Thursday, August 28, 2008

Goat Mountain


Well I finally made it up Goat mountain. It’s sure a lot easier to find the train in summer. Especially when the trail markers are only about five feet tall and we had a snow cap well over 12 feet last year. I discovered Dam mountain and Thunderbird ridge by way of snowshoe last winter. The view is magnificent and the climb is easier than Hollyburn Ridge, which is also awesome. The back country was closed due to avalanche risk with such a heavy snow cap.

So here we are. Goat Ridge from Goat mountain looking over the next stop, Coliseum mountain in the top left.

Larry Silverstein WTC 7

Larry Silverstein’s interview with the media after 911 does not show a somber spirit mournful of the death and destruction that resulted from 911. His Cheshire cat smile reveals something that lingers. In that interview he admitted they pulled the building. That means they brought it down in a controlled demolition which would takes weeks to prepare for. If they lied about brining down WTC7, what else did they lie about? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ9BofDUXv0

He certainly made quite a profit on the insurance claim. Did you know about the asbestos in the Twin Towers they were ordered to repair? The Port Authority applied for a permit to demolish the towers but they were denied one because of the hazards from the asbestos. http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/silverstein.html

http://tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html

Sunday, August 24, 2008

BBC Tower Seven Report

BBC Reports the fall of Tower Seven before it happened. You can see Tower seven (the Salomon building) still standing in the video after they said it fell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s&feature=related

Although the argument that the reporter is standing in front of a green screen and the live footage is being redirected in from another location like they do on weather reports is plausible, it does say live footage and the BBC response to their involvement in the conspiracy is ridiculous.

If they reported the fall of the building before it happened it wasn’t just an error. That’s like reporting a murder or any other crime before it happened. It’s not an error it is somewhat ironic and suspicious.

Mayor Giuliani evacuated out of tower seven long before the fires started and was told the towers were going to collapse. Larry Silverstein stated they made the decision to "pull" the building (tower seven): http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6357586375896950217

Larry Silverstein Makes a Huge Profit off of the 9/11 Attacks: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/silverstein.html

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth: http://www.ae911truth.org/

911 2008

On Septemebr 11 2008, members of the Canadain Public will March on Ottawa and demand to know the truth behind 911: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/canada911truth/

PETITION TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED

We, the undersigned citizens of Canada draw the attention of the House to the following:

THAT, scientific and eyewitness evidence shows that the 9/11 Commission Report is a fraudulent document and that those behind the report are consciously or unconsciously guilty of covering up what happened on 9/11/2001. This evidence overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that World Trade Center Towers 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by demolition explosives and that the official theory of the towers collapsing from the airplanes and the ensuing fires is irrefutably false.

We further believe that elements within the US government were complicit in the murder of thousands of people on 9/11/2001. This event brought Canada into the so-called "War on Terror," it changed our domestic and foreign policies for the worse, and it will continue to have negative consequences for us all if we refuse to look at the facts.

THEREFORE, your petitioners call upon Parliament to:

(1) Immediately launch its own investigation into the events of 9/11/2001 on behalf of the 24 Canadian citizens murdered in New York City.

(2) Act lawfully on the findings of its own investigation by helping to pursue the guilty parties in the international courts.

Committed to truth and accountability,

Sign the petition. Join the March: http://www.marchonottawa2008.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1

911 - Who done it?

My first bone of contention is somehow members of the public got the impression that the U.S. invaded Iraq because Iraq was responsible for 911. That is not the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq. Bush told us Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and the U.S. went in to find them. Only he was wrong and they didn’t find any: http://www.peacecandy.com/gwbush/remindus/

Despite the fact that the U.S. sold chemical weapons to Iraq for them to use on Iran during that conflict. So it’s OK for the U.S. to sell Iraq chemical weapons but it’s not OK for Iraq to possess them? That doesn’t make sense. Nor does it make sense to occupy that country for thirty years after they were proven wrong.

