Death on the track

In my last post, I said I was one Calgarian who tried to ignore the Stampede and the accompanying yee-hawing. It isn't easy as the exhibition and rodeo grounds are practically across the street from me. Not is it easy when animals continue to be sacrificed for fun and profit.

On Saturday night the chuckwagon races claimed the lives of three more horses, making it 11 in the last six years, almost two a year.

The man who caused the crash that resulted in the deaths, Kelly Sutherland, a veteran racer described as an "icon" in the Calgary Herald, was suspended for one day. Stampede senior manager Lindsey Galloway believes the suspension "sends a strong signal to everybody involved that [the Stampede] will not tolerate anything that compromises the safety of animals and competitors." The man whose horses died as a result of Sutherland's misconduct, Gary Gorst, doesn't agree. He says it feels like a slap in the face to him and insists Sutherland should be banned from racing for life. Animal rights activists suggest it's chuckwagon racing that should be banned.

But that isn't going to happen. Stampede management says ending the races isn't even up for discussion. And the attitude of the racers seems to be shit happens, life goes on. Racer Wayne Knight says, "We feed those horses and look after them just like kids." We can only hope Mr. Knight and his fellow racers wouldn't enter their kids in an event that killed two children a year.

The Calgary Stampede - the voice of heresy is heard

This morning's Globe and Mail ran an article on the Calgary Stampede which -- horrors! -- contained critical material. As a proud Calgarian, I feel obliged to respond to this heresy.

The article is entitled "The Tyranny of Stampede" and focuses on the social and career pressure on Calgarians to dress up and get in the mood. At the risk of having to get an unlisted phone number, I publicly admit I thoroughly appreciated the piece. YAHOO for the Globe and Mail.

The whole Stampede thing has become somewhat embarrassing for those of us who believe Calgary may not be a big city yet but should at least have grown out of its cow town phase. We should no longer have to pretend we all enjoy the same things. Nor should we have to believe that getting "sauced" before noon is a matter of civic duty.

As the Globe article emphasizes, much of the pressure to conform comes from employers. As one young employee of a supplies store observed, "There is this total tyranny that takes hold. It's this total Big Bother aspect ...." More boosterism than fun, it seems.

Speaking for myself, I have absolutely no interest in all that horsy cowboy stuff. As for the cultural heart of it all -- rodeo -- I simply cannot accept that tormenting animals for entertainment or "sport" is something to be celebrated. And yes, my individualism is offended by the group think, or perhaps I should say group drink, of coercive fun-making.

One native Calgarian summed it up this way: "I can't take it any more. The dressing up, the partying -- it's all just too much now. I'm going to Vancouver for Stampede."

Me, I just ignore it.

Is there hope for Dubya after politics?

Contemplating this weekend's Live Earth concerts, inspired by Al Gore's Alliance for Climate Protection, I couldn't help but note how American ex-presidents, or in this case a near-president, can be such forces for good in the world while the current president seems to foul everything he gets his hands on.

Jimmy Carter's work advancing human rights and alleviating human suffering through the Carter Center and Habitat for Humanity; Bill Clinton's fund raising for AIDS and other causes and his foundation's initiatives to address a range of global problems; and of course Al Gore's magnificent work on global warming; all testify to powerful commitments to make the world a better place by peaceful means.

Intriguingly, all three of the above were to a degree failures at political office. Jimmy Carter was a one-term president, losing in his bid for a second term after the Iran hostage crisis. Bill Clinton had a disappointing presidency culminating in near impeachment over a little white lie any gentleman would have told (of course, a real gentleman wouldn't have put himself in a position where he had to lie). And Al Gore famously lost a presidential election even though he got more votes than the other guy.

So maybe there's hope for George W. Bush after all. If Carter, Clinton and Gore can all rise above mediocre political careers, maybe even Dubya will do something worthwhile after his presidency mercifully ends. At least, if he can be trusted with anything.

Killer priests?

As if pedophile priests haven't embarrassed the Catholic Church enough, now they're having to deal with torturers and murders. Although church bishops condemned the tactics the Argentinian military used to suppress dissent during their 1976-83 dictatorship, not all the priests were on side. One, Christian Von Wernich, is now on trial charged with participating in seven murders, 42 kidnappings, and 31 cases of torture while he was chaplain to the Buenos Aires police force. Apparently, he isn't alone. About 20 other priests are suspected of collaborating with the military during the "dirty war." Von Wernich was extradited from Chile where he was practicing as a priest under the name Cristian Gonzalez.

One ex-policeman, Julio Alberto Emmed, has testified, "The three ex-subversives who were still alive were taken out. ... the doctor gave them two injections each, directly in the heart... They were loaded on to a van belonging to the unit and were taken to Avellaneda. We went to wash and change our clothes because we were bloodstained. ... Father Von Wernich saw that what had happened had shocked me, and spoke to me telling me that what we had done was necessary; it was a patriotic act and God knew it was for the good of the country. "

A former detainee, Luis Velasco, stated, "I once overheard Christian Von Wernich reply to a detainee who was begging for his life to be spared that 'the life of men depends on God and your collaboration.' On another occasion he came to me and touching the hair on my chest smiled and said, 'They burned the hairs ...'"

Like the pedophile priests, the accused murderers are aberrations. Nonetheless, Von Wernich's story of persistent evil, of never being appropriately dealt with by the Church, and then simply going on to serve another parish, has disturbing echoes.

A few millennia late, but Egypt finally bans female circumcision

Believed to have begun in the time of the pharaohs, it is one of the more despicable atrocities committed upon women to control their sexuality. I refer to clitoridectomy, an exercise in barbarism to which 97 % of Egyptian women, Christian and Muslim, are subject. Now, after all these millennia of suffering, The government of Egypt is finally banning the practice. Anyone performing circumcisions will be punished, according to a health ministry official.

Meanwhile the practice will continue in almost 30 countries across Africa. What a barbaric species we are.

"She made it clear that [Brown] is not our poodle"

Is there hope after all for nuclear responsibility in the West?

