Those purveyors of justice in Tronna - Metro's finest, have decided that, because of numerous cases of vandalism to cars parked in station lots, and even someone writing down license plate numbers, they had better pad the budget to build some fences. Working on the principle that good fences make good neighbours, they are building some really fine neighbourhoods. Palisades of power that will not be easily-scaled by nefarious evil-doers bent on tearing antennae from the 'beemers' of the fuzz.
We should be glad that ex-Belfast types are not present in greater numbers - although I would lay the 'wall' solution to them. Police stations in Belfast are 'fortresses' with concrete walls, razor wire ,surveillance cameras, sally ports and observation slits. They're also daubed like harlequins in a rainbow of paintspatters and blackened areas from molotov cocktails. The 'police' enter before day break in convoy, and leave in darkened vans at the end of shift. Bunker mentality assumes a whole new meaning with these guys. And now, because it's a mickey-mouse 'police service' over there, they've come over here for some real policin', with their walls.
The Chief was on TV justifying the 17.5 million dollar expense. When he's lying, he looks like he's sucking shit. He must have felt like he had Mr. Henke in there. Eyes rolling and lips pursing he was recounting how, sadly, his department seemed incapable of keeping idjits out of their own parking lot. Come on, give me a break, who's going to jack around in a parking lot behind a building filled with cops?
And then there's the writing down of the license plate numbers. Once you have a number you phone the license bureau right, and they'll give you all the info they've got, right? Only if your last name's 'Bullitt', or you're balling one of the clerks. You or I, however, might be just as well off using them to generate lottery picks. Those T.O. cops are hilarious!
At least they might be if they weren't so paranoid. A lot of police persons are paranoid. "The bad guys will find us and .... Ohhh BAAAAD! It's a dangerous job we do." Schoolteachers are in more danger! Geez, there are more carpenters killed on the job. And they don't have an arsenal to protect themselves, or even a kevlar vest!
It's a bit scary but some of these guys aren't educated enough to think their way through this stuff. Their 'GOOD' guys are cops and cops' friends - their BAD guys are , potentially, everybody else. And we arm these guys?
I recall a few years back some local asshole was plinking the back of my house one night with a pellet rifle. I called the police. After 20 minutes they showed up at the front door. The cop waited in the hall while I went to turn on all the lights in the back rooms of the house. He then made a careful search of the interior, looking out each window to see what he couldn't in the back yard. After 10 minutes of that, he drew his flashlight and headed for the front door. Sleuthing, I thought, nope just walking round the back. Of course the sniper was long gone, but at least the cop saw a pellet in the bathroom window frame, so he couldn't say I had hallucinated everything.
And to-day, he'd probably have wanted a gander at that .22 I've got registered.
Goes ta show ya tho', ya can't be too careful. That's why the WALLS.
THE 'ROYAL' CANADIAN.....the ravings of somebody who's been out in the 'Big White' too long.
Friday, April 28, 2006
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Stolen Memo: re: Flags
NatDefHQ - Ottawa : RE: National Standards utilized as funeral accoutrements
Memo:
Item: All Flags suitable for funerary use i.e. Req. # qF 11007877 - fge - Taffetized nylon national standard (365.7cmX182.88cm) shall be issued from NatDef stores base Trenton only.
QMSTR Ref: AS 1120-5534-AC45.
Item: All Command units CANFORAF may indent for 12 such to have on charge as circumstances arise.
Item: Such flags retrieved after use S/B returned to NatDef Stores base Trenton for proper credit and reissue to indenting units.
Item: As a cost-saving measure the memorial flag given to relatives, etc, at conclusion of interment service S/B procured through the office of the Local MP who has been issued a number of such items for riding use. CO of Gd detail to arrange and to remit DND property as in item above.
Item: Failing acquisition of suitable flag from MP, CO Gd detail is warranted to purchase locally a national standard (121cmX60.96cm0 not in excess of $10.00). Such to be prefolded for presentation at end of interment. Reimbursement if desired S/B docketed on claims NDFC CL12-a303a/b E or Cl12-a303a/b F
Francais au verso
"Frenchy" Lapierre GSO1 - log/QMC/RASC
NatDefHQ - M- 3320-12290-34348 a 34 10:15 Ap/24/06
Memo:
Item: All Flags suitable for funerary use i.e. Req. # qF 11007877 - fge - Taffetized nylon national standard (365.7cmX182.88cm) shall be issued from NatDef stores base Trenton only.
QMSTR Ref: AS 1120-5534-AC45.
Item: All Command units CANFORAF may indent for 12 such to have on charge as circumstances arise.
Item: Such flags retrieved after use S/B returned to NatDef Stores base Trenton for proper credit and reissue to indenting units.
Item: As a cost-saving measure the memorial flag given to relatives, etc, at conclusion of interment service S/B procured through the office of the Local MP who has been issued a number of such items for riding use. CO of Gd detail to arrange and to remit DND property as in item above.
Item: Failing acquisition of suitable flag from MP, CO Gd detail is warranted to purchase locally a national standard (121cmX60.96cm0 not in excess of $10.00). Such to be prefolded for presentation at end of interment. Reimbursement if desired S/B docketed on claims NDFC CL12-a303a/b E or Cl12-a303a/b F
Francais au verso
"Frenchy" Lapierre GSO1 - log/QMC/RASC
NatDefHQ - M- 3320-12290-34348 a 34 10:15 Ap/24/06
Canada: A nation of Redmen
What makes an indigenous person - an Indian - in Canada to-day? One requirement is needed - you have to be recognized as belonging to a tribal band. This has lead to a multicultural microcosm of people who legitimately claim 'band status' in Canada - they are 'status' Indians entitled to all the rights and privileges with which the crown has endowed our native peoples. There are another group who would match perfectly the DNA profile of any First Nations person, but who aren't. They aren't Indians because they do not belong to a tribal group - they have no 'band status'. I have distant relatives who are freckled, red-haired Irish-dancing Mohawks. There are children on reserves who would fit equally well in Cairo, or Kingale, Acapulco or Hong Kong - yet in Canada they are considered 'status' Indians.