All along we were told that Osama Bin Laden claimed responsibility for the attack on the Twin towers on 911. The Pentagon released a videotape of Bin Laden claiming responsibility for the attack: http://www.npr.org/news/specials/response/investigation/011213.binladen.tape.html

Only the videotape (Photo E) didn’t look like Bin Laden:


The eating with the right hand thing can be explained by the fact that seemingly members of the Islamic faith avoid using their left hand, yet the video doesn’t really look like Bin Laden and Osama Bin Laden officially denied responsibility for the attack:
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/


Bin Laden has admitted that he will kill civilians, which the Taliban’s recent murder of aid workers has demonstrated. Just because Bin Laden denies 911 does not mean he is innocent. After he declared war with the U.S. in 1998 he is clearly a prime suspect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnhJwxYsomw


Nevertheless, we simple cannot rely on the Pentagon since the day before 911 Donald Rumsfeld announced that "The adversary is closer to home. It’s the Pentagon bureaucracy. In fact it could be said that it’s a matter of life and death."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlnQTcLHaMM&feature=related

The question remains: Who is responsible for 911?

Libby Davies and the Canadian people want to know: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r6DK_jTVcA&eurl

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Global Warming

I’m certainly not going to jump on the global warming bandwagon. All this obsession with melting glaciers to me is somewhat suspicious. This is summer. Snow caps and glaciers melt. That is not a sign of alarm. It's called the water cycle.


The concern is when we compare last summer’s level with this summer’s level and last winter’s lever with this winter’s level. Global warming may be a valid concern but it didn’t happen overnight and the trendy obsession with it is almost yuppie like.

The media is driven by sensationalism and the public is gullible and apathetic. On one hand we show pictures of melting snow in summer and sound the alarm about global warming. On the other hand we have some scientists claim that however widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html

These scientists claim that we may be heading for another ice age. So which is it? Make up your bloody mind. The polar ice caps are receding or expanding? It can’t be both.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Glaciers.htm

OK so they don’t know which but they do say that if man continues his "interference with climate through deforestation, urban development and pollution, we may soon be confronted with either a runaway glaciation or a runaway deglaciation, both of which would generate unacceptable environmental stresses."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,910467,00.html


Conclusion: tree planting is good, pollution is bad. Go to Cypress lookout and see the smog over Vancouver. That is a concern. Vancouver is a relatively small city compared to New York or London. It’s even much smaller than Toronto. Speaking of which, the pollution in the Great Lakes has been a huge concern for many years: http://green.sympatico.msn.ca/canadianpressarticle.aspx?cp-documentid=607567 Nevertheless, smog is a visible concern we can see and be affected by. It reminds me of when I was a kid visiting LA.

As we watch the Olympics in Beijing, the smog is a real factor despite all their genuine efforts to reduce it with bicycles. Now Beijing is a much larger city than Vancouver so it would be logical to assume the smog there would be a bigger concern than here but when you see all those commuting with bicycles perhaps industrial pollution is also a concern we must examine.

The reason I’m so cynical is because of our addiction to oil. The movie who killed the electric car raises some questions about buy outs from large oil companies.
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/

Tillers Folly sing a song about an electric railway that existed in Vancouver that ran better than any current rapid transit system. Another example of how if something isn’t broken, don’t fix it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqoDtrwW5ws

Surely electric and hybrid vehicles are something we should look at and propane conversions for larger vehicles would be much cleaner. It still doesn’t address the issue of industrial pollution which is a much larger problem but it is a good start. It does also raise the problem of providing that much electricity for large cities but these are problems we can work on. Personally, I prefer Dams to nuclear reactors but that's just me.

Saturday, August 9, 2008

The Third Tower

Jesse Ventura asked how the third tower in New York City fell when no planes hit it. What third tower says me? Turns out that yes indeed a third tower fell in New York and it was not hit by any planes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBOel-LyJ_E

It contained all the records of the Secret Service, the CIA, the Department of Defence and the SEC Economic watchdog of Wall street: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7485331.stm

Indeed the world’s biggest paper shredder after Donald Rumsfeld’s colossal warning the day before: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlnQTcLHaMM&feature=related

Here’s another video called Loose Change with cold hard facts that clearly opens Pandora’s box:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3719259008768610598

Say hello to the new beast. Same as the old beast. The beast’s name is tyranny: http://finiansworld.blogspot.com/2008/08/alexander-solzhenitsyn.html

Mao Beijing

Well I must admit, China has an amazing culture. Human rights violations are being swept under the carpet as we sit back and enjoy the splendor of the Olympic games. The swimming facility is amazing. To think that was built all by donations from Chinese living outside China. Somewhat ironic for a Communist country to receive a wonderful facility paid for by capitalist donations.
.
.