While Western nations, particularly the United States, express alarm over Iran possibly developing nuclear weapons and thereby violating the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, they continue to violate the treaty themselves. The treaty, after all, is a quid pro quo, the non-nuclear nations agreed not to develop weapons and the nuclear nations agreed to get rid of theirs. None of the latter are filling their part of the bargain.

But there is at least one indication that may change. Britain's foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, is calling for major reductions in the nuclear arsenal of the two major powers. Ms. Beckett pointedly said that the "stagnant" condition of nuclear disarmament is undermining efforts to rally international opinion against nations like Iran. She noted that of the world's 20,000 nuclear warheads, 96% are in the U.S and Russia.

Of course convincing either country to reduce its armaments at a time when both are in a belligerent mood is quite the challenge. And Ms. Beckett will probably be replaced by the new prime minister, Gordon Brown. Nonetheless, British officials made it clear she was speaking for Mr. Brown, and the fact her remarks were made in Washington, only a few hundred metres from the White House, indicated the new prime minister will not be catering to Bush intransigence on the issue. As one American official remarked, "She made it clear that [Brown] is not our poodle." A welcome change, indeed, and on a critical issue.

Israel and the dictators gang up on Hamas while Tony rides to the rescue

So Egypt's president, Hosni Mubarek, invites Jordan's King Abdullah and Israel's Ehud Olmert to join him in a summit with the now autocratic leader of the Palestine Authority, Mahmoud Abbas.

All are delighted, of course, with Abbas ridding the Palestine Authority of its democratically-elected Hamas government. Israel fears Hamas because it won't submit to their design for the region. Abdullah and Mubarek fear Hamas because it is prepared to take the democratic route to government and dictators fear nothing more than democracy. Both Egypt and Jordan have nascent movements associated with Hamas, and the dictators no doubt would like to strangle them in the cradle.

Meanwhile, Western powers cheer the process on, all their talk of wanting democracy in Palestine, or indeed in the Middle East, now revealed as hypocrisy.

What mischief this all is. The possibility of achieving peace in the Levant without including a force as powerful and popular as Hamas in the process is remote, while dealing for peace with the hopeless Abbas and his corrupt Fatah is futile.

But will the appointment of Tony Blair as envoy for the "quartet" turn things around? One thing he has going for him is the recognition from his experience in Ireland that all parties, even those you like to call terrorists, have to be brought to the table. But can he convince Israel and the United States to sit at the table with Hamas? As Bush's poodle, it seems unlikely he can convince the president of anything. Furthermore, he has thoroughly discredited himself in the Middle East with his contribution to the catastrophe in Iraq, The prospects are not good.

The Palestinian people, it seems, their freely elected government crushed by forces greater than themselves, have a lot of suffering to do yet.

The Darfur crisis: Are we the cause?

For millennia the herders and the farmers of the province of Darfur in western Sudan managed to get along in relative peace even though they followed different occupations on essentially the same land. Then, in 2003, all hell broke loose. Militias called Janjaweed, formed from among the nomadic herders, descended upon the farmers, committing rape and mass murder and driving millions from their villages. Something terrible had happened.

Various factors were in play. The farmers, after years of neglect by the central government, had risen in revolt. The government, exhausted after fighting a brutal civil war in the south, responded by arming local militia and supplementing them with criminals.

But the underlying question remains. Why would the nomads turn on their agricultural neighbours with such ferocity? What had changed? The answer lies in a shrinking land base. Populations have been increasing, as has the size of herds, straining the land. Meanwhile, the rains have failed and the region subjected to massive drought. The land becomes less capable of sustaining life and the desert creeps down from the north. In parts of Darfur, precipitation has fallen by a third in the past 80 years. The climate has changed.

The rapists, murderers and pillagers are desperate men, their traditional way of life unravelling in the face of catastrophic change in the weather. To quote The Guardian, "Global warming created the dry tinder. Khartoum supplied the match." And the tinder will become drier. Forecasts suggest that as climate change continues, rainfall will continue to decline and crop yields will drop further, up to 70 per cent in the worst areas.

And who is the principal perpetrator of global warming? Not the Janjaweed, and not the government in Khartoum. It is us, the industrial nations of the West. We are the guilty party.

So the question is what are we going to do about it, other than letting them kill each other until their populations have been reduced to a level the land can carry. The only response offered so far is stopping the violence. It goes without saying this is the first priority, but it is obviously not a long-range solution. We could immigrate the surplus populations, but this may be far from optimum for either them or us. The answer lies in dealing with global warming. In the medium term, this means dramatically reducing the amount of greenhouse gases we vent into the atmosphere, and in the short term, instituting massive land reclamation projects in the affected regions. In other words, we need to give them their land back, the land we are stealing from them with our profligate use of fossil fuels.

Darfur may be the first climate-change war, possibly the first of many -- yet another challenge to add to our global warming agenda.

Knighting Salman Rushdie

Britain's knighting of Salman Rushdie has predictably caused great distress in and, sadly, threats of violence from the Islamic world. Perhaps the most serious comes from a minister in the Pakistani government, Ijaz-ul-Haq, who is quoted as telling his country's national assembly, "If someone commits suicide bombing to protect the honour of the Prophet Muhammad, his act is justified." This intolerant gentleman is, as we might expect, the minister for religious affairs.

Yet again we witness the dangerous and violent passions that religion arouses. Maybe Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, et al., are right in confronting organized religion. It may simply not be wise to leave such mischievous institutions unchallenged.

Why are we opposed to a Muslim democracy in the Middle East?

As I read about our enthusiastic restoration of full relations with the Palestinians now that they have rid themselves of their democratically-elected government, I can't help but wonder why we in the West are so opposed to Muslim democracy in the Middle East.

We can go back to the 1950s when the United States and Great Britain conspired with the Iranian military to overthrow the Mossadegh government and replace it with a police state under the Shah. The chickens from that atrocity are still coming home to roost in very dangerous ways today.

The most recent episode of course is our concerted and now successful effort to undermine the Hamas government in Palestine. Chosen by their people in a free and fair election with a voter turnout better than we can muster, Hamas met with nothing but scorn from the West.