Status Indians live either on or off their reserve. Reserves are areas set-aside for bands of Native people. On the reserve, they are not taxed for work they do, on any goods they buy or sell. Off the reserve, they can be taxed like other working people, but remain exempt from other forms of taxation and government user-fees. Many Native people are very successful at what they do. Often , at retirement, they consider returning to their reserve to build their retirement home under the tax-free aegis of the band. Other native people remain on the reserve all their lives. Once again, many are financially successful in business, trade or vocation. Others, particularly on more remote reserves, do not do as well and social problems relating to youth, alcohol and drug abuse mark them in the public mind as truly needy and dependent places. Often native people bring these needs and dependencies with them into larger Urban settings. Native people, for instance, are the group in which the spread of HIV/AIDS is presently most prevalent.
Non-status Indians are not permitted to live on a reserve, unless they marry a status person.
In Canada to-day two major areas of concern affect the interaction of Native and non-native people. The first is unsettled land claims. Large areas of Canada, particularly in the north have never been 'ceded ' officially to the crown. Perhaps because there was no one there to cede them years ago. Now there are people who claim a right to negotiate for the settlement and use of the land. The Canadian government works steadily on these. The second area is he current set of lawsuits in regard to abuse claims in residential schools. These court settlements have to be paid by to-day's citizens for incidents that were done by our predecessors. They run into the billions of dollars.
A third element that from time-to-time roiled the situation is the re-interpretation of treaty rights. It seems that virtually every government has to reinvent the wheel by renegotiating treaty rights that are challenged by the current generation of native people. Some of this could have massive effect on property rights. For instance, one group is claiming rights to one of the Great Lakes and the ability to charge fees for use. Another group has obtained full and sole access to commercial fishing in an area of Ontario. The MiqMaq of Nova Scotia were awarded virtual rights to the provincial lobster fishery. In most of Canadian Lake Huron there are now no non-native commercial fishing operations, the government bought them out, and gave them to the native groups. Recent court interpretations have changed significantly the traditional application of some native treaties.
The government annually spends billions of dollars to support the Native people of Canada. Much of this money is funneled through an inept bureaucracy to individual band councils for their use. Very little accountability has been applied to these moneys over the years and significant sums have been misused or wasted in an exercise in 'self-reliance': the Kashechewan reserve in Northern Ontario for example. The people there have been relocated three times in the past year. The first time due to bad water, the latter due to spring flooding. The people of the reserve claim, now, that they were forced to move onto what they considered to be a poor town site. For a number of years they have dealt with water problems due to faults in a purification system that was never operated correctly and exacerbated by a little home-town engineering which interfered with the intake of clean water. There was some engineering that resulted in the failure of a dike around the town site that led to this year's flooding - a broken valve. Of course all costs of food, clothing, relocation and up-keep are covered from the Indian affairs purse. This reserve is not alone, many face such recurrent tragedies.
This time the government swears to fix it!
Status Indians live either on or off their reserve. Reserves are areas set-aside for bands of Native people. On the reserve, they are not taxed for work they do, on any goods they buy or sell. Off the reserve, they can be taxed like other working people, but remain exempt from other forms of taxation and government user-fees. Many Native people are very successful at what they do. Often , at retirement, they consider returning to their reserve to build their retirement home under the tax-free aegis of the band. Other native people remain on the reserve all their lives. Once again, many are financially successful in business, trade or vocation. Others, particularly on more remote reserves, do not do as well and social problems relating to youth, alcohol and drug abuse mark them in the public mind as truly needy and dependent places. Often native people bring these needs and dependencies with them into larger Urban settings. Native people, for instance, are the group in which the spread of HIV/AIDS is presently most prevalent.
Non-status Indians are not permitted to live on a reserve, unless they marry a status person.
In Canada to-day two major areas of concern affect the interaction of Native and non-native people. The first is unsettled land claims. Large areas of Canada, particularly in the north have never been 'ceded ' officially to the crown. Perhaps because there was no one there to cede them years ago. Now there are people who claim a right to negotiate for the settlement and use of the land. The Canadian government works steadily on these. The second area is he current set of lawsuits in regard to abuse claims in residential schools. These court settlements have to be paid by to-day's citizens for incidents that were done by our predecessors. They run into the billions of dollars.
A third element that from time-to-time roiled the situation is the re-interpretation of treaty rights. It seems that virtually every government has to reinvent the wheel by renegotiating treaty rights that are challenged by the current generation of native people. Some of this could have massive effect on property rights. For instance, one group is claiming rights to one of the Great Lakes and the ability to charge fees for use. Another group has obtained full and sole access to commercial fishing in an area of Ontario. The MiqMaq of Nova Scotia were awarded virtual rights to the provincial lobster fishery. In most of Canadian Lake Huron there are now no non-native commercial fishing operations, the government bought them out, and gave them to the native groups. Recent court interpretations have changed significantly the traditional application of some native treaties.