OK so the fireworks were faked:
As well as the song for the opening Olympics:

Image isn’t everything. Nevertheless, when one sees the splendor of China one must ask what freedoms don’t they have. Surely they are free to work, earn a wage and spend that money how they see fit. What freedoms that we have could they possibly be denied? http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/hr_facts.html

Free Speech is the obvious one and religious freedom seems to be another. What do you mean you can’t practice a religion? Why not? Why can’t Communist ideals of the common good exist without removing individual rights and turning everyone into robots.

One PR spokesman said that in the West the emphasis on individual freedom is seen in the East as selfishness. The materialistic drive to put one’s needs above your neighbor’s. Interesting analogy indeed and surely it has some merit, yet one wonders how deep the rabbit hole goes.

We all remember the student protests at Red Square that resulted in a massacre. One of the protesters said stop killing my people. Who’s being killed? Stalin and Hitler hid their death camps. Are the Chinese Communists doing the same?

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761573064/tiananmen_square_protest.html

I don’t know much about Mao other than China’s Communism was modeled after Russia which was based on the Communist Mafefesto which I feel is flawed. Mao’s little Red Book I will address in another thread. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotations_from_Chairman_Mao_Zedong

During the TELUS dispute at the boot I often saw Chinese Canadians holding signs and handing out literature about a long list of murder and atrocities committed by the Chinese Communist government on it’s people. To their credit I’m going to have to dig a bit deeper into the facts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no1KbBOsMds&feature=related

As we remember the tank man and the subsequent massacre at Red Square, let’s find out what he was talking about and make a clear distinction between Chinese Communism and Chinese culture.

Chinese culture is so much more that Communism. It existed before Communism and will continue without it. but perhaps an understanding of Chinese culture can help us enrich our understanding and quest for a better world for all of us not just us as individuals.

Thursday, August 7, 2008

A New Manifesto

I was discussing what I felt were the flaws within the Communist Manifesto with a friend at the Post Office a few years ago. He responded by saying "Well if you think you can do better why don’t you write one?" Great idea says me. That night I did. This is a copy of what I gave him the next day.

Trade Unionism is the hub in the Labour Movement wheel. The historical origin of the Trade Union was consistent with the origin of the Manifesto. It was born during the industrial revolution and the exploitation of wage labour.

Historically, life in the factories was outrageous. Exploitation of child labour was common. Long hours, bad working conditions, enhanced with bad wages and nonexistent rights and benefits created an employer’s dream and an employee’s nightmare.

That was long ago and thanks to Trade Unions and collective bargaining, wages, rights and working conditions have greatly improved. Trade Unionism began to expand and diversify promoting a broader and universal quest for social justice. This quest was tied to the Manifesto.

Many in the public sector saw Unions as greedy and lazy having out lived their original purpose. Having lost sight of their founding purpose, Unions became distracted with extreme causes becoming completely out of touch with the workers they were created to represent.

Then came free trade and the global economy. Big Corporations were no longer happy with profits, they became obsessed with a steady increase in profits which was needed to satisfy the ever increasing demands of the shareholder and foreign investment. As a result, large Corporations launched another industrial revolution exploiting wage labour.

Full time positions were converted into part time position preventing large Corporations from having to pay employee benefits. Cost of living continued to rise while wages were rolled back. Competing with a global economy became the perpetual rationalization that large Corporations needed to continue to downsize and lay off employees in times of record profits.

The essence of the problem we now face is not rooted in class struggle. It is rooted with listing large Corporations on the stock market. Originally the purpose of the stock market was to help new companies find working capital. Continuing to list large Corporations on the stock market will be dangerous for two reasons.

Investors want a high return on their investment. Wages, workloads and working conditions in a company are of no concern to the investor who simply wants a high return on their investment. This creates the climate where profits are not good enough. Companies need to create increased profits on a regular basis to maintain its investor’s interest. When large numbers of investors sell their shares and invest in another portfolio this puts a company in an artificial crisis situation where it is forced to downsize.

