The law is an ass....

Reginald Lacroix, I admire you.

There comes a time when thoughtful men decide to take action against that which is believed to endanger the lives of others. You recognized from an actual situation, there was an object that did cause the death of a person, a child, a beloved human being and you did not want to hear of this happening again. Many parents and grandparents would agree with you. Perhaps the city council would agree after deliberations, taking up time to resolve a situation as you did by cutting down the “tree of death.” You did a good deed for our society, at no cost to the tax paying public. I agree with you and with what you have done.

I would join with you in paying whatever the costs might be to buy and plant a “tree of life” that will provide beauty to the environment, to be enjoyed by the people; that would bring pleasure and happiness to the people of Gatineau.

Mr. Lacroix, you took away an offence; you are now willing to give. Let me join with you in the pleasure of giving for the betterment of our little world and in the memory of an innocent child.

Delusional, Stupid, Sleep Deprived ???

Yesterday in my blog I quoted the Ottawa Citizen, Feb. 26: "Martin "delusional" to expect U.S. notification.".

Earl McRae writing in the Ottawa Sun, Feb. 27, about the prime minister's decision to not go along with the American missile defence plan explained his personal theory that for Martin, "it's sleep deprivation." He further suggested that one "could also go with 'massive stupidity' but he didn't "know how anybody could be that stupid." These are quite strong comments!

I have always believed that the Sun was a "sensationalism rag' which I had chosen not to read. Today I received a "free" copy, delivered to my door. Taking a quick glance, I caught McRae's article, "Nuke plan isn't rocket science." I read it and accepted it as a humorous piece with an imaginary conversation between President George Bush and Prime Minister Paul Martin.

Part of the "conversation" follows.

President: "Oops, just got word from NORAD. One of them (two launched nukes) is heading for Ottawa either by malfunction or design. I NEED YOUR GO AHEAD FAST."

PM: "Er, uh, umm, er. I have to consult my cabinet first, and then poll Canadians."

President: "So we should let them hit Ottawa and Washington - or would you rather take them down with one of your military's slingshots?"

PM: "Umm, ah, uh, umm..."

Ka-BOOOOM!

President: "Paul? Paul? Damn. And Ottawa was such a nice city."

Now, perhaps I was a little harsh on our prime minister, quoting the "delusional" comment in yesterday's blog. But, Sun readers reviewing part of McRae's article will appreciate the prime minister being characterized as a dithering person, one who could be "sleep deprived" or a reflection of the prime minister's "mass stupidity."

The prime minister has lost face in the eyes of Canadians but of greater concern is how he is perceived by other nations. Dithering, stupid and dishonest have been words that some individuals are using. This is most unfortunate for the man and could easily lead to his resignation.

If the prime minister does resign, Mr. John Manley, a former deputy prime minister, has an excellent chance to assume the position which he covets with all his heart. There can be no doubt that he would never dither, he is not stupid, an as to his honest, let it simply be said, he is a politician.

“Martin ‘delusional'....."

“Martin ‘delusional’ to expect U.S. notification.” This is a quotation from the Ottawa Citizen February 26.

I thought yesterday that I would not be writing more words about the American Pentagon’s missile defence shield. In fact I read my blog of yesterday to a group very bright people with a feeling that I might even be thought as being “delusional” for the words in that blog. I know that there are others who think quite rationally about what is going on, who from experience and insight have an in-depth understanding of events as they unfold.

Does it not stand to reason that the Americans would not hesitate to use Canadian air space to prevent a missile from hitting any American target? Our prime minister is either “delusional” or simply stupid to think otherwise. In fact I can’t see, based on evidence just revealed, how he would not know about the implications of not signing an agreement with the U.S. on the missile defence shield.

Canadians need to know that:“The U.S. will offer protection to Canada only on the basis of an explicit government of Canada request. This would require a formal government to government agreement.” This information was part of a “secret” slide presentation to a Liberal cabinet meeting on April 10, 2003.

Without an agreement, the lives of Canadians would be at risk. And, to believe that without an agreement the Americans wound not fire a missile over Canada as our air space is “sovereign” is beyond credulity. It is believed that the American ambassador to Canada has stated the American position, that “Canada had forfeited sovereignty of its airspace due to the government’s decision not participate in the U.S. missile shield.” I don’t believe that this is legally possible but that would only be a technicality in any case of a possible invasion of American territory. The American attitude is one of America first, damn any law that would put American lives at stake. Canada has been place on notice that Canadian airspace would be “invaded” if necessary for the protection of American territory. Sovereignty would mean nothing! This is a simple reality in our modern world. This I understand and as a Canadian, I accept.

I believe that the prime minister understands all this but because of the political climate in Canada, with his government in a minority position, he was “forced” to take a stand on the “sovereignty” of Canadian airspace. I wish the prime minister would get “real” and be honest with the Canadian people, who are not stupid. That which is real, we must accept; we would accept!

