On Green Island
Some commentary and letters from outside the box about what gets reported - and what doesn't get reported - in the Canadian MSM. The Canadian MSM never prints the missives, which is understandable, of course - the last thing any con artist needs (or any gatekeeper will allow) is some educated guy telling the marks about the game. But you can read it all here - and for free. Keep your money for beer, it's liberating. In vino veritas. In veritas libertas.
Creative Commons License
[EFC Blue Ribbon - Free Speech Online]duh

Green Island
Some Essays on the General Situation

Press responsibility

How Democracy Works on Green Island

Managed Elections In Canada

The Canadian National Debt Scam

911 Thought Experiment

911 'Experts'

Get Rid of the Beancounters! - Fixing the Canadian Health Care System

PEI Revival Plan
(historical document)


Wayback stuff

other 'outside the box' readings

Pogo - what if the 10,000 is wrong and the one guy is right and the one guy is right?

"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." - Henry David Thoreau

It's every man for himself, the elephant said as he danced among the chickens.
- Tommy Douglas

In this world, we are all butterflies and we need to be mindful of what can happen when we flap our wings
- David Suzuki

Democracy is comin...
What Canada looks like from outside the Walls of Indoctrination

Case study: Canada - a managed democracy

July 15 - Toronto Scar, and most everone else
In the box: - - The downfall of Conrad Black

Out of the box: - actually, they ought to have titled this something like Now we Piss on our Fallen Leader or something - but then, that would have been honest, and as there is no honor among thieves, there is no honesty in corporate Canada, or corporate anywhere for that matter. I didn't, and don't, like the man and what he stands for, but he does have a lot more character than most of the faceless trolls occupying the boardrooms of the fascist overlords running our country and world, and intelligence. I wrote him an email many years ago, lost in the ancient archives somewhere, telling him I disagreed with something he was doing, and he actually took the time to reply personally, and politely, telling me he thanked me for writing, but he thought he was doing the right thing, or something like that. I'm not unhappy to see his fall, but I don't think there's anything any honest person would call 'justice' going on here - one gang of crooks taking out one of their rivals when they smell blood is not justice, no matter how many editorials they write about it - it's not the end that counts, really, it's the means - and the 'means' here had nothing to do with justice for We the People. Picking up a few pennies falling from the coaches of the wealthy as they pass by does not mean we have achieved financial independence.

July 14 CNEWS
In the box: - - Canadian, Afghan forces find Taliban weapons cache

Out of the box - good jazus you don't even know where to start with stuff like this - it would be fine in a neighborhood 'newsletter' of kids having pretend 'gang wars' or something - but in a national paper talking about a 'war' our country is engaged in?!?! (sorry, that should have been 'our' country, if you follow....)

I mean, what's the message? "Jeez, look at this!!! The bad guys have weapons!!!! We never knew that!!!!! And - guess what?!?! - they don't carry them around all the time, but sometimes they just sort of leave em somewhere- and we found em!!! HAHAHAHAHAH!!!! WE'RE SO FUCKING CLEVER HAHAHAHAH!!!!

- but only after following the (drum roll!!!) "BLOODY TRAIL!!!!!!" - on the edges of your seats chilluns!! They's bad mans out there, but our BRAVE LADS are on the job!!!!!!

Isn't that sort of normal warfare stuff? The bad guys have guns and bombs, and we have guns and bombs, and we sometimes store that stuff somewhere, and sometimes the other guys are going to find them? We find theirs, they find ours, all part of the game, right?? Like we shoot them, and they shoot us? We kill civilians, and they kill civilians - oh wait, they haven't actually killed any Canadian civilians, yet, have they? And that would be really, really, really REALLY bad if they ever did!!!! It's ok when we do it, because we only do it by accident of course, and we are the good guys so things'll be ok in the end (our trusty media will see to that hoho) - but if THEY were to kill - sorry, I lost the framing, the bad guys would not 'kill' civilians here in Canada, it would be a horrible act of terroristic slaughter only real lizard klingon terrorists would do - not to be confused with our 'killing by accident and really all the best intentions, no hard feelings, eh mate? just send whatever kids are left off to the nice school we've constructed over there (that'd be with a 'wink wink' for the 'embedded' journos, of course)' civilians over there, where we are invading their country ...

I don't know, maybe I should have joined the army when I was younger, and maybe I'd understand this stuff more. Or maybe I just should have had the lobotomy they wanted to give me when they found out I still had a brain when I was 16 or something. Or just read the newspapers and believe what they tell me like everyone else does ....

And look at the end of the story - sorry, 'story' - "The last three Canadian-Afghan operations have drawn on air support with no civilian casualties." - I mean, fucking jesus, could you get more obvious? There's been a considerable outcry about the civilians 'our' bombs have been killing during this whole mess, so GET THE MESSAGE, PEOPLE - NO DEAD CIVILIANS THIS TIME!!!

Ha ha ha. Like we all believe everything they say, now. (Who? Either of them, army spokespeople or media, they're pretty much one and the same any more, wouldn't you say?)

July 11 CNEWS
In the box: - - Ont. police want public more engaged in organized crime fight: ... - "...The public has to make better choices with respect to the type of activities that they engage in," said Bill Blair, the president of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police and head of the Toronto police force..."

Out of the box: - Police SUPPORT organised crime in Canada (oh surprise surprise!!!!)

- well, cute, the 'media' playing a secretarial role again, but if we can stand back from the framing a bit here, we might manage to see another meaning, "The people of Canada need to understand that although we call this a 'democracy', you people gotta do what we (that is, we the 'police' the paid enforcers of your rulers) damn well TELL ya to do!"

That is to say - if we had a fair 'democratic' debate and vote - do you think pot and prostitution and gambling would be illegal, and the cops filling the courts with people engaging in such activities? Do you think there would be outrageous taxes on cigarettes? Do you think a majority of Canadians would vote to use our police to enforce corporate labelling? (note here I said 'fair' debate - I do not suggest we would ever see one in the 'corporate' media - but since all of this is fantasizing anyway, just imagine we could ever have a 'fair' debate, somehow...)


You will never, never, never, never see it in the MSM, but of course the whole purpose of most of the laws that are being 'broken' by these terrible scofflaw 'criminals' according to the cops here are actually laws that SUPPORT organized crime in Canada, and elsewhere, and I have very serious difficulty believing this is not intentional, although we'll never know for sure without a few little scopalomine trials - the solution to organized 'crime', of course, is to take away their money (sort of like the solution to 'democracy' they've been working on for the last 30-odd years) - remove the criminal laws from pot smoking and prosititution and gambling, and THAT is how you stop the flow of money to organized crime (not to mention increase government income by huge amounts, by ceasing all the unnecessary, and very substantial, money spent on 'enforcing' these laws few people want, and also by some judicious taxation - not through the roof like with cigarettes, but just a little user tax like cigaretttes and gas used to have, in the good ol days, that makes a lot of money through sheer volume).

