1228-Straw dogs and dissembling
1212-An iceberg you say??
1130-Justice for Sam?
1115-Deficit or delusion?
1031-Ghouls & Ganja
1018-What's that smell Ma?
Ammo - selection of very good commentary from other writers on important stuff; - FAAAAARRRRR BETTER THAN TV!!!
Canadians for Canada Coalition (CCC) - United Left, if you will - but bottom of the line - Get Rid of Corporate Government in Canada - 2004 Federal Election may be your last chance - act NOW PLEASE!!
The Debt Conspiracy Theory Fact - do you believe people who email you from Africa wanting to give you 10 million bucks? No? Well WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THE NATIONAL DEBT IS LEGITIMATE?!?!? (Sorry - I get excited about this...)
911 - as important as the debt scam - ask yourself why you are so afraid to admit the truth here, even when it's been kicking you in the face almost since it happened? When the world you live in is operating under a lie this big and obvious and monstrous, you have no security whatsoever.
Hand of Mordor
George Orwell 1984
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
mama mama who dat scary man mama??!!
HAHA HAHAHA HAHAHAHA !!!!!!!!!!
040119 - Get outta my friggin bong!
- sorry if this whole ramble seems a bit wishy washy or disjointed or anything, considering the imaculate precision of everything else I do HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA - I've been a bit off my oats the last couple days, as they say somewhere I used to be, about a small situation that happened at the day job (ongoing actually for awhile, but came to a head a few days ago...) - one of those things that just won't get out of my head and I keep thinking about, much as I just want to leave it behind - one of the things about my character such as it is I don't really care for - but it's all part of the package.....
- sometimes I think I get too judgemental and harsh with the mass of my fellow citizens - I know that most of them are pretty decent people, and it is surely my belief that we all have the right to form our own opinions freely, and live pretty much as we want to (I'm pretty Libertarian in that sense - my freedom basically stops at your nose sort of thing, and vice versa of course - and then pretty "socialist" if you will in the sense that we also have an obligation to look after one another - but I ain't getting into all that here - I'm already deep in one confusing Gordian Knot to work my way out of!) - but that is in considerable conflict with my belief that some really bad people have taken over our government and are doing some very bad things and on the verge of doing some things much much worse than they are doing now - and as with any disaster, it would make a whole fuck of a lot more sense to try to stop it from happening where possible than to stand back and let events take their course, and clean up afterwards. I will bet anything you want a couple of thousand people on the Titanic, for instance (not to mention a few thousand relatives and maybe some investors and insurance people), would have been a lot happier had the precautionary principle been followed by whatever careless halfwit was driving that boat - and I have this real bad feeling that our grandkids are going to be thinking the same thing about us. As, undoubtedly, the German kids were thinking sometime around 1950 and onwards, and things were calming down again, how in the FUCK did our parents allow that mad fucker to do what he did?!?!?!?! DAAAADDDDD!!!!! GET DOWN HERE I GOT SOME QUESTIONS!!!! (do you have answers if your kid calls you someday and wants to know why there are no fish left in the ocean and no forests and everyone's starving to death???)
RM NEWS MONDAY JANUARY 19 2004
Quoting PM Paul Martin at the recent so-called "Monterey Summit" (Martin says he'll take a Canadian approach in talks with Bush in Mexico), who said "....Terrorism, the drug trade and corruption have put democracy at risk in the Americas, Martin warned during opening remarks ...", a certain "Rude Macedon", who refers to himself as the "sodium pentathol of government in Canada, and elsewhere as it strikes my fancy or I have time - the buggers are always striking my fancy, and it definitely gets irritating at times ...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA", answered the following yesterday... (Mr. Martin has not responded nor, as he is not required to, is he expected to, being much too bu$y talking with tho$e who $$$upported his $o-called "leader$hip campaign" last year with $$$ome $$$12 million (Cdn)) (HAHAHAHAHA $$$orry!!!)
Dear Mr. Martin,
I am happy to see you are concerned about these three major problematic situations in Canada and the world - drugs, terrorism and corruption - and, fearing that the current political process in Canada and your status (both as high-ranking MP and "rich person") has surrounded you with some rather tunnel-visioned, unimaginative advisors who are most likely not providing you with the information you require to make truly good decisions for all of us, I decided to take a few minutes of my time and tell you what actually needs to be done in Canada to tackle and defeat these problems (we'll leave the world on its own for now - but as soon as we have these things under control in Canada, we will provide a shining example of how things can be done everywhere, with the great strength of True Democracy, and the others will all follow along as soon as they can - with our new strength and good government, we will probably be able to help them then as well).