We live next to an elephant. Stay clear of the elephant for if it moves over on our territory, we may be right on territorial sovereignty but in the end, we would both right and dead right. We do not want to get crushed!

A serious matter, a laughable matter…

Canada, through the prime minister, has officially rejected the U.S. missile defence program. Most understandable, given the fact that the Liberal government is in a minority governing position. To come right out and say yes to the program would certainly mean that the government would be defeated in the house by some motion and then be faced with a new election; an election that could be lost. That is a serious matter!

But what makes this a laughable matter? No matter what Canada would ever decide, there can be no doubt the Americans would do whatever would be necessary to thwart any attack on their territory. Evidence to support this point of view is there, clearly to see

How much time did it take the Americans to unite their thoughts and actions after the 9/11 attacks? How much money has been spent on their homeland security efforts since then? When it was believed that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, did the Americans hold back on an invasion of that country? How many military personnel have been lost and how much has that war cost? The evidence is clear to see and easy to understand!

If there is any Canadian who believes that the Americans would seek Canadian approval to use its sovereign air space as missiles were targeted for and moving toward American cities? If there is one, that person is not aware of how Americans operate. For them, it is better to act now and to face the music and questions of the public later. It is easy to justify taking severe measures when lives are at stake. All lives are precious but let it be clear, to Americans; American lives are the most precious of all.

So, I laugh internally at the actions and reactions of our prime minister. It must be said that in this case, he did not dither too long. His political life was at stake; and among political lives, that of the Liberals are the most precious of all.

Yesterday's budget...

I pay my taxes, unwillingly, but without serious objection. I, along with most Canadian must depend on the government to spend those dollars with wisdom and with justice, that those funds will not be diverted from their primary purpose, that the public will not be taken advantaged of by those individuals who might divert, through whatever means, those dollars to and for their own personal use.

Now, in that regard, I am looking forward to the December release of the Gomery Commission report on the sponsorship scandal. There may be lesson to be learned by our government!

Our prime minister is one of the most powerful men in the world in relationship to his country. Whatever he wants, he usually gets. His decisions are almost automatically accepted by parliament, in particular, if his government is in a majority position. He controls his cabinet; he controls the secret cabinet meetings. Cabinet members either obey or they are out, and I really mean, out. Was not our present prime minister, even as minister of finance, out of the loop relating to monies going to Quebec contractors for government advertising? At least, I believe, that is what he would like the Canadian public to believe.

Yesterday was budget day. Being in a minority government situation, the budget was one of compromise. That should prove to be good news for most Canadians. There was something there for most of us. Were there pressures for the government to have budget items that would reflect the strong interests of the opposition in parliament? Of course, and that is why the budget should pass. To defeat the government bill on the budget would mean another election, too soon after the last. The Canadian public would not look upon an election in a favourable light. The Liberals in all their wisdom would not want to be defeated at this time or, for that matter, at any time! So, we have a budget with something for every one!

A few words for Mr. Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada:

Thank you Mr. Dithering Santa Clause, and here we are in February! And to think, you are just providing “gifts” for which, we, the recipients, have already provided the funds, our tax dollars. Yes, pat yourself on the back. You use the surplus dollars to reduce the country’s debt; you use some surplus dollars to provide necessary social programs. Those surplus dollars came from excessive taxation. You take with the right hand and give with the left, whatever is left after administrative fees, bureaucratic costs and other expenses are deducted. Yes, your dithering comes at an expense to the Canadian public, and your dithering produces a bad image of Canada. You dither; we wither; that is not good enough. Why don’t you just resign? The next Liberal convention will find a good man; he is standing in the wings.

Budget Day

Today is a day of theatre. We start with parliament where one discussion centred on the topic of missile defence. The big question was the government’s position on participation in the missile defence of North America.

I have written earlier about the decision of Canada to continue its support of NORAD. By doing this, I have believed that Canada did commit to the American ballistic missile defence system. My conclusion is the one that was expressed by the Canadian ambassador–designate to the United States. The prime minister today denied having made the decision to agree to the missile defense system.

For political purposes, the prime minister could or would not agree to this statement. He is concerned about members of his own party who do not want Canada to be involved in the program. Many members of parliament from Quebec object to Canadian involvement in such a program. Many people from Quebec have objected to Canadian programs relating to the military; many were opposed to Canada’s participation in the First and the Second World Wars and with the war in Iraq.

The Province of Quebec at times is the “tail that wags the dog.” The Canadian government bends over backwards to support the people of Quebec. It was not too long ago that Quebec narrowly missed separating from Canada. The government since then has done much for the province to keep it in Confederation.

If I were a resident of the Province of Quebec, I would probably want to separate, separate to become “masters in our own house.” As a Canadian, living in Ontario, I would support any Quebec decision to separate. I am sick and tired of giving into the demands of Quebec. That province provides a drain on government programs. I would not mind visiting Quebec as a foreign land. What changes would be brought on that would be harmful to me? None that I can think of at this time, so I say: “Let them go!”