The government annually spends billions of dollars to support the Native people of Canada. Much of this money is funneled through an inept bureaucracy to individual band councils for their use. Very little accountability has been applied to these moneys over the years and significant sums have been misused or wasted in an exercise in 'self-reliance': the Kashechewan reserve in Northern Ontario for example. The people there have been relocated three times in the past year. The first time due to bad water, the latter due to spring flooding. The people of the reserve claim, now, that they were forced to move onto what they considered to be a poor town site. For a number of years they have dealt with water problems due to faults in a purification system that was never operated correctly and exacerbated by a little home-town engineering which interfered with the intake of clean water. There was some engineering that resulted in the failure of a dike around the town site that led to this year's flooding - a broken valve. Of course all costs of food, clothing, relocation and up-keep are covered from the Indian affairs purse. This reserve is not alone, many face such recurrent tragedies.
This time the government swears to fix it!
Aux Barricades
This week the natives are restless just outside of Hamilton, Ontario. The small town of Caledonia has been moderately disrupted this past week since OPP officers muffed an attempt to remove Six-Nations protestors from a disputed building site.
Just what the land claim involves is unclear. The land, originally taken/given(?) for a road allowance was never used for that purpose, but was, apparently, at some time long past (when pounds, shillings and pence were still Canadian currency) sold into private possession. It has lately come into the hands of a developer who initiated construction of a number of homes. At this point the local band of Six Nations recall a claim and set-up an occupying protest.
A court order is issued for them to be removed at which point in step the Province's finest. As usual, they should have kept to traffic stops, because, after some huffing and puffing, pepper spraying, stun-gunning, and attempted mass arrest, they realized discretion to be the better part of valour and beat a retreat. The natives assisted them by smashing-in the back window of a van full of H&K armed 'Swatties'.
The next day the protest had expanded to close the abutting highway with a barricade, the standard alarm-fires and a group of masked 'warriors'. 100 meters down the highway the OPP formed their own barricade - I guess to stop drunk drivers, because it didn't stop the natives.
Schools were closed for a couple of days and the local residents were discomfited by a round-about drive to the Hospital among other things. The government leapt into action - or rather "talks" - which succeeded in calming the natives and the police. The townsfolk however were beginning to simmer. A town meeting resulted in a 1000 person march to the barricade and a confrontation with police over their inaction and the community sentiment that no one was concerned with their safety, or economic loss (earlier the Prov. Gov. said they would pay compensation to the developer and contractors.) There were some harsh words traded with the natives who refused to remove the roadblock.
The next morning the Mayor made a gaff by passing a comment on the economic status of the Native protestors, who seemed to have significant amounts of free time to stand around the bonfire with a stick in one hand and a 'timmies' in the other. I believe she mentioned they might be on public assistance. That resulted in a denial of her representation by the village council and an abject, personal and on-foot apology to the 'brothers' at the road block.
My dear old father used to say, half in jest, that they should, "Give Canada back to the Indians". I would assume the sentiment was shared by many Europeans enjoying their first Canadian winter. That time however is long past. There were no parts of Canada developed by native skill when the 'whites' first arrived. It was a survival society for the most part - one poor harvest, mould outbreak, or poor hunting season away from whole villages dying. The Europeans invented better ways to ameliorate the Canadian seasons. Better ways to husband animals and grow crops. To preserve and store food. In doing so they cleared and improved the land, built all-season roads and developed a new form of society.
One of the things they also did was deal with the native people they met. In the French system, applied to Canada, friendship and mutual benefit were he prime motive factors. The land was large enough and the human element small enough that both sides could live in comfortable proximity, or distance, as circumstances dictated. Under the British, the' rule of law' indicated that land could not be arbitrarily 'taken' in the American style and, as the King's subjects the native population was entitled to more equitable treatment than was afforded to their southern confreres. Many parts of Canada became the territory of this, or that native group, by summary occupation, well after white settlement had begun. The Six Nations are a case in point.
After the American War of Independence, during which they supported the losing (British) side, five of the Six Nations were forced to move from their ancestral home in New York State. King George III granted them lands along the Grand river and near the eastern end of Lake Ontario. Neither area was anywhere as large as the area they'd left behind. The area being argued over now, is part of an area called the Haldimand Grant The areas given to them had been largely depopulated 150 years previously by the Six Nations extinction of the Huron and related tribes. In the interim the Ojibwa occupied parts of the area and removed the Six Nations from it, until George gave some back.
As it is now, they want 'their' land back - not the part valued at the 83 pounds it sold for, the 83 pounds that went to assist the government pay for the subsistance of the Native people for the past 150 years. No, they want the 'big bucks' - what the developer paid for it, or the value of those trespassing houses.
They should have waited until they were complete.
Just what the land claim involves is unclear. The land, originally taken/given(?) for a road allowance was never used for that purpose, but was, apparently, at some time long past (when pounds, shillings and pence were still Canadian currency) sold into private possession. It has lately come into the hands of a developer who initiated construction of a number of homes. At this point the local band of Six Nations recall a claim and set-up an occupying protest.
A court order is issued for them to be removed at which point in step the Province's finest. As usual, they should have kept to traffic stops, because, after some huffing and puffing, pepper spraying, stun-gunning, and attempted mass arrest, they realized discretion to be the better part of valour and beat a retreat. The natives assisted them by smashing-in the back window of a van full of H&K armed 'Swatties'.
The next day the protest had expanded to close the abutting highway with a barricade, the standard alarm-fires and a group of masked 'warriors'. 100 meters down the highway the OPP formed their own barricade - I guess to stop drunk drivers, because it didn't stop the natives.
Schools were closed for a couple of days and the local residents were discomfited by a round-about drive to the Hospital among other things. The government leapt into action - or rather "talks" - which succeeded in calming the natives and the police. The townsfolk however were beginning to simmer. A town meeting resulted in a 1000 person march to the barricade and a confrontation with police over their inaction and the community sentiment that no one was concerned with their safety, or economic loss (earlier the Prov. Gov. said they would pay compensation to the developer and contractors.) There were some harsh words traded with the natives who refused to remove the roadblock.