1) Drugs: if I might paraphrase your most illustrious predecessor once or twice removed, get the government out of the bongs and pipes of the nation. Seriously - quit wasting everyone's time charging the people using these devices and others for personal pleasure with various "crimes" - Remember Prohibition, I say, and what a crazy and impossible-to-enforce idea that eventually proved to be. You just can't legislate the way people choose to spend their leisure time, or what substances they choose to partake of during that time, and it's long past time the governments of this world clued into and recognised this basic fact about human nature. If a few individuals commit crimes "under the influence" - charge them appropriately (I am sure you are well aware that many more crimes are committed under the influence of alcohol than marijuana anyway, and even more under no chemical influence at all - and the MAJOR component of "organised crime" in Canada is providing illegal drugs, as you must know - you could knock the feet right out from under this blight on our society in one simple move!). Look at all the stories the last few months about cops busting "grow operations" - all that police and court and legal time and money wasted, when these people could be contributing to the economy, and your government could be making a fairly nice penny from simply taxing the finished product (and the growers' profits!), as you do with tobacco and alcohol. Utterly insane to criminalise this. Get on this one real fast, Paul - you have talked about Canada being a leader in the 21st century - this is the first step to take down that path.
2) "Terrorism" - we hear a lot about this, and as a thinking, intelligent, well-informed Canadian, I have a lot of concerns. First, we have yet to have any kind of public debate on this - all we have are a bunch of wild stories from the US government about crazy Arabs in caves attacking the US which, quite frankly, are pretty unbelievable, and only grow moreso the more one delves into the unanswered questions of that tragic day. You may note, we have never, in spite of huge amounts of press hype and hysteria, had a real terrorist attack on Canadian soil, so what's all the fuss? It's fine to take precautions, but they MUST be reasonable in the circumstances, and arrived at ONLY after careful deliberation, neither of which appear to apply to what is currently happening in Canada. It's getting pretty scary, actually - if there wasn't all this hysteria about "terrorism" floating around, then I think you would admit that a lot of what the Canadian government is getting up to in terms of demanding "bio-ID cards" and checking everyone at the airports and borders and giving all these security people complete access to a database containing huge amounts of private information and whatnot would be looking an awful lot like police state stuff. We really, really need a full Public Inquiry into all this terrorism stuff, checking out what exactly it is, and how much danger we here in Canada are actually in, and only then figuring out what we ought to be doing, if anything, in Canada, about it all (and I would hope that you aren't spending much time listening to the people who rounded up all them mid-eastern people last summer and slammed 'em all in jail, accusing them all of having terrorist connections - and then had to let them all go in a few weeks, when it turned out they had no "terrorist" connections at all - this is really dangerous stuff, Paul, and I hope you can tell these people to back off in the future and "get real" - it doesn't help the situation at all to have this kind of laughable-if-it-weren't-so-very-serious incompetence in high places in the Canadian security system masquerading as "protection from terrorists" or whatever they were calling it, and shows the danger of making laws and chasing people based on hysterical tales from the US Republican media (who are ANYTHING but reliable or impartial) and bogeymen-in-caves rather than the kind of factual stuff we might expect in a serious attempt at getting at the truth of things, such as we might have in a Public Inquiry).
3) Corruption - I wonder if, in this regard, Canadians might ask a few questions about things in Canada, although the western leaders who talk about this prefer we should look overseas - i.e. although there have been literally dozens of scandals in the federal Canadian government the last 20 years, large and small, we could literally count on one hand the number of politicians or, more importantly, businesses (you can't have a "corruptee" official without a "corrupter"!) which have been even investigated, let alone charged - it is more than a tad hypocritical to be talking about "corruption" in other countries when the evidence of it is so widespread in Canada. The very fact that all of these things have happened, with no investigation or charges, indicates rather clearly that the corruption in Canada is widespread and deep, infiltrating every level of our infrastructure from politicians to courts to police. If you want a place to start, start with the so-called "National Debt" that has occupied so much of your concern the last few years, and get some serious answers as to why the Canadian government undertook a course of action which has resulted in owing private investors half a trillion dollars, and to whom the Canadian taxpayers have already paid over a Trillion dollars in "service charges", when the Bank of Canada could have provided the same lending service essentially interest-free, and we would NOT have paid out that trillion in interest, and we would NOT currently have that half-trillion dollar debt hanging over our heads, in the name of which your Liberal government has gutted Canada's social programs and infrastructure spending, and promises more of the same. Provincially things are just as bad - in Ontario the last few years, for instance, the Harris-Eves government engaged in the most blatant cronyism, handing out sweetheart deals to their friends, selling off Ontario assets at pennies on the dollar, engaging in other programs that were great for their business friends but very bad for the citizens they were supposedly representing - and not a peep of protest from the legal system or anyone in government for such blatant crimes, indicating once again that the corruption is deep and pervasive. And until this kind of corruption is stopped, we are NOT going to have good or democratic government in Canada. I would strongly urge you to look into this very soon and very quickly. Hmmmmm - but then again, considering the $$12 million you received yourself in "donations" from wealthy corporate interests in Canada, it is a bit difficult to imagine you taking any steps that would see these people named the corrupting criminals that any honest observer would.