To return to the budget, the one item, above all others for which I am enthusiastic is the money allocated to the Department of National Defence, about 13 billion dollars over the next five years.

Most Canadians pay their taxes, often without any objections. They have a trust in the government that monies will be spent in the best possible ways. The parties in opposition in parliament will criticize the budget but it should not result in a motion of non-confidence that would pass. Canada will continue along its own merry way. The theatre of parliament will continue. One person has even called parliament as zoo. Perhaps an apt description when one views or listens to the proceedings.

Hockey's Stanley Cup

A cup by another name could serve a unique purpose in the world of international hockey. It is time that women’s hockey be recognized with the awarding of a cup for the best international team. To see the women in action would be wonderful and with an annual cup as a reward, greater recognition would be given to the sport. More young women are into the sport and enjoying it. I have one niece who loved to play and now a grand daughter who is into the sport in a big way; she loves it too.

As the Stanley Cup will not be won this year, it should be retired forever. This cup and the present Governor General could “retire” together. That would be most fitting.

One argument in favour of retiring the cup is that it is for the NHL, the National Hockey League. This league, this year is both non-functioning and non-functional. The most senior of hockey leagues should be reorganized and called the International Hockey League with a new cup. As most teams are American by location, a new cup should be named by an American leader, in memory of an American leader. How does the Kennedy Cup sound?

Terrorism, what is this?

Terrible terrorist attacks were made on September 11, 2001. The American government reacted quickly with legislation designed to prevent further terrorist activities. How successful has the government been? We will never know. To provide any information would not be in the best interests of all anti-terrorist organizations and in the final analysis the American people.

The Canadian government, in knee-jerk reaction and perhaps to pacify American concerns about any terrorists in Canada who potentially could “invade” American territory to perpetrate terrorist actions against American citizens and property.

Three months after the 9/11 attacks, legislation was rushed through the Canadian parliament. The law gave the police new powers. Extreme powers of arrest were given to the police, even without any warrant being issued. In fact a suspect could be held for 72 hours without any charge being made. All that would be required was a belief that an imminent terrorist attack would occur.

Anti-terrorist legislation may be needed. The enforcement of the legislation, the organizations need to prevent terrorist activities all cost much money. It is recognized that there could be a loss of lives and destruction of property. This can not be tolerated.

Simplistic risk analysis might indicate the risk to life and property from any terrorist activity to be extremely low. There is today a much higher risk of losing life and property on Canadian roadways than there is to any potential terrorist attack but vigilance must take precedence. Perhaps the same holds true for the U.S.

Fear of terrorism exists; we cope and remain secure by investing money for protection. We do the same for our homes and vehicles through insurance. We really don’t know much about terrorism but we have the belief that the potential is there.

We do live in fear of terrorist activities; also with the fear of unjust and unwarranted police activities of arrest and detention.

Life as adaptation…

From the moment of birth, if not before, life is a serious of adaptations. One’s total physiology is a continuous serious of multiple and miniscule adaptations. These occur without any thought; they are frequently interdependent and automatic. They are a part of one’s total system for living.

At a conscious level, we adapt to our total environment and thus survive. For example, if we do not adjust our behaviors to what is expected of our particular society, we are doomed to rejection, suffering and possibly to an earlier than would be the case, death.

Many individuals have suffered from persecution, hatred, prejudice, discrimination, and many social ills as well as being dominated by those who were more powerful or in control of the government. Life was often lived in fear. Survival demanded adaptation.

Adaptation did not mean a total surrendering of beliefs or customs. Away from public scrutiny, behind closed doors, individuals, families and communities continued to not only exist but at times did flourish.

Minor adaptations could be called compromise. We learn to compromise within the family, with friends and very much so in school. In many respects we had to compromise our behaviors to the rules and regulations of organizations. These compromises, these adjustments to the environment taken together can be viewed as adaptation.

Adaptation means living; animals and humans learn to adapt and if they do not, they do not survive. Let us continue on the path of adaptation and survival for tomorrow may be the day when the larger community will become accepting of that which had been frowned upon, discouraged or absolutely rejected. It has taken democratic society many years to set aside slavery, to grant voting rights to women, to reduce discrimination in many of its forms yet other changes are still required and will be made.

Today, we are faced with new forms of control, for example, the laws, rules and regulations relating to our security. Security from attack from external and internal enemies to our way of living is of paramount concern. We often refer to those “enemies” as terrorists. Terrorists, they are called because they induce fear to the point of terror. It is the fear of the unknown that controls us. To this fear, we are adapting, to the control of the “security” forces we are adapting, to the external wars, we are adapting, to the suffering of peoples, we are adapting. We may not like any of these adaptations but they are necessary and we do adapt.

Life is adaptation!

Terrorism, where is it?

Following 9/11 attacks on the World trade Centre in New York and on the Pentagon in Washington D.C., the Canadian Government passed the Anti-Terrorism Act. Though I, along with many other Canadians must believe that the act was passed to protect Canadians for attacks from Terrorists, to date only one person has been detained under the provisions of the act.

