WORKING A HARD EIGHT-HOUR DAY FOR THE DEVIL

I never really cared about the budget, until I learned where all that money is going, yup, to the Corporates once again. Isn't it time to stop the suffering that these polluting organizations unleash onto us, the innocent bystanders. It is us and our poor helpless Mother Earth that are the victims of this quest for money and power that our government continues to exploit for their own money-hungry purposes. While they are drinking their bottled water, we will be wading in red frothing oceans and eating diseased, pus-filled animals, and pesticide induced vegetables. I say we put that budget money (which is once again our hard earned cash!) into something that will benefit US AND MOTHER EARTH, now that is progress!
OTTAWA - The Green Party is rejecting the Conservative budget as a budget with no vision that fails to provide responsible leadership on the economy or the environment.
"I look at this Conservative budget", said Green Party deputy leader Adriane Carr, "and I see a big group of ostriches with their heads stuck in the tar sands."
"There's no vision," said Carr. "While other countries are growing strong, sustainable economies based on conserving energy and developing clean renewable energy, the Conservatives are entrenching our reliance on fossil fuels."
Carr noted that the single biggest initiative regarding global warming in this budget allocates $250 million to sequester carbon from coal-fired electricity.
"The Conservatives are taking Canada backwards instead of forward," said Carr.
"The nuclear industry is not the way to go, either," said Carr. 'This budget puts $300 million in new nuclear technology. Given the long-term health, environmental and international security problems related to nuclear energy, our government should invest instead in Canada's vast solar, wind, tidal and geothermal resources," stated Carr.
Ms. Carr said that a carbon tax, coupled with green tax-shifting, is critical to both addressing climate change and developing clean, renewable energy. Just yesterday, the new David Suzuki Foundation report, co-authored with economist Mark Jaccard, concluded that a carbon tax will not only help solve the climate crisis but will represent a significant opportunity for Canadians to save on taxes and will keep our economy strong."

MAD COW NIGHTMARE RESURFACES!

Need another reason to get off the fleshy stuff, we call animal meat, well, read on...
Massive Beef Recall Follows Mad Cow Scare
USDA orders recall of 143 million pounds of frozen beef
By Mark Huffman
ConsumerAffairs.Com
February 17, 2008
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is recalling 143 million pounds of frozen beef in the wake of a video showing so-called downer cattle being prepared for slaughter at a California plant. The recall includes beef products produced after February 1, 2006 at the Westland/Hallmark Meat Co. in Chino.
A consumer group said the recall was the result of a "terrible failure" by the USDA and said consumers are losing confidence in the safety of the American food supply.
The release of the video earlier this month by the Humane Society of the U.S. triggered a USDA investigation of the plant and an immediate suspension of production.
Of particular concern is the fact the plant has been a major supplier of meat to the federal school lunch program.
The recall was announced over the weekend after USDA investigators concluded the downer cattle were slaughtered, along with healthy cattle. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer says investigators uncovered evidence the plant violate numerous health regulations. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) noted that there have been more than 20 beef recalls in the last 20 months.
"This recall is the result of a terrible failure of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s mandate since 1906 to ensure that sick animals are not slaughtered for human food. Once again, USDA is in reactive mode—taking steps to protect the public long after a highly publicized animal welfare scandal," said CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaal. The slaughter of downer cattle set off alarm bells among investigators because not being able to walk is one of the symptoms of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, otherwise known as Mad Cow Disease.
There are strict rules that are supposed to keep meat from infected cows out of cattle feed – much less the human food supply. In addition, Schafer says the fact the cows weren't inspected raises all sorts of other alarming possibilities, including foodborne pathogens such as E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella. "Along with all Americans who watched the Humane Society's disturbing videos, we are concerned with the mistreatment of animals at Westland Meat Co. We are writing today because of urgent concerns this incident raises about food safety in the National School Lunch Program and the implications for our children's health and well-being," the lawmakers wrote in their letter. Despite these steps by the USDA, the lawmakers cited serious concerns about the overall effectiveness of the federal government's effort to ensure the safety of meat on the school food supply. To date, no independent investigation has been launched into the safety of the schools' meat supply.

Unite With Fort Chipewyan Against Corruption by Our Government!

Dear Friends and Allies,
Please join with members of Fort Chipewyan this Saturday to demand justice for their community.
Out of control tarsands development is having disastrous impacts on the environment and health of people throughout Alberta. Increasing numbers of the small aboriginal community of Fort Chipewyan (downstream from the Alberta Tar Sands) are being diagnosed and dying from rare cancers and other auto-immune diseases. A recent water study confirmed that the water in Fort Chipewyan had increased levels of arsenic, mercury and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and was not safe for consumption, particularly in the fish eaten by local residents.
The study further supports the Mikisew Cree's recent call for a moratorium on tar sands development.
But as stated by Councillor Russell Kaskamin of the Mikisew Cree First Nation, "The Federal and Provincial governments are continuing to issue approvals for projects despite all of the uncertainties with the true environmental effects of oilsands development. This analysis suggests that we can no longer continue to exercise our rights to harvest foods due to the uncertainty of potential health risks."
Demand Justice for Fort Chipewyan!!!
Rally at the Alberta Legislature in Edmonton
March 1st, 1:00 pm
And Vigil at Parliament Hill in Ottawa
March 1st, 7:00pm
And, if you can’t make it either of these events, you can still take action by signing a letter to both the Alberta Government and Canadian Government to demand that they take action. Please sign on here.
It is time to demand justice for the Mikisew Cree and the residents of Fort Chipewyan.
Contact: George Poitras at george.poitras@shawbiz.ca, Lindsey Telfer at Lindsay@sierraclub.org or Mike at mhudema@greenpeace.org for more information about the Edmonton action, or Jessie at jessie@polarisinstitute.org for more information about the action in Ottawa.
And, if you haven’t done so already please join 37 Alberta based organizations, 31 national and international groups, prominent individuals like Stephen Lewis, Dr. David Schindler and Reverend Bill Phipps and over 2000 individuals who have signed on to a pledge stating NO NEW APPROVALS on tar sands development!
Jessie Kalman
Tar Sands Watch Campaigner
Polaris Institute
jessie@polarisinstitute.org
(613) 237-1717 ext. 106
mobile (613) 698-8222
www.tarsandswatch.org

The Canadian Government Caught in Seal Pup Slaughter!

