo.com/half-mad/teevee/teevee.html

checks-and-balances: statement of the obvious

If you cannot find a leader that inspires faith that you will succeed, you have to settle for a manager that can inspire confidence that you will at least not fail.

No wonder we have multicameral governments and heavy bureaucracies!

objective science vs guided religion

Faith picks up where confidence leaves off; the fight between atheists and theists is where to draw the line.

abuse of power

I was almost digging this release, until I got to the last sentence.
Harper's abusive arrogance has no limits; who the hell does he think he is? Why should we accept such clear partisan shots from Canada's PM when its not even campaign season? What an ass.

-----Original Message-----
PRIME MINISTER HARPER PRESENTS NEW MINISTRY
August 14, 2007
Ottawa, Ontario

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today presented a new Ministry which will continue to lead Canada's New Government through the next phase of its mandate.

"We did what we said we were going to do and now it's time to keep moving forward," said the Prime Minister. "To seize the opportunities that lie before us; and rise to the challenges that confront us."

In particular, Prime Minister Harper pointed to continued strong leadership on the economy, and defence and foreign affairs.

The Prime Minister said the new Ministry would continue to provide the same strong and decisive leadership that Canadians have come to expect from Canada's New Government.

"As our record over the past eighteen months demonstrates, we have a proven capacity to get things done for all of Canada's families."

Prime Minister Harper said the new Ministry would continue to:

Assert and defend Canada's sovereignty;

Keep the economy strong and taxes low;

Vigorously tackle crime;

Preserve and protect the environment; and

Strengthen the Federation at home and abroad.

"This new Ministry presents Canadians with a clear choice; a choice between strong leadership that is moving Canada forward or a weak opposition that would set families and taxpayers back," concluded Prime Minister Harper.

The Prime Minister's Office - Communications

different gears for different fears

say what, "prima facie" evidence?
this obviously wasn't written by the usual propaganda-writers.
Still, they never miss a chance to take a vindictive stab. Even if factually not incorrect, such statements are inappropriately partial for the PM's office.

I also wonder just how "independent" this third party is going to be. The USA political system has that going for it, at least: the Senate must scrutinize and can veto each presidential appointee! Maybe Harper is worried that a properly reformed Canadian Senate will diminish his dictatorship reign quest for absolute rule?

-----Original Message-----

STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER

November 13, 2007
Ottawa, Ontario

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today issued the following statement on asking the third party to advise the Government on terms of reference for a public inquiry:

"On Friday I announced that I would be appointing an independent and impartial third party to review what course of actions may be appropriate given Mr. Schreiber's new sworn allegations. These allegations remain unproven and untested in a court of law and arose in a private lawsuit. There are however now issues that go beyond the private interests of the parties in the lawsuit.

Many have called for a public inquiry, including most recently Mr. Mulroney.

Given the conflicting information and allegations (including what appears to be some conflicting information under oath) and the extended time period over which the events referred to in various documents and allegations surrounding this matter have occurred, I have decided to ask the third party to advise the government on appropriate terms of reference for a public inquiry.

If in reviewing material, the independent party finds any prima facie evidence of criminal action he or she will identify this and advise how this should be handled and what impact, if any, it should have on the nature and timing of the inquiry.

A public inquiry is a major step and one that should only be taken when it addresses Canadians' interest, not those of the various parties, whether Mr. Schreiber, Mr. Mulroney or political parties. That is why it is important that we engage the necessary independent expertise and take the time to ensure that the terms of reference meet that test."

The Prime Minister's Office - Communications
[Note: You are receiving this e-mail for information only, and because you have subscribed to our distribution list.

ECO 92 RJ - Severn Suzuki

unprecedented

Wow, this is the first time that I ever notice the PM announcing his availability for questions since I subscribed to this service (shortly after the election). at the press theatre, and taking questions even? what's going on?

-----Original Message-----

Public event for Prime Minister Stephen Harper for today, November 9th is:

4:00 p.m. - Prime Minister Stephen Harper will be available to take questions from the media.