The next morning the Mayor made a gaff by passing a comment on the economic status of the Native protestors, who seemed to have significant amounts of free time to stand around the bonfire with a stick in one hand and a 'timmies' in the other. I believe she mentioned they might be on public assistance. That resulted in a denial of her representation by the village council and an abject, personal and on-foot apology to the 'brothers' at the road block.
My dear old father used to say, half in jest, that they should, "Give Canada back to the Indians". I would assume the sentiment was shared by many Europeans enjoying their first Canadian winter. That time however is long past. There were no parts of Canada developed by native skill when the 'whites' first arrived. It was a survival society for the most part - one poor harvest, mould outbreak, or poor hunting season away from whole villages dying. The Europeans invented better ways to ameliorate the Canadian seasons. Better ways to husband animals and grow crops. To preserve and store food. In doing so they cleared and improved the land, built all-season roads and developed a new form of society.
One of the things they also did was deal with the native people they met. In the French system, applied to Canada, friendship and mutual benefit were he prime motive factors. The land was large enough and the human element small enough that both sides could live in comfortable proximity, or distance, as circumstances dictated. Under the British, the' rule of law' indicated that land could not be arbitrarily 'taken' in the American style and, as the King's subjects the native population was entitled to more equitable treatment than was afforded to their southern confreres. Many parts of Canada became the territory of this, or that native group, by summary occupation, well after white settlement had begun. The Six Nations are a case in point.
After the American War of Independence, during which they supported the losing (British) side, five of the Six Nations were forced to move from their ancestral home in New York State. King George III granted them lands along the Grand river and near the eastern end of Lake Ontario. Neither area was anywhere as large as the area they'd left behind. The area being argued over now, is part of an area called the Haldimand Grant The areas given to them had been largely depopulated 150 years previously by the Six Nations extinction of the Huron and related tribes. In the interim the Ojibwa occupied parts of the area and removed the Six Nations from it, until George gave some back.
As it is now, they want 'their' land back - not the part valued at the 83 pounds it sold for, the 83 pounds that went to assist the government pay for the subsistance of the Native people for the past 150 years. No, they want the 'big bucks' - what the developer paid for it, or the value of those trespassing houses.
They should have waited until they were complete.
Monday, April 17, 2006
FREE AIR
At last the heartening news that someone is taking on the moghuls who 'control' Canada's communications systems - an action long overdue.
In to-day's electronic marketplace everything is for sale - from the concrete to the ephemeral. Electronic signals - once paid for by advertising revenue and seeking anyone to 'tune in', are now hyped by quasi-personalization and privacy into marketed commodities. What was once a free annoyance, has been 'spun' into subscribed 'necessity'.
Long ago the government, which, in theory, is mandated to control what gets electronically pumped into our environment, set up the CTRC - a commission to oversee the telecommunications industry. At one time this organization had some teeth, now, however, it appears to be a reason for a group of political hacks to get together to approve the latest industry-demanded fee increases and to have a nice social in Ottawa at tax-payers' expense. When was the last time you heard of the CTRC - other than as a reference on your cable company's letter about the latest hike in service fees? It's supposed to be looking after our interest, but that, I believe is the last item on its agenda.
In the meantime your Znaimers, Aspers and Rogers-types are the guys who really call the shots. They not only highly-profitable media empires, but because they exercise editorial control, also control the social agenda of the country to greater or lesser extents. Along with presenting Canadians with the spins that their corporate clients want us to see, they have agendas of their own. The recent up-welling of the 'gay' lifestyle was largely successful due to empathetic coverage in the media - and the contrary denigration of opposing views with the appelation of a 'phobia'. They are highly sensitive to multicultural causes, particularly in defending Judaism from comment or criticism (particularly that directed at Israel). I believe it entirely possible that media has been able to influence the government in terms of recent changes of national policy regarding Afghanistan and Palestine.
At the same time they are at the forefront of the attack on 'traditional values' - often showcasing alternative views on religious or social issues and denying opportunity to rebut, or even question them. As far as being responsive to 'consumer complaints' they have been permitted to isolate themselves in a cocoon of self-generated oversight boards which respond well to 'agenda issues' and ignore, or rationalize away, complaints to the contrary.
The moghuls have been able to convince our politicians that an increasing number of 'natural', or socially-financed resources are in need of privatization and the application of user 'fees', and of regulation to exclude the use or application of alternate sources of access. Indeed they have been able to convince our governments to provide them, and their businesses, with 'protections' - such as user 'agreements' that are reminiscent of those of the days of indentured servitude.
Kalle Lasn of 'Adbusters' who is planning to take his issue over access to the media to the Supreme court, if necessary, is doing the Canadian Public a service. His 'shtik' is anti-consumption advocacy aimed at natural resources and fast food industries. The media 'biggies' have been denying him access, since 2004, to their advvertising market because his messages conflict with those of some of their largest advertising customers. But this issue is about freedom, and access to the media - which can't, and shouldn't be, left in the hands of a few corporate 'Big Brothers'.
Where do I make a donation?
In to-day's electronic marketplace everything is for sale - from the concrete to the ephemeral. Electronic signals - once paid for by advertising revenue and seeking anyone to 'tune in', are now hyped by quasi-personalization and privacy into marketed commodities. What was once a free annoyance, has been 'spun' into subscribed 'necessity'.
Long ago the government, which, in theory, is mandated to control what gets electronically pumped into our environment, set up the CTRC - a commission to oversee the telecommunications industry. At one time this organization had some teeth, now, however, it appears to be a reason for a group of political hacks to get together to approve the latest industry-demanded fee increases and to have a nice social in Ottawa at tax-payers' expense. When was the last time you heard of the CTRC - other than as a reference on your cable company's letter about the latest hike in service fees? It's supposed to be looking after our interest, but that, I believe is the last item on its agenda.
