Nov. 11...

I just wanted to say I hope everyone has a good Remembrance Day and takes a little time to remember those who went into battle so we could enjoy today's freedoms (like tracking our bills on CMT!). I know I am very grateful.

Thank you for the reminder of the freedoms that we can appreciate today and the great losses of lives for our life today. I to am very grateful.

For me this Rememberance Day brought mixed emotions. Our society talks about not forgetting the sacrafices that so many made in past wars, yet we are manufacturing conflicts/wars that are unnecessary. I find this extra saddening at this time.

For example, attacking Iraq was clearly not the right choice. There had to be a better way to deal with the situation, because clearly things are just a bad there now. Plus, it is too bad all the world focused their attention on this, and yet I bet many of you reading this probably know little to nothing of the close to a million souls that were killed in about a month in Rwanda only a decade ago- and the world did nothing.

So during this time I hope people really recognize that the wars of the past were fought on the belief of bringing long lasting peace and in my opinion that is what we all should be work for today to honour those who fought.

BTW, to find out more about Rwanda, I recommend picking up the book just published by the Canadian Lt. General (retired) Romeo Delaire.

I bet many of you reading this probably know little to nothing of the close to a million souls that were killed in about a month in Rwanda only a decade ago- and the world did nothing.

The history of the 20th century shows that that was not an isolated incident. Sarge can cite more examples, but in addition to WWII's millions of Jews AND Russians AND Chinese, there was also the the Armenian genocide, and the deliberate starvation of 7 million Ukrainians and Kulaks by Stalin.

'…not the right choice' ?

I suppose leaving Saddam in power to murder his own people would have been the right choice, eh? He only executed or killed for sport 250,000 of his own people since the end of the first Gulf War. This war wasn't about oil or WMD, as much as the media likes to say it is. It was about genocide. His sons were reported to have been even worse.

BTW, T-Rev, it is interesting how you remind us of Rwanda's genocide, yet you ignore the one Saddam was committing. What was your 'better way to deal with the situation'? Keep in mind sanctions weren't working, they only cause the general population to suffer, not the leadership; and Saddam had ignored 14 seperate UN resolutions on Iraq since 1991.

Delaire's book is good. It demonstrates how internal UN politics are more important than the lives of numerous people. The UN has a vested interest in keeping tyrants in power rather than protecting the rights and lives of individuals, as many dictators and inhumane regimes are staying in power thanks to the influence they have in the UN.

To quote Major-General Lewis MacKenzie (Ret'd) from the National Post, April 11, 2003 article "Surely Genocide is Reason Enough"

" I cannot comprehend how our government can formally demand that Saddam Hussein should be indicted on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity once the war is over, and in the same breath try to justify not taking part in the very action designed to remove him from power and bring him to trial. Forget links with terrorism and destroying weapons of mass destruction. Genocide trumps them both – doesn't it?…
Who can argue with "war is bad and peace is good" and all the myriad of variations on the same theme? The questions the anti-war protesters and our political leaders have to answer is: Who would have spoken for Saddam's next 250,000 victims? Who would have stopped the genocide? "

True the war was not about WMD or oil. It was in large part because it was part of a plan- The Project for a New American Century. Some may deny it but this plan was written up by the who's who of Bush's circle. Personally, I do not want to be part of this or support American hegemony.

And anyone can go online and read the Project word for word if they want. Of course this is not the news any American hears about and thankfully on the almost as bad CBC I caught the few words they said about it. And the National Post, well there is media gatekeeping at near its worst, one would be foolish to think they are presenting a non-biased view. Two words: Media Conglomerate, meaning they have big business interests. Maybe a look at Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent would maybe people think more about the media.

Don't believe me you say. A perfect example was the WTO protests in Seattle. I knew several very well spoken university students who went there and from their summary almost everyone who was there was intelligent, and had a true reason to be there. Yet, on CNN, almost the ONLY people they showed on TV were few the idiots. But CNN, like most media, is in the business of making money, and Mr. Turner is a business man, thus they have a definite agenda to present.

In other words, it was not about genocide either, the plan states, they wanted they thought to be a stabilizing interesting in the Middle East, and thus they idea was to influence the future direction of Iraq whether Saddam was there or not. It says as much.

As for the genocide, I totally do not deny what has been happening in Iraq. It is terrible as well and is a very good point. But overall, to maybe explain my point better, I was not saying peace is the solution. In other words, peace for the sake of peace is not a solution either. Something should have been done to stop Saddam, this is very true. It probably was going to involve military action. I just can't help think there was a better way to go about it (a non-American dominated way), one that would not have caused such conflict now within Iraq and that would not have caused a massive swell of support for extremists, so that now the world is probably less save for everyone.

By the way, I mentioned Rwanda, because it was by far the worst genocide this planet has ever seen, in the sense of the numbers of people killed in such a short time, and the obsolutely sick ways the killings were done. But because of the media, most people just don't know about it. So I thought this was a good time to try and inform more peopel about it. Indeed, it was a