Press Theatre
National Press Building
150 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario

*Open to media*

The Prime Minister's Office - Communications

Rememberance Day Thanks

Joint missive from the Ministries of Truth and Peace:

> -----Original Message-----
>
> REMEMBRANCE DAY MESSAGE
>
> As Minister of National Defence, I have had the privilege of meeting with many of you. I find myself humbled by the bravery and the professionalism of the fine men and women who work for Canadian Forces.
>
> In Afghanistan, you are continuing the noble role that Canada has always played in the world. You are giving hope to millions of people in need of assistance. You are acting as a cause for good in an unstable world. This is also true of Canadian Forces members who are deployed under Operation ALTAIR and Operation SEXTANT; our sailors, soldiers, airmen and airwomen who are stationed around the world; and the personnel who are protecting North America.
>
> Like generations before you, many of you have left your homes in Canada to confront an extremist ideology on foreign soil. Many of you have risked your lives to defend Canada and Canadian values. Without doubt, your sacrifices are building a better world.
>
> Now, more than ever, I appreciate Canada> '> s very proud tradition of military accomplishments. As communities across Canada think and pray of the sacrifices that brave men and women have made on their behalf this weekend, they will also pause to think and pray for you.
>
> Canada will forever remember those Canadians who fought in past conflicts and those Canadians who served the cause of peace.
>
> To all soldiers, past and present, thank you.
>
> Lest we forget.
>
> Peter G. MacKay
> Minister of National Defence

I emailed this earlier today:

Mr. Sterling,

Before I start, I'd like to congratulate you on your recent re-election. The overall election results were rather surprising, though in hindsight, not entirely unexpected. I also want to thank you for the pressure you are keeping on the Carp Dump situation.

I recently brought a small crate of unwanted electronics to a local "Take It Back" program participant for proper disposal. I was prepared to pay the "small handling fee" they had verbally quoted at $35.

I was stunned, however, when they gave me a receipt for $30, plus GST and PST. Shocked. Why have the federal and provincial governments not tax-exempted waste diversion/recuperation services? I could have easily sent them to landfill with the rest of my garbage for free (well, through municipal taxes), but, mindful of future generations, I chose to dispose of them properly at my personal time and expense. Had I known about the upcoming amnesty day for electronic components, I would have waited a few more weeks and at least saved my money.

The Ontario government already has several excellent incentive programs, aimed at what consumers bring into their homes (PST-exempt EnergyStar qualified appliances and a cost sharing program for packaging materials, for example). When will the government extend their attention to address what goes OUT of consumer's homes, by shouldering more waste diversion program costs, or, at the very least, exempting compost bins, rain barrels, electronic recuperation programs, and the like from the PST as well? Certainly this would make diverting toxic trash from the Carp dump more palatable, even more accessible, and help secure a clean environment for our children to grow into the strong and vibrant workforce of tomorrow.

Bottom line is, we should not be taxed for our greenwill.

abuse of communications

have you seen the PM's website lately?
His name in big letters, underlined with "strong leadership, a better Canada."
Seems to me this website belonged to the OFFICE of the Prime Minister. I'm quite ok with it trumpeting priorities and achievements of the government, but I have a big problem with his personal use of it as a campaigning device.

putting errors behind us... with new ones

I'm all for protecting the way of life of aboriginals who choose that path, and affording those who choose to strike off on their own a comfortable place in our society. However, I am concerned these campaign-style promises will result in a culture of fence-sitters that want their cake and eat it too. Either separate and preserve, or integrate and merge. Can't have it both ways.

PRIME MINISTER HARPER OUTLINES THE GOVERNMENT'S ACHIEVEMENTS FOR ABORIGINAL CANADIANS
Halifax, November 2, 2007

In an address to the annual general assembly of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP) today, Prime Minister Stephen Harper outlined the Government's actions for Canadians of native ancestry. The Prime Minister noted that Canada?s rapidly growing Aboriginal population increasingly lives off-reserve in urban communities.