In the meantime your Znaimers, Aspers and Rogers-types are the guys who really call the shots. They not only highly-profitable media empires, but because they exercise editorial control, also control the social agenda of the country to greater or lesser extents. Along with presenting Canadians with the spins that their corporate clients want us to see, they have agendas of their own. The recent up-welling of the 'gay' lifestyle was largely successful due to empathetic coverage in the media - and the contrary denigration of opposing views with the appelation of a 'phobia'. They are highly sensitive to multicultural causes, particularly in defending Judaism from comment or criticism (particularly that directed at Israel). I believe it entirely possible that media has been able to influence the government in terms of recent changes of national policy regarding Afghanistan and Palestine.
At the same time they are at the forefront of the attack on 'traditional values' - often showcasing alternative views on religious or social issues and denying opportunity to rebut, or even question them. As far as being responsive to 'consumer complaints' they have been permitted to isolate themselves in a cocoon of self-generated oversight boards which respond well to 'agenda issues' and ignore, or rationalize away, complaints to the contrary.
The moghuls have been able to convince our politicians that an increasing number of 'natural', or socially-financed resources are in need of privatization and the application of user 'fees', and of regulation to exclude the use or application of alternate sources of access. Indeed they have been able to convince our governments to provide them, and their businesses, with 'protections' - such as user 'agreements' that are reminiscent of those of the days of indentured servitude.
Kalle Lasn of 'Adbusters' who is planning to take his issue over access to the media to the Supreme court, if necessary, is doing the Canadian Public a service. His 'shtik' is anti-consumption advocacy aimed at natural resources and fast food industries. The media 'biggies' have been denying him access, since 2004, to their advvertising market because his messages conflict with those of some of their largest advertising customers. But this issue is about freedom, and access to the media - which can't, and shouldn't be, left in the hands of a few corporate 'Big Brothers'.
Where do I make a donation?
Friday, April 14, 2006
Six, Laws and Video Images
Aha, there's skullduggery afoot at Pearson Airport. A poorly-educated man, trying to be re-united with his family in Canada has his phone inspected by the Immigration folk who find a picture of his baby son, (naked from the waist down) and call it 'kiddie porn'. The upshot, this poor chap signs some document abrogating his right to enter Canada and is returned to his former home in California.
Already the rumblies and grumblies of an indignant minority group are beginning to exercise their Canadian right to sound off about (unfairness, inflexibility, stupidity, denial of rights, malfeasance, cultural insensitivity, prejudice, intolerance - your choice.)
The 'victim' who is portrayed by his wife as a wonderfully caring man and good father, and by the Star as a man who perhaps did not understand the circumstances due to difficulty with English and a grade 10 education, was interrupted in his attempt to join his wife and family here in Canada.
The spouse who is, I assume, a Canadian citizen, had met and married him, then lived in California where she bore their two children before she returned to Canada, I imagine again, to sponsor his immigration. She was taken aback that her husband was stopped.
The picture in question was a frontal shot of his son wearing a lucky charm and little else. Although the picture was, no doubt, innocuous and 'charming' to the family, it probably bore semblance to other graphics with less social value that are problematic to police forces here and of growing popularity among a number of denizens of the internet's darker corners. Given the fact that the man in question had no wife, or children, with him - this was a judgement call.
Two questions come to mind - the first in respect to the customs service. Was this man given 'special treatment'? And if so, for what reason - cell phone checks? I've seen plane loads of visitors from a country where there had been widespread break-out of avian flu coughing their way through customs with no more than, 'Welcome to Canada, state your business and how do you pronounce your name?'.
The second in respect to immigration. I thought we had a points system for immigrants. Obviously, it doesn't apply to people entering Canada under the 'family class'. I did my citizenship swearing-in with someone's aged parents who needed a translator to answer the judge's questions - they are now citizens too, but they probably don't need to speak English at home. In this instance how many points would our new immigrant have attained without the Canadian wife and kids? Are they 'sponsoring' him? At least his green card, a much-envied possession, or so I'm told, allowed him to work in America. Here he's looking at English classes for a start and possibly some education up-grading, unless he's willing to 'condemn himself to the ignominious experience of the immigrant'. Mom's got two infants and, although I'm sure she works, sponsorship, while he's at school, will be a 'squeak'. So much a squeak in fact, that that's what it really is - we'll be sponsoring our new immigrant especially now that he's a victim.
Any lesson in all this? If he researched Canada, or if he'd been any more sophisticated, he'd probably have thought twice about walking around with naked baby pictures - his, or anyone else's.
Already the rumblies and grumblies of an indignant minority group are beginning to exercise their Canadian right to sound off about (unfairness, inflexibility, stupidity, denial of rights, malfeasance, cultural insensitivity, prejudice, intolerance - your choice.)
The 'victim' who is portrayed by his wife as a wonderfully caring man and good father, and by the Star as a man who perhaps did not understand the circumstances due to difficulty with English and a grade 10 education, was interrupted in his attempt to join his wife and family here in Canada.
The spouse who is, I assume, a Canadian citizen, had met and married him, then lived in California where she bore their two children before she returned to Canada, I imagine again, to sponsor his immigration. She was taken aback that her husband was stopped.
The picture in question was a frontal shot of his son wearing a lucky charm and little else. Although the picture was, no doubt, innocuous and 'charming' to the family, it probably bore semblance to other graphics with less social value that are problematic to police forces here and of growing popularity among a number of denizens of the internet's darker corners. Given the fact that the man in question had no wife, or children, with him - this was a judgement call.