4) Finally, you say in your Monterey remarks that as long as the previous items - drugs, terrorism, and corruption - are problems, we are going to have less of a Democracy than we ought to. I very much agree. One of the major items needed to be addressed is the Democratic Deficit, and most importantly the influence of Big Money on politics in Canada. It is hardly truthful to even label the country a "democracy", implying that all citizens have open access to the political process, when in reality only those above a certain quite high level of income have any realistic chance of running for public office - giving people a "choice" of candidates selected ONLY from those able to raise a certain high level of money is NOT democracy. We see a perfect example of this this week, even as I write, where no less than three possible candidates for the new "Conservative Party" are saying they will not contest the leadership primarily because they cannot raise enough money (Right's roster leaves us cold Halifax Herald 04/01/17) - and at the same time we see stories of a certain Belinda Stronach, whose primary qualification, considering her complete lack of any political activity prior to now, seems to be nothing more than that she is rich far beyond the dreams of most Canadians, throwing her hat in the ring (i.e. Stronach enters leadership race Toronto Star 04/01/15) - neither a complete lack of political experience nor lack of money being a concern to the heiress of a billionaire's fortune. I suppose others might disagree, Mr. Martin, but at least in my view it should not be the primary prerequisite to running for public office to have a lot of money - it is hardly democratic to say as first principles that the 95+% of Canadians who do not have nor cannot raise a few million dollars are automatically excluded from the process of making a serious effort at running for the leadership of a political party, while one with a lot of money can decide to do so with no more consideration of "doability" than a normal person might have about purchasing a lottery ticket or newspaper. Stories like this just reinforce the exclusivity of the pool - Conservatives put $2.5-million spending cap on leadership race - this is not "democracy" in action, Mr. Martin - it is Oligarchy in action.
What does it say, Mr. Martin, to the majority of Canadians (average family income around $50,000) who have to work 20 years to even gross a million dollars if they're lucky, and mortgage most of their working years to a bank just to purchase a decent home for their families, and have essentially no chance whatsoever outside of winning a lottery or something of ever having even one million dollars "free and clear" in the bank at some point in their lives to invest in something like running for public office? "Democracy" is supposed to mean EVERYONE can participate in the public process, not only those who have or can raise amounts of money far beyond the average person's normal ability.
It would not be all that difficult to at least alleviate if not fully solve this situation if the political will was there - laws requiring all commercial media, for instance, to provide equal space for ALL registered political candidates in an election, such space to be paid for from public funds (at a nominal sort of cost i.e. to cover the newsprint, not the maximum billable - the media should be happy to contribute to an open and strong democratic process!) would be a start - the main thing money buys in a political contest is media space in various forms. Provision of office space with all the necessities would also enable more people, budgets for travel and production of information brochures, etc - how can you pretend we live in a "democracy" when any individual's ability to contest any democratic race is very closely tied to their ability to raise significant sums of money? In a word - you can't.
- I spend time on this now, Mr. Prime Minister, because, as we all know, an election is coming up shortly in this country, and it would be instructive to see just how deep your concern about the flawed democratic process and other problems really is - will you offer Canadians true solutions to these things in a few months, or more of the same old same old, a few cosmetic changes at best (more "free votes" and so on)? And it will be a significant message itself, if you try to claim time does not allow such debate between now and then, or something, and make another hollow political promise to "look at it" or something sometime during the next five years - the flaws in our democratic process are deep and of long standing, and there are many, many things that can be done during the upcoming election to address at least some of them - if, of course, you are sincere in your talk about such things.