"The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, in many ways, represents the future of our country," said Prime Minister Harper. "Your membership constitutes the fastest growing segment of Canadian society. The "Forgotten People," as you call your members, cannot be forgotten or ignored any longer. On the contrary, I believe you will play a pivotal role in the prosperous future that beckons for all Canadians."

Prime Minister Harper also discussed the numerous initiatives undertaken by the Government to create equality of opportunity and improve the lives of on-reserve and off-reserve Aboriginals. These include:

Implementation of the Indian Residential Schools Agreement.

Legislation to repeal section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act to ensure Aboriginal people on-reserve have the same human rights protections as other Canadians.

Extensive national consultations to establish matrimonial real property laws on-reserve to protect the rights of Aboriginal women.

A plan to expedite the Specific Claims resolution process, including the creation of a new independent tribunal.

A plan to improve drinking water quality standards and training on-reserve.

A $105-million investment in the Aboriginal Skills and Employment Partnership.

A strengthened focus on the Urban Aboriginal Strategy.

Providing $300 million for Aboriginal off-reserve housing.

"Our Government, in conjunction with able organizations like yours, is working very hard with aboriginal communities on- and off-reserve to address the problems that need to be fixed. In our first 21 months, I think you?ll agree we've made a very good start," said the Prime Minister.

What we are

Dance monkey Dance!

justice system: time to revisit the social contract?

Interesting concept of justice described to me a few days ago in the carpool:
In small simple agglomerations (e.g., tribes or villages), peace and order was maintainable through personal relations (peer pressure and/or threats of emotional and/or physical harm, e.g., lynching). Organized religion is a natural outgrowth of that phenomenon as agglomerations grew in size and complexity.
Today's "western" society is too highly complex, anonymous yet interdependent, and educated for religion (through promises of heaven and hell) to work effectively. The responsibility for maintaining social harmony is transfered to the state in what is called a "social contract."
If we feel (fear?) that violent crimes are getting out of hand today, it may be time to review the terms of the social contract we have with the justice system (incl law enforcement and correctional services).

mgmt hypocrisy

I'm a contrator/consultant/temp/etc. The (client) department I work for is under strong pressure to keep headcount down so they hire contractors/consultants/temps/etc like me, then impose restrictions on our job conditions to avoid appearance of employer/employee (ER/EE) relationships, which could put them on the hook for benefits/pensionable time etc. Avoidance of ER/EE rel'ps is also advantageous to independent contractors who pay taxes at corporate (as opposed to personal) rates. I'm not independent so that doesn't apply to me.

A few weeks ago the directorate sent an email asking all EEs to submit their personal contact info for emergencies. I ignored it believing that it wouldn't apply to contractors, and if I complied, it would counter efforts to avoid ER/EE relationship appearance. I thought it was in the managers' best interest and left it at that.

Yesterday my boss' boss blasted an email at three of us contractors (cc: our bosses) accusing us (inappropriately strongly) of not being team players and inconsiderate because if we're in an airplane that crashes they will phone the body shop and hit a machine after hours so they won't be able to inform our families.

WTF? Besides the fact that scenario is stupid for a number of reasons, my boss, all my colleagues and the boss' boss' secretary all have my personal coordinates.

And today I find out that in 5months time it won't matter anyway because rather than contracting with one or two body shops to provide a team of professionals, they will prequalify a number of body shops and award each individual position to the lowest bidder.

So they give us shit for playing by their own friggin rules, with a patronizing note stating we've caused "very deep disappointment" because we're "not team players." Meanwhile, they've been secretely crafting a new structure for a follow-on professional services contract that will make it very difficult to get re-hired as a team.

Double WTF.

centsless

I don't get folks who are attached to the penny. "prices will go up because businesses will round up." balderdash. obviously these people underestimate competitive forces (either that or they are too lazy to change their buying habits).