Two questions come to mind - the first in respect to the customs service. Was this man given 'special treatment'? And if so, for what reason - cell phone checks? I've seen plane loads of visitors from a country where there had been widespread break-out of avian flu coughing their way through customs with no more than, 'Welcome to Canada, state your business and how do you pronounce your name?'.
The second in respect to immigration. I thought we had a points system for immigrants. Obviously, it doesn't apply to people entering Canada under the 'family class'. I did my citizenship swearing-in with someone's aged parents who needed a translator to answer the judge's questions - they are now citizens too, but they probably don't need to speak English at home. In this instance how many points would our new immigrant have attained without the Canadian wife and kids? Are they 'sponsoring' him? At least his green card, a much-envied possession, or so I'm told, allowed him to work in America. Here he's looking at English classes for a start and possibly some education up-grading, unless he's willing to 'condemn himself to the ignominious experience of the immigrant'. Mom's got two infants and, although I'm sure she works, sponsorship, while he's at school, will be a 'squeak'. So much a squeak in fact, that that's what it really is - we'll be sponsoring our new immigrant especially now that he's a victim.
Any lesson in all this? If he researched Canada, or if he'd been any more sophisticated, he'd probably have thought twice about walking around with naked baby pictures - his, or anyone else's.
Friday, April 07, 2006
Suffer the Little Ones
Big business weighs in on child care. In to-day's Toronto Star business columnist Dave Crane posits that "Harper is killing key chance for kids". In this opinion piece Crane cites the research of one James Heckman, of Chicago, who sees nothing but a rosy future with government-supported, equal-opportunity head starts in government-funded daycare centres. His sentiment is echoed by no less than David Dodge, governor of the Bank of Canada, who also percieves a national day care system as a panacea for social woes.
Yes, ladies and germs, just let big business do what it wants with the little nippers and there'll soon be an end to just about every social ill that the young grow into. Nothing in the land but good, obedient citizens and, no doubt, obedient little consumers and corporate trolls. Unless, of course, there is bad parenting involved! Because, after all, good parenting is an equal requirement of any good daycare system (it leaves someone to blame for poor performance).
Seems to me these fellows haven't taken their research far enough. How about the effects of some 'national daycare programmes' that have been around for a while - like in Russia, or China. Fifty years, or more, of government child care haven't done much to make Russia a land of sunny promise, with or withhout communism.
The Swedish model could stand a look as well. Just how does being socialized and institutionalized at a young age affect the adult of the species? In fact, I believe, that the research would tend to indicate that good parenting is more than just an adjunct here, it's vital.
So what does Bay Street want - the best for your kids? No, the chance to make a buck so they can get the best for their kids, of course. And what better way to do that than to get the taxpayer to fund their operation.
Have these guys ever been in a day care centre? They are run by professionals ( i.e. trained, 9 to 5 types - extra charge for late pick-up - who have lives outside the centre) - with structured programming (toilet time, meal time, activities, etc) all very nice but aimed at inculcating a herd mentality among the infants - " Yes Donnie, we all sit on the potty till everybody is finished." These centres are as 'natural' as a feedlot operation. You can bet your bippy that even with a 'nanny', as some of these elite fellows might have had, childhood was never like that. The only kids I could see benefiting from such warehouses are those from homes which are profoundly deprived.
I like Steven Harper's thinking because it keeps the focus of child nuturing exactly where it should stay, on the parents. If the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, then the results of what goes on there should remain, for the most part, the responsibility of the participants.
Governments have an interest in what happens to kids. Some say that institutionalizing them young means not having to institutionalize them when they're older - that's a theory requiring proof - basically I think it's hogwash! Supporting parents as they fulfill their child-rearing responsibility is government's prime function, not usurping it. Families are important and need support, they are not primarily economic units - as they have been treated by Liberal governments for too many years, but the milieu in which good citizens develop. We need more healthy families, not more institutions to play a poor second to them.
Bottom line, we need Bay Street style National Day Care like we need another market crash.
Yes, ladies and germs, just let big business do what it wants with the little nippers and there'll soon be an end to just about every social ill that the young grow into. Nothing in the land but good, obedient citizens and, no doubt, obedient little consumers and corporate trolls. Unless, of course, there is bad parenting involved! Because, after all, good parenting is an equal requirement of any good daycare system (it leaves someone to blame for poor performance).
Seems to me these fellows haven't taken their research far enough. How about the effects of some 'national daycare programmes' that have been around for a while - like in Russia, or China. Fifty years, or more, of government child care haven't done much to make Russia a land of sunny promise, with or withhout communism.
The Swedish model could stand a look as well. Just how does being socialized and institutionalized at a young age affect the adult of the species? In fact, I believe, that the research would tend to indicate that good parenting is more than just an adjunct here, it's vital.
So what does Bay Street want - the best for your kids? No, the chance to make a buck so they can get the best for their kids, of course. And what better way to do that than to get the taxpayer to fund their operation.
Have these guys ever been in a day care centre? They are run by professionals ( i.e. trained, 9 to 5 types - extra charge for late pick-up - who have lives outside the centre) - with structured programming (toilet time, meal time, activities, etc) all very nice but aimed at inculcating a herd mentality among the infants - " Yes Donnie, we all sit on the potty till everybody is finished." These centres are as 'natural' as a feedlot operation. You can bet your bippy that even with a 'nanny', as some of these elite fellows might have had, childhood was never like that. The only kids I could see benefiting from such warehouses are those from homes which are profoundly deprived.
I like Steven Harper's thinking because it keeps the focus of child nuturing exactly where it should stay, on the parents. If the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, then the results of what goes on there should remain, for the most part, the responsibility of the participants.