This has been an extremely distressing day: First Stephane Dion wimps out on us and passively lets Stephen Harper continue the war on the Afghanistan people to 2011 and beyond, a disgusting slaughter on its own...But hey, if we are going to slaughter humans, why not kill seal pups too, and while you are at it, you might as well kill off the poor, the prisoners, the naysayers, the first born child of every family...Wait this sounds very familiar....I thought you might want to know that the Canadian government no longer gives a sh*t about us, nor anything living thing on this earth, they just want too fill their pockets with money, their fat cat friends' pockets with money and laugh at us as we are crying for JUSTICE! LET US UNITE! WE HAVE TO, IT IS GOING TO BE TOO LATE, WE MUST FIGHT NO MATTER WHAT! Come on Canadians let's kick these fat cats out, let's stop putting our cash into their fat pockets, lets get sustainable, lets email their asses off, and lets spread the word!
Here is an excerpt on the inhumane seal hunt, and also check out another article on Canadian Press, our government is absolutely and totally corrupt. Sign the petition here
Article By Rebecca Aldworth (Humane Society International)
This spring marks a macabre anniversary for me: It is the tenth year I have observed commercial seal hunting in Canada at close range. In that decade, I’ve seen things that still haunt me every day and night. But nothing could have prepared me for what I just witnessed in Nova Scotia.
Two weeks ago, the government of Nova Scotia and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans opened a protected nature reserve to commercial seal hunters. Fishermen were authorized to club more than 2,000 baby grey seals [PDF] to death on Hay Island, a part of the protected Scaterie Island Wilderness Area off Cape Breton.
I and my colleagues from Humane Society International and the Humane Society of the United States—along with a representative from the Atlantic Canadian Anti-Sealing Coalition—traveled to the site of the massacre by ZodiacTM.
Before the hunters arrived, Hay Island was a stunning, wild, and windswept vista. A tiny plot of land off the larger Scaterie Island, it faces directly onto the Atlantic Ocean. Its stone beaches surround grassy, snow-covered hills—the habitat of grey seal mothers and their pups.
Everywhere across the island, seal pups nursed from their mothers, their soft calls drowned out by the sounds of the ocean waves crashing onto the rocky shores in the distance. Some of the newborn pups were covered in white fur; others, a few days older, had already moulted their white coats. The moulted pups have the most valuable skins, and the hunters meant to kill them.
On the opening day of the seal hunt, we arrived at Hay Island after the killing had already begun. We climbed out of our ZodiacTM onto the rocky beach, facing a high ridge beyond which we could not see. As we clambered over it, we noticed a steel pail in which sealers had left wooden bats covered in blood—an ominous indicator of what lay ahead. Directly behind the bloody pail lay a newborn whitecoat seal pup, crying pitifully. She was terrified and bewildered, unable to comprehend the violence happening around her. Her calls struck a chord deep within me. There is something about the misery of a newborn creature, confronted with violence even adult humans cannot stand to watch, that defines exactly why commercial seal hunting must end.
As I looked up, it took a full minute for me to understand what I was seeing in front of me. Hunters had herded moulted pups, newborn seals, and mothers together into groups. They bashed the moulted pups with their crude wooden bats, slicing them open with box cutters. Inches away, the mothers tried to put themselves between their babies and the sealers, but they were no match for these men armed with wooden bats.
“Come here, little buddy, I have something for you,” yelled out one sealer as he ran directly at a terrified pup huddling in a crevice beside a rock. Without a second of hesitation, the sealer raised his bloody bat and struck the seal pup. The repeated thuds of the clubs against the skulls of the grey seal pups sounded out across the island, constant and sickening.
Soon, the grass and snow of Hay Island was covered in vast pools of blood. The surviving newborn pups were moving miserably through the carnage, red blood smeared across their white fur. Bloody trails led away from the killing sites to the areas where dead pups were being winched onto a sealing boat stationed just off the island.
I saw my horror at the scene reflected in the some of the faces of the government officials there. No one could watch this brutality and remain unaffected. Even the sealers seemed to realize there was something wrong with what they were doing; they would deliberately stand in front of our cameras to prevent us from filming as they smashed in the skulls of the baby seals.
I moved through the killing fields, apologizing to the surviving pups, over and over again. The site of their home, their sanctuary, being turned into an open air slaughterhouse by these ruthless invaders was too much to bear. What had once been one of Nova Scotia’s wilderness treasures had been destroyed by the commercial sealing industry.
It is unthinkable that the Canadian government is allowing grey seals to be slaughtered commercially. By 1949, commercial hunting had almost wiped out this population, and it has only begun to recover to any real extent in recent years. While the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has attempted to portray this recovery as a population increase, it is hard for any population not to increase when it is starting at close to zero.
Fishermen have long scapegoated grey seals for the impact of destructive commercial fishing methods on fish stocks. They say that grey seals are preventing fish stocks from recovering, despite the fact that there is not a shred of evidence anywhere in the world that this is the case. But despite this, the Canadian government allows fishermen to promote the myth that killing grey seals will somehow help the ecosystem to recover. And that is exactly how the Canadian government and the government of Nova Scotia have tried to sell this devastating slaughter to the public.
But it won’t work. We will hold the government of Nova Scotia and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans accountable for their behaviour. The footage we filmed is being provided to governments around the world to show the depths to which the Canadian government will sink to appease the fishing industry lobby. We will not forget the suffering of the grey seals. And the horrible deaths of these seal pups over the past two weeks will not be in vain.
A local supporter from Cape Breton remarked to me after our first day of filming the grey seal slaughter, “I’ve always thought the grey seal hunt would end the harp seal hunt in Canada.” She believes the cruelty of this slaughter, which occurs in areas people can see it, will wake up Atlantic Canadians to the reasons why all commercial seal hunting must end.
She may well be right.
As we prepare to depart for the much larger harp seal hunt just a few weeks from now, I hold that thought in my mind.
The end is coming for the commercial sealing industry in Canada. Allowing the grey seal slaughter to happen in the Hay Island sanctuary was the biggest mistake the Canadian government could have made. They will live to regret it.

Another reason to END THE WAR!