I mean, i can understand why we needed a penny when it was worth say 1/50th of minimum wage. but now that the NDP is talking about raising minimum wage to $10, what the hell do we need a 1/1000th coin for? I mean, it takes more than four hundred of these stupid things just to buy a medium popcorn at AMC. C'mon people, let it go once and for all so i don't have to wait in line behind you while the cashier counts up her 1/400th-of-a-grande-latte coins!

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2007/10/10/penny.html

first greenwashing, now pinkwashing

whatever happened to marketing ethics?

Pinkwasher: (pink'-wah-sher) noun. A person or company that purports to care about breast cancer by promoting a pink ribbon campaign, but manufactures products that are linked to the disease.

http://www.thinkbeforeyoupink.org/

monarchy by any other name

"The Americans, with their penchant for firsts, are attempting the political equivalent of Olympic synchronized swimming, a sort of political double helix manoeuvre - father-to-son (the Bushes), interwoven with husband-to-wife (the Clintons), and all this seamlessly, in just 20 years."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/reportsfromabroad/murray/20071004.html

obey democracy - support our troops!

Ottawa City Hall bowed to pressure (from exactly where I can only guess) to alloworder Support Our Troops decals to be applied on city police cruisers.
This strikes me as being wrong, in a way very similar to the way the PATRIOT act was passed - the unspoken message being "this may be a bad law, but if you don't support it (we'll make sure that) you'll be perceived as unpatriotic/against our troops."
Why do I think this is a bad idea? well, for practical reasons really:
1. cost - of ordering, applying, and eventually removing/replacing faded decals. you ever try to remove an old bumper sticker?
2. divisiveness - those who aren't displaying decals MUST be AGAINST our troops!(???)
3. forcefulness - city hall ordered ottawa police to apply decals to all vehicles - what are our troops fighting for again, freedom?
4. partiality (opposite of neutrality?) - if a city is to function smoothly, it has to make everybody feel welcome. Branding city assets with decals for various non-charity-event causes that highlight one particular segment of the population, no matter how legitimate, undermines the faith in the institution that is necessary for other segments of the population to feel like their ideas will be welcome; worst case, they'll shrink away from the table and spiral their frustration into a tight little explosive Waco-style knot that nobody will have seen coming. what's that other thing our government sent our troops out to Afghanistan for - democracy? Can't have democracy without dialog, and you sure can't have dialog without trust.

PS. I realized that the title was a little off-point and misleading so I changed it. Just to be clear: I do support our troops. I think its very important for our troops to know we (the general public) care about them, and that we aren't tearing them away from their families willy-nilly. I also think that *forcing* displays of affection robs them of their emotional impact.

Battle of the (Youth) Bulge

wow - shocking, politically unsavoury, but surprisingly sympathetic and logical:

We have two million jobs that we cannot fill - and a welfare-dependent population of six million, and the two do not meet. The welfare group grows each year because of new babies, but the vacant job slots are not filled.
...
Some American strategists are beginning to question whether the USA, with its one-son families, ought send out troops to fight populations with many sons. That is the mistake we have committed in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you have to go in because you have been attacked, then you must do it, but as soon as the danger has been defeated, it is necessary to withdraw. It is up to the Iraqis and the Afghans themselves to ensure that there is a balance between the size of the population and the number of positions society can offer. And as far back in history we look, we can see that this balance has been maintained by young men killing each other. We have done it in Europe, and it has happened elsewhere. We cannot allow them to send their young men over the borders to kill others.

German sociologist Gunnar Heinsohn, who believes that the game is over for Europe. See full interview at
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/06/continent-of-losers.html

wtf - a green tax?