And the other big revenue generator for 'crime' these days of course is cigarette smuggling - again, very direct and intentional support for whatever connections this has to organized 'crime' - get the taxes down to some reasonable rate, and voila! no more smuggling - how fucking stupid are these people? (Either very or not much, depending on whether you believe they really think they can stop cigarette smuggling while maintaining prices like they've driven the 'legal' stuff to, or if they know exactly what they are doing, and are intentionally supporting the organized crime - as always, there are undoubtedly two kinds of people, those very simple in-the-box types who believe the indoctrrination they have been fed all their lives and thus don't have much functioning 'grey' matter about things like this, and those a little higher on the food chain who know exactly what they are doing, and why.) And as for the profits buying guns etc - well, exactly why do you think most of these guns are being used? Organised crime is not a democracy, it is very 'the biggest guy wins' stuff - and that includes, since they obviously operate outside any 'laws' that bind thee and I either 'legally' or morally, getting rid of the opposition by killing them off, just like in the good ol days - and guns are, of course, the best way for killing off those you don't like (just ask the guys in the Pentagon and various other similar places) - so again, you stop criminalizing things people are going to do anyway, and you remove the incentive for 'bad' people to get involved with such activities, thus you remove the 'competition' for such activities, thus you reduce gun usage by a huge percent. Not rocket science - but then, fascist enforcers are rarely high IQ types. (although I expect their leaders are more than well aware of this little operative truth - but if you remove the incentive for 90% or more of the bad guys to have guns and go around killing themselves and others, then at the same time you remove the justification for the Big Brave Police Officers to be toting the same guns around, and what fun is being a cop in north Merica if you can't carry that big gun around?!?)

The people making the laws know very well what they are doing, however.

And as for counterfeit products like designer label or DVDs - why are the cops getting involved in a major way with protecting massive windfall corporate profits?? Why are they hassling the people who buy this stuff anyway? Shouldn't they be targetting the suppliers, who are knowingly selling phony products? If a customer is buying a cheap noname brand part for his car, then it's going to wear out faster and there's no real gain to be made by the customer - but very often, it's poor people who buy this stuff, and would happily buy the 'real' and superior product if they could afford it - so once again the cops, and our society, are simply criminalizing poor people for not having enough money to participate in our 'modern advanced' society - which is something we probably ought to be talking about as a society a bit more, rather than how Paris Hilton was feeling last week. And if the cops are 'protecting' the right of big-name labels to exploit cheap third-world labor and thus get huge windfall profits in Canada or other countries by selling a shirt for a hundred bucks or whatever that cost them a buck to make and get to the store - well, maybe this would be another good thing to have a national debate over, in various ways, not least of which would be why in the hell people in general are so stupid as to be buying that stuff, for many reasons. But calling some of them criminals because they want to look like they are wearing a hundred dollar shirt while paying twenty bucks for it - well, the logic escapes me, really, aside from, as I said, protecting corporate profits, which I do not think is or should be a job for the Canadian police.

'Corporate Profits', of course, whilst always being revered by many, including ambitious politicians, has more or less officially become the new God in Canada since about 1988 and the FTA. Funny how these people are all gung-ho and hands-off about 'the market' when it means Canadian workers have to compete with workers from third world countries, and thus reduce their remuneration demands in the name of competition - but when it comes to Canadian consumers getting cheaper products from same third world countries, the 'market' suddenly takes on a different color, and suddenly serious intervention in the name of protecting corporate profits is just fine, although intervention to protect labour wages is not to be thought of. Do I smell a little hypocricy here?!?! Not to mention schizophrenia?!?

Is my cynicism showing again?!? darn.

July 10 CBC
In the box: - - Afghan mission

Out of the box: - Dear Kathleen,

I listened to the segment yesterday about the Afghan mission - I hoped for a bit of honest debate from the military. Unfortunately, as seems to be the norm with CBC, the pro-invasion/war bias was front and center in this show, ignoring the 50-60+% of Canadians who do NOT support 'the mission'. How disappointing from the CBC. It actually could have been something useful and interesting for Canadians to listen to, if you had these three young very positive about the war men talking civilly with three others equally opposed to the war, who could talk about Afghans opposed to the invasion, and tell stories about things not quite so wonderful that NATO-Canadian occupation forces had been doing and what the Afghans thought of this, and etc. An honest debate that reflected the different views of Canadians, rather than this 100% rahrahrah stuff.

And your overall rightwing prowar bias was very evident after you played the short clip of Alexa McDonaugh's comments, in which she said at the very first, 'I'm not saying it's because we are losing lives we should leave, it's because it is not something we can win militarily' -

After which you paraphrased her comment as "How do you respond to her point, which is 'we're not winning so we should get out' -

- you misinterpret what she said, either intentionally or otherwise - there is a big difference between 'we can't win' and 'we're not winning' - the latter implying that well, maybe things were ok before, but now we're taking a beating and can't stand the sight of a body bag sob sob so let's tuck the old tail between the legs and get outta here! - which is NOT what she or we are saying, and is actually quite insulting.

What Alexa was saying is what many of us said from the beginning and continue saying - this 'mission' was poorly conceived and planned from the very first in every way, and was not winnable from the first and remains non-winnable, and we're just wondering when the ongoing deaths are going to help wake up the 'war at any cost for any excuse' gang to accept that it was a mistake going there, and gritting your teeth and 'sticking it out' does not make it any less of a mistake - as, for instance, the Americans found in Viet Nam, after 60,000 needless deaths of their own soldiers, and the deaths/murders of a couple of million Vietnamese. Not to mention, of course, the Soviets who tried the same sort of operation we are trying today, with the same results as the Americans in Vietnam. Rather arrogant of we Canadians to think our military can do what the Soviets could not, at the very height of their power to a next door country.

To let one of your interviewees bring up the Dieppe invasion, and pontificate about how those of us who oppose this Afganistan invasion would have been fleeing the shores of Europe after a few deaths, is blatant nonsense, and it says a lot about you and the show that you let such things go unchallenged. Just for one obvious point, when you think about it, the Canadian roles there and in Afghanistan are entirely the opposite - in Europe we were trying to force an occupier out of France and other countries - but in Afghanistan - wow, we ARE the occupier!!! Hmmmmm - could be interesting to have your young men speak with someone who would challenge them on such points. But not on the good ol pro-invasion CBC!!!

And that is the question for the Current, of course - why did you not have someone on the show to talk with your three young 'we think the war is great!!' men from the other perspective, rather than this obvious 'speak to the brave soldiers in a hushed, respectful voice to show our reverence for them all, and feed them softball lob questions to answer, you're all such heroes' type of 'interview'?

Ah well, I'll write no more - I know well the fate of letters to the CBC opposing your pro-invasion policies - right into the old wastebacket unanswered. Just thought I'd let you know, though. There are many of us - a majority, actually, I think, from every poll I read these days, who agree with Alexa, who do NOT support this invasion, and NOT because we're cowardly wimps of some sort which seems to be the current 'talking point' of the pro-invasion speakers for lack of anything more honest, and it's getting to be time you started letting some of these voices onto the CBC, I think.