I have just come out of the flu, feeling stronger than ever to fight for peace and justice. While in bed, i got the chance to read up on the environmental catastrophes that human beings, especially the government of Canada, have, and still are, to and even greater degree causing on our country. It is disgusting that we are in a war with a Middle Eastern country that we are treating like a colony; while our own country is failing in democracy itself. We have been rendered voiceless by this government that would rather spend 7 billion in a war against another country, rather than clean up its own act in its own land and sea. Our environment and its inhabitants are suffering immensely, and it is just getting worse. We need to take a stand NOW, it will be too late if we wait for this government to take action. WE MUST TAKE ACTION. I know, I have a job and a family too, that is no excuse, actually, it gives us an even greater reason to fight for environmental welfare, animal welfare, clean air, and clean water. We have to stop this war now, it is not in anyones interest except for the pockets of the fat cats in government and the armament-building corporations. We are in this war so as to make money for those who build military weapons and aircraft, for the Bush administration and all his fat cats, and for the Canadian government's own pockets. This is about making money for those in power, it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WELFARE OF AFGHANS! We could be spending our tax dollars on our own desperate needs...We have so much clean up to do in our own country; there are piles upon piles of chemical wastelands waiting to be cleaned up, there are thousand of Canadians deserving compensation for becoming ill due to coporate industrial practices; there are thousand of small farmers who are in great need of subsidies; there are species who are in dire need for land space and healthy habitats...and on and on and on...LET'S GET OUT OF AFGHANISTAN AND START PUTTING OUR TAX DOLLARS WHERE WE CANADIANS NEED IT! Email our leaders (email contacts can be found in previous blog entries), vote for a GREEN leader, talk to those around you, and LET'S UNITE!
I found this article on CBC.ca for uptodate catastrophes in Afghanistan...
Canada's top soldier urged Parliament to come to a quick decision on the country's role in Afghanistan, warning that lengthy debate may put soldiers increasingly at risk as the Taliban take advantage of the uncertainty.
Gen. Rick Hillier said on Friday that the Taliban are watching Canada's debate on the Afghan mission and may increase attacks on the country's soldiers if they perceive weakness.
"We are, in the eyes of the Taliban, in a window of extreme vulnerability, and the longer we go without that clarity, with the issue in doubt, the more the Taliban will target us as a perceived weak link," Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier said Friday.
Speaking at a meeting of the Conference of Defence Associations, a military advocacy group, Hillier referred to recent attacks in Afghanistan.
A spate of suicide bombings hit southern Afghanistan earlier this week, including one attack that targeted a Canadian convoy, slightly wounding three soldiers.
Hillier wouldn't definitively say the suicide bombings were linked to political debate in Canada.
But he warned that if the Taliban sense weakness, they may try to take advantage of it and attack Canadian soldiers to prevent a cohesive mission.
The longer the Canadian Forces go without clarity about the mission, the more difficult it will be to protect the soldiers, he told reporters after the speech.
Ottawa is in the midst of deciding what form Canada's military presence should take past its current end-date of February 2009.
While debate is necessary, Hillier said, there has to be a decision at the end of it.
Debate unavoidable, Dion reiterates
Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion repeated his assertion Friday that debate is unavoidable.
"I think the Taliban want to kill our soldiers anyway. It's a dangerous mission, I know," Dion told reporters in Winnipeg.
"We are a pluralist democracy and we're fighting to be sure that Afghanistan too, one day, will be a pluralist democracy where people may debate without being in danger of their lives."
Dion is not making any commitment to back a revised Conservative motion on Afghanistan, a proposal intended to bridge the gap between the government and the opposition Liberals.
But he said the government has moved toward the Liberal position and much progress has been made.
"Our brave men and women in uniform are risking their lives, it's true, which is why I would prefer not to have an election with that as a trigger," he said.
NATO general expects allies to offer troops
The new motion, which Harper revealed before the same group Hillier addressed, calls for the mission to be renewed past 2009 but with a focus on reconstruction and training of Afghan troops, and for all Canadian troops to leave Afghanistan by December 2011.
Previously, the Conservative government had put forward a motion that left the mission open to renewal in 2011 and would have seen the military continue in a combat role.
The latest motion still makes Canada's continued presence in the volatile Kandahar region contingent on whether NATO allies provide 1,000 extra troops and Ottawa secures additional equipment.
Also on Friday, Canadian Gen. Ray Henault, who chairs NATO's military committee, said he believes other countries will be able to contribute the extra troops Canada requires to continue its mission in Afghanistan.
"I am confident that NATO nations will come to the assistance of Canada," said Henault. "We'll source the additional personnel requirements that Canada has called for in the south."
Motion won't restrict military operations
Canadian soldiers have been keeping a close eye on the Afghan mission debate, Hillier said, and all they ask is that the government give them a clear mandate.
"They do ask … that they get that clarity of purpose as soon as we can give it to them."
Troops also need flexibility on the ground to not only defend themselves but to ensure security by going out and finding insurgents, he said.
He noted that over the past few months Canadian soldiers have hunted down six senior Taliban leaders who orchestrated attacks against coalition forces.
Hillier said he doesn't have any concerns that the current government motion will restrict his soldiers' flexibility on the ground.
The prime minister said Thursday that both the Liberals and Conservatives agree that operational decisions should be left up to the commanders overseeing the mission in Afghanistan. -CBC

Wanted: Climate Leaders

OTTAWA, Canada — Greenpeace marked the third anniversary of the Kyoto Protocol coming into force by projecting the words "Wanted: Climate Leaders" on the Parliament Buildings in Ottawa this evening. Activists holding candles also held vigil in protest of Canada’s lack of progress on combating global warming.
The projection, measuring roughly 15m x 15m, lit up the Parliament Buildings’ Centre Block at approximately 7:00 p.m. and remained there for 30 minutes. Greenpeace activists left the site confident their message had been delivered.
"This is a message to everyone on Parliament Hill that global warming is at your doorstep and it’s time to show some leadership on reducing greenhouse gas emissions," said Dave Martin, Climate and Energy campaign co-ordinator for Greenpeace Canada. "The Kyoto anniversary is a sad day for all Canadians who have seen a lot of hot air from Parliament contribute to rising global temperatures."
When Parliament ratified the Kyoto Protocol in December 2002, it agreed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions six per cent below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. The Protocol took effect internationally on 16 February 2005. However, by the end that year, emissions had increased 33 per cent above our Kyoto target, placing Canada among the worst countries in the world for reducing emissions.
"With a federal election around the corner, it’s not just the responsibility of politicians to show leadership on climate change, but also the voting public who are going to fill the position in our want ad," said Martin.
Greenpeace is calling for Canada to honour its Kyoto commitment and then move on to further deep reductions that will see greenhouse gas emissions reduced at least 25 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020, and 80 per cent by 2050.

PEACE COOKIE TOUR!

PEACE COOKIE WEEK
Come get a yummy vegan peace cookie and support environmental and political peace!
Where? The Vegetarian Lunchbox (420 Main St. Wolfville)
When? March 3-7 (M-F store hours)
THE PEACE COOKIE TOUR WILL TRAVEL ACROSS CANADA IN APRIL, BE ON THE LOOKOUT CANADIANS!
All donations go to fund the Summer of Change Festival 2009; a national event promoting sustainability, environmental awareness, holistic living and more!

With Knowledge We Fight!

Why Are We in Afghanistan?
by Jason Kunin
November 23, 2007

There are probably still a few people among the hardcore supporters of Canada’s war in Afghanistan who believe we’re there to restore peace, create democracy, and help women go to school. Yet among opponents, whose numbers are growing, the most common analysis is that we’re there to please the U.S. and to atone for the fact that Canada did not send troops to Iraq – complaints often rooted in a lament for a romanticized Canada, the "honest broker," the "peacekeeping" nation.

Whatever our reasons for invading Afghanistan in the first place, our reasons for still being there have little to do with simply pleasing the United States and everything to do with the usually causes of war: self-interest and profit. And all Canadians are complicit whether they know it or not. Yes, there is a small group of Canadian companies getting rich off this war. But as the profits of these companies are feeding our pension funds and creating Canadian jobs, those of us in Canada who oppose this war cannot be under any illusion that our opposition is rooted in the simple struggle between private interest and the public good. To be against this war, we must not only accept the way in which we currently benefit from it, but we must be prepared to accept the consequences of ending it. Because the reality is that it cannot be ended without cost. Ultimately, beyond merely withdrawing from this war, we must meet the deeper challenge of untangling the dependency of our public sphere on the private profit of war profiteering.

Though negligible in terms of its military power, Canada profits from war in many ways. To start, we have the dubious honour of being the sixth largest supplier of military goods in the world. Between 1997 and 2002, Canada’s military exports rose from $23 million to $678 million. Since then, according to a recent CBC investigation (1), Canada’s military exports have tripled. Though under the Export and Import Permits Act, the government is supposed to report its military exports to parliament, for the past four years – that’s three successive governments, two Liberal and one Conservative – that has not happened. Keeping this information from the public is a trend that cuts across party lines.