I've had been holding back on throwing out various junk electronics until I had a bin worthy of a trip to the local "Take It Back" program participant. I was prepared to pay a "small fee" as posted, which ended up amounting to $30. I dutifully consented, thinking the only alternatives were to keep them in the garage until a museum came begging me for them, or tossing them to landfill so the PCBs and heavy metals could leech back into my drinking water.
Then I looked at the bill.
I was dumbstruck.
So much so that it wasn't until the next day that the disbelief turned to resentment and insult.
At cause were two simple lines:
GST 2.10
PST 2.56

How can any self-respecting government CHARGE TAX on DIVERTING TRASH from public landfills???
I'll chalk this one up against Ivory Tower Ignorance and write a letter to the newspapers and politicians. If it turns out waste-diversion handling fees are already exempt from sales taxes, then you can be sure I'll get that participant educated (by having them dumped from the free advertising TIB brochure).

git yer head back on, Tory

What's with all the fuss over politicians and their "promises" these days?
Sure it's election time, but when I go to the polls I vote for who I think has the best leadership, long-term vision and management ability to improve our collective lot. I don't want them to make promises, I want them to tell me what they stand for and how they intend to achieve it! Later I will judge them on their ability to monitor the situation as it evolves and implement the most appropriate course of action toward the long-term goal.
If the ruckus is merely because roasting public figures has become a media sport, well, lets just designate a family as useless incompetents, dress them up in silly uniforms and robes with swords and crowns and an orb, and chain them (and their descendants) to government forever so people can get their jollies. Meanwhile, the members of the other branches of government could get on with their jobs of actually governing this country responsibly and with dignity.

He saw it coming

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism
lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy,
which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a
dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The
effects are apparent in many countries, improvident
habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish
methods of commerce, and insecurity of property
exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or
live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of
its grace and refinement the next of its dignity and
sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every
woman must belong to some man as his absolute
property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine,
must delay the final extinction of slavery until the
faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among
men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but
the influence of the religion paralyses the social
development of those who follow it. No stronger
retrograde force exists in the world.

Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant
and proselytizing faith. It has already spread
throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors
at every step; and were it not that Christianity is
sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science
against which it had vainly struggled, the
civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell
the civilization of ancient Rome."

Short speech reportedly by Sir Winston Churchill, in 1899.
(The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages
248-50, London: Churchill saw it coming.)

why i don't trust them

Thou shalt not lean too far to the right
globeandmail.com, September 22, 2007
Words of wisdom from Tom Flanagan, a professor of political science at the University of Calgary and a former Conservative campaign manager:

"...People don't vote just for good ideas; they vote for potential rulers whose character they can trust and who inspire passions of loyalty and support. Conservative statecraft has to be more than the logical deduction of policies from philosophical premises if it is going to succeed. It has to be an artistic combination of sound policy with the deft communication of conservative values, such as integrity, reliability and fortitude."

Then, in the next two breaths,

"Staff must avoid the limelight and let the communications department deal with the media. Candidates must talk about the platform, not their personal beliefs, and (except for designated spokesmen) concentrate on local rather than national media."

and

"Conservatives have to conduct thorough opposition research and make use of the results, run hard-hitting, fact-based negative ads, and do whatever is legally possible to jam our opponents' communications and disrupt their operations."

followed by:

"A conservative party stresses individual choice and responsibility in a competitive marketplace. That gives it a special responsibility to deal with voters as individuals, to find out what their concerns are, and to give them a stake in the political process by making it easy for them to donate time and money."

Besides the fact that I don't know why Conservatives believe the role of the prime minister is supposed to be a despot, how can they talk about demonstrating such contradictory values as "trusting character," integrity, and reliability at the same time as running attack-ads (based on stories that could only have been avoided if they were in full control of the media) and stressing individual choice and responsibility while forbidding personal beliefs; how can I go about convincing people to "donate time and money" to me (without any strings)?

PS. http://ago.mobile.globeandmail.com/generated/archive/RTGAM/html/20070921/cover22.html
and, in case it gets censoreddeleted:
http://mqup.typepad.com/mcgill_queens_university_/tom_flanagan/index.html

you call this leadership?