The modern stock market is one step above the casinos. It is not driven by class struggle, it is driven by greed and speculation. Insider trading, hot tips and artificial hype create a very unstable market. Owning a casino would be a much safer investment. The stock market has no concern for social justice despite the political attempts to create ethical funds. The stock market is not a place of mutual advancement where all who participate benefit from the fruits of honest labour.

The founding premise of the new Manifesto is not that the history of all conflict in the world is based on class struggle. The new Manifesto concurs that the history of all struggle is based on greed and speculation. Greed and oppression can plague left wing or right wing politics indiscriminately. To assume that one is right and the other is wrong is very narrow minded.

The people want a balance between fiscal responsibility and social justice. Social justice that is not fiscally responsible will run out of money. Fiscal responsibility that runs out of social justice will lose public support. It’s that simple.

People want balance. People need balance. The environment, the food chain, the entire ecosystem is one of balance. When one species becomes extinct the whole system becomes unbalanced. The second premise of the new Manifesto is Diversity makes us strong.

The age old idea that if we eliminate classes, religions and different opinions, we will no longer have anything to fight about and thereby establish peace is simply wrong because the end does not justify the means. The Manifesto cannot exist if human rights are not entrenched in it.

The old Manifesto taught that the people did not know what was in their best interest and big brother needed to make the decisions for them. The logical dilemma for the old Manifesto is that you cannot eliminate human rights and freedoms to create a system where all people prosper simply because where there is no justice, there will be no peace.

To strip away human rights and freedoms is unjust. Where there is no justice there is no peace. Therefore the Manifesto must respect human rights and seek justice. To this end we have the second premise of the new Manifesto which is Diversity makes us strong.

Women have a right to form a women’s caucus but may not force members to join it. Men have the right to form a caucus, Gays and Lesbians, Christians, Atheists, Jews, Muslims any unique collective has the right to form a caucus and should not be discriminated against. Tied to the second premise is free speech, freedom of association and freedom from discrimination regardless of race, colour, creed, gender or gender preference.

The primary objective of Trade Unionism was and is, free collective bargaining. As Corporations get leaner and meaner Unions need to become streamline and focused. Focused on their mandate to democratically represent their members in the free collective bargaining process.

Any global quests for social justice will fall short if Trade Unions lose sight of their founding purpose in representing their members in the free collective bargaining process. Nevertheless, Trade Unions and free collective bargaining provide a necessary checks and balances within a democratic system. Streamlined Trade Unions are needwd now more than ever.

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Alexander Solzhenitsyn passed away on Sunday at the age of 89.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7540038.stm

He was the Russian author who won the Nobel Peace Prize for some of his works exposing Stalin’s death camps. He had personal letters intercepted and was imprisoned for criticizing Stalin in a private letter while serving in the military. Talk about big brother reading your mail. Kinda like Darren Entwistle intercepting private E-mail and using it as evidence in the Bob Varaleau Decision: http://darrenentwistle.com/telusidol/new_telus_idol_conspiracies.htm

In my Solzhenitsyn tribute I’m going to cite four beasts and compare their similarities Perhaps they’re just three beasts and the last one has two heads. First, in Solzhenitsyn’s honour, let’s cite the Russian beast and I’m not referring to Rasputin. I’m referring to Communism under the hands of Stalin and Lenin. No not John, Vladimir. John Lennon’s song Imagine wasn’t evil, just wishful thinking.

After Stalin’s many death camps were exposed, many started to draw a line between Stalin and Lenin. Some said that Stalin’s death camps were to be minimized for the greater good of the cause and Lenin was much better. Not. Solzhenitsyn exposed Lenin for what he was - an opportunist who took over the revolution by murdering the real workers hero then sent in the machine guns on the striking trade unionists when they started to protest.
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles7/SolzhenitsynWarning.php

My father used to always say that Communism works in theory but doesn’t work in practice. That’s a good quote for a kid to cite without really understanding what it means. Here’s the deal; there are many ideals within Marxism, Communism, and Socialism that are noble and good. Social justice is good but the end does not justify the means. I have spoken about my feelings about what I see as the major flaws within the Communist manifesto and will repost it in a separate thread.