July 8 CNEWS
In the box: - - Report: North Korean leader Kim Jong Il enjoys working all night

Out of the box: - ??????? The only 'news' here, reading between the lines, is how in the hell this qualifies as a 'news' story. The man likes to work at night. News?!?!?!?!?! And the rest doesn't get any better - "...Kim, 65, also appears to make phone calls to officials during pre-dawn hours to give instructions..." - good god, what a scoop!!!!!!! - the real news here is the incredible patheticness of Canadian 'journalism'. If one hadn't despaired long ago, one would despair indeed.

July 8 Toronto Star
In the box: - - Why might doesn't always win - A new study suggests that involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan might be doomed from the outset

Out of the box: - The depth of analysis is absolutely stunning. As is the certainty with which the 'new' results are presented here - "...Now, Sullivan's research, which appeared in the June issue of The Journal of Conflict Resolution, tells us why this happens in the first place..." - note that - Sullivan 'tells' us - as if noone had any idea of this stuff before.

And "...It turns out that..." begins the next paragraph - new information, in other words, revealed by this amazing researcher, telling us poor sods stuff nobody had the faintest idea about before.

It turns out that, according to this brilliant 'new' research, that people in their own country, minding their own business, when invaded by a foreign power who arrogantly think they can waltz in a drop a few bombs and the natives will fold like week old lettuce, often manage to outlast the invading force. The writer has apparently heard of the Americans being driven from Vietnam, but apparently doesn't fee; that anyone might have learned something therefrom. Or the various invading forces that have been driven from our own Waterloo there in Afghanistan over the centuries, most recently the Russians - no, the writer is going along with the notion that this is all a great new surprise for everyone.

How shallow and pathetic these people are. I suppose though it's part of the 'plausible deniability' alibi they're putting together for sometime in the next few months, so that instead of a bunch of people getting charged with incompetence amounting to treason and murder for getting Canada involved in an invasion we should NEVER have considered, we'll have these old fucks on the National getting fed softball questions by wide-eyed friendly announcers, and telling us that, gosh darn, they sure wish this insightful 'analysis' had of been available to them when they were discussing the drattedly difficult question of doing our duty in Afghanistan, and they just might have made a different decision, you know, old chap. Too bad about all those young soldiers being killed and all, but we really thought those darn natives would welcome our democracy and all, you know, etc and etc.

Too disgusted to write more. They play everybody for absolute idiots with this kind of 'news' story - and the worst part of all, from outside the box, is that they appear to do so with considerable justification.

July 8 Toronto Star
In the box: - - Iraqi Civilians Slaughtered - Truck bomb targets rural village market

Out of the box: - that 'framing' stuff again - American / Canadian / NATO bombs have killed hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, depending on which frame of reference you want to talk about, including the well known instances of bombing things like wedding parties - but when was the last time you heard of 'our' bombs 'slaughtering' someone?

Give up? Not a trick question at all - we're the good guys! We NEVER 'slaughter' people, we just kill em. 'Slaughter' is what the bad guys do.

Not sure if the dead much care if they were killed or slaughtered, or their relatives for that matter - but it's pretty important to the media people reporting it all - I guess it has more to do with helping you the too-stupid-to-figure-out-for-yourself-who's-doing-good-stuff-and-who's-doing-bad-stuff reader the words are used for.

Bad guys slaughter innocent civilians. Good guys kill em accidentally. Rah rah support our troops YEA!!

July 5 Toronto Star
In the box: - - Hamas seeks 'legitimacy' - Release of British journalist Alan Johnston seen as PR coup for militant group, Mideast analysts say

Out of the box: - it's just so obvious from outside the box, this framing of things. We don't like Hamas, so we'll interpret everything they do in some bad light. We like the Canadian gov, so they'll get a free ride (I know, I know, we criticize the gov about some things - but not this!!). That is to say - we read weekly about the wonderful things the Canadian soldiers and military are doing in Afghanistan, opening schools, training police, freeing the women, bringing democracy, etc and etc - and exactly when was the last time you saw a headline about 'Canadian gov scores PR coup!!! with news of new schools and democracy for poor Afghani women' or something?

Right. Although, of course, some cynicism, even outright eyebrows raised disbelief, would be more appropriate about most of the claims they make about all the 'great' stuff we're doing over there, when we're not shooting kids on bikes or bombing civilian residences on the off chance we might get a real 'terrorist'.

And the full spectrum propaganda goes on unabated, and with the complete unawareness of the mass of those it is directed at, who seem to lap it up like twinkies and beer with the evening tv.

haha that's kind of an oxymoron, isn't it? If people had any idea what was happening, the propagandists couldn't do it.

why do I look around, and everything I see on the Canadian news sites looks like I'm reading from inside a rabbit hole tonight?!?!?!? I won't even start on the sense of unreality that began when I saw, on the front page of the Star, a story about how men are allowed to wear shorts to work now. On some days only, of course, and only in some places. In Toronto, don't get this confused with Edmonton or something. I mean holy fuck. But hey, we just had Canada Day and it's a great, great, great democracy, and we're all really, really free. And happy, yea. Free and happy. Just keep that thought in your head. And Democracy. GREAT democracy. Got it. Get that tv on - calm down, calm down. And no, we're not wearing shorts to work tomorrow - not until we see what everyone else is doing. And maybe not even then. Really. Do you really want that kind of nonconformist reputation getting into your work record?!?! Whooeee.

July 5 Toronto Star
In the box: - - Teacher shocked by breast comment

Out of the box: - hard to figure what is sadder, that the Star would headline a 'story' like this - or that it was at the top of the 'most read' list. What a bunch of sick, sexually repressed people this society breeds. One thing was missing from the story - nobody seemed to be asking how such a jerk got hired in the first place. And nobody was trying to explain how being a jerk - which is hardly something that would make one stand out in anyplace in Canada I have ever been - is 'newsworthy' enough to get space in the Star. The whole thing could make for a longish essay about what's going on in the country and world (why exactly are people so repressed about sex? Why should a comment about a woman's tits get major newspaper space? etc), but I guess not right now. If you've been reading along here and felt some enlightenment at some of the insights - start figuring yourself. I won't be around to turn the light switches on forever.

July 4 CBC
In the box: - - CBC Inside Chat: What is the future of news, with Peter Mansbridge

Out of the box: - Nice. I write a shortish polite letter to these people and go to post it, and they say "Hey! You're only allowed 2,000 characters!!" (300 words, give or take - enforcing soundbite land - part of the dumbing down process, of course - you can't even get a decent introduction in, in less than a few thousand words - but in modern Canada, well. Look at the One the people in the right wing press admire as our Great Leader to the south - functionally illiterate.). So here it is, in full.