Caucus dissent grows over schools policy
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070925.wonttory25/BNStory/ontarioelection2007/Ontario/

Bill Murdoch [Ontario Progressive Conservative MPP] said in his rural riding of Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound that he could no longer defend his boss' plan to extend public funding to Jewish, Muslim and other religious schools. He said he came to that realization after hearing "loud and clear" while campaigning door to door that residents are predominantly against the policy.
At a campaign stop in Guelph yesterday, [Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory rather childishly] dismissed Mr. Murdoch as a "maverick" and said his views are not representative of the other 24 caucus members.
"Bill Murdoch is sort of like a jack-in-the-box, where you wind the handle and you don't know when something's going to pop up with Bill and it popped up today" Mr. Tory said.
"I think you will find we have good support for this policy," he said. "I mean, when you look up maverick in the dictionary, you find his picture there in colour."
[Granted, ]Mr. Murdoch has become renowned during his 17 years as a member of the provincial legislature for speaking his mind [, but] At least five other [PC] caucus members have expressed reservations about the policy, including veteran MPP Bob Runciman. He recently told The Canadian Press that: "It's not playing well. I am not hearing from people [who are] supportive, by and large."
Meanwhile, John Tory is running TV ads blasting Dalton for broken promises and praising himself as a good leader. I wasn't sure that slandering a member of the team, a well-seasoned MPP was a appropriate behaviour, so I looked up the definition of the term "leadership." Oddly enough, John Tory's picture was not there.

Save the Lawn Lamps!

The days of the soft white (incandescent) snowball lawn lamps in my earth-friendly, simple-lined, well integrated, 1970s heritage neighborhood are numbered.
The city of Ottawa wants to tear them up and replace them with one of several gaudy and garish "pre-approved" models (majority vote by street) and increase overall illumination levels.
Other than the recommendations affecting Katimavik and Beaverbrook, the draft policy is quite well done.
I do NOT want high-mast high-pressure sodium replacements - the dull orange glow sucks the color out of everything, and, being so much higher, they are often obstructed by trees and cast shadows across peoples' faces. This style clashes severely with Teron and Campeau's visions of building pedestrian- and earth-friendly neighborhoods, which is specifically what attracted me to this area. Brighter lighting will strip the pedestrian character of the streets and encourage drivers to drive even faster.
I've spoken about this to my community association, contacted my city councilor and emailed two city officials on this. I want a change of course. The one-size-fits-all just doesn't.

Producer responsibility

I don't know how much of this I've blogged compared to how often I've written notes on the way home from work on this topic, but I'm very much of the opinion that manufacturers have to be taxed on the crap that they are bringing to the Canadian market, both product AND packaging. Not made in Canada? No problem: tax the Importer. This tax would correspond to a portion of the environmental cost of disposing the product at the end of its useful life in an environmentally-friendly manner. For example, the cost of gas would increase by (a fraction, initially, of) the cost of capturing the major pollutant gases and transforming the for reuse elsewhere. Why? so we stop wasting energy violating the planet extracting her natural resources and throwing the waste products right back at her. That's no way to treat a woman, let alone your mother (earth). Anyway, I'm really glad to see that this idea is getting traction and even got exposure at the debate between the local candidates for Member of Provincial Parliament. Partial transcript follows (formatting mine):

Legend
All points are paraphrased as best as I could interpret them.
"Stuff in quotes are verbatim comments, as best as I remember them."
[Stuff in square brackets are my personal comments.]

EMC Press question: Where do you stand on the Carp Dump expansion?
Norm Sterling (PC, incumbent): I was the first in the riding to oppose it. I opposed it in the legislature.
- McGuinty promised 60% diversion of waste but this was nowhere near achieved; the environmental commission in Ontario decried his lack of action in this area.
- I want to ban organics in landfills.

John Ogilvy (Green): We have to focus on the long-term, and we have a plan to divert waste from the industrial and commercial sector.
- Says NS had 30 years to do something about this.
- Believes in producer responsibility laws, where the creater of a product is responsible for its eventual disposal.

Michael Hadskis (NDP): Reduce! Reuse! Recycle!
- Producer responsibility laws: yeah!