The answers to why we opposed democracy in these two cases are obvious: Mossadegh was threatening our control of his country's oil reserves, and Hamas would not submit to Israel. Perhaps more difficult to answer is why we aren't satisfied in simply undermining democracy wherever it rears its head, but why we also ardently support the region's dictatorships. Egypt, whose torture chambers are notorious (a great place for renditions), receives more foreign aid from the United States than any other country in the world except for Israel. As for our very favourite dictatorship in the region, Saudi Arabia, the British government recently offended one of the basic principles of our civilization, the rule of law, so as not to interfere with its massive supply of armaments to that most misogynistic of places.

On the one hand we crush their democracies while on the other hand we generously support the dictators who oppress them. And then we wonder why some respond with rage.

Public services: the key to capitalism

One - two - three, that's the order in which Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal ranked for ease of doing business in MasterCard Worldwide's new MasterCard Worldwide Centers of Commerce Index.

MasterCard's index ranks the world's top cities in terms of their performance as centers of commerce in the global economy. It consists of six dimensions designed by a team of eight independent economic, urban development and social-science experts from leading academic and research institutions around the world. Canadian cities topped the index in the dimension "Ease of Doing Business," defined as "Availability of quality, cost-competitive trade logistics; level of interconnectedness; and ability to attract and retain talent due to a high quality of living."

"The strong performance of Canadian cities as Worldwide Centers of Commerce reinforces how fortunate we are to live and do business here," said Kevin Stanton, president of MasterCard Canada. "Canadian cities stand shoulder-to-shoulder with leading global economic centres."

The criteria that made Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal the top three in the world included "a strong national health care system, excellent infrastructure, low traffic and easy access to public transportation." The index illustrates how good public services are essential in making cities good places to do business, i.e. to do capitalism. Investing heavily in items like health care and public transportation doesn't just make for better living for people, it makes for better business opportunities. It makes us, if you'll forgive the somewhat clichéd expression, more competitive in the global marketplace.

It's no coincidence that high tax regimes in northern European countries produce both prosperous economies and high social standards. As MasterCard's index demonstrates, it's precisely what's to be expected.

For American children, every year is 9/11

As we are incessantly reminded, on September 11th, 2002, Islamic extremists flew planes into the World Trade Center in New York and into the Pentagon, killing up to 3.000 people. As a result, President Bush declared a war on terror.

What we are rarely reminded of is that that many children are killed by firearms in the United States every year, about two-thirds of them homicides. That's not once in all of history, but each and every year. Yet, curiously, the U.S. administration has not declared a war on guns. On terror, yes, and of course on drugs, but not on guns, even though American children are 16 times more likely to be killed by firearms than children in 25 other industrialized nations averaged together.

If George W. Bush's first concern was the security of the American people, as he so often claims, clearly he would be waging a war on guns in his own country rather than a war on terror internationally. Indeed, not doing so seems inconsistent, even perverse, yet it is in fact perfectly consistent. Waging a war on terror is the macho thing to do, and packing guns is the macho thing to do, so a war on the former and a peace pact with the latter meshes perfectly with the mores of a macho administration.

The death of 3,000 children a year is simply collateral damage.

"The hanging gardens of Halliburton"

Babylon is being turned into an archaeological desert.

In an article in the Guardian, Simon Jenkins describes the rape and pillage of the heritage treasures of Iraq under the American occupation. The greatest storehouse of ancient human history faces two assaults: first, the trampling of archaeological sites by the heavy boot of the American military and, second, the unrestricted looting carried out by thieves operating with impunity in a climate of chaos.

It may seem callous to worry about artifacts -- mere things -- when tens of thousands of people are dying and millions are turned into refugees, but we aren't talking about any old archaeological dig here. This is the birthplace of our civilization. This is where intensive agriculture began, where the first city states arose, where written language and arithmetic were invented along with the wheel and the plough, where time was first measured with clocks and 12-month calendars, and where the first codified systems of law and administration were developed.

We are witnessing one of the greatest acts of vandalism in history. And as trivial as vandalism may be relative to human suffering, this one is nonetheless a crime against all of us.

Kudos to Dara Fresco and friends

Earlier this week, Dara Fresco, a head teller with the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, launched a $600-million class-action lawsuit against her employer. Ms. Fresco launched the suit on behalf of 10,000 of her colleagues who regularly work overtime for which they aren't paid.

And it's about time. Statistics Canada reports that over 1.6 million Canadians worked unpaid overtime in April. Almost a quarter of the work force regularly puts in over eight hours a day but only ten per cent gets paid for it.

Employees are protected against unpaid overtime by labour laws, but it isn't difficult to have them "volunteer" for overtime when employers can hold promotions, raises, or even just keeping their jobs, over their heads. And a round of layoffs, real or threatened, is often enough to whip recalcitrant employees into line.

And why wouldn't employers take advantage? Keeping costs down and profits up is the name of the capitalist game. Without the occasional swift kick, employers will push their advantage to the limit. Ms. Fresco's courageous suit may just deliver the kick business seems in need of at the moment. Similar suits in the U.S. have squeezed huge retroactive overtime payments to employees out of a number of companies including $78-million out of Wal-Mart's Pennsylvania stores.

Incidentally, after ten years with the bank, Dara was making the princessly sum of $30,715 a year. She claims she is owed $50,000 for unpaid overtime. She deserves every penny. Plus interest, of course -- at the bank's top mortgage rate.

Quebec's carbon tax may just work

Quebec has announced it will implement Canada's first carbon tax in October. The tax will be applied to gasoline, diesel fuel and heating oil at just under a penny a litre and collected from petroleum companies.

Natural Resources Minister Claude Bechard said he hopes the companies will pay the tax without passing the cost on to consumers. If Mr. Bechard's vain hope was somehow fulfilled, and the companies absorbed the cost themselves, the tax would do nothing to discourage people from driving. The minister is quoted as saying, "Every Quebecer has a responsibility." He then institutes a tax that is designed to relieve every Quebecer except the petroleum companies of that responsibility.

But of course Mr. Bechard is just playing politics. He knows full well the companies will pass the cost on to the consumer. They pass all their costs on to the consumer.