A new idea - something that really ought to be done in regards to people who don't vote is to leave a bunch of empty seats in the House of Commons - this would serve various purposes - first, those who actually were elected to the House would constantly be reminded of the many Canadians without voices in the House whose interests they must consider, at least morally if not legally; secondly, as long as this gaping hole in the House was constantly brought to the voters' attention one way or another (as it ought to be in daily media reports), it would be a constant reminder to that those who did not vote that whatever was going on in the House, there was noone there speaking for them; thirdly perhaps it might be a reminder to everyone that an awful lot of Canadians thought that there was something so very wrong with the Canadian political system that they were not even voting. This of course would require the institution of Proportional Representation, wherein it was decided perhaps that every shall we say 100,000 Canadians would have one rep, and thus there would only be one seat allocated for each 100,000 votes. Imagine, in our current parliament, if it was featured on the news every night, and pointed out that of a possible 300 members, there were only around 160 - the 140 empty seats representing the people who had NOT voted! I think it would be a powerful message.
A final word - dealing with "President" Bush and the illegitimate American government is going to be a tricky issue - how do you deal with a psychopath and his handlers, equally psychopaths all - who happen to be in control of the most powerful government and military in the history of the world? It is verily not a task for which I envy you - but again, in my role as self-appointed advisor, I cannot shirk from saying what I believe to be the appropriate course of action.
First, I'd be very careful about travelling to Fortress USA unless you absolutely must, and then only under the strictest of guarantees - we would hardly want to see you shipped off to Syria or some such place for "questioning" if some minimum-wage American "border agent" took it in her head to be suspicious of some visa stamp in your passport or something - as a Canadian MP for a number of years, you have undoubtedly been to many countries that are on the US shit-list, if you'll forgive the language (sometimes you must use appropriate words, distasteful though they may be to some), and those border people don't seem to have much tolerance for countries with names they can't pronounce very well, let alone being aware of where they are in the world. But when you do have dealings with them (email is safer - trust me on this one), you must be very, very firm with the American government - as diplomatically as possible, I suppose, but nonetheless firm - the very, very last thing anyone should do with any kind of mentally ill person is to give in to their demands, as I expect you know - the "co-dependency" books have been making the rounds for many years now (I think we could even trace out such a thing in the Canadian House of Commons, with the PMs office handing out travel tickets to backbenchers who fulfilled expectations, that sort of thing, but we'll just leave all that for another day shall we?) - so when they start with the "You are with us or against us!" nonsense, you must simply stand back from their demands a bit, as an adult would with a wayward child, and take a firm and reasonable stance - that is , for instance, just tell them that we are sympathetic to their problems, but do not feel that bombing everyone on the planet who disagrees with them is a good or rational policy, stuff like that. When George lowers his head a bit and gives you that sort of schoolyard bully threatening look - well, as I said, email is much better.
Anyways Mr. Martin, there are many, many other things I would like to advise you about, but I fear I have taken too much of your time already. I do thank you for your patience, and wish you well in a difficult sort of job. I won't say "good luck" about the election, as frankly I think it is long past time Canadians were smart enough to elect a government less beholden to the wealthy bankers and corporations of Bay St and such places - but I guess it is ok to say "Happy New Year" - as I am sure you are having one.
Regards - RM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA - we'll reserve some space for his reply next week HAHAHAHAHA - not much though
-- - all the shit about the US demanding access to Canadian databases (and presumably those of other countries) for people entering there, fingerprinting everyone, etc, is really getting out of hand, and it escapes me why there is not a FUCK of a lot more outrage about this - but I guess it's the old frog in the slowly boiling water story, and most people are so stunned they just don't see what is happening anymore - I can't think of any other logical sort of explanation anyway - surely to fuck most of them don't believe that crazy shit about terrorists?!?!?!?! Remember the one or two universal attributes of past and fictional totalitarian states - dissidents repressed quickly through serious violence and complete information on every citizen, to ensure equally complete control - to minimise any attempt at overthrowing the state (pre-emptively, isn't it interesting how we have been getting used to that word the last year or so?!?!!!!), there must be minimal privacy and maximum intrusion by the authorities, and maximum fear and suspicion of everyone among the population at large. We see here what may be the final stealthy step by the US in their quest for world domination, now that they have more or less established, through the lack of serious protest on the part of the governments of the world, their 'right" to go anywhere they please and bomb the fuck out of someplace until they get rid of a government they don't like and get it replaced with something that is more amenable to their interests - access to the records of every citizen on the planet, to give them ever greater powers to nip any protest in the bud. The Coming-Out Party of the 4th Reich or something.
And the media is rolling over and playing dead, accepting the justifications of the US that they are doing this as part of the "war on terrorism" and to "protect" America.
I think I have mentioned Xymphora Blog before - one of the best commentators going - a quote from a day or two ago:
"Two more reasons why Venezuela is such a dangerous country:
Venezuela has draft legislation for a revised penal code proposing the decriminalisation of possession of drugs for personal use (see here, but I don't think the legislation has passed); and
a Supreme Court judge has proposed (or here) to add to the same set of revisions to the penal code a provision that those who take food, medicine or inexpensive goods without using violence and for necessary reasons would not be punished (the Jean Valjean law; Reuters UK publishes this in a section called 'Oddly Enough'!).