Governments have an interest in what happens to kids. Some say that institutionalizing them young means not having to institutionalize them when they're older - that's a theory requiring proof - basically I think it's hogwash! Supporting parents as they fulfill their child-rearing responsibility is government's prime function, not usurping it. Families are important and need support, they are not primarily economic units - as they have been treated by Liberal governments for too many years, but the milieu in which good citizens develop. We need more healthy families, not more institutions to play a poor second to them.
Bottom line, we need Bay Street style National Day Care like we need another market crash.
Thursday, April 06, 2006
Old MacDonald HAD a Farm
Farmers are much in the news of late, both provincially and nationally. They claim they need help.
That would be financial in nature - like the kind governments manage to scrape-up if an automaker or pulp and paper corporation starts making noises about "closing down".
Now the farmers, or a significant chunk of them, are telling the governments that they too might have to shut down or, at least, sell out.
The problem, for many of them, goes back to the 'mad cow' thing that resulted in the US refusing to buy Canadian beef for a year. You will recall that the government bailed out the beef industry during that trying time. The interesting part was that the 'beef industry' was, by-and-large, the meat packers and not the farmers.
How, you might ask, did that come to pass? Well, the government subsidies were paid per head of cattle owned. And who owned the cattle at the time of the bail-out? The meat packers.
Those meat packers had been running a 'help the farmers' campaign of their own. Taking cattle off the farmers' hands at well-below market price - I've heard as low as $0.10/pound - and then paying the farmers a stipend to feed and pasture them. What looked like the least of a lot of evils, became a windfall for the packers when the government got mobilized. Most of the western meatpackers, by the way, are American-owned - and that had to look good down south.
The only thing the farmers came out of that sorry mess with, was a lot of bank debt. Since then the meatpackers successfully lobbied to have US borders reopened to their cattle - another little 'bonus'. The farmers, well they're all over the map. Some have been able to weather the storm. Others have diversified into other operations and many are hanging on by the skin of their teeth hoping for a good summer and decent commodity prices. Some of them, unfortunately, can't hold on that long.
Old Macdonald might well have HAD the farm, literally and metaphorically. Here come the Agro-corps!
That would be financial in nature - like the kind governments manage to scrape-up if an automaker or pulp and paper corporation starts making noises about "closing down".
Now the farmers, or a significant chunk of them, are telling the governments that they too might have to shut down or, at least, sell out.
The problem, for many of them, goes back to the 'mad cow' thing that resulted in the US refusing to buy Canadian beef for a year. You will recall that the government bailed out the beef industry during that trying time. The interesting part was that the 'beef industry' was, by-and-large, the meat packers and not the farmers.
How, you might ask, did that come to pass? Well, the government subsidies were paid per head of cattle owned. And who owned the cattle at the time of the bail-out? The meat packers.
Those meat packers had been running a 'help the farmers' campaign of their own. Taking cattle off the farmers' hands at well-below market price - I've heard as low as $0.10/pound - and then paying the farmers a stipend to feed and pasture them. What looked like the least of a lot of evils, became a windfall for the packers when the government got mobilized. Most of the western meatpackers, by the way, are American-owned - and that had to look good down south.
The only thing the farmers came out of that sorry mess with, was a lot of bank debt. Since then the meatpackers successfully lobbied to have US borders reopened to their cattle - another little 'bonus'. The farmers, well they're all over the map. Some have been able to weather the storm. Others have diversified into other operations and many are hanging on by the skin of their teeth hoping for a good summer and decent commodity prices. Some of them, unfortunately, can't hold on that long.
Old Macdonald might well have HAD the farm, literally and metaphorically. Here come the Agro-corps!
Monday, April 03, 2006
God help America - Nobody Else Will
Condoleeza Rice blew into Baghdad to echo the Prez' sentiments that Prime Minister Ibrahim Al Jaabari is no longer eligible for office - a regime change (if there was a regime) is in order. The only problem is who to put in his place. It can't be a Sunni and it won't be a Kurd, so what's needed is 'reformed' Shi-ite - one of the modernists who whips himself with a loofah and pours Calvin klein skin care products on his head. One for whom the sharpest object nearing his body is an electric (remingtion) razor and Baghdad is a word on the label of his imported dining room carpet. A Shiite who did at least one semester at a US University and has a blonde missus. Preferably one who attended West Point and the Wharton school. Somebody the US can talk to.
But, ya know, Condy was talking to the wrong people. She needed to be talking to the US Army and the friendly folks at Bechtel - what they do has more to do with Iraqi democracy than any number of Iraqi ministers right now. In fact it's impossible to have a democracy when these organs and everyone in them are above the law - correct that, they ARE the law.
I can't help but think that that oil is the real reason the Yanks are still in Iraq. When they do pull out, they want to make sure that oil will be coming with them. Until that's a positive, watch for them to stay. The tactics are changing - they're going to set the Iraqis up for the 'small shit' that costs daily casualties.
The Yanks will stay in air-conditioned comfort out in the desert with a 60 mile security perimeter and leave it for big 'heli-borne' operations designed to contain, search and destroy 'insurgents'. The sort of massive fire-power battles the Yanks love to see on TV - lots of shooting and explosions, where every dead Iraqi is an 'evil-doer' and the news footage is well-censored.
The hope is the Iraqis will regain control (I wouldn't bet two bits) or that the Al Qaeda will get tired and go home. Then Bechtel can start pumping out that Iraqi 'war loan'.
But, ya know, Condy was talking to the wrong people. She needed to be talking to the US Army and the friendly folks at Bechtel - what they do has more to do with Iraqi democracy than any number of Iraqi ministers right now. In fact it's impossible to have a democracy when these organs and everyone in them are above the law - correct that, they ARE the law.
I can't help but think that that oil is the real reason the Yanks are still in Iraq. When they do pull out, they want to make sure that oil will be coming with them. Until that's a positive, watch for them to stay. The tactics are changing - they're going to set the Iraqis up for the 'small shit' that costs daily casualties.