Because of state secrecy we do not know if any terrorist activities have been prevented. We do not know the nature of governmental activities or how the potential for terrorists activities is measured. But, the Public Safety Minister Anne McLellan has stated that the threats are worse now than they were at the time of 9/11. What is the nature of these threats, where are they coming from and who might be making these threats? We should learn about the why of these threats. What have Canadians done to warrant becoming targets for the terrorists?

Are the potential threats being eliminated one by one? If there are eliminations going on, these have not been reported, why not? To say that the threats are worse now than before 9/11 days leaves much explaining. That statement requires verification.

Of course now is not the time to divulge what activities have been entered into nor is it the time to be jubilant. Perhaps Canada has passed the Act to please the Americans. They have wanted an improvement in all activities that relate to the Canadian people so that any threat coming from the north side of the border will either be eliminated or significantly reduced.

Canadians do have a role to play in continental defence and in the maintenance of security of the people. How far does the act go in these regards?

What is good for the goose...

We have learned that Charles and Camilla will be wed in a "town hall." It had been anticipated the Charles would wed at Windsor Castle as he is, in "reality", Prince Charles of the royal family of England. Now, why the change in venue?

It was determined that if the Castle applied to have a licence at a cost of $2,000 Cdn.; the licence could then be used by the "general public", like most of us "commoners", to be wed there. Well, that just could not do. Individuals without "blue blood" should never, ever, think of such a possibility.

Nevertheless, if commoners want to see the happy wedded couple before or after the "big, legal event", it will now be possible, to a greater degree. How nice! How wonderful!

In America, we have our "stars" of stage and screen, and from the world of sports. We stretch our necks to see them on all occasions. So, who are we to look askance at the "royal blues?"

The times are changing, the prince and other members of British high society, those of the horsey set, who enjoy the hunt, "the running the foxes", will be able to enjoy such "foolish" activity for the last time for the law forbidding such practices will come into play, in the near future. The law has finally caught up to the prince!

Ditching royals....

"Ditching royals is easy, expert says," music to my ears. A Canadian constitutional expert argues that when the Queen ends her reign, Canada could refrain from proclaiming a new monarch. The monarchy is not relevant to Canada. The present Queen's representative is superfluous to the needs of Canada and is a drain on the national purse. If we are to have a "head of state", that person should be elected with tight controls over activities and budget. I say, enough is enough and all vestiges of the historical relationship with Britain removed.

It is believed that this change can take place in a polite way and with a measure of good will. Yes, it can be done quietly, without fanfare. It must be done, nonetheless.

The present Parliament should, some how, look at the situation as important and work needs to be undertaken now to bring about an early solution to the "problem" of the Governor General. The G.G. must go, the sooner, the better.

It's all over...

It's all over but for the crying. The crying of the long suffering hockey players who are so much over-paid for the demonstration of their athletic abilities. Not that many years ago we had players who were paid much less than members of Parliament. Today the athletes playing hockey are paid sometimes more than a politician would earn in a lifetime. The annual salaries of players at the lowest level on the income ladder are many times over that of the Prime Minister. I would say they are very much over-paid.

These athletes are there because of the many children who provided team competition for them as they advanced from team level to team level. Their previous team members had parents who sacrificed to suit up and equip their children, provide transportation at all hours of the day and night, traveling at times to distant locations. Yes, they did it for fun and enjoyment but, the ultimate payoff went to those who were highly talented. Their achievement came at a high cost to so many others.

Yes, there is entertainment value in their playing but not at the cost of tickets to see their performances. Many Canadians have turned to more junior leagues to have a view of some good hockey playing, very good entertainment for the costs involved.

Many Canadians in response to the question of what they thought of the ongoing negotiations simply replied, "I couldn't care less" and those are my sentiments as well!

Fear

Many years ago I recall a discussion in a high school classroom with a friend about the controls that one is subjected to in society. To me the paramount factor was fear. The fear of loss is ingrained in one’s personality as one expects from birth such elements of life as warmth and comfort which includes food and being taken care of which later translates into love.

Later, the need for comfort is affected by the feeling of pain. A child learns early that discomfort and pain are not nice and will cry to have these taken care of by a protector or a guardian. The mother is the key person to provide those basic necessities to the infant. Later other humans assist and a feeling of trust is developed.

Fear of discipline comes early at home and later outside the home, and in particular within organizations within which the child participates. These external authorities to the home are increased and intensified through the school years.

There is the fear of being criticized before ones peers, the fear of being punished for improper activities which would include not doing whatever was expected by the school’s authorities. Then, the fear of the police which can be intensified through comic books, stories, film, TV and sometimes through actual contact.

Fear of failure has caused many individuals to avoid participating in activities for example, some students early in their schooling were unwilling to read in school before others as they were subjected to ridicule. Some were actually traumatized. A few teachers even frightened some students to the point of they would lose control of their feeling and understanding of what was going on. Some would actually faint. These early fears would cause blockages in the individual’s development. In fact, some Americans are illiterate as a result of these early schooling experiences.