So, despite Mr. Bechard's political gamesmanship, the tax will add to the cost of gasoline and should therefore discourage driving. The more someone drives, the more they pollute, and the more they will pay. Each will be accountable, each will pay for his or her own mess. Just as it should be.

If the $200 million a year the tax is expected to raise goes toward energy-saving initiatives such as public transit, as the Quebec government promises, it will be a model and a challenge for the rest of the country.

Television, advertising and the CRTC

In an editorial in Monday's Globe and Mail, the writer suggests the CRTC, who he or she (will editorial writers hide forever behind anonymity?) refers to condescendingly as “a bunch of civil servants,” should not be setting the advertising limits for television. Rather, he (or she) insists, viewers should do this via the magic of the remote control.

The writer is being disingenuous. He (or she) knows perfectly well if the viewing public could choose the amount of advertising on TV, they would choose none. This, the broadcasters, who are instruments of advertisers, could not abide. They will thus dismiss the viewers most meaningful choice and offer them only those options amenable to their own narrow interests. Such is often the working of the “free” market.

A good example is the BBC, a service the market could never provide. A truly meaningful alternative to the sameness of commercial broadcasting, the BBC not only operates without advertising, it is probably the finest broadcaster in the English-speaking world.

If the CRTC doesn’t set the limits on TV advertising, network executives will. I fail to see how giving this right to “a bunch of corporate servants” is better for the public interest than leaving it to “a bunch of civil servants.” Not surprising the editorial writer would think so, though; after all, Globe editors are corporate servants themselves.

Norway: land of peace and plenty

Not only is Norway one of the world's most prosperous nations, it has now been ranked the world's most peaceful by the Global Peace Index. The index, compiled by The Economist with a team of international experts, ranked 121 countries on the basis of 24 indicators which measured ongoing national and international conflicts, national safety and security, and militarization.

New Zealand and Denmark came second and third. Canada ranked eighth -- not bad. Rock bottom, not surprisingly, was reserved for Iraq. Our wayward neighbour to the south, instrument of Iraq's woes, managed to break the top 100, but barely, at 96th.

So kudos to Norway. What with its vigorous economy (its petroleum-based heritage fund is now worth over $300-billion), it sounds like a very nice place to be indeed.

The catch-22 of Omar Khadr

Omar Khadr is the young Canadian who was captured by the Americans in their war in Afghanistan. He fought heroically. The last survivor of a five-hour battle, he was subdued only after being seriously wounded (he is now blind in one eye). Before succumbing to his injuries, he threw a grenade that killed one GI and wounded others.

Omar can hardly be blamed for his actions. He was only fifteen at the time, a victim of brain-washing in extremist Islam since his birth. He was sent to Afghanistan by his father. And he was, after all, fighting in a war. Nonetheless, the Americans intend to try him for murder.

But how, you might well ask, can he be tried for murder for killing an enemy soldier during a war? Well, the Americans answer, he isn't a prisoner of war, he is an "unlawful combatant," a term invented by the U.S. administration to circumvent the Geneva Convention.

Now, the Americans have declared that if he is acquitted of the charges, they can hold him indefinitely anyway. Why? Well, they say because the war on terror isn't over and convention allows them to hold captives until a war ends. But if he was captured in a war on terror (their words), and he is held indefinitely because the war continues, mustn't he be by definition a prisoner of war?

So this is Omar's predicament. He can be tried for murder because he isn't a prisoner of war. If he's convicted, he could be sentenced to life in prison. But if he's acquitted, he can still be imprisoned indefinitely because he is a prisoner of war. Catch-22.

How sad that Joseph Heller isn't still with us. He would have appreciated yet another example of his famous phrase in action.

Why are subsidizing these counterfeit Canadian TV networks?

The two private Canadian TV networks, CTV and CanWest, recently went on a huge buying spree in the U.S., continuing their trend to spend more on American shows than on Canadian. CanWest alone bought 13 new U.S. dramas. They did announce one Canadian production -- set in Boston.

In 2006, private broadcasters spent $478.6 million on drama, a 15 per cent annual increase, for American shows, and just $70.9 million, a 16 per cent decrease, for Canadian shows. That's seven times as much. As for overall programing, they spent $686 million on foreign programs in 2006, $619 million on Canadian programs.

Every penny the networks receive, they receive from Canadians. Their revenue depends entirely on advertising and of course the source of all advertising revenue is us, the buying public. Every time we buy something, we pay for the cost of advertising the product, and therefore, whether we like it or not, we pay for the mass media (and yes, that includes the daily press). We have no choice, at least not if we want to buy food, clothing, gas for our car, and all those other mundane things. Unfortunately, this coercive subsidizing of corporate media we can do nothing about.

Government handouts to media we can do something about. Canada's broadcasters receive over $200 million a year in public support from the Canadian Television Fund, Telefilm Canada, and several provincial tax supported programs. Considering that we already subsidize all their expenses via advertising, handing out another $200 million ventures beyond generosity into foolishness. That money should be spent on programming for the one truly Canadian network, the CBC.

Is fighting global warming a lost cause?

Yet another article in my daily paper has me wondering if exercising environmental responsibility, and fighting global warming in particular, isn't delusional.

The article in question had to do with house size in the United States. As the average number of people per household declines, now down to 2.6, the houses they live in get bigger. The fastest growing house type in the country is those with five or more bedrooms. The average new house is now 2,434 square feet. That's almost 1,000 square feet per person -- what are those 2.6 people doing in all that space? Do they ever run into each other? And why do they each need two bedrooms?

So as I truck down to the recycling bin with my little collection of newspapers, cans and bottles, am I kidding myself? Are my efforts for the year undone with the building of just one more monster house?

Maybe the only sensible thing to do is get in on the hedonism. Drive the big SUV, buy the big house, fill it up with stuff, and enjoy, enjoy, enjoy. Life is short, you only live once, let the future take care of itself, etc., etc. Or maybe I just got out of the wrong side of bed this morning.

First the Cloverdale Rodeo, next the Calgary Stampede?