The Yanks will stay in air-conditioned comfort out in the desert with a 60 mile security perimeter and leave it for big 'heli-borne' operations designed to contain, search and destroy 'insurgents'. The sort of massive fire-power battles the Yanks love to see on TV - lots of shooting and explosions, where every dead Iraqi is an 'evil-doer' and the news footage is well-censored.
The hope is the Iraqis will regain control (I wouldn't bet two bits) or that the Al Qaeda will get tired and go home. Then Bechtel can start pumping out that Iraqi 'war loan'.
Only in Ontario? Pity.
The Toronto Star reported to-day the incipient 'crack'-down on those who claim they need to smoke some pot to hold their disease symptoms at bay. So far they've just charged one fellow who claims that the 'cannabal raisins' help ameliorate his GM seizures. He's looking at possession and trafficking charges.
Pot is, or has turned into, a kazillion-dollar a year industry. Grow operations get raided often enough to have become a regular news item. Homes in quiet neigbourhoods get turned into moisture-soaked and mould-infested dumps by folk willing to pay big rents to absentee landlords and to tap into their Electric Power connection. An ounce of pot that once sold for40 bucks many moons ago, now commands $200 bucks and up. It's N times as potent as the wacky tabaccy of my youth, and there seems to be no shortage of it. (Remember the old saw about pot getting you through times of no money better than the reverse?). Pot, these days, will get you shot - or stabbed at least if a recently reported story of an attempted rip-off is any indicator! I guess us 'Joes' get to make up the increased insurance losses and hydro fees caused by these 'entrepreneurs', and to pay increasing municipal taxes to hire more cops to catch 'em.
Why can't government be as enlightened as they are about the methadone program. 10 years ago there were 600 poor souls on the methadone program. That , if you don't know, it gives one, or two, daily doses of a heroin replacement to help addicts 'break their habit' (provided they continue to test negative for the hard stuff). Well to-day, great lands o'goshen - there are 14 000 poor souls lining up daily for their slug o' juice. The Methadone program has spawned itself an industry! Pharmacists are devoting themselves to the sole practice of distributing it! (NOT!). They get the contract then hire some cheap (but well-supervised) labour to pass it out. Horse (not heroin) Balls!
The ONTGOV is looking into irregularities, but the 14 000 get their dose-a-day - who'd want 14 000 irate druggies rioting over no juice! I would hope that this has put a severe crimp in the heroin market - or at least knocked the street price down, but I doubt it - the latter is just producing new needs for free methadone!
Anyhow, this is dumb. Why doesn't the government just grab the whole thing - legalize hard and soft drugs and peddle them in outlets marketed like the Liquor Stores. Nice displays, free samples, flashy seasonal publications with lifestyle articles "Your Olde Fashioned Christmas Fix", "Spiking in V'ball: an Alternate View", "Jointing in the Woodshop".
At least you'd get a good look at who was doing it, or buying it to sell to kids.
Sick people shouldn't have to go sneaking around to get pot of consistent price and quality. They shouldn't have to bogart a stash just to make sure there'll be 'meds' available next month. Like the alkaloid addict, they have every right to expect that their weed will be waiting, without the blueclad arm of some latterday 'stoss truppe' waiting to hail them into court.
Pot is, or has turned into, a kazillion-dollar a year industry. Grow operations get raided often enough to have become a regular news item. Homes in quiet neigbourhoods get turned into moisture-soaked and mould-infested dumps by folk willing to pay big rents to absentee landlords and to tap into their Electric Power connection. An ounce of pot that once sold for40 bucks many moons ago, now commands $200 bucks and up. It's N times as potent as the wacky tabaccy of my youth, and there seems to be no shortage of it. (Remember the old saw about pot getting you through times of no money better than the reverse?). Pot, these days, will get you shot - or stabbed at least if a recently reported story of an attempted rip-off is any indicator! I guess us 'Joes' get to make up the increased insurance losses and hydro fees caused by these 'entrepreneurs', and to pay increasing municipal taxes to hire more cops to catch 'em.
Why can't government be as enlightened as they are about the methadone program. 10 years ago there were 600 poor souls on the methadone program. That , if you don't know, it gives one, or two, daily doses of a heroin replacement to help addicts 'break their habit' (provided they continue to test negative for the hard stuff). Well to-day, great lands o'goshen - there are 14 000 poor souls lining up daily for their slug o' juice. The Methadone program has spawned itself an industry! Pharmacists are devoting themselves to the sole practice of distributing it! (NOT!). They get the contract then hire some cheap (but well-supervised) labour to pass it out. Horse (not heroin) Balls!
The ONTGOV is looking into irregularities, but the 14 000 get their dose-a-day - who'd want 14 000 irate druggies rioting over no juice! I would hope that this has put a severe crimp in the heroin market - or at least knocked the street price down, but I doubt it - the latter is just producing new needs for free methadone!
Anyhow, this is dumb. Why doesn't the government just grab the whole thing - legalize hard and soft drugs and peddle them in outlets marketed like the Liquor Stores. Nice displays, free samples, flashy seasonal publications with lifestyle articles "Your Olde Fashioned Christmas Fix", "Spiking in V'ball: an Alternate View", "Jointing in the Woodshop".
At least you'd get a good look at who was doing it, or buying it to sell to kids.
Sick people shouldn't have to go sneaking around to get pot of consistent price and quality. They shouldn't have to bogart a stash just to make sure there'll be 'meds' available next month. Like the alkaloid addict, they have every right to expect that their weed will be waiting, without the blueclad arm of some latterday 'stoss truppe' waiting to hail them into court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)