After schooling came employment. For some individuals finding that first job and keeping that job was difficult. Then the fear of survival in the workplace developed. The need for money was there. The fear of not having enough money for survival became a controlling factor.

Then, the ever present state would dominate the person’s existence. The welfare system, the judicial system, the religious system and other systems all served to control the individual. To break any rules and regulations could result in punishment. Fear of potential punishment had a strong controlling influence on the individual.

My conclusion at that time was that we were all controlled by fear. We were all influenced by war and fighting the enemy. At home we had air raid practices and air raid shelters for there was a fear of an enemy attack using aircraft. Later missiles were included and national defense was strongly oriented towards protection from these potential intrusions.

Now, additional legislation for the protection of our way of living has been introduced; we have different measures of “security." North America needs to be protected not just from any external attack but from the internal. Now, not only is there the fear of some nation doing something to jeopardize our peace and security, we are faced with the possibility of some groups or individuals doing something that would cause physical harm to our society.

We can’t get away from these fears. What is most disturbing is the reduction of freedoms that we have. Big brother is ever watching. Incarceration now is possible if one is suspect, with the withholding of former legal entitlements for contact with the “outside." We do not even know what all of these are. Some organizations are questioning these new laws, their interpretation and their execution.

There is a lingering fear of the American military and other agencies of government that have unquestioned power and control. Homeland security covers so much that our older freedoms are in jeopardy.

We have lived in fear, and fears are increasing. How will American society adapt to these new fears?

New York, New York.

My first visit to New York City was in 1946, just after the Second World War. The Empire State Building, Rockefeller Centre, St Patrick’s Cathedral, Central Park, Yankee Stadium, Times Square are some of the many memories that I hold. There were many visits since that time but 9/11 brought all those visits to a close. The memories of that day, ever etched in my mind, have produced a major block.

Now, there is a joyous artistic adventure that I look forward to. There is now a “golden river” that runs through Central Park. The TV news has provided a view on this happening. Yes, there will be many photographs taken for later viewing in books, on the internet or placed in photo albums. But the real life viewing is a once in-a-life-time experience. If one does not see this over the next two weeks, the opportunity will be lost, forever.

The 9/11 block will be smashed by my visit to New York City. My almost 60 year love affair with that great city will be renewed!

Royal Engagement

Two people may marry; that is nice. They should be wished the best for their futures. Now, if one of the parties to be wed comes from royalty, headlines are made. British royalty gets a big “splash” in Canada. The headline for the event is larger than either that for the NHL hockey season or for the sponsorship program. Is this because hockey and the scandal are of lesser importance in the minds and hearts of Canadians? No. Could it be because the Canadian press has not received the message that the Canada of today is far from the Canada of 1905 or of 1955? Between those dates, Canada came of age. Canada fought two World Wars under the strong direction and influence of the British Empire. That is history, almost ancient history in the evolution of modern Canadian society.

Let the British proclaim the wonders of royalty. Let the British delight in the festivities of the future wedding. Let not the Government of Canada go overboard in any gifts that might be given. Let the Canadian government reflect the sentiments of the large proportion of the Canadian public that holds little interest and less affection for the royal family.

Canadians are not the colonials of the past. Canadians have their own distinctive flag. Canadians have their own constitution. Canadians are almost independent.

When the Governor General’s position is abolished, as a relic of the past, Canadians will develop a stronger sense of pride of country and of people. There will be unity as there has never been before. Canada will truly become an independent nation.

Long live the peoples of Canada! Long live Canada!

Expressed Fear

There has been an expressed fear by some Indians (Natives) of the American government's reaction to a the International Leonard Peltier Gathering that will take place in Washington D.C. on May 9. This may be understandable when history is reviewed.

Now, the government now is very concerned about international coverage of news events. For example, the news coming out of Iraq was rather controlled for the press was often embedded with the troops or under the influence of the editors of their papers.

In other countries, America is not in control of their presses. America is "concerned" about what is thought by people in Europe and around the world; the government does not want to have negative press in those countries.

The gathering will prove to be peaceful and the press will be positive. Much good will come from the gathering. There should not be any negatives there.

The Indians are open, they share their ideas, nothing is hidden, and there is no hidden agenda. There can be no criticism of peoples who search for truth, peace and freedom. What else should America be all about?

Yes, Indians are sensitive to history. They do not bury their heads in the sand. But times do change. They should put the maximum of positive spin on what they write, say, think and do.

They are united in doing what is right, they believe in what is right and fair and that is the why of the International Leonard Peltier Gathering.

Leonard Peltier Gathering

An announcement of an "International Leonard Peltier March" has been made.

I prefer to refer this “march” as a gathering. A gathering is a term frequently used by Native peoples to describe a meeting, a coming together of people, a celebration, a happening. When I think of “march”, I think of a massive movement of people such as THE MARCH ON WASHINGTON,1963: “WE STOOD ON A HEIGHT” when Dr. Martin Luther King delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” address.