To its credit, the Cloverdale Rodeo in suburban Vancouver has dropped four events from its program. Calf roping, team roping, steer wrestling and the cow-milking race will no longer be part of the "fun." Finally, somebody in this questionable business has recognized that tormenting animals for pleasure is not perhaps the most humane thing to do. Other events will continue, but this is at least a start.

Debra Probert, executive director of the Vancouver Humane Society, has this to say about rodeo: "They're exploiting the reaction of animals to pain, fear and stress. They harass them. They kick them. They goad them. ... they harass them into acting like wild animals." All true, of course.

As a Calgarian, I am embarrassed each July when our internationally famous Stampede, "the greatest outdoor show on Earth," features the torment of innocent animals as prime entertainment. And it appears I will continue to be embarrassed. A spokesman for the Calgary Stampede & Exhibition stated they don't anticipate eliminating any events, claiming, "The Calgary Stampede is passionate about the proper treatment of animals."

So the cruelty will continue. Ya-hoo!

The Manitoba voter -- an analysis

The Manitoba NDP won a convincing victory on Tuesday, capturing their third term in a row while winning more seats each each time out. The results depended on some interesting demographics, as revealed by a Winnipeg Free Press/Global TV survey conducted just prior to the election.

Not surprisingly, women were much stronger NDP supporters than men. Forty-eight per cent intended to vote NDP with only 34 per cent supporting the Conservative opposition. Men were much more evenly split at 41 per cent NDP, 40 per cent Conservative.

Voters over 55 showed majority support for the NDP (51 per cent) compared to 34 per cent for the Conservatives. Youth on the other hand, those between 18 and 34, narrowly went the other way, 41 per cent Conservative, 37 per cent NDP. Those in-between sided with their elders, 47 per cent NDP, 37 per cent Conservative.

Interestingly, income made little difference with all groups from rich to poor favouring the NDP at a ratio roughly 1.2 to 1. University-educated voters, on the other hand, showed a strong preference for the NDP, 48 per cent to 33 per cent, while those with less than university education split about evenly between the two parties.

Town and country made a major difference. Winnipeg voters, particularly in the inner city, strongly preferred the NDP, 51 per cent to 29 per cent. In the rural areas, the picture reversed with the Conservatives topping the NDP 49 per cent to 34 per cent. Liberal support varied little, 17 per cent in Winnipeg and 15 per cent in the countryside.

So that's the picture. NDP voters are more likely to be women, over 30, university educated, and urban. And, of course, they are more likely to vote for the winning party.

Is George Bush fulfilling Osama's dream?

According to Lawrence Wright, author of The Looming Tower, a history of the events leading up to 9/11, Osama bin Laden's master plan was to do a Soviet Union on the U.S. He would provoke the Americans into invading Afghanistan where they would be humiliated by the mujahedeen. The collapse of the United States would quickly follow. That, after all, was what happened to the Soviets.

But he spectacularly miscalculated. He drew the Americans into Afghanistan all right, but instead of being humiliated, they nearly destroyed al Qaeda. And if they had pressed on, they probably would have. But of course they didn't. Inexplicably, they eased off and threw their efforts into Iraq instead.

The result, of course, has been the fulfillment of bin Laden's plan. So far, at least. The Americans are being humiliated while Islamic extremists grow in numbers and expertise. But will the final phase of his plan come about -- the collapse of the United States? The war has bitterly divided Americans, but collapse? Of course not. Nonetheless, things could get very much worse.

Bush and his neocon advisers have not only precipitated bloody chaos in Iraq, they are destabilizing the region. Forty to fifty thousand refugees are fleeing Iraq every month, mainly to Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, and these countries simply cannot sustain such a migration. Just feeding them and providing shelter is a huge burden. The refugees often face tough restrictions that prevent them from finding work or gaining access to health care and other public services. As they become increasingly angry and bitter, they will increasingly threaten the stability of their host nations.

No, the US. will not collapse, but Iraq has and much of the rest of the Middle East could follow. The stage is being set, by the United States no less, for a triumphant surge of militant Islam in the Middle East. Osama must be smiling in his cave.

Paul Wolfowitz -- neocon to the end

So they didn't have to drag Paul Wolfowitz kicking and screaming out the front door of the World Bank after all. I would say he had the decency to resign; unfortunately he didn't resign decently. Admitting to no sins, offering no apologies, he had, according to The Globe and Mail, "only praise for himself."

He exhibited the same arrogance, the same self-righteousness, the same contempt for the opinions of any who had the temerity to disagree with him, that was characteristic of the neocons who led the United States into the Iraq debacle, of which he was a chief architect.

The damage he has done to the Bank is serious but should be easily reparable. Not so reparable is the damage done to the influence of the United States on the Bank's affairs. The disenchantment of the Europeans is manifest, and already the right of the Americans to appoint the president is being challenged.

This is symptomatic of what the neocons have done to their country. They have not just created immediate problems but have done deep damage to their country's interests. The next administration will have a big repair job on its hands.

NATO - the new arm of empire?

NATO's Director of Policy Planning Jamie Shea has announced his organization is considering deploying sea-borne rapid-reaction forces to help private oil firms. So far, NATO has been in discussions with Shell and BP. "We are looking very actively at using our maritime resources ... to see how we can link up with oil companies," Shea said. This could mean sending forces to Africa, Asia and the Middle East to protect oil company facilities. NATO has also approached Qatar about securing its liquified natural gas facilities and may approach Saudi Arabia. All this, of course, is in the name of energy security.

First the North Atlantic, then the world.

Holding the bully's coat

The Bush administration is doing it again. They will persist in picking fights. And we apparently are, to borrow Linda McQuaig's phrase, prepared to hold the bully's coat.

As host of next month's annual summit meeting of the G8 industrial powers, Germany has prepared a strong declaration on climate change which includes pledges to limit global temperature rises to 2C this century and reduce world greenhouse gas emissions to 50% below their 1990 levels by 2050. A modest goal, yet according to Reuters news service, the United States has "rejected any mention of targets and timetables, don't want the UN to get more involved and refuse to endorse carbon trading because it must by definition involve targets." Yup, sounds like the Bush administration. And apparently our benighted government intends to support the U.S. position.