Megan Cornell (Liberal): When NS was MoE, he reduced funding for blue box recycling.
- The Liberals have a plan that will work.

Norm Sterling: Said that gov't blue box funding was cut because it was replaced by funding from a fund which was paid into by the packaging producers themselves. This saved taxpayer money!

Thanks to Michael Low for taking the time to transcribe this and distribute it after the debate.

ain't this the truth

the ultimate facebook song. really. amusingly truthful.

DO NOT CALL service

I signed up for the DO NOT CALL service at the CMA. I'm also curious to see if also selecting the DO NOT MAIL option makes a dent in the amount of crap I recycle every week.

greening vs greenwashing

I was pleasantly surprised to find a Top Ten list of questions for product design on the Canadian Marketing Association's website. Then again, naturally, they would want to show they really do care about the environment and want others to follow suit... sure... maybe its just their implementation of a greenwashing strategy?

computer costs

Did You Know
A computer that is on constantly uses approximately $165 worth of electricity per year. However, if it is on continuously, but goes into 'sleep mode' , it will cost $84 per year to operate. If you shut it off at night, it will cost only $28 per year.

From the Canada School of Public Service's Green Procurement course (C215).

Too bad they don't state the electricity rates or actual power consumption so we can calculate difference at today's rates wherever we happen to be. Still, should be enough to convince people to power their PCs down when not in use for a large chunk of the day.

urinal social-awareness devices

just to give those bladder-shy guys out there something else to worry about:
electronic talking urinal mints
don't miss the embedded video.

first time

I went to my first community association meeting tonight. Been wanting to go for a coupla years now but this was the first time I actually (a) had open schedule and (b) had something of grave enough concern that the local paper and city councilor wrote up on it last weekend (councilor even sent out an email to those on her list).

locals stayed mostly for the grave part: correctional svcs ontario is relocating a parole/probationary something services office just down the street from a "less to-do" area closer in town. my assessment is that us locals feel that our beyond-the-greenbelt non-ottawa-proper-community status has been violated, partly adding to the still simmering amalgamation resentment. Now "they" want to move ex-cons and parolees and other such people under community surveillance (from "in town") out into "our" neighborhood in the middle of two grade schools, several day care centres, a womens' shelter, and its just beyond a little forest running behind some of our backyards. Go figure. "Oh and by the way its opening next month we're just here to advertise our program really, and reassure you that only the high-risk people will be visiting twice a month, with no extra surveillance in the area. Did we mention there was only one death associated with such a program in the past 20 years? You see, nothing to worry about. The two other facilities in Ottawa are in a high-traffic street in an industrial park and at the provincial courthouse. We thought your little bedroom community is perfect for us here in the west end."

Its a major case of NIMBY, and I am just as apprehensive as the other residents who attended tonight; I don't like it one bit.

After the rather tense Q&A period that ensued, everybody except the community association executive and the local councilor cleared the room. I stayed behind, paid my dues, listened to the issues being discussed, and threw in my two cents' worth (though perhaps too forcefully for a newcomer - but hey - there weren't any rules of engagement and I haven't been around these things to know any better).

Having already thrown my regular caution to the wind, I can only hope my credibility didn't go with it. I will only know after the next few meetings. >:) (evil grin)

outstanding in french fields

bill-maher-aime-les-francais

deeds, not words

I remember my dad got letters from the Prime and Defence Ministers' offices in response to a complaint he sent them about nuclear submarines many years ago - must have been under Mulroney. Later, under Chretien, I received email responses from the PMO from most of the comments I sent them via the PMO website.
In contrast, I still haven't had any response whatsoever from any of the various emails and comments I have submitted to the current PM and his ministers. Seems to me a small army of public affairs people responding to individual citizens' inquiries is a good way to show you truly take personal accountability to heart...

footprints

Our current standard of living is like a frat party that has no intention of cleaning up after itself. Is this how we want the Earth (or at least future civilizations, if there are any) to remember us?