This “gathering” will take place on May 9, 2005, in front of the U.S. Supreme Court Building, in Washington D.C. A number of key figures in the United States will be invited to address the gathering. There will also be a number of activities that participants will be able to take part in, all of which are being arranged.

The gathering will focus on the topics of peace and “freedom” and what it means in its many dimensions, in particular to Leonard Peltier who has been in prison for 10, 598 days, for a crime that many believe was never committed. Thirty years ago, two FBI agents were shot and Leonard was charged with the crime. Fearing that he would not receive a fair trial, he fled to Canada. It is believed that illegal and false affidavits were used to have him extradited from Canada.

Many individuals and organizations have sought a new trial or a pardon for Mr. Peltier. It had been hoped that President Bill Clinton would have issued a pardon before he left office. Might there be hope for a pardon before George Bush leaves office?

If Mr. Peltier’s “consecutive” life sentences were made “concurrent” he would be able to apply for parole.

The gathering will demonstrate that many individuals continue to support the freeing of Mr. Peltier. Many articles and letters have been written, many phone calls have been made now there will be a physical coming together in the name of peace and freedom for Leonard Peltier.

Note: A new website for the International Leonard Peltier Gathering can be found at:

http://washingtongathering.croweagle.com

This website has been developed to provide up-to-date information on the gathering.

It should include:

A listing of sites that can be visited in Washington.

Maps of Washington and area.

Articles and poetry.

An opportunity for individuals to provide ideas and information.

Leaders

There are times in the affairs of people when individuals respond to the feelings, sensitivities, and awareness within their minds and hearts. They understand feelings of sorrow, pain, and suffering. They are sensitive to prejudice and injustice, and have awareness as to what needs to be done to change the world, even if it is only in their own "back yard."

Sometimes an occasion will arise where through inspiration given or through ideas expressed, one stands out. Those individuals are often called leaders. They need not be at the head of organizations, they need not be elected to positions, they need not be at the head of a pack or group, but simply and quietly they use whatever gifts they possess to bring about change, in humility and with respect for others. These individuals are leaders.

It could even be said that leaders have obligations to selves and others to "lead" in their own ways, but the bottom line is that they are leaders. The best leaders are individuals who demonstrate by example not by word alone. They "show" the way; they are followed. Leaders are often respected and given the title of leader. They do not request this but if they are recognized for who and what they are, so much the better.

International Leonard Peltier March

Words from Thomas Greywolf, an American Native leader:

From Dawn To Dusk!

May 9th, 2005 in Front of the
U.S.Supreme Court Building
in Washington, D.C. 20543

This a Monday which is decision day.

Spread the word far and wide.

Bring Your Signs, Your Bullhorns,
Your Love for Justice and Your Determination!

Let's See if We can't Put a Few Thousand People
in the streets of D.C.!

IT'S TIME TO FREE LEONARD PELTIER!

Jean Chretien before the Commission of Inquiry

Today was the day that many Canadians were looking forward to; the day when Jean Chretien, the former prime minister who was responsible for the introduction of the national unity strategy, would face some sharp questioning concerning his involvement in the sponsorship scandal.

Mr. Chretien had the unique opportunity to start the day by making a presentation that lasted half an hour. It was a spirited defence of his stewardship in government for a period of forty years and his leadership of his party as prime minister for ten years. Very few people would deny that Canada had advanced economically over that period of time and that the deficit had been reduced. During that time a major challenge had to be faced as the movement for separation of Quebec from Canada was very strong. Chretien’s reaction to a possible future referendum on separation was to develop a unity strategy that would place emphasis on the federal presence in the Province of Quebec and the benefits of the Province remaining in confederation.

I had looked forward to this day for quite some time as I had viewed much of the previous testimony given by bureaucrats and ministers of the crown. So often in the past witnesses could not remember their involvement in particular activities. After spending well over three hours viewing today’s proceedings, I am somewhat disappointed that it took that much time to reveal what I personally had anticipated. Much like the testimony of many witnesses to date, Mr. Chretien could not remember so much that might have placed him in a bad light. He denied knowing specific facts about transactions or the involvement of friends in contracts or subcontracts under the sponsorship program.

When a list of contributors and amounts to the Liberal party were provided, the question was asked if he was aware of those contributions, his answer was that he was not aware of those numbers. He may not have been aware of those specific numbers but he must have been aware of some major contributors to the party. When his lawyer asked about the golf balls that he used as gifts, he stated that he did not order them himself, the golf balls had been paid for by the “association”, meaning, I suppose, the Liberal party.

What was not addressed was the matter of the golf balls that had been paid for with sponsorship funds. The Commission lawyer did not ask that question so a question still remains. Did Mr. Chretien profit from purchases made with sponsorship funds?

Prime Minister Paul Martin will testify on Thursday. He will then shed light on how much of the unity strategy he was aware of while he was in the federal cabinet.