In addition to pushing for an ambitious plan to combat global warming following a European Union deal earlier this year, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has also made a sincere attempt to improve Germany's relations with the United States. With their opposition to her initiative on global warming, the Bush people could undermine that budding relationship before it blossoms. This administration seems bent on alienating its friends.

Nothing is more important than dealing with global warming, and the United States produces more greenhouse gases than any other country. This is an opportunity for Americans to show some responsibility and support Chancellor Merkel's proposal. They could even show some leadership and propose even tighter targets than the Germans. But no, they refuse even to follow, never mind lead.

And, sadly, we will tag along behind. Holding their coats.

Gouged at the pumps: good or bad?

The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has issued a report claiming oil companies are overcharging us to fill up our gas tanks. Even if they are right, I admit to ambivalence.

Of course I don't want to see consumers ripped off. Nor do I believe corporations should profit through oligopoly rather than through honest competition. But I also recognize the higher gas prices go, the less gas people will use, and isn't reducing consumption the best way to reduce greenhouse gas production?

I also recognize the price of gas deceives us about the real cost of driving a car. If we had to pay directly for all the associated costs, including tax subsidies to the oil industry, the full cost of transportation infrastructure, the cost of policing roads, and the vast range of environmental, health and social costs created by environmental degradation and urban sprawl, the price of a litre of gas would be many times the current pump price.

So if the price of gas is artificially high because of the oil oligopoly, drivers are still getting a free lunch, and a hearty one at that. If environmental damage and urban sprawl are mitigated even a little, the higher price certainly isn't all bad. Making progress requires picking the right battles. I'm not sure the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives chose well in this case.

Alberta's cowboy caucus: Rent problem? What rent problem?

Despite a government task force report advocating controls on Alberta's overheated rental market, Premier Ed Stelmach is digging in his heels. "Rent controls will only make the situation worse," the premier insists, without explanation.

Meanwhile, renters in Calgary suffer from increases up to 200 per cent. Fred Bisschop, who suffers from a heart and lung condition, lives on $1,212 per month in government assistance. He will see his rent increase by 50 per cent to $1,110. "This is going to wipe me out," he said.

The position of Stelmach's government is not surprising. Even though Calgary and Edmonton make up over half the population of Alberta, his cabinet is dominated by rural MLAs. But it is in Calgary and Edmonton, particularly in Calgary, where the rental crisis is most severe, and rural MLAs are not known for their sympathies for the problems of big cities. At least one urban Tory, Calgary-Nose Hill MLA Neil Brown, has openly broken ranks and voiced support for controls.

Stelmach's government is essentially a rural government, but the big problems of the current rampant economic growth are suffered predominantly in the cities. If this government can barely understand the challenges facing Alberta, how can it be expected to deal with them?

Sarkozy and the work ethic

The election of Nicolas Sarkozy as president of France will no doubt be welcomed by capitalists and their supporters everywhere. Certainly his decision to spend the first few days after his victory on a luxury yacht belonging to one of the richest men in France does not suggest otherwise.

The French are constantly criticized for a relaxed attitude toward work, epitomized by their introduction of the 35-hour week. Editorials in the corporate press -- The Globe and Mail serves as a good example -- are amusing in their frustration with the French. They find French workers' approach to life and work incomprehensible. Why, they seem to plaintively cry, would people want more time with their families, more time to engage in politics and community life, more time to simply enjoy themselves, when they could be producing and consuming ever more stuff? Isn't producing and consuming stuff the purpose of life? These French, the editorial writers conclude, must be mad.

But what, a person less sympathetic to corporate obsession and more sympathetic with the French view might ask, is the point of decades of extraordinary technological advance and globalization, if it only means we must work harder, we must submit to the soul destroying mantra "we must compete in the global marketplace," we must serve the economy rather than have it serve us, if the only measure of progress is rising GDP?

After all, the corporate sector and its political puppets promised us globalization would improve the lives of all of us. Working harder than ever in some kind of mindless competition would hardly seem much of an improvement. But then to the corporate mind, progress is more production, more consumption, more growth, more profit, more market share, more GDP. And GDP doesn't measure happiness, pleasure, healthy family life, responsible citizenship or respect for the environment that sustains us.

Sarkozy sides with the corporate crowd. He will serve them well. For those of us who believe modern technology should be freeing us to make more choices about how we live our lives rather than submitting us even more to economic servitude, his election is bad news indeed.

Alberta public schools and the lies they tell

In the beginning, only water lay beneath the sky. There being no solid place to dwell upon, the first people lived in the heavens. One day the chief’s daughter fell ill and he could find no cure. An elder told the people to dig up a tree and lay the girl beside it. As the people dug, the tree suddenly fell through the hole and dragged the chief’s daughter with it. Two swans, swimming on the water below, heard a clap of thunder and looked up to see the sky open and the tree and the girl fall into the water. The swans swam to the girl and supported her, and took her to the Great Turtle, master of all the animals. The Great Turtle called a council. He told the animals that Woman Fallen from the Sky presaged good fortune. He commanded them to find the tree that had fallen and bring up earth from its roots so that they could build an island on his back for the woman to live upon. The swans led the animals to the place the tree had fallen and Otter, then Muskrat and then Beaver dived into the depths. But the dive was so deep they returned to the surface utterly exhausted, and rolled over and died. Many others tried but they too succumbed. Finally old lady Toad took her turn. She was gone so long everyone thought she was lost forever when suddenly she emerged and before she too died she spat a mouthful of earth onto the back of the Great Turtle. The earth was magical and began to grow. When it was large enough, the animals set the girl down upon it. Still it grew, until it became the great earth island we live upon today.

This charming myth, this delightful bit of nonsense, was once an ancient truth to the Iroquois people of eastern North America. It was their theory of how the earth was formed and how people came to dwell upon it -- their creation myth. This myth will not, however, be taught as truth in Mitford Middle School, a public school in Cochrane, Alberta. The Christian creation myth of Genesis will.

It, too, is charming, a delightful bit of nonsense, but it will be taught as scientific fact at Mitford. The Rocky View School Division is instituting a Christian program at Mitford, supplementing one it already has in place in a school in Chestermere and adding to similar programs in Elk Island, Pembina Hills and Red Deer public school districts.