I define Communism under the hands of Stalin and Lenin the second beast. China’s Communism I’m going to have to address separately. The first beast is of course, a dictator from the other side of the fence, Fascism under the hands of Hitler and Mussolini using Machiavelli's The Prince as a model.

I remember dating a German girl once and was worried about what my father would say. He was from a different generation so he was. He volunteered when he was under age for WW II and his father was wounded with mustard gas under the hands of the Germans in the trenches of WW I. I was worried what he would say when he found out I was dating a German girl. His response was simple; "The war is over isn’t it?"

What Hitler did was horrific. What was done to the Jews in the death camps and the ovens was horrific. Denying that happened is offensive nonsense. A desire to return to that kind of genocide is a declaration of war. Nevertheless, I would like to point out that most in Germany at the time did not know what was going on in the death camps. It started with segregation. When the ruthlessness of the Nazis was revealed many speculated what was happening but by then it was too late to stop it.

The third beast I will cite, the one with the two heads is that of the Corporation and the second head is that of the Bush Administration and the Pentagon. I say Bush Administration despite the fact that it started before him and will continue after him. His small face is the one that the public sees. The real head is hidden by the CIA: http://www.bushflash.com/swf/thanks.swf

Without diving into all the evidence, I will submit that the Pentagon and the Bush Administration are tied to the profit driven corporation. They have become mercenaries not for the common defense but for the almighty dollar. Idolatry at it’s peak: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CKmVXRLziY

In the American’s defense I will say that I completely support the U.S. Constitution. I believe that is an inspired document and that the Communist manifesto is inherently flawed. Nevertheless, there are noble ideals within some forms of Marxism and there is practical corruption within the American system. Apathy is one of the root causes of the failure of that system, which demonstrates that those who never fought for freedom shall never know the taste of it.

Monday, August 4, 2008

The day before 911

I am not going to jump on the conspiracy bandwagon. I personally think that the implication that the U.S. government demolished the twin towers in New York City is offensive. I personally think that having planes crash into a tower could indeed generate enough stress on the structure to bring it down.

However, there are a few legitimate questions that are left unanswered. The third tower falling long after the event not being hit by any object is one point. The plane running out of fuel before it hit the White House may be ironic, as are the discrepancies with the plane wreckage at the Pentagon.

The documented explosions from inside the twin towers after the planes hit is very suspicious: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related Yet the biggest event happened the day before and has come and gone unnoticed.

The day before 911 Donald Rumsfeld announced that "The adversary is closer to home. It’s the Pentagon bureaucracy. In fact it could be said that it’s a matter of life and death."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlnQTcLHaMM&feature=related

He pointed out that the military’s own auditors admit that the U.S. Military cannot account for 25% of what it already spends. Donald Rumsfeld stated that they could not account for 2.3 trillion dollars in military spending. That was the day before 911.

After 911 the war on terrorism has left the war on waste completely forgotten. In 2003 Bush’s defense budget called for 48 billion in new defense spending. Each year Bush has asked for billions and billions in new Military spending but the fact that the military cannot account for 25% of what it spends has not been mentioned and the quest for the mission 2.3 trillion dollars has been abandoned.

Jesse Ventura has raised several interesting questions about demolition as well. He claims "These two buildings were white elephants. They were losing money. They had asbestos in them and they were being required by law to do over a billion dollars of asbestos removal."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZxacn4zkYc

Aside from the conspiracy at hand, my question is, what happened to the missing 2.3 trillion dollars and is 25% of the U.S. military budget still unaccounted for?

Saturday, August 2, 2008

Ireland and the European Union

I had heard that the people of Ireland voted down something with regards to the European Union in a referendum but I wasn’t sure what it involved. Then I find a politician in Dublin named Fianian McGrath who opposed the Lisbon treaty and explained why. With a name like Finian he can’t be all bad so he can’t.

He raises two very significant concerns that affect the future of Ireland's sovereignty and democracy. Perhaps Ireland’s struggle for sovereignty has made her a we bit cautions in just singing it over as a blank cheque. Perhaps general apathy is proof that those who never fought for freedom shall never know the taste of it.

Here was Finian McGrath’s concerns with the Lisbon Treaty:

http://www.finianmcgrath.ie/lisbon-treaty

The five points fell into two categories. One was a concern about mandating each member state to increase their military and the European Arms Industry. His point was why prioritize military and arms spending over education and health care.