There are many Canadians who are very anxious to read the Commission’s report which should be ready by December.

The Sgro Affair

On January 14, Citizenship and Immigration Minister Judy Sgro resigned her position, without the prime minister requesting it. She did so because she had been accused of receiving food for her election staff in exchange for having a Mr. Singh avoid deportation.

Mr. Harjit Singh entered Canada as a visitor 17 years ago. His application to remain in Canada was refused a half dozen times. Perhaps as a last desperate effort to stay, he claimed that the Minister had him arrested and a deportation order prepared.

Mrs. Sgro filed a lawsuit against Mr. Singh and others. Her claim was that they were guilty of libel, slander and conspiracy.

A federal court judge later upheld the deportation order saying that Mr. Singh’s story did not make sense, that an experienced politician would never risk a career and reputation for free pizzas and other food items. Mr. Singh was put on a plane for India on February 2.

Those Canadians who know Judy Sgro accept her as a conscientious politician who worked very hard serving her constituents and the people of Canada. It is hoped that she will soon return to a position in cabinet.

Sponsorship Scandal

Who can explain the why of the 721 “events” for 1997 – 2000, or the benefits that were obtained? Here are a few examples of the events and their costs:

1998 – 1999 125e GRC $1,000,000
1998 – 1999 Promotion GRC $1,371,750
1997 - 1998 Golf GRC Rech. Maladie Inf. $17,750
1997 – 1998 GRC 11 November $6,000
1998 – 1999 GRC 125e (Verglas) $10,960
1997 – 1998 GRC 125e Anniversaire $360,000
1997 – 1998 GRC Benefice $17,750
1998 – 1999 Promotional Items $687,062
1999 – 2000 2000 Olympics – Advanced Planning $250,000
1998 – 1999 CMHC Corporate Image & Mess. Proj. $314,175
1998 – 1999 CMHC Project $96,825
1997 – 1998 Defecit O –Developpement Creatif $100,000
1998 – 1999 Divers Promo $351,500
1997 – 1998 Expo 2005 $292,500
1998 – 1999 Fetes gourmandes $75,000
1999 – 2000 Fetes gourmandes int’l de Montreal $75,000
1998 – 1999 Fetes gourmandes de Montreal $125,000
1998 – 1999 Logos Canada – Via $336,000
1998 – 1999 Millenaire BDC $143,750
1997 – 1998 NATO Training $168,000
1997 – 1998 Promotional Ítems $56,718
1998 – 1999 Unforeseen Events $200,000
1997 – 1998 Via Canada on Board $79,500
1997 – 1998 Via-Magazine $325,000

This list is 1/30 of the “events” for 1997 – 2000.

Here are another four examples:
1998 – 1999 China/Team Canada T.V. Series $1,500,000
1997 – 1998 CD-Roms $500,000
1997 – 1988 China T.V. Series $1,600,000
1999 – 2000 China Project $3,000,000

There are so many “events” that could be questioned.

The golf ball prime minister.

Jean Chretien, "da little guy from Shawinigan", former prime minister of Canada should appear next week before the Commission of Inquiry relating to the sponsorship scandal. He will be on the "hot seat" as the scandal is being investigated; the present prime minister will also testify.

Mr. Chretien may have derived some personal benefit from the golf balls that may have been paid for with “sponsorship” funds. Yes, Chretien golf balls, now, have a good laugh. With his skills as a golf player, he should be forgiven for using any Chretien golf balls. I predict that he will go down in history as “the golf ball prime minister”; he should have spent more time playing golf and less time in politics.

I believe his tenure is a reflection of personal hubris and a weak-knee Liberal party that should have had him replaced some time ago.


(Note: the above article along with three others that have recently appeared as blogs have been submitted to the Ottawa Citizen as letters to the Editor. One was published yesterday.)

Of what value, at what cost?

In any review of the government’s budget for national defence, a sharp focus should be placed on the Snowbirds, the aerobatic flying team. Questions need to be asked about the value of this demonstration flying group to the people of Canada.

Although many Canadians have seen the Snowbirds in flight, it is only for a few fleeting moments. Does this really generate some sense of pride? What other reasons might there be to continue with a national “spectacle” that has resulted in 5 deaths since 1972, with the destruction of numerous aircraft. Questions need to be asked about the total costs to maintain the squadron. Many aircraft are required with ongoing maintenance and operational costs. Salaries and benefits for supporting officers at headquarters, supervisors, ground and flight crew and the future costs relating to pensions, all contribute to high final costs. Most thinking Canadians would look at all the costs in relationship to the values that are actually derived. The monies that would be saved by disbanding the squadron could be used for other programs that might assist the poor, the homeless, the hungry and the unemployed. There are many programs that affect the people that could use additional funding.

A review of the Snowbirds schedule for 2005 indicates 60 days of participation in events; 40 days in Canada and 20 days in the United States. Of the 40 days in Canada, 16 days are in the province of Ontario, 14 of which are in southern Ontario. Is this a national program in which all Canadians can take pride, whatever that might mean?