Dear Peter et al,

I'm sorry I did not learn about this discussion until after it was done - I would have submitted a question of some sort, something drawn from the following comments.

Something like:

Basically, do you feel the CBC is, in 2007, a fair and balanced provider of news and commentary to Canadians?

(One small initial caveat I should note, I listen only to the radio via the internet from my home in Thailand, but even before moving here I watched very little television, as the radio was always superior, in my opinion, with less 'lcd' pandering (and of course no commercials, possibly the two things were/are related) - from my reading of things in Canada over the last few years since the internet made it here, I have no reason to suppose that the balance has shifted any, although it does appear that a sinking tide has lowered everything.)

As to the question - my answer is that I don't believe the CBC to be a fair and balanced provider of news to Canadians - it seems to me the CBC is very much engaged in promoting the globalist, neocon version of our country and world desired by certain minority but influential sections of our society, even though most Canadians do not really support this view - and in the pursuit of this goal, you continually spin the 'news' in various ways, from things that border on outright falsehoods to sensationalisation of certain things to marginalizing commentary and analysis you do not approve of, regardless of how many Canadians might disagree with your spin. Thus you have become in essence a propagandist, trying to induce people onto a path many or most do not really wish to be taking through an inaccurate portrayal of their country and world. A very clever propagandist, of course, as befits the amount of expertise available for you to draw on and long decades of practice and refinement of your art (this is evident from this Q-A itself, which could easily serve as fodder for several pages of deconstruction, a case example of modern, sophisticated propaganda, presenting the very propagandist itself as an 'honest broker' (this is done several times a year by the CBC, and all Canadian media, letting Canadians know how lucky they are to be 'served' by such great 'journalists')) - but a propagandist nonetheless, as I believe is quite evident from any honest examination of what you do and how you behave. (and you can see the rest here)

July 2 Toronto Star, etc
In the box: - - Dirty bomb would cause panic, cost billions: Study

Out of the box: - It's the dishonesty of all this that bothers me as much as anything - the 'unspoken assumption' of all these stories is that 'Golly, we poor innocent so good Canadians living here minding our own business, and in danger from those psychotic terrorists, just wanting to hurt us because we're all such nice and free and democratic and happy people..." bla-de-bla-de-bla, as they say. And what a lie.

One could write a book about the false assumptions behind that little paragraph there (watch this space, coming soon). (One could also write a lengthy essay on this article as a good example of modern 3rd-rate 'journalism as propaganda for the dumbed down masses' - but why bother? Nobody seems to care anymore. Send me the ticket, ET, please!!! I wanna go somewhere sane and intelligent for a few years before my time is up ...)

But for the shorter version, I just gotta say something sometimes to let you know I'm still kicking, still have a functioning brain, there are a few of us still left - wouldn't it just be so much more honest for all of us to look in the mirror some day, television off and brain on, and admit that in the past we sort of supported the western imperialist actions of countries like the US and Uk (even if we didn't understand too much about it, and didn't complain as long as the malls and/or booze stores were open on the weekend), and weren't in too much danger because of that because the people the up-front imperialists were bombing and killing were more concerned with fighting the US and UK directly - but now that we are taking a more active role in the new wave of imperialist conquests, sending troops to places like Afghanistan and participating in the blowing up of households full of innocent civilians (and brazenly blaming them for it too, damn people hiding terrorists!!), and blasting other people in cars or on bikes when we mistakenly think they might be defending their country by attacking we-the-invaders - now that we are doing that, there is more of a danger that some of those people might decide to bring the fight to us, as it were, and kill some of our civilians, show us what it's really like in a war zone, things like that.

And then we need to have that discussion as a country - do we rally want to put ourselves, and our children, in the way of that kind of warfare, the kind of warfare and killing and bombing we are taking to other countries, the kind of warfare where WE start a fight, and sort of hope that we really win big before the other guys start doing to our country and civilians what we are doing to theirs? For it's more than hypocritical of us to say that it's fine for us to be over there blowing up civilians etc (I don't think the people burying their relatives really give much of a shit about our professed 'good intentions', to tell the truth), but golly, they shouldn't do that here!!! - it's just stupid. That just isn't the way the world works. We do it to them, they might well do it to us. Let's keep that straight - to whatever extent there is a fight there and, maybe someday, here, WE started it. Nobody from Afghanistan did anything to any Canadian, at least nothing that would ever justify declaring war against a non-beligerent, non-threatening state ("we accuse your government of doing bad things and that gives us a right to bring in our military and blast anything we like to change it!!!' is just not going to cut it in any non-American-rigged court, not ever, not anywhere - I can't imagine even most Canadians are sufficiently dumbed down and docile enough to actually go for that, if such a question was ever put to them honestly, not that it ever would be by our current ruling class or media).

And thus we gotta be ready if they fight back, using whatever weapons they choose, and quit whining about it - I certainly don't recall any discussion of 'rules' before we starting sending soldiers and bombs over there, so we can't really complain much about anything at all they decide to do to get rid of us. The bully can dominate by fear for so long, but sooner or later, the bullied get enough pissed off and/or desperate to hit back. As and where they can. (It's equally stupid for the NATO commanders to whine about 'the enemy' not fighting fairly - not everybody is as stupid as our leaders appear to be - 'the enemy' know that it would be suicidal for them to line up on some designated 'battlefield', battle to commence at 08:00 hours or whatever time 'the gentlemen' agreed on, at which time our superior modern weaponry (backed up by American air power of course) would blow the shit out of them. I mean really. Are our 'leaders' really that stupid that they think those we are invading should behave so? Unfortunately, it often appears so. But when a poor people are invaded by a superior force, they fight with whatever they have or can arrange. Rules are not that important when you're trying to get rid of an occupier - the only rule, really, as our people well know, is that the last guy standing 'wins'. And, as many people have noted, many others have tried to invade Afghanistan in the past, and the last guys left standing have always been the home team, and there's no reason to suspect otherwise will be the end result this time - and I really hope we get some sort of investigation into the rilly rilly bad decision making process that led Canada into this mess, but I don't expect there ever will be one.)

But nobody in the great Canadian media is talking like this - they're just spreading this fear shit around, to try and drum up support for this toadying to the American imperialists that most Canadians do not really want.

I think they're actually hoping there might be some serious bombing of some sort from some 'terrorist' somewhere like they're spreading around in this blatant propaganda piece making the rounds this week - they could use that to 'rally the citizens behind the flag' sort of thing - one of the oldest tricks in the book, yet still one that most people seem vulnerable to, like any cheap carnie game. You'd think more people would be getting more smart these days, but actually it all seems to be going the other way - the more I look around, it seems like more people are getting more stupid, more docile, more gullible to the lies of the rulers and media.

Here's to Stephen's New Canada - the one that has decided it can go around the world engaging in regime change actions militarily without talking honestly about the potential repercussions at home of starting a war with the people of Canada. It's an idea that won't last long, I think, as the Afghanis continue their defence of their country, but is going to be pretty messy until Stephen's New Government is left behind like his new ideas.