Mitford's principal, Bill Bell, says Christian beliefs will be woven through every subject in the program. Regarding teaching the Christian creation myth as science, he added, "The first teaching will be from a Christian point of view and then there will be an acknowledgment that there is another theory."

Another theory? If he's referring to evolution, that life evolves is a fact not just "another theory" -- at least as much as we can know a fact. He may be thinking of Darwin's theory of evolution, i.e. natural selection, which is the mechanism of evolution, the way it works, not evolution itself. And a sound theory it is, having withstood any serious challenge for nearly 150 years.

As to Genesis, it is one creation myth among hundreds, even thousands. All peoples had one at one time, at least until science came along. To teach a creation myth as science is to insult science, education and, indeed, Mitford public school. To say nothing of betraying children to lies. And to do it at public expense is outrageous.

Public money spent on education should not be used to indoctrinate children in theology -- that's the questionable business of home and church -- and it should certainly not be spent on programs that exclude children because of religious belief. The "Christian" program at Mitford doesn't just exclude atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and other religious groups, it even excludes most Christians. It isn't so much Christian as fundamentalist Christian. Most Christians after all, including the Catholic Church, have come to terms with the fact of evolution.

If we are going to exploit public education to substitute fairy tales for facts, then in all fairness we should give the Great Turtle his due as well.

Why are we tight with these Saudi misogynists?

While we send soldiers to Afghanistan to do battle with the Taliban, ostensibly to promote human rights in that country, particularly for women, we remain cozy with the most misogynistic country on the planet, Saudi Arabia. Even when they shove their misogyny in our face.

Just last week, at an education fair in that benighted country, the religious police shut down a Canadian embassy booth, as well as a booth run by LaSalle College, because they were staffed by women. According to George Chrysomilides, president of the Canadian Education Network, "... the religious police were very rude. They shouted at them in a way that was disrespectful ..." The women were then run off the grounds.

The Canadian embassy claims it had prior permission for the women to be there, but this cut no ice with the Saudi Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. Because the women were staffing these booths alone, Canadian organizers had even gone to the trouble of separating them from the main pavilion to show respect for Saudi sensibilities. Even that humiliating act of deference apparently wasn't enough.

So why do we defer to these barbarians? Well, in this case it may have something to do with the fact they send hundreds of very rich students to Canadian universities and colleges. One wonders if the Taliban were flush with oil wealth, and were willing to send a little our way, we might be willing to overlook their idiosyncrasies.

Brit general supports Iraqi insurgents

Retired British General Sir Michael Rose, who has in the past called for the impeachment of Tony Blair for going to war on false pretenses, now says Iraqi insurgents are justified in opposing the occupation of their country. He says the U.S. and its allies should admit defeat and depart. As to the dire consequences some predict, he insists they won't happen, observing, "The British admitted defeat in North America and the catastrophes that were predicted at the time never happened. The catastrophes that were predicted after Vietnam never happened. The same thing will occur after we leave Iraq."

As for the insurgents, he compares them to George Washington and his rebels during the American revolutionary war and quotes 17th century British politician William Pitt, the elder, who famously said: "if I was an American ... as long as one Englishman remained on American native soil, I would never, never, never lay down my arms". "The Iraqi insurgents," Rose says, "feel exactly the same way."

Now here's a general who learns from his history.

Toronto, city of the future -- Calgary, not so much

After nine months of research, Britain's Foreign Direct Investment magazine has released the results of its North American Cities of the Future competition. The competition included four categories: major cities (over 2,000,000 population), large cities (500,000 to 2,000,000), small cities (100,000 to 500,000) and "micro" cities (up to 100,000). The rankings were based on seven criteria: economic potential, cost effectiveness, human resources, quality of life, infrastructure, business friendliness, and development and investment promotion.

As a Calgarian, living in a city topsy-turvy with insanely rapid growth, I suspected we would rate tops in our category. Not so. We weren't even in the top 10. Worse, Edmonton was number four. Humiliating.

Other Canadian cities did very well, Toronto coming second only to Chicago in the major cities category, and Windsor ranking first among small cities.

It must be said that some of the choices were questionable. Juarez, Mexico, was ranked first among large cities, for example. I ask you -- Juarez?

But enough of the sour grapes. Kudos to Toronto and Windsor, and as for my home town ... well, maybe growth isn't everything

Progress in strange packages

Sometimes progress is illustrated by dark statistics, but it is progress nonetheless. This is how I felt reading that the world's execution rate was down in 2006. According to Amnesty International's annual report on the death penalty, at least 1,591 people were executed last year, down from 2,148 in 2005, a quite significant decline.

The Islamic world cannot be proud of the fact that the only four countries bucking the trend -- Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Pakistan -- were all Muslim. China led the field as usual, killing 1,101 of its citizens. This, however, could be a gross underestimate as China does not reveal official statistics. Amnesty suggests the toll may be as high as 8,000.

The Philippines became the 99th country to abolish the death penalty for ordinary crimes. In 1977, only 16 countries were abolitionist.

Amnesty International is calling for a universal moratorium on execution. "The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment," said Secretary General Irene Khan. "It must be abolished and a universal moratorium will be an important step forward."

Premier Charest -- a ladies' man in the best possible way

Quebec Premier Jean Charest has not had one of his better years. With his Liberals managing only to squeeze out a minority victory in the March election, he as leader must carry the can for what went wrong. But now he has got something very, very right indeed.

He has appointed a new cabinet and ... wait for it ... half the members are women. And they are not, as women often are, tucked away in the weaker portfolios. Monique Jerome-Forget is Treasury Board President and also holds the most important position in cabinet -- Finance Minister. Nathalie Normandeau becomes Municipal Affairs Minister and deputy-premier, with the job of rebuilding party support in predominantly francophone areas. Line Beauchamp becomes the first woman appointed to the increasingly important position of Environment Minister. Women also head Education and Transportation.

Women are now truly holding up half the sky in Quebec, and Premier Charest deserves full credit for recognizing that's how the world should work. Time for a few more premiers to step up.

Is the poodle slipping the leash?