How many Canadians know anything about Millville, New Jersey or Millington, Tennessee? Hardly any! Yet four days will be spent at those two locations. Why? Will there be any value gained for Canadians, including Canadian pride?

How many Canadians know anything about Nunavut, the North West Territories, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador? Very many! Yet, no days will be spent in any of those locations. What is the value or importance of the Snowbirds to the residents of those areas?

The Government of Canada should disband the squadron; give Canadians a break by reducing taxes and by increasing benefits for Canadians who have significant needs!

Recent Shootings by Police

Aboriginal people in Canada have higher suicide rates, higher death rates while in custody and much higher death rates due to police shootings. On January 31, we learned about another in a long series of deaths that have resulted by police shootings: this one took place in Winnipeg, Manitoba. This was the second death of a Manitoban aboriginal within a month. What goes wrong in these situations?

In 1988, J. J. Harper’s death at the hands of police lead to the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. This Inquiry produced many recommendations for the improvement of police relations. Aboriginal leaders have said that not enough of the recommendations have been adopted. This recent death of Matthew Dumas will be subject to an independent inquest by a Crown attorney from outside the Province. As well, there will be an internal investigation.

What has taken place in Manitoba is not uncommon to the rest of Canada. Police agencies across the country need to take note. Lessons must be learned from these recent shootings in Manitoba. A thorough review needs to be made of the recommendations from past inquiries. Is there a problem with the attitudes of police officers toward aboriginal people? Why are aboriginal people treated differently from others? What training are provided police officers relating to race relations? How much racial profiling is taking place? What are the consequences of racial profiling?

Policing is a profession. To be viewed as true professionals some police tactics need to change. The public demands the best performance by police officers. More guidance is needed; more discipline must be provided. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, as a group, needs to assess what has gone wrong and determine what their ultimate responsibility is in this regard.

The Chicoutimi Affair

A few years ago the Canadian government purchased four used British submarines for $750 million. At the present time three of the subs are not being used and are tied up at dock. Yesterday, the Chicoutimi, a damaged sub, arrived in Halifax aboard a Norwegian vessel. A real loss of pride!

After the fire on board the sub on October 5, an inquiry was set up and its report was presented on December 17. Now we learn the enquiry is to be reconvened to explore further what actually happened. The earlier part of the enquiry took place over a period of 26 days in Halifax, in Ottawa and in Scotland. The enquiry has been held in secret; the public must wonder why.

The Canadian government should review the present need to have submarines for the defence of Canada. If it is absolutely necessary to have subs, then full price purchases should take place. You get the quality that you pay for; do it on the cheap and suffer the consequences.

Canadians need to accept the possibility of further problems on these used subs, even after expensive refits take place. No more deaths are required to confirm the fact that the original purchase was a big mistake.

It is time for Canadians, through the government, to cut losses. Perhaps the subs might be sold to some countries for their navies. Or, the subs could be set aside as museum pieces. In any case, one should be placed as a permanent museum located in the Ottawa River between Parliament Hill and the Museum of Civilization. Many visitors would be willing to pay top dollar to visit a “modern” but useless sub. It could serve as a monument to governmental ineptitude.

The submarine Chicoutimi should be renamed Chretien, to honour the former prime minister.

Chretien vs Gomery

If one were to believe that former prime minister was anxious to testify before the Gomery Commission, think again. His lawyers, high priced guns, have put forward arguments that the chairman of the commission should step aside. Mr. Gomery decided to stay on. I believe that he is a fair man; that whatever he did say may have been inappropriate but without sufficient justification for him to quit.

I believe that Chretien does not want to testify and if he is obligated because his tactics are ineffective, he would like to have the public believe that any conclusions arrived at that are negative to his public image were due to a biased commissioner. I further believe that Chretien has much to hide; much will be revealed.

I, along with many Canadians who have watched and/or followed the progress of the inquiry have grave doubts about the truthfulness of much of the testimony given. If crimes were committed, charges should be laid and judgment rendered through a court of law.

I don’t believe that Chretien performed his duties properly. He had too much power to do as he pleased, and this is what he did. He did not supervise his Ministers and did not hold them accountable for their actions. How could 100 million dollars “disappear” without some officials asking pertinent questions or evaluations taken place as to how well monies were expended: proper accounting was perhaps just not there? And why must be the question. Was so much done as it was a “hands off” project because of the prime minister and his interests?

One thing for sure, Chretien may have derived some personal benefit from the golf balls that may have been paid for with “sponsorship” funds, Yes, Chretien golf balls, now, have a good laugh. With his skills as a golf player, he should be forgiven for using any Chretien golf balls. I predict that he will go down in history as “the golf ball prime minister”; he should have spent more time playing golf and less time in politics. I believe his tenure is a reflection of personal hubris and a weak-kneed Liberal party that should have had him replaced a long time ago.