Which may or may not ever happen - note comment a bit back about people not getting much smarter .....

June 24 CNEWS, etc
In the box: - - 'Chemical Ali' sentenced to hang : "...al-Majid was convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes for ordering army and security services to use chemical weapons in a large-scale offensive that killed or maimed thousands.."

Out of the box: - hmmmm - isn't that pretty much what the Americans were doing to Viet Nam for about ten years? Except, of course, over ten years the American-caused deaths would be in the hundreds of thousands rather than the petty crimes of this guy. (Interesting (but not particularly surprising, of course) also that none of the news stories are talking about where 'Chemical Ali' got his chemicals from... another generation of American politicians complicit in mass murder around the world... - they've been doing it for way over 100 years)

June 20 CBC Radio
In the box: - - CBC Biznet - David Baskin - Baskin Financial Services, Canada: A profile of a global champion in prudent financial management

Out of the box: - Dear BizNet,

Greetings from Thailand - I sometimes catch a bit of your show before Island Morning (from PEI) comes on, which is my post-jog early evening listening here. Love that internet. I just listened to the last bit of your show of June 20, and write about the column commentary of David Baskin. I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, as the CBC, notwithstanding the constant whining of the far rightwing 'press' in Canada, has pretty much adopted most of the dogma preached by the neocon globalisers, including the type of dogmatic wonderlandish financial 'analysis' Mr Baskin offered, and dutifully does its bit to see that Canadians get with the program, bad as it is for most of them/us.

But sometimes listening to this type of revisionism just sparks me to write, fruitless though it usually is. One always hopes one might do a bit of good, open an eye or something. Mr Baskin writes of the beginnings of the Canadian debt - well, there are those of us who remember, among other things, that contrary to this revisionism of Mr Baskin it was not really due to 'massive unaffordable government overspending' (such phrasology being a dead giveaway of the neocon political mindset of the speaker), but was much more related to the corporate tax revolt of the same time (think MacEachen budget), and the resulting greatly reduced tax revenue of the federal government. There is a rather substantial difference between borrowing because of overspending or borrowing to meet an unavoidable revenue shortage - a financial analyst should understand this. Funny how none of the revisionists think to mention this revenue loss as a cause of the resulting government shortfall and borrowing. (I make no excuses for the Trudeau government, mind you, as they still had the option of turning to the Bank of Canada to meet those shortfalls, but in a rather puzzling and unexplainable move (without recourse to some sort of conspiracy theory, at any rate), a move contrary to previous policy as well, decided to initiate the string of borrowing from private banks/'investors', then borrowing to pay interest on the original borrowing, etc, that resulted in the completely needless huge national debt that became such a useful sledgehammer of the Mulroney government to begin the assault on the social infrastructure of the country.

And as Mr Baskin pats the Canadian banking and financial sector on the back because of their great skill and integrity in recent years as 'proven' by the rise in the Canadian dollar, he somehow forgets to mention the huge bank bailout of the early 1980s (not to mention 1990s), after some considerably BAD moves on their part had jeopardized the entire banking infrastructure of the country, and the impact of that on the ensuing national debt and many other things.

And it was about here I really began to understand the revisionism and historical rewriting, or reinforcement of same, that was the evident purpose of this entire commentary. Well, I'll leave it here, I don't suppose you're much interested in this kind of thing at the CBC anymore (there are those of us who also remember when the CBC was much more interested in searching for truthful things and promoting the common weal from a 'we-the-people' perspective rather than this neocon ideology, as well) - but one more thing I recall - as Mr Baskin lets your listeners know that the Canadian dollar is doing so well against the American because of our great management, isn't he overlooking the rather strong possibility that a great deal of the changing exchange rate has to do with world confidence in the American dollar starting to get very, very shaky, after several years of massive mismanagement by the Cheney neocons openly looting the American treasury and otherwise overspending hugely in their military endeavors around the world, until the debt of the US is at a point where it's an open secret that it can and will never be paid off, and the economy of the entire world is resting on a huge US bubble-cum-pyramid-scheme-confidence-game, and there's a lot of concern about what is going to happen when that bubble bursts, as it very inevitably is going to?

It's too bad you're doing this sort of shallow neocon stuff on the CBC - Canadians need some good and truthful economic analysis these days, and they surely aren't getting it from the Canadian mainstream media.

Good luck - the CBC is still the best, so I listen, and there are some good things - but in the neocon world, the 'best of the media' is not a very high bar, unfortunately. Again, we are very thankful for the net.

June 18 CBC Island Morning
Out of the box: - Always good listening on the CBC, in terms of studying propaganda and the Box. This morning, for instance, Karen of Island Morning in PEI was interviewing some guy about the new no fly lists (making the rounds this week in all sorts of places - on The Current in a few minutes) - both Karen and Anna Maria are very much Box people, and they keep doing things like this - near the end of the interview the interviewee said something like he hoped Canadians would be a bit less docile than the Americans in their rolling over and playing dead whilst the government did things like this, and Karen gave that little 'mmmhmmm' she has - and I could just hear the thought going through her mind, but she knew enough not to say - 'But it's GOOD to be docile! Our government is only looking after us and if you've done nothing wrong you've nothing to worry about!'. That's what life in the box looks like from here on the outside today.

June 17/07 Toronto Star (and various others the last few days)
In the box: - - We can be better than `mediocre

Out of the box: - - what these people never get around to talking about is at what point in time we had a national discussion of some sort and decided that the most important thing all Canadians ought to be doing, and we as a country ought to be devoting all of our resources etc to, is working more and being 'more productive' etc, at great expense to their personal lives, so that the small group of capitalists and investors and bankers who run the country could become more wealthy. This is certainly great for those bankers et al, who stand to make lots of money from this increased output of the serving class, but if there was any entity in this country that identified with 'we the people', they ought to be able to understand that there was nothing useful in the whole thing for them, unless you consider more work and less security useful. But in today's indoctrinated society, that's sort of like saying the cows ought to understand that being free might be more rewarding for them than working for farmers, of course. As in 'non-starter'. Don't know why I bother trying anymore, I really don't. I won't even start on why it should be that people like this can be so rabidly anti-Canadian without a word of protest - they're free to say as they wish, of course, the point is that anytime anyone criticizes the US like this, you've all of a sudden got a circle of fingers pointing at you, and a big chorus of 'anti-American'!! ringing in your ears. The country is being run by Benedict Arnolds. And nobody seems to care.