You can see why the thugs who run the United States hate Venezuela so much."
- (sorry, I didn't have time to dig into the links and add them here - you'll have to go visit yourself if you want to follow them) - not to mention their Canadian counterparts - more stuff you will NEVER see in the Canadian mainstream media, for some very odd reason (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA) - Xmph should be on your regular browse.....
One Thomas Axworthy talking about something very important - Martin should reduce the truth deficit - yes, in the Pispot - that doesn't make me think a whole lot higher of them - they print a piece like this now and then because Axworthy has the stature to get it out somewhere, and also ask a lot of hard and embarrassing questions that they would be forced to deal with because of his public profile about their role and duty as a major media in a "democratic" country if they didn't - but if you weigh this one piece against the steady stream of Fraser-Republican crap they print, it doesn't really amount to much more than cabin boy forlornly shouting out "Iceberg ahead!!" while the Captain and crew party in the ballroom. What we need is a Canadian paper doing this sort of thing EVERY day, giving people a chance to get this perspective on things on a regular basis in a quantity that can at least compete with the media owned by the wealthy and constantly trumpeting the Bay St Boys "vision", and a government as well that is equally committed to telling the truth and working for ALL Canadians rather than primarily for Tom d'Aquino and the Bay St Boys.
Still, a good read. Got it all here for ya - RM archive copy. A quote: "...Real democratic accountability begins with truth and trust. "Truth," Montaigne tells us, "must be loved for its own sake" because it is the principal and fundamental part of virtue since all other virtues depend on it. Truth, for example, is necessary to trust: One cannot have good faith if your fidelity results in illusions or deception. Trust in turn is central to social cohesion: It is the foundation of family, contracts, and even love itself. Francis Fukuyama writes that, "a strong and stable family structure and durable social institutions cannot be legislated into existence," they depend on a strong civil society, and civility depends on the level of trust inherent in society...."
- which is one of the things I have been most concerned with, and write about a lot - if we do not have truth in society and government, there can be no real trust, and without trust, a decent society is impossible. We have to expose the one big central lie under which we are all living - the lie that it is "our" government, honestly trying to make things as good as possible for all of us - the truth is that it is NOT "our" government at all in anything other than theory, but a government controlled by elite interests, doing their best to make things as good as possible for that elite, while still maintaining the illusion, the belief, in the rest of the population that it is a democracy, a government "of, by and for the people" - when it is no such thing. If this is understood, so many, many other things begin to become clear. And as long as it is NOT understood, things will continue as they are, slowly getting worse for most of us, as the power of the elite demands more and more concessions, and the mandarins of the government try to meet those demands whilst pretending to respond to "democratic" control.
Geezus look at the time! 2004!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA WHAT HAPPENED TO MY FUCKING LIFE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
man there must be ONE left ...... (fuck how many times have I said that in my life???? HAHAHAHAHAHAA)
George Orwell: During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act
"I didn't say it would be easy. I just said it would be the truth." - Morpheus
- and insofar as this grasshopper understands it, so it is.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” (Upton Sinclair - great writer - reading stuff like this helps understand how the problems of today are NOT new!!! - and is a clear indication of the truth of the old saying that he who does not know history is destined to repeat it, or whatever)
"Your failure to be informed does not make me a wacko." — John Loeffler
Write if ya want (ya gotta take the xxx off the front - I'm trying to reduce the intake from the spam assholes (oh yes you fucking are - it is NOT amusing - get a fucking life why don't you, instead of bothering people - how fucking stupid can you be?? If you were the last fucking product on earth I wouldn't buy anything from you!! Fuck.)).
What direct action did you take today to do something to get rid of corporate government in Canada besides deleting spam? Do you feel that it was enough, given the situation? Will you feel content telling that to your grandchildren, should they survive, and the country, and the planet?
So much left to say, so little time to say it in - probably only a few months until the next federal election - do you want to try to save Canada in that frantic four weeks when big Paul drops the writ and EVERY friggin advantage is his - or would you like to start now, when we have some sort of outside chance? Canada for Canadians Coalition - get involved.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: With thanks to the Editors of the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Ottawa Citizen, Ch'town Guardian, Vancouver Sun, and others I cannot think of at the moment, for their refusal to print my letters over the last few years on various issues of national import - had I even a hope of being printed occasionally in these fora and my voice acknowledged in the national debate, I would undoubtedly not have bothered putting all this together. Cheers!