So who is benefiting? One company now being targeted by anti-war activists in Canada (2) is SNC-Lavalin, one of Canada’s largest publicly traded companies and one of its largest arms manufacturers. SNC-Lavalin is a major supplier of bullets to both the Canadian and American militaries. Montreal-based CAE makes flight simulators, and in August they won $60 million in military contracts for U.S., German, British, and Canadian aircrafts (3). Last year, DRS Technologies Canada and L-3 Spar Aerospace Ltd. sold a combined $87 million in military gear to the Netherlands and Norway respectively – two countries with NATO troops in Afghanistan. General Dynamics of Canada, meanwhile, has supported the occupation of Iraq with a staggering $658 million in sales of military goods to the U.S. military in 2006. And all of this is just the tip of the iceberg. (4)

Canada does not have a military-industrial complex like the United States, though there are parallels. Certainly, like the U.S., Canada is seeing its defense industry take an increasingly central role in its domestic economy, with many jobs and related industries directly or indirectly dependent upon the sale of military goods. In the U.S., there is barely a single congressional district in which thousands of jobs do not depend upon the sale of arms and other supporting industries of war. Canada is not yet there, and unlike the U.S., it does not possess the world’s largest army upon whose imperial pursuits the arms industry depends for its lifeblood.

Since most sales of military goods do not go to the Canadian army, one might well ask why Canada would bother with the expense of keeping 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. The answer is that Canada has become a lynchpin in a mission that fuels a market for international arms sales. If Canada were to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan without securing replacements, the entire mission would risk collapse, bringing down with it the market for Canada’s military exports.

That’s not something any government of Canada is going to risk. The Canadian human rights group the Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade (COAT) reports that the Canada Pension Plan has invested over $2.55 billion in military and related industries both in Canada and abroad. This makes every Canadian, knowingly or unknowingly, a war profiteer. In 2005, Seven Oaks Magazine reported, "The [British Columbia] government controls the BC Investment Management Corporation, which in turn controls $63 billion in pension fund investments for the Municipal Pension Plan, the College Pension Plan, the Public Service Pension Plan and the Teachers Pension Plan. As of March 31, 2004, these investments included $4.6 billion worth of stock in 251 corporations producing war materiel and/or contracting to provide goods or services to the Pentagon." (5)

As a teacher who has tried unsuccessfully to get my union to adopt a policy of opposing to the presence of military recruiters in schools, I find the inclusion of the B.C. Teachers Pension Fund particularly troubling in this list of war profiteers. Institutionally, of course, teachers have always served the interests of state power – and in Ontario, where I teach, under the Education Act we are, in effect, owned by the state, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Yet I find it particularly dangerous when the state guardians of children in loco parentis have a vested interest in their charges becoming part of a war machine that lines their pension funds. This is very problematic.
For those who are troubled by the increasing militarization of Canadian society, ending Canada’s occupation of Afghanistan is only the beginning of the story. Yes, as the war grows more unpopular, Canada will likely withdraw its troops from active combat, and it may happen sooner than we think, though it will probably be the success of the Taliban’s roadside bombs, not public opinion, that will bring an end to Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. Yet unless we can unravel the increasing interdependency between military exporters and the public sphere in this country, we will have achieved only a temporary respite from the many more Afghanistans that will certainly follow.
Jason Kunin is a teacher in Toronto. He can be reached at jkunin@rogers.com.
Notes:
1.http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourview/2007/10/canadas_military_exports_soar.html. 2. See No One is Illegal campaign, http://users.resist.ca/noii-van.resist.ca/snc.html.
3. http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2007/08/07/cae-contracts.html. 4. Project Ploughshares, an ecumenical agency of the Canadian Council of Churches, publishes an excellent annual audit of arms sales in Canada, which it has posted at http://www.ploughshares.ca/libraries/monitor/mons07i.pdf.
5.http://www.sevenoaksmag.com/features/60_feat2.html.

ENOUGH OF THE PUPPETS!

Canada is in bed with this guy, and the money hungry corporates behind him; need I say anything more?
Come to Summer of Change 2009, June 21-22 2009, and let's get some REAL people to lead our country, enough of the puppets!

BIG BROTHER HARPER ONCE AGAIN YIELDS HIS UGLY EYE!

OTTAWA – The Green Party has criticized the Harper government's reinstatement of two anti-terrorism provisions from the Anti-Terrorism Act and warned that these measures may threaten fundamental Canadian values.

The investigative hearing provision allows a police officer to arrest someone and bring him or her before a judge to answer questions if the officer suspects that the person has knowledge of someone who is suspected of being involved in a terrorist activity. In addition, the preventive arrest provision allows a police officer to arrest someone without warrant if the officer suspects that the person is about to commit a terrorist attack.

These two measures were subject to a sunset clause which ensured that they would cease to apply unless they were extended by a resolution passed by both the House of Commons and the Senate.

"The government's primary responsibility is to ensure the safety and security of our communities," said Green Party leader Elizabeth May. "It is of great importance, however, that measures taken to protect the Canadian public from the threat of terrorism do not in turn threaten our fundamental rights as Canadians."

The Green Party is opposed to the investigative hearing and preventive arrest provisions for a number of reasons:

The provisions represent a substantial departure from Canadian legal traditions and their use may, over time, extend beyond terrorism offences to other offences within the Criminal Code;
No only does the obligation to give testimony seem to violate the right to remain silent, but the preventive arrest power is too broad because it can be based upon mere suspicion;
Because the provisions allow for arrests based upon suspected knowledge of others who are suspected of planning to commit offences, such provisions mean that those who volunteer information to the authorities could in turn find themselves subject to a preventive arrest or investigative hearing.
"We are wholly committed to ensuring the security of all Canadians and we will remain vigilant in our opposition to those who would threaten the safety of our communities," said Justice Critic Jared Giesbrecht. "However, we also believe what Canadians believe—true security will be gained from good governance and fair procedures that are administered according to the rule of law."

The safety of Canadians depends upon the effectiveness of our counter-terrorism and security laws. The Green Party views terrorism as an especially dangerous criminal offence. They are committed to ensuring our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies have adequate resources and the political leadership to deal effectively with these criminals.

"A responsible government will not sacrifice civil rights in the name of security. Doing so will actually open the door for greater injustice and insecurity," said Mr. Giesbrecht. "If our security policies are not consistent with the values of our society, they will serve to undermine the foundations of our society."
thanks to greenparty.ca for the update!

Goal: Overload Stephane Dion's Email Inbox and Help End the War!

Easy, copy the letter below, paste it in your email, sign it with your name, and send it to Dion.S@parl.gc.ca
I am sick of the blind leading the blind, which seems to be our new foreign affairs mandate. The letter says it all...

Dear Stephane Dion,

I write at this time to encourage you to vote against the continuation of Canadian participation in the war in Afghanistan past 2009. The near genocide that is taking place in Afghanistan is unconscionable. The war is being sold to Canadians as a humanitarian war. Our instincts are to help the Afghan people who have known little but war for 25 years. However, more war is not the answer. This war goes back to 2001 when the Bush Government decided to bomb Afghanistan in retaliation for 9/ll even though no Afghanis were among the perpetrators. The Americans already had plans for the war in order to have access to oil from the Caspian Sea and other South Asian areas. We have lost sight of the origin of this war and try to convince ourselves we are doing it for the sake of the Afghan people. I believe we do it mainly to placate the Bush administration.

The Manley panel is composed of people very committed to good relations with the US, mainly for economic and trade reasons. Mr. Harper was very clever in selecting a Liberal, but a known pro-US and pro-Afghanistan War Liberal, to head the panel.

We must find an alternative way to help Afghanistan, with an emphasis on diplomacy, financial aid, NGO involvement and the United Nations. NATO, a war fighting organization, is not well suited for the required negotiations.

Our very best chance of ending the war in the near future is for you and your Liberal caucus to resolutely vote against extension. The majority of Canadians are against continuation of this war despite the continued propaganda from the government. I believe a well-run campaign by your party based on liberal values will enable you to win the election you may be forced to enter.

Sincerely,

YES, CANADA IS NOT JUST A TWO PARTY SYSTEM, SURPRISE!

Surprise! Canada has a potentially incredible Leader, we just need to put a scratchy checkmark by her name, and SPREAD THE NEWS (read biography below!)! Now let us start that Green Revolution we have all been waiting for! It has been TOO DAMN LONG! I need the future of our children to be a much more positive one, that does not include war, corporate ass-kissing, environmental warfare, and ego-driven photo-ops (Harper shaking the hands of the Dalai Lama, while holding a gun to the Afghans, and spreading cancerous waste through the tar sands, is too traumatic to go into right now).
Elizabeth May - Biography
Elizabeth May is an environmentalist, writer, activist and lawyer. She has been active in the environmental movement since 1970. She first became known in the Canadian media in the mid-1970s through her leadership as a volunteer in the grassroots movement against aerial insecticide spraying proposed for forests near her home on Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia. The effort prevented aerial insecticide spraying from ever occurring in Nova Scotia. Years later, she and a local group of residents went to court to prevent herbicide spraying. Winning a temporary injunction in 1982 held off the spray programme, but after two years, the case was eventually lost. In the course of the litigation, her family sacrificed their home and seventy acres of land in an adverse court ruling to Scott Paper. However, by the time the judge ruled the chemicals were safe, 2,4,5-T’s export from the U.S, had been banned. The forests of Nova Scotia were spared being the last areas in Canada to be sprayed with Agent Orange.
Her volunteer work also included successful campaigns to prevent approval of uranium mining in Nova Scotia, and extensive work on energy policy issues, primarily opposing nuclear energy.
Elizabeth is a graduate of Dalhousie Law School and was admitted to the Bar in both Nova Scotia and Ontario. She has held the position of Associate General Counsel for the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, representing consumer, poverty and environment groups in her work.
In 1986, Elizabeth became Senior Policy Advisor to then federal Environment Minister, Tom McMillan. She was instrumental in the creation of several national parks, including South Moresby. She was involved in negotiating the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer and new legislation and pollution control measures. In 1988, she resigned on principle when the Minister granted permits for the Rafferty-Alameda Dams in Saskatchewan as part of a political trade-off, with no environmental assessment. The permits were later quashed by a Federal Court decision that the permits were granted illegally.
Elizabeth is the author of five books, Budworm Battles (1982), Paradise Won: The Struggle to Save South Moresby (1990), At the Cutting Edge: The Crisis in Canada’s Forests (Key Porter Books, 1998, as well as a major new edition in 2004), co-authored with Maude Barlow, Frederick Street: Life and Death on Canada’s Love Canal (Harper Collins, 2000), and most recently, How to Save the World in Your Spare Time (Key Porter Books, 2006). Frederick Street focused on the Sydney Tar Ponds, and the health threats to children in the community – the issue that led her to protest in front of Parliament Hill over a seventeen-day hunger strike in May 2001.
She has served on numerous boards of environmental groups and advisory bodies to universities and governments in Canada, including the International Institute for Sustainable Development and the National Round Table on Environment and Economy and is currently a member of the Earth Charter International Council, co-chaired by Maurice Strong and Mikhail Gorbachev. Elizabeth is the recipient of many awards including the Outstanding Achievement Award from the Sierra Club in 1989, the International Conservation Award from the Friends of Nature, and the United Nations Global 500 Award in 1990. In 1996, she was presented with the award for Outstanding Leadership in Environmental Education by the Ontario Society for Environmental Education. In 1998, the “Elizabeth May Chair in Women’s Health and Environment” was created in her honour at Dalhousie University. She holds honourary doctorates from Mount Saint Vincent University, the University of New Brunswick and Mount Allison University. She is also the recipient of the 2002 Harkin Award from the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS). In 2006, Elizabeth was presented with the prestigious Couchiching award for excellence in public policy. Most importantly, she is the mother of fifteen year-old Victoria Cate.
In March 2006, Elizabeth stepped down as Executive Director of the Sierra Club of Canada, a post she had held since 1989, to run for the leadership of the Green Party of Canada. She was successful in her bid, was elected the Green Party’s ninth leader at their national convention in August 2006 with a clear majority of the votes.
Elizabeth is an Officer of the Order of Canada since 2005, and is the mother of fifteen year-old Victoria Cate.

A MUST READ FOR ALL CANADIANS, THIS IS SERIOUS!

I found this article on Aljazeera.net; basically, the International Community sees Canada as a PRO-WAR country because of what the decisions our government is making, WITHOUT OUR VOICE! Harper is putting us through a war, which Russian's President Putin, is calling America's Cold War if they continue; this is SERIOUS! We are in a war we do not want to be part of; neither does anyone else, except America and its puppets, this is Bush's greed and desire for revenge that we are serving, NOT Afghanistan. GET OUR TROOPS OUT NOW, before it gets worse, we must do everything possible to make this clear, in whatever way you can!
One ways is to send a simple email to our party leaders, to say BRING OUR TROOPS HOME, we have had enough; what we are doing there is NOT WORKING! There is a reason why other countries will not set foot in Afghanistan, because they believe in peaceful measures, not war measures (remember? war=more war), LET US LEARN FROM OUR MISTAKES (Vietnam anyone?)...We must pull out now!
Here are the emails of our party leaders, please just send a quick anti-war message to all of them, trust me, WE NEED TO BE HEARD!
Mr. Harper: pm@pm.gc.ca
Mr. Dion: Dion.S@parl.gc.ca
Ms. May: leader@greenparty.ca
Mr. Duceppe: Duceppe.G@parl.gc.ca
Mr. Layton: Layton.J@parl.gc.ca
THANK YOU, now let's start spreading some PEACE!

WE WANT SOMEONE TO LEAD NOT POSSESSED BY GREED!

Keep your eyes and ears open for perhaps an earlier federal election than we thought; April 7 and May 12 are possible federal election dates. However, whatever happens, SUMMER OF CHANGE 2009, is a go! Whoever is in power, needs to HEAR WHAT WE CANADIANS THINK AND VALUE; ENVIRONMENTAL AND POLITICAL PEACE RIGHT NOW! We are sick and tired of having our government do everything behind closed doors, these are our soldiers going to war; these are our tax dollars being spent on military engagements in the Middle East; these are our waters that are being exploited and poisoned; these are our landscapes being destroyed for oil going to the United States; these are our wild animals being suffocated into smaller and smaller habitats so corporates can suck our minerals and trees dry...THIS HAS GOT TO STOP! Summer of Change 2009; you can't afford to miss it!
Report from the Council of Canadians on the ELECTION:
There is increasing speculation about a spring federal election. While there are a variety of possible scenarios, the following report sets out two specific 'routes to an election'.
As reported in today's Globe and Mail, "The first vote on a February 26 budget would likely be February 28...If the government is defeated, there will be an election. The earliest it could be held would be April 7."
Or, "Since the Prime Minister's Office has said the vote on whether to extend Canada's mission would be held in 'late March', (it would be held in the House on March 31). If the government makes this a confidence motion and is defeated, the earliest an election could be held would be May 12."
Additionally, "The Tories also rattled the election sabre at a Senate committee. Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said he will ask the Prime Minister to 'go to the people' if the omnibus Bill C-2 on violent crime doesn't pass by the end of the month. Mr. Nicholson suggested the Governor-General could be asked to dissolve Parliament if the legislation doesn't move through quickly enough."
While it does appear that the Liberals are seeking a compromise with the Conservatives on Afghanistan (in other words waffling on the end to the combat mission there), all of this merits watching.
And while the security certificate legislation Bill C-3 passed in the House of Commons last night in a 191 to 76 vote, there is some speculation that it might still die in the Senate depending on the timing of the election.
We will keep watch on this and we'll be prepared for a Council of Canadians intervention in an election when the time comes.
-Thanks to Brent Patterson, The Council of Canadians

What is REALLY going on behind closed doors?

I wanted a concise, easy-to-understand explanation about Canada's role in Afghanistan; it is really hard to find, but I found this on the NDP website (i am not an NDP person, but, i do love good information) , and it really helped. Now when we chant for PEACE and BRING OUR TROOPS HOME, we can back up our statements with truth. It is time to spread the news to Canadians and our government officials that we want to be PEACEKEEPERS! Mr. Harper is not speaking for Canadians, he is speaking for his corporate and american cronies, THIS MUST STOP! We cannot let our government continue spending our tax dollars for war, he has already spent $7 BILLION on the WAR, yes, to kill people, it is time to RISE UP!
Settle down on your cushion, and read this...
Afghanistan is important to us as a people, because the manner in which we help the people of Afghanistan is integral to how we, as Canadians, define who we are and the role we aspire to for Canada to play on the world stage.
And in the coming weeks, Parliament will once again be called upon to make decisions that will draft the definition of who we are as a country for an entire generation.
I believe there are two very different visions emerging about what Canada’s role in Afghanistan should be and ultimately, how we wish to define ourselves as Canadians.
One vision suggests that Canada should continue to participate in a counter-insurgency war with increased soldiers, helicopters and unmanned drones until quote “the job is done.”
This vision has its roots planted in the Liberal government’s executive decision to send Canadian troops into Afghanistan six years ago without a deadline, an exit strategy or any definition or measurement for success.
This vision is premised on the notion that through a counter-insurgency combat mission, NATO forces will create the conditions that bring about security and stability and improve the lives of the Afghan people.
To date, not only has this approach failed to achieve these goals, it has had the opposite effect.
At the same time, there is a second vision for Canada’s role in Afghanistan – one that focuses on bringing about security, stability and improving the lives of the Afghan people by building a path toward peace.
This is the approach that I believe Canada must follow.
It’s also the approach that millions of average Canadians believe should be followed and I’m proud to lead the Party that gives voice to that shared vision.
It’s also an approach that we are encouraging other Parliamentarians to embrace.
I can share with you tonight that earlier today I spoke with Mr. Dion, leader of the Liberal Party and appealed to him not to follow Mr. Harper in extending the combat role for Canada in Afghanistan, but to join with us charting a new direction to truly help the people of Afghanistan.
Just as Mr. Harper has extended a hand to Mr. Dion for his approach, so too am I extending a hand to Mr. Dion to embrace our approach.
Mr. Dion has some decisions to make. And I look forward to a continued dialogue over the coming days and weeks.
And tonight, I want to talk about our approach. I want to lay out our vision for the role that Canada should play in Afghanistan.
But first, it is important to understand the current situation and why the approach being taken by NATO, the previous Liberal and the current Conservative government is not working.
Review of the Current Situation in Afghanistan
According to Canadian government officials, one of the main reasons for participation in the counter-insurgency combat mission is to ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid.
But the situation is not getting better - it’s getting worse.
In September 2006, Malalai Joya, the courageous Afghan MP who has dared to take on corrupt and violent officials in her own Parliament, told 2,000 people at the NDP’s convention that there has been “no fundamental change in the plight of the Afghan people” since this recent war began.
She told us that “then entire country is living under the shadow of guns and warlordism.”
In the year and a half since she stunned me and the 2,000 others in that room, the situation has not improved.
Over the last few months, food prices, particularly for wheat and wheat flour, have increased by 60 to 80 per cent.
Because of these price increases, 3 million Afghans cannot afford to eat.
In addition to rising food costs, the number of areas that are too dangerous for aid workers to access is growing – once concentrated in the south they have now spread to pockets all over the country.
Aid groups have long warned of the dangers of blurring the divide between military and humanitarian efforts.
According to Gerry Barr, who speaks on behalf of Canada’s development groups:
“There needs to be some space between them. They need to be independent. If not, we can end up with civilians being targeted.”
Yet the bulk of Canadian spending continues to be funnelled to the combat mission – at the expense of development.
In fact, this morning we learned that total spending on the military mission in Afghanistan has reached a total of $7 billion – more than half of that spent since Canadian troops joined the combat mission in Kandahar.
Over the same period, only $670 million was spent on development aid.
Sadly, we have seen the results of a blurring of the divide between military and humanitarian operations in the pattern of attacks on schools.
Oxfam has found that schools built by international military forces are twice as likely to be targeted by militants as those built by civilian agencies.
Nonetheless, more and more development dollars are going through the Provincial Reconstruction Teams, so that, in fact, military interests are driving increasingly who gets aid, and what kind of aid they get.
The deteriorating humanitarian situation was also highlighted extensively in the report of the Independent Panel on Canada’s Future Role in Afghanistan.
In addition to the deteriorating humanitarian aid situation:
Opium production, which finances the insurgency, is up;
Crime is up;
Corruption is up;
Rates of insurgent and terrorist violence are up; – 20 per cent since 2006.
The number of Afghan civilians killed is up; – doubling since 2005.
The counter-insurgency combat mission has failed to build;
security for the Afghan people;
a robust economy;
a vibrant democracy;
gender equality; or
a stable and lasting peace.
The evidence suggests that the current approach – after being given seven years to prove itself effective – is not working.
NATO’s Role: The Wrong Approach
And one reason that it’s not working is because NATO is the wrong organization to be in charge.
NATO is a regional defence organization that has been searching for a purpose since the end of the Cold War.
It is a military organization that does not possess the experience, expertise or inclination to deal with the diplomatic and humanitarian needs in Afghanistan.
In short, NATO’s military focus makes it a questionable fit for the task of nation-building.
And aside from it being a bad match in Afghanistan – it has executed its activities poorly.
Coordination efforts in Afghanistan have been hampered by internal divisions.
The US, Canada and Britain have taken on the bulk of the counter-insurgency, while the other European countries have placed considerable caveats on their involvement.
Those caveats are not the result of cowardice.
Rather, they indicate certain scepticism about the prospects for military victory.
Even the Manley Report noted the “harmful shortcomings” in NATO’s counterinsurgency campaign.
I’m quoting here:
“A top-heavy command structure at ISAF headquarters in Kabul;
An absence of a comprehensive strategy directing all ISAF forces in collaboration with the Afghan government;
Inadequate coordination between military and civilian programs for security, stabilization, reconstruction and development.”
The Wrong Mission for Canada
But the blame cannot be laid on NATO exclusively; the Canadian government must also take responsibility.
Just look at the detainee transfer issue that once again emerged as a top issue this week – and with good reason.
While other NATO members are forthcoming with information, Canada is keeping its citizens in the dark.
And the response of the Prime Minister reminds me of the guy who being in the driver’s seat, never admits to being lost and is too stubborn to ask for directions.
And sometimes, our prime minister doesn’t want to be in that driver’s seat, like yesterday when I asked him why the British, Dutch, and Americans release their detainee information to their publics without compromising their national security. He said if our military wanted to give out such information, it would be up them!
Many who have read the Manley report have observed that its recommendations do not logically flow from the body of the report.
The report devotes page after page to describing the short-comings of the NATO mission as well the worsening conditions for the Afghan people, yet its key recommendation calls for a continued combat role for Canada if increased soldiers and equipment can be secured.
Despite the fact that things are getting worse, the Manley report says that Canada should do more of the same.
I think that’s wrong.
When we know that a particular approach is failing, we have a choice.
We can pick another approach.
Today, there are two choices in front of us – the approach that successive Canadian governments have set or we can embark on a new approach.
The current approach intensifies the war.
It is an approach that many others have taken before in Afghanistan …
From Alexander the Great, to the British in 19th century, to the Russians in the last century.
The Russians were in Afghanistan for 10 years.
At one point they made decision to switch from a ground effort to using helicopters because they thought that it would mean fewer casualties for soldiers.
This is what Manley is proposing Canadian troops do.
But when the Russians made the switch, insurgents secured ground to air missiles and shot down helicopters.
Is that where we are headed?
Towards an increasingly intense and armed combat approach?
There is no evidence that that approach will work. In fact the evidence illustrates that it won’t.
It doesn’t make sense to think that adding 1,000 soldiers to 36,000 that are already there is somehow going to tip the balance.
It’s time for Canada to make a break with the past.
The Liberals and Conservatives have taken us down an all too familiar path.
But the signposts are clear: they say “Cul de Sac”.
Why do we have to go all the way to the end to see for ourselves?
Imagine ourselves 10 years from now.
We could be having a debate about whether to add yet more troops so as to finally secure victory in Afghanistan.
This is where I predict we will be if the government’s proposals are adopted.
A wearied Canadian public will be grappling with the same questions and many more families will be mourning the loss of their loved ones.
Now, imagine that we pick the other approach.
In ten years the history writers will be recording that there was a turning point in history when the clarion call of Canada was heard.
They will be teaching that Canada’s decision provoked a reconsideration of the impasse into which the Afghan conundrum was finding itself increasingly locked.
The first step along this path is the clear indication that we are withdrawing our troops now through an operational plan for a safe and secure withdrawal.
Some ask: Why start there?
Quite simply because, being combatants, chasers of insurgents, and escalators of war – will deny us any credibility to serve as leaders for peace.
Some say that by pulling out Canada would be harming NATO.
Yesterday, NATO spokesperson James Appathurai, flatly denied that speculation.
As reported in the Ottawa Citizen this morning he said and I’m quoting “I think that making links between this (Canada’s possible withdrawal) and NATO’s credibility are quite frankly unnecessary”
In the debate over the future of Afghanistan ours is not the only voice calling for a new approach. President Karzai, Afghan Parliamentarians and aid groups have all spoken of the need to kick-start the dialogue that will bring about a lasting peace.
Even former deputy minister of foreign affairs, Gordon Smith, has recently said that: “What is needed is a process of substantial conversation or reorientation of anti-state elements into an open and non-violent political dynamic”
I believe that Canada should be working to ensure that exactly this type of ‘conversation’ take place in Afghanistan.
We should be using the considerable skills and expertise of Canadians to bring the various actors in Afghanistan to the table.
We should be working to put in place an effective disarmament programme.
65% of Afghans say that disarmament is the most important step toward improving security in Afghanistan.
But the current effort has not gone far enough to make a significant impact.
Taking the path to peace through diplomacy also means involving regional actors in discussions. Pakistan in particular.
Regional cooperation is vital to any successful strategy for regional security and peace.
The path to peace requires a political, not a military, approach.
To carry out this vision, the key international body involved in Afghanistan must be the UN, not NATO.
Unlike NATO, the UN’s explicit mandate is to preserve and promote international peace and security.
The UN agencies tasked with carrying out this mandate have a vital role to play in meeting the challenges of Afghanistan:
UNICEF
The United Nations Development fund for Women
The World Health Organization
The United Nations Development Programme
The United Nations Disarmament Commission
And of course, the United Nations Peacebuildng Commission headed up by Canadian Carolyn McAskie
All too often, we focus on the UN-led peace-keeping missions that did not succeed. Missions in Somalia, Rwanda, and Bosnia.
But there are many other examples of successes – like East Timor, Cambodia or Mozambique.
Consider for a moment the enormous impact that the UN peacekeeping mission had in East Timor.
UN efforts there helped to protect a nascent and fragile independent state.
With the help of the UN, the Timorese were able to surmount incredible odds – years of violence and repression – and create a largely stable and successful state.
There are lessons to be learned from the UN’s failures – but also from its successes.
It’s time to apply these lessons to Afghanistan.
To do this, one of the UN’s member states must boldly suggest this approach.
I believe that Canada should be that state, and make this our calling in the months to come. This role resonates with our values and our hopes here in Canada.

Conclusion
I believe that Canada can and should be a voice of moderation, realism and peace on the world stage.
And to become that voice, we must embrace a new approach for Canada as well as for the international community.
One of the tenets of just-war theory is that a country must have a reasonable chance of success in order for that war to be legitimate. But under the NATO approach, there is no evidence of such a success in Afghanistan.
The experience of the last seven years of NATO engagement has shown that a military approach is not working.
It’s time for Canada to change its approach, withdraw from the combat mission and lead a process for peace and stability.
Michael Byers, one of Canada’s leading experts in Global Politics and International Law, has warned that:
“Our involvement in the counter-insurgency mission in southern Afghanistan, has challenged our commitment to international humanitarian law and precluded our involvement in important UN peacekeeping missions elsewhere.”
Canadians have prided themselves on their principled, strategic and compassionate stand on foreign affairs.
They are proud of the accomplishments of Canadians on the world stage:
Of John Humphrey who drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
Of Stephen Lewis who has tireless fought for AIDS sufferers in Africa;
And many more like them.
We could add that list; Afghanistan – but we must be willing to lead the way on the path to peace.
As Lester B. Pearson said: “Of all our dreams today there is none more important - or so hard to realise - than that of peace in the world. May we never lose our faith in it or our resolve to do everything that can be done to convert it one day into reality.”
It will take courage and leadership, as it always has.
But in the end, I believe that is the approach Canadians will want to take because that is how Canadians wish to define themselves and the role they aspire Canada to play on the world stage.

Harper Choosing War Over Peace

Yes, it seems that our Prime Minister shares the same "I-Love-War complex" with George W. Bush, no wonder they get along so well; however, even if parliament is dissolved, and Dion perhaps takes the reigns, he needs to take more of an activist role. Of course, it is up to US canadians, to voice our choice of PEACE NOT WAR in order to get any of these "leaders" to take their damn blinders off, their corporate chains off, and their thirst for foreign blood and money! It has been a long winter, time to get marching and exercise all that extra winter weight off, even if it is just the weight of the world that is slowing you down.
Here are the "goods" so far:
CANADA'S CONSERVATIVES READY TO RISK ELECTION OVER AFGHANISTAN
by Michel Comte
Wed Feb 6, 2:17 PM ET
OTTAWA (AFP) - Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper is prepared to head to the polls if Canada's cleaved Parliament votes next month against prolonging its Afghanistan combat mission, officials said Wednesday.
"The government will introduce a motion in the House based on the Manley Report later this week," said Sandra Buckler, spokeswoman for the prime minister, citing a report on Canada's future role in Afghanistan.
"We expect debate to begin next week," she said.
Local media said the Conservative government is prepared to give notice Thursday of the motion to extend the troop deployment.
If the government were to lose, it would plunge the country into an election, Liberal leader Stephane Dion told reporters. Harper "made that very clear," he said.
The actual vote in Parliament would precede a ballot on the next federal budget, also expected in March, said Dion.
Tuesday evening, the prime minister met with Dion to try to hammer out a common front. Dion has said he would keep troops in Afghanistan, but not in a combat role.
"I suggested to him (Harper) if he was ready to contemplate a non-combat role for Canada, (I would support him). He was not ready for that. On that, we have a big difference," Dion said.
"So under the circumstances, I clearly explained to the prime minister that this mission would require Liberals to make a compromise with respect to our principles -- something that we cannot do."
The New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois have said they want Canada's soldiers returned home at the end of their current mandate in February 2009.
Last month, a report by a committee led by former Liberal deputy prime minister John Manley urged Canada to keep its 2,500 troops in Afghanistan only if its NATO allies send at least 1,000 additional troops and equipment, including helicopters and drones, to bolster the Canadian force.
Heeding its findings, Harper has said he will bring Canada's troops home in February 2009 unless NATO allies step up their support for the mission.
He has informed US President George W. Bush, Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown, France's President Nicolas Sarkozy and NATO's secretary general of Canada's position.
Dion said he would like Canada to play a larger development role in Afghanistan, such as helping to rebuild the war-torn nation's infrastructure, training its military and police, and offering pointers on good government.
As well, he said Afghanistan still needs help to stem corruption, its illegal poppy trade and the alleged torture of detainees.
The Liberals will present amendments to the Conservatives' motion in these areas for the minority Parliament to consider, Dion said. "We'll do our best to convince other colleagues in the House to come to our position.
"You need to be prepared to fight, but a combat role is when you are proactively seeking engagement with the enemy," he commented.
According to the latest polls, the Conservatives and Liberals are tied in public opinion.
Canada has deployed 2,500 troops in Afghanistan's volatile southern Kandahar province as part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) battling Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters.
Since 2002, 78 Canadian soldiers and a senior diplomat have died in roadside bombings and in melees with the insurgents.

NAFTA + CORPORATES= CANADIAN DISASTER, AGAIN

Bilcon appealing quarry decision under NAFTA

The American company that was refused permission to develop a quarry near Digby is looking for $188 million in compensation.
Bilcon of Delaware, a subsidiary of New Jersey-based Clayton Concrete, Block and Sand, has filed a complaint under NAFTA rules that allow companies to go after foreign governments if they can prove they have been unfairly treated.
Bilcon claims a joint federal-provincial environmental review panel was both unfair and discriminatory when it rejected its plan to set up a quarry at Whites Point in Digby County.
"This is not about sour grapes. It's about having a fair process," said Barry Appleton, lawyer for Bilcon.
Appleton said "community values" were at the core of the review, which he said was a change from the original criteria on which the company based its environmental assessment.
"They had the Bilcon people filing all kinds of environmental reports. They filed the reports, then [the panel] changed the criteria. It's like changing the goal posts for the Super Bowl. You're not allowed to do that," he said.
Bilcon had proposed to develop a basalt rock quarry on approximately 120 hectares of a 150-hectare site. The company had planned to employ 34 people to help ship two million tonnes of rock a year for the next 50 years to the United States.
In October, the review panel rejected the proposal, stating the project would undermine and jeopardize the community's vision and expectations and lead to undesired changes in the quality of life.
Gil Winham, an international trade expert at Dalhousie Law School, said the terms of the environmental assessment included socio-economic impacts.
He said the company's strongest argument may be one of discrimination and why the quarry's review process took much longer than one to open a mine owned by an Australian company at Moose River.
"Mr. Appleton referred to a new gold mine that was assessed in 11 months, whereas the procedure for Whites Point quarry took five and a half years. I would say that is something you would look at," Winham said.
Winham said there have been 15 cases in which foreign companies have sued NAFTA countries for unfair treatment, 10 of which have been ruled in favour of government while five were in favour of the companies.
"And I must say, in five cases that were won by the companies, I thought they had reasons to win," Winham said.
Nova Scotia's minister of environment is declining to comment until the complaint has been heard, a process that could take up to two years.
Last Updated: Tuesday, February 5, 2008 | 5:14 PM AT CBC News

For more information on why the Digby Quarry is so important to the environment, visit the Save Digby Neck website

Poster Art Contest Entry

We are very excited to have our first poster art contest entry...If you would like to enter, rules and regulations are found in this blog under the January 14 blog entry...Summer of Change may seem far away, but we need to start advertising now so no one will miss out on the fun....

LOOK OUT FOR FLYERS!

Yes, we at Vegan Mountain have begun to advertise for the event that is going to rock this nation, THE SUMMER OF CHANGE 2009, again, if you would like to help with flyers and stuff, we will send it out to you, or if you want to speak, or be a vendor, or just stand on a milk crate and talk about the goodness of buying local, just drop us an email at veganmountain@gmail.com....We are super excited to be doing this, and in the grassroots tradition, we want to get all like-minded individuals involved. We know that a lot of people in Canada are awakening to the fact that we are at a very sensitive moment in human history, and that we must now change the soul-sucking, material, capitalistic, money-mongering and corporate system, which has taken over Canada. We now are realizing that there is a better, more holistic way of living, for ourselves, for our children and for further generations. A future that lives on knowledge, such as, how to grow our own food; how to care for our health in natural ways; how to live in natural sustainable housing; how to use our natural environment without raping it for Big Business; how to identify a tree, a bird or a wild plant; how to live with less chemicals; how to support local and organic practices; how to live simply; that is, a future of leaving the lightest, yet happiest footprint on Mother Earth. It is a time to fight the corporates and the government that supports them, not with our fists, but with our knowledge of our landscape, our willingness to help local efforts, the power of spending that Canadian loonie on local, organic and sustainable practices. This is our soul we are talking about, and the little souls yet too be in this nation. Let's celebrate this happy, healthy, and sustainable future, let's talk about it, let's share ideas, let's sing and dance and stretch, let's start leaving lighter footprints in our paths. Summer of Change 2009, the West Kootenays is where it's at!