June 15 CNEWS
In the box: - - Study: Two-thirds of 40-somethings not saving for retirement

Out of the box: - I don't know why we don't have similar headlines, like Study - 100% of newborns refuse to contribute to own care! (I suppose I shouldn't give these pathetic f***s ideas) - what's wrong with this society that it thinks of nothing but money money money?? Most of these older people that this pogrom has been going on about for awhile now have spent 20 years or even more of their lives and god only knows how much money raising children and getting them through school and university and training them to be good little members of the capitalist work force, and working at the same time paying taxes and growing the society - don't they get some credit for that, some payback at the other end? Not, I guess, if you're a capitalist berserker, whose only thought is how much money they can wring out of the slave labor - which is, of course, the problem - nowadays, the capitalists are running the entire economy into the ground so much that few people have enough money left for any decent retirement savings after just trying to get by and provide a half decent life for themselves and their families, whilst the capitalists and their manegerial class live the good life as provided by the peasant labour. In any kind of civilized society, and true social democracy with caring, intelligent human beings for citizens, ALL the people would be looked after ALL the time, no questions asked - it's just what we do, as a civilized sort of people, in a place like Green Island. Most people are not natural parasites - by far the worst parasites in our 'modern' society are the capitalists - and will work for a good portion of their lives just because they feel better working and contributing. Most of them will, during that time, buy a home for themselves, and accumulate most of the stuff they need for the years when they retire - and if they don't, mainly because they can't find a job that pays enough to do that in this backwards place that funnels as much money as possible upwards into the parasitic capitalist bank accounts by ripping off as many workers as it can as much as it can - what kind of whiny bunch of ungrateful bastards would let these old folks suffer in a cold shack rather than providing a bit of bread and water and heat for them? What a gang of despicable people we have running this place. And the ones who just lap this shit up like it's mother's milk and jump on the 'criticize the old folks' bandwagon aren't any better.

April 21 CBC Charlottetown, etc
In the box: - -

Out of the box: - So the Canadian military is so overstretched they're sending reservists to the Great War for Freedom and Democracy in Afghanistan - and the hype continues. No talk from any of the rapidly growing number of people in Canada who oppose this whole operation and have from the started, nothing about how this increase in forces maybe indicates there's some problems happening there - but boy the CBC always has time for boosterism and hype - a nice little segment on how much the new reservists are really looking forward to being like the real soldiers, with their 'real kit' and all, better job than working at Wal mart boy, for sure. As always with these things lately, and there's no shortage of them, hardly a day goes by without something telling us all that we ought to support this whole invasion of Afghanistan because by golly look at our wonderful young men who are over there fighting for us!! (this one has been going on for several days in one place or another). I'm beginning to understand better that the people actually delivering the propaganda, the 'reporters' and 'journalists' doing the stories, the low level announcers amd hosts like dear Karen and Mitch on the Island Morning show - don't actually understand that they are the front line soldiers in the propaganda war that has been waged on Canadians for a long time now - they actually believe this stuff. That is to say, they are so indoctrinated themselves already that they don't question the 'real' media, the big boys from Ontario, or the government departments issuing the propoaganda. Others like Anna Maria on The Current I'm not entirely sure about - one suspects that with such high level people they are probably well aware of what they are doing, but you never know, they may just have such good jobs and be so well indoctrinated that they actually never question what they are doing. - except, except, stuff like this makes you wonder - once again the 'media' have had an opportunity to engage in pretty much their favorite overall activity - navel gazing - and they love it. Look at us!!! We're doing such a difficult job - and by golly, we're just doing sooooooo!!!!!!!!! great at it!!!!! - the Virginia Tech shootings, of course, all sparked by the tape the kid made and sent to NBC. I had to wipe out my ears when I heard the CBC news announcer telling us all, with just such a smug little pursed-lip voice, about how while other media outlets had decided to show some of the tape, they had by golly decided not to, in the interests both of protecting their viewers from disturbing images, and also to not encourage copycat incidents. I for one sure appreciate such wise leaders for keeping things from we poor sheep people who couldn't deal with them - but on the other hand, could you ask for much more obvious admissions that they do see themselves as gatekeepers? And they tell us about stories like this, it would be pretty obvious if they didn't - but then don't you have to ask what they are keeping from us, and NOT telling us about, since it doesn't get out anywhere else?

Well, some of us do, anyway.

They do a lot of good and useful and interesting stuff, too, of course, on the CBC, which also serves as smokescreen for the propaganda - but what it all is, what you need to see to understand it, is that it is all box stuff. Box things can be talked about freely - things that would expose the box or the rulers of the box are terra no goa.

Apr 15
June Callwood, 82: Tireless social advocate - and Kurt - geez two more gone. The end approaches.

If that sounds cryptic, think on this - the generations born before about 1960 or so may well be the last human generations - look around and see who is fighting the imposition of the new fascism, the New World Order, the new generation of automatons who seem to actually be unable to get their heads up in the air and understand the box that has been constructed around them, who seem to think that artificial tv-malls box is all there is, and not only that they love it!! - once we older guys are gone - the game will be over. There will be noone left to protest, to fight, to understand what is happening because our brains got developed before the full scale modern indoctrination took over all modern western communication. A theory I am working on, but I see little to contradict it.

April 12 CBC
In the box: - - Every day, every day, every day they are propagandizing - I try to ignore it and get on with something more important, but it is so frustrating to think about how many people are really believing this total full-bore propaganda. The whole Ypres thing last week was masterfully done, and then the interview after the 6 soldiers were most conveniently killed telling everyone that by golly we can't let them brave young lads die in vain!!, and now this morning the bodies arrive home and we have a 6 year old kid telling everyone how the brave lads died fighting for freedom, so he thought he'd just come and show some respect. Sure he did. The idea is good, of course, and if we were really in a situation where the lads were dying for something useful I'd be out at their funerals myself, but right now the talk we need to be having is what the hell Canadians are doing participating in a regime change operation that the Americans started in a country half way around the world that has NEVER done anything to Canada, or threatened anything - we're over there shooting innocent people and they're fighting back, as many Canadians would if someone landed in Ottawa and said they didn't like our government and were going to give us the government THEY thought we needed. The Canadian soldiers are dieing needlessly over there, and somebody ought to be answering some pretty hard questions about that. Which they will never be asked to do in the current Canadian media. This is not 'cut and run', this is 'what the hell are we doing there in the first place?'

Any sort of impartial, non-propaganda coverage, of course, would be something like on a regular basis, at least once a week on the major shows (this is a significant issue, after all, not the latest fuck-partner of some celebrity) get a couple of good spokespersons from the major points of view and let them talk, share their ideas with Canadians, let them explore the arguments of the other and see who was being honest and who was trying to dissemble in whatever ways - how else are we going to get informed from the media? They can't do this, of course, because with this as with all of the major issues they are propagandizing on, they cannot prevail in any open debate and they know it, therefore the only strategy is what they do - selective interviews with people who support their position, shameless boosterism like this kid parroting words his dad told him to say, and gatekeeping to make sure the people who could express things they do not want expressed get little to no time to do so.