The other category was the erosion of democracy. Being a self-amending Treaty which would permit the EU Prime Ministers to shift most of the remaining policy areas where unanimity still exists, to majority voting, without a need for new EU Treaties or referendums was a valid concern. Voting based on population size isn’t necessarily undemocratic but is not much incentive for smaller member states to join the union without being swallowed up and giving up their sovereignty. Bowing down to Rome or bowing down to the EU. What’s the difference?

I still say that the Irish Proclamation of Independence is an inspired document: http://iol.ie/~dluby/proclaim.htm

Can those rights be guaranteed by the EU constitution? If not, then the whole process is one big red flag to democracy and sovereignty. Some may argue that Ireland has benefited financially from EU money and shouldn’t complain. However, I contend that argument is offensive. Ireland is not a whore. Her sovereignty is not for sale.

Friday, August 1, 2008

Friendly American

At first glance, the term friendly American seems to be an oxymoron. After all look at the ratings of George Bush and the American reputation in the world after the invasion of Iraq. Not a pleasant one. We all know the stereotype that Americans are arrogant and rude yet that is a stereotype and stereotypes were made to be broken.

We had a friend of the family visit from Texas the other week. He was a really nice guy. He was totally American but he wasn’t rude or arrogant at all. In fact, him being from a small town made it somewhat shocking for him to see how rude many Canadians can be in a larger city. Back home people are friendly he said. They smile and say hello and ask how you are doing. He had several incidents in Canada where people were rude and confrontational.

OK so we live in Surrey and Surrey has a bad reputation but it is hardly a large city like Toronto. I think it’s a valid observation that we are all in a hurry and are stressed. The cost of living versus wages has put added stress on us as what was within reach for a family on a single income when we were kids is simply out of reach for a double income family today.

I’m sure there are many factors but my point is a simple one about stereotypes. I’ll have to admit I did have a falling out with a former long time American friend over the Bush thing. His blind devotion to Bush and absolute contempt for any democrat’s desire for peace or fair medical insurance was met with offensive mockery. When Mitt Romney mocked Hillary Clinton's desire for better medical coverage by referring to it as Hillary’s House of Terror, I was somewhat offended.


Martin Luther King said "As long as there is poverty in the world I can never be rich, even if I have a billion dollars. As long as diseases are rampant and millions of people in this world cannot expect to live more than twenty-eight or thirty years, I can never be totally healthy, even if I just got a good checkup at the Mayo Clinic. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. This is the way our world is made. No individual or nation can stand out boasting of being independent. We are all interdependent."

Some called Martin Luther King a Communist. That was absurd. He was a preacher. Having a social conscience doesn’t make you a Communist. My former friend cited Abraham Lincoln and basically said that if you don’t support the war in Iraq you are guilty of treason. To me that was absurd and sounded more like an argument from Stalin the one they are so deathly afraid of. If you dare criticize the government you are guilty of treason. What ever happened to free speech and the American dream?

Hey wait a minute, Martin Luther King was a friendly American. Yeah, but they shot him dead. Point taken. However, they all didn’t shoot him. Many marched beside him. One of my biggest pet peeves with American society is the intolerance. A guy from Boston wrote a profane but eloquent discourse on the North versus South struggle on f*ckthesouth dot com. That kind of sums up my feelings on the matter. Why would anyone want to live in a state where the majority of them fought a war for the right to keep slaves. Those are not the kind of people I want to live with.

Yet last month I spent a week traveling back and forth to Blaine for my son to attend a Jazz Festival there. It was so nice to rub shoulders with so many talented Americans and never once talk about politics. The subject never came up at all. I have no idea who were republicans and who were democrats. They were friendly and supportive. Once again a small town but surely you can see where I’m going with this.

The friend from Texas said back home they don’t talk about politics. It only starts fights. When someone starts they just say hold it right there, you know we’re just going to get in a fight about this and change the subject. Interesting.

I do think politics is a moral obligation and free speech a fundamental right. Yet I have been enlightened having met some friendly Americans and some unfriendly Canadians. I guess a person should be judged by the content of their character not by the country on their passport. Cheers.