If what Hilary Benn, Britain's international development secretary, is saying in Washington this week is any indication, the Blair government is starting to drift significantly from its cozy relationship with the Bush administration. Consider:

• While Bush continues to refer to "the war on terror," Benn insists Britain has rejected the phrase as counter-productive. He claims it only encourages terrorists by inflating their sense of importance. Furthermore, he says, it will take much more than military means to overcome the problem and, in any case, there is no clear enemy with an organized set of objectives.
• He also insisted achieving global peace and prosperity requires give and take, implying criticism of the Bush administration's tendency to rely on military force and economic sanctions.
• He reaffirmed his country's support of the International Criminal Court, an institution the Americans have attempted to sabotage.
• He repeated Britain's call to close Guantanamo.
• And as for World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz, who Bush continues to support, Benn observed, "what's happened is very, very damaging to the bank .. and it simply can't continue."

All this is enough to make one wonder if the poodle isn't slipping the leash.

The Charter yields to blood sacrifice

Today is the 25th anniversary of the patriation of our constitution and the birth of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a day one might think worthy of special note, a day to celebrate becoming masters in our own house. Yet there is a deafening silence. The media have little to say and our federal government shamefully makes no special plans to commemorate the event.

One cannot help but compare it to the recent hoopla over the battle of Vimy Ridge. Thousands visited the site, the Prime Minister and the Queen made speeches and the media ran page after tedious page covering in excruciating detail every aspect of the affair. Over what? A massive slaughter so that our boys could stand on top of the hill rather than their boys? We used to play top of the hill when we were children but eventually grew up and went on to other pursuits. There was no more purpose at Vimy Ridge because there was no more purpose in the First World War; it was an exercise in bloody-minded European hubris, nothing more, a bunch of tired old empires taking a pointless whack at each other to the cost of millions of lives.

And yet it is often thrown up as the defining moment in Canadian history. The reason is simple, ancient and primitive. We continue to believe as we have for thousands of years that a people must be defined by blood sacrifice. Nothing else will do. Certainly not a peaceful, constructive act like patriating a constitution and establishing a charter of rights.

We have all the trappings of a highly-advanced species -- centrally-heated homes, cars, computers, etc., etc, -- yet we are in our souls much the same brutes we were when all we had was stone tools. We still need tribal myths to unite us, especially the myth of the immaculate warrior, the killing of our tribal enemies as the purest and highest attainment of manhood.

So of course the Charter yields to Vimy. It may be a far greater achievement but it involved no blood, no human sacrifice. It was, in other words, a far greater achievement for a fully civilized species, but for us ... it is second tier.

How funny is this?

How would you like to run a couple of wars? The job could be yours. President George W. Bush is trying to find what the media is calling a "war tsar" to manage the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, but so far hasn't found any takers. Now there's a surprise.

To date, he has asked three retired four-star generals and all have not so politely declined. General John J. Sheehan, shown in the accompanying picture, remarked, "The very fundamental issue is they don't know where the hell they're going." Sheehan mentioned Dick Cheney as an obstacle to taking the job.

So, if this sounds like your kind of thing, get your resume in. If, for example, you have experience running a peanut stand, you just may be a shoo-in. You certainly can't do any worse than Bush and Cheney.

Meddling in Iraq

The Americans, it seems, are mightily annoyed at what they refer to as Iran's "meddling" in Iraq. Iran, they claim, is providing Shia, and possibly Sunni, militias with equipment and training.

Let's get this straight. The U.S. has precipitated a state of bloody chaos in Iraq that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives, created millions of refugees, and leaves most Iraqis living in a state of constant fear -- and they accuse the Iranians of meddling?

Whose backyard is this anyway? The Americans are fighting wars on Iran's eastern and western borders, and they expect the Iranians to sit idly by and observe? Of course they won't. This is their turf and they will defend their interests, just as the U.S. has always done in the Americas. In Latin and South America, the Americans' backyard, they have persistently interfered in the affairs of other nations, even going so far as to overthrow democratic governments and replace them with more amenable dictatorships, a step well beyond anything Iran has ever done. This does not, of course, justify Iran interfering in the affairs of other states in the Middle East, but Iran's involvement in the Levant and Iraq is largely a response to aggression by Israel, the United States and other Western powers. Meddling as a response to meddling, one might say -- no Monroe Doctrine here. If the Americans can extend their reach to the other side of the world and wage bloody war, they are not on very solid ground to criticize Iran for supporting its local allies.

The Americans have made their hostility to Iran abundantly clear for a long time. The Iranians will quite reasonably do what is in their limited power to alleviate this threat and send the American meddlers home.

Biofuels and the destruction of the rain forest

Fidel Castro, apparently not dead yet by a long shot, has been ranting of late about agricultural land being used for the production of ethanol rather than for food. Not the first to suggest that human beings will ultimately starve themselves in order to feed their machines, he claims that billions could face starvation as productive land in poor countries is taken over to produce fuel for rich countries. "By offering financing to poor countries to produce ethanol from corn or any other kind of food," he states, "no tree will be left to defend humanity from climate change."

He may or not be right about the corn, but the old revolutionary certainly has a point about the trees. Predictions are that within 15 years, 98% of the rain forests of Indonesia and Malaysia will be gone, taking with them some of the world's most important wildlife species, largely for palm oil plantations to produce biofuel.

Over 80% of the world's palm oil is produced in Indonesia and Malaysia, up until recently for food. With the European Union aiming to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020, to be achieved partly by requiring that 10% of vehicles use biofuels, a huge surge in palm oil demand for use as energy is being created. The rain forests will pay the price.

Ironically, much of it is a scam. Lumber companies, who have already stripped much of the region's forests, are accused of taking out palm oil leases just so they can harvest the timber.

And if that isn't irony enough, clearing the forests may in itself send vast quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere. Up to half the new plantation area will be created from peat-land which contains large amounts of carbon. As the land is drained, the peat dries and releases the carbon. Even worse, it is often burned, adding even more CO2 to the massive forest fires that plague south-east Asia.

The ultimate irony, of course, lies in destroying the Earth in order to save it.