April 4/07
Yesterday waiting for the nice tax lady to call me up to collect my money, it occurred to me that this whole tax business is about as clear a proof as you would need that we do NOT live in a 'democracy', but a feudal system painted with pretty colors to look like a democracy. The rulers do not ask us if we want to contribute some money to THEIR cause - they demand the tribute each and every year, from each and every person - sure they have some rules to let the very poorest of the poor not have to pay the direct tribute, although they certainly pay the indirect tribute every day (GST etc) - but nonetheless it is an enforced tribute from 'we the people' to 'they the rulers'. We do not get to sit down at meetings and talk about things and decide if we want to spend money sending soldiers to serve as some sort of tribute from our smalltime rulers to the American Empire or if we would rather spend that money on health care or education or whatever - we are told what the money is going to be spent on. Democracy? How so?? We see this today - Stockwell pays 'surprise' visit to Afghanistan (editorial honesty - my quotes there around 'surprise') - krist, half the government must have been over there one way or another by now, and they're flying all over the world all the time, using HUGE amounts of money - only point being, did you or I ever get handed a provisional budget of some sort that said "Plans for around the world trips by 'our' 'reps' - xx hundreds of millions of bucks" - and asked if we approved of all this 'business' travel? Sure, about the same as we got to 'approve' of sending 'our' soldiers off to war in the service of the American wannabe world empirists (and if you really believe these are 'your' soldiers, try joining a demonstration sometime against some government policy that particularly bothers you (you know, like creating the WTO and talking about how to make it 'better' (as much in secret as possible - remember Vancouver, Quebec, Toronto, etc) and handing 'our' sovereignty over to it, or something) and see which side the soldiers line up on. Think about it. You need to do this yourself, you sure as hell won't read about it in 'your' great, free Canadian democratic 'we're the best haha' media.) And me, I tend to listen with considerable disbelief to arguments saying these jaunts are for 'necessary government meetings' etc - I suspect no more than maybe 10% of them are actually necessary in some way, and the rest could be handled much easier, and much less expensively, through emails. But then, what would be the point of fighting hard to get elected and participate in the great Canadian 'democracy' farce if these perks weren't available to the good mandarins?

Don't sit there thinking 'Golly, but we have elections where they tell us what they plan, don't they, and we vote for what we think is best...?" - just a huge shell game. I hardly know where to start - if you lived in a democracy, again, wouldn't it be logical to sit around at a few meetings and talk about general priorities with your neighbors first, and draw up your own list of things that was important, and GIVE that list to your rep who, in any sort of honest representative democracy, would then go to Ottawa and have a meeting with the other reps where they talked about all their respective wish lists? Voting between lists of promises provided by the parties of tweedledee and tweedledum - promises you KNOW they are not going to keep most of the time, while enacting all sorts of stuff they never talked about at all during the 'campaign' - does not strike me, at least, as anything I would call 'democracy. Sure there'll be some disagreements if the people from the small local meetings got to Ottawa via some sort of actual local meetings system, but I would bet, if this were ever tried, there would be a whole lot more agreement on important things than disagreement (make a list of people you know who would disagree with not cutting corporate taxes anymore, or who would disagree with not funding the health care system as it needs to be funded, or who believe our poor MPs are underpaid and really need another raise - etc and etc) - and for those things where there was serious disagreement divided at least somewhere around the middle proportionally, there would be a widespread public debate for awhile, until the arguments of one side began to prevail, which they surely would as most of us are well-intentioned people who want to do the right things and most of us agree on those things when all the facts are in - if, for instance, the Canadian public had any real idea of the history of Afghanistan and what was happening currently, rather than the continual stream of lies and boosterism they currently get from the mainstream media, there would be a very strong majority demanding that we get out now, and demanding that the people who lied us into this situation (including most surely the media) be held responsible for what they have wrought in some way. Some serious way - this is a BIG mess, and deserves some equivalent punishment. Which is, of course, why those who rule will never allow us to get anywhere near a real democracy.

But I digress - the thing that started me remains, though - taxes levied by the rulers, with no real representation, with tax cops to chase down those who do not agree with what the taxes are being used for and refuse to pay since they have no say in how the money is spent, are proof positive, I would say, that we live in a feudal rather than a democratic society.

(But but - how do we fund our health care programs and other things we all agree we need, if not through taxes? That's a bit of a long story I will get into a bit later - but it involves replacing the capitalist cesspook we live in now, where the capitalists steal half of everything we produce in terms of wealth, and using that wealth for We the People stuff, rather than 50 million dollar mansions for the local dominant capitalists and their chief minions - think about it - get that capitalist bloodsucking parasite off your back and out of your brain, and pretty much anything is possible)

March 19 Toronto Star
In the box: - - Budget has votes in mind

Out of the box: - I'm just so out of touch with everything that is going on in 'my' country. This whole 'election' thing just escapes me, at least in terms of anything I actually understand about 'democracy'. To me, 'democracy' means that 'we the people' decide amongst ourselves what is going to happen in our country - and yet everyone else, or at least most people, seem to feel that 'democracy' means we get a vote to choose between a political party or three based on what they promise to do for us over the life of their 'mandate', and once the votes are in, the party with the most 'seats' get to rule us any way they please for that 'mandate' - even if that party only got 30 or 40% of the votes, and even if a whole lot of people did not (or could not) vote, meaning that in reality maybe 20-25% of the people of Canada actually voted for that party. And notwithstanding the fact that that party can - ummm - 'change their minds' later about whatever promises they made and not do some or all of those things at all, and do all sorts of stuff they never talked about during the 'election'.

I guess the strangest thing of all to me is that so few people seem to feel as I do, even though there are problems all over the place in Canada.

March 13 CBC
In the box: - - Spincycles

Out of the box: - Maybe they should start with a mirror - a commentary on the CBC 'Spincycles' series

Dear Ira Basen,
I've now listened to your full series on spin ( Spincycles ), and thought I'd take a few minutes to offer a few thoughts on it all (the letter is a bit delayed because I was away for a week as the series finished, and then had some internet problems for another week). Really, one could write a book on the series, taking apart each episode, but I don't suppose there's much point - the major problems were repeated over and over again, in each and every show, so I'll just summarize the main general points, with only a few specific examples.

Let me briefly start by noting that once again I find myself disappointed in the CBC, but no longer surprised (I have been living in Thailand for about 12 1/2 years now, and for most of that time was unable to listen to CBC, so there was almost a 12-year gap between when I listened to the CBC back in Canada pre-1994, and when I started listening again in March 2006). To me, and I think many others, you once represented the very best of journalism, as good as any in the world really, showing us our country and world more or less as it really was, impartially and with some considerable insight and intelligence for those Canadians who wished something more than the tab-style 'news' offered by the mass media catering to the lowest common denominator to max the advertising revenue flow, and also generally pushing a rightwing and 'neocon' agenda through their publications starting in the later 1970s or so. The CBC was a counterforce to much of this, pushing neither right nor left wing POVs (constant whining of the far-rightwing fringe through their increasingly right-wing media notwithstanding - now that was true 'spin' that it might have been informative to examine in a series such as yours), but giving space to all important, and many lesser, POVs more or less equally. But that was then and this is now, and now, it increasingly seems, alas, you have become simply another, if somewhat more sophisticated, propaganda arm of the neocon ruling elite, pushing the NWO, globalisation, corporate perspective and agenda on your listeners, albeit with the odd moment of lip service to opposing POVs - spin for the managerial class, perhaps, or the remaining (but shrinking daily, it appears) group of older, somewhat intelligent people remaining in Canada who remember 'the old days' and oppose the very misguided path the new rulers are taking us down, pushed along by pretty much all the media now. It may be, of course, you were always so, and it has only been in recent years that I have come to understand your actual role. I have not yet had time to consider my past experiences of listening to the CBC in detail in comparison to my now considerably greater understanding of history and contemporary world politics in general, but I suspect that you have indeed changed, along with our government and country, over the last couple of decades as neoconism has become predominant in most of the English world, Canada most certainly included, and is working hard at the rest of it, by stealth where possible, by economic or military violence in other places. But always, propaganda is a central and essential facet of the New World Order - and the 'spin' you speak of here is, of course, not simply corporate product spin, but societal direction and control propaganda, and a central part of the NWO drive.

(and you can see the rest here)

Feb 20 CBC Radio 'news'

Out of the box: Anals of particularly egregious propaganda (and no, that first word is not a misspelling - and actually it never stops, I've just been too depressed to keep shouting at them lately, but eventually the frustration becomes unbearable, and shouting alone in the dark forest is better than silence)

- they just never stop. Morning CBC news, Feb 20/07, every hour on the hour, with variations, all across Canada, this is what's available for the coffee break talk for the 5% or whatever of progressive or lefty or whatever Cdns who listen to CBC -

** story from Washington about the ongoing Libby trial, about which I won't even start - but the CBC spin is telling us, as if this is something they just discovered, that those darn people in the White House were apparently actually plotting to use the media to spin their war in Iraq!!! My god, says grandma - the sneaky buggers! Using our innocent, wonderful media people for such a dastardly thing!! (that is certainly the underlying message from the 'reporter' here). Which does not quite directly involve the Canadian media, but they of course, rely on trustworthy and honest BB media to the south - the venerable and honorable (I keep meaning to devise some new font that indicates dripping sarcasm) Washington Post and NY Times - but there is a definite message here, that if the media happens to be caught out in some lie (such as promoting the idea that Saddam had WMD, which is the basis of the Libby trial) - then, golly darn, it wasn't really their fault, it was some darn spin people tricking those innocent, honorable people. I can't go much further with this without barfing, but the Enright Sunday Morning show is doing a series on spin that is mainly notable for being spin itself of the same variety (we oh-so-well-intentioned media people getting fooled by them darn old spin people!), about which I am working on a letter that I may or may not decide to send (I am I suppose getting close to the point of accepting that it really is pointless to do this - not close to giving up at all, but close to accepting that if 'they' have as firm a grip on the minds of 'the people' as they appear to, then my shoutings in the wilderness aren't going to change anything, and I might as well get on to something else...).

** And the next story on the same newscasts - about how some people (I can't recall exactly who now, but obviously 'important' enough to get CBC coverage - again missing the font, but meaning that the CBC and their controllers want this story out there, and the conveyed message....) are pushing to have the 'restrictions' on retirement from working removed, so people can be happy in their freedom to work right up until the day they die!! - and all in a chirpy, positive voice, you bet - and one example of some guy 81 years old working parttime in Tim Horton's - and by golly, he uses the 'extra money' from his 'part time work' to go to Europe and Mexico (although they didn't actually specify how he manages that while still working - but surely just a minor detail only malcontents would pick up on). But ain't that gonna have the people lining up at Timmy's now, if they can afford that kind of lifestyle on a part time job there! haha, of course he has his own savings - but there was not a word in this story about the reality behind all this 'removing the restrictions to work' stuff - that our neocon gov is removing the financial support of seniors so if they are NOT independently well-off, they'll be forced into this kind of thing whether they like it or not. So Flaherty or whoever can keep reducing taxes, and the banks can continue posting record profits year after year. And the NWO can keep steaming along on its projected course of the New Feudalism, where you're either a serf or a master, and all of this money wasted on looking after people who can't or won't support themselves can be retrieved and returned to the bank accounts of the wealthy, where we all know it belongs.

** And again, as reported on the National Broadcaster - the military acknowleges that shooting civilians or Afghani soldiers/police officers 'by mistake, gosh darn we're really sorry about that, and we ARE talking to our people...' makes it, you know, well, just maybe a bit more difficult for the locals to trust them in their Noble Mission of Bringing Democracy to the Infidel .... - never, never does one cease to be amazed at the insights of the Canadian military .... nor the willingness of the Canadian media to act as their personal PR people ...

And what the hell, one more from a couple of days ago - Federal repair bill going through the roof - Sale of properties would leave Ottawa $2-billion short on renovations" - now just imagine if your spouse came to you and said "Dear! I have a great idea! - we'll sell off the house we've been working to pay for all of our lives, and then we'll have this big amount of money in the bank, and just rent the house! lala! lala!!" - well, I can't speak for everyone, but most people would understand that this is a pretty stupid idea, at least for the house owner, although it has a lot of merit for others who want to reduce the security of that houseowner and increase their own wealth - and, of course, since we are talking about the country itself here, we're talking about assets that have been acquired over years that the gov is planning to sell, which is reducing our own 'capital base' - which is, of course, what the neocon movement is all about, reducing the ability of the people to govern themselves, reducing the ability of the people to stand up to the wealthy elite. They're doing a good job of it. And 'we the people' are looking like Joe Schmuck on sucker's day at the bigtop as they steal everything out from under us. It's so freaking embarrassing sometimes to appear to be part of this species.

Gatekeeping - two meanings, first, of course, the people in charge of any particular media choose what stories to publish and what not to, with motives more involved with presenting a certain worldview to their listeners/readers than 'holy cow we can't talk about everything you know!!' as they say - and second, by keeping the people ignorant of things they should know, they effectively control and maintain the gate of the box, beyond which people cannot pass without knowledge of certain things that are happening in their society ....

Dec 26 'The Star'
In the box: - - Surviving mom ready to forgive

Out of the box: - Editor - the picture on the front page of the internet version of your paper today, Dec 26, of the mother and her daughter holding a picture of their family killed in Pennsylvnia, is one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen featured in a 'mainstream' Canadian paper. This is the stuff of the crappiest tabloids. You are supposed to be above this kind of thing. The mourning of these poor people should be private, and you are showing the crassest sensationalism to feature this picture this way. Merry frigging xmas to all of you - and may someone come and hold your face up for the world to stare at in crass, stupid curiosity during your saddest moments - you deserve it for helping to create the kind of society that engages in this sort of thing for lack of a real life.

And if you're still feeling insomniac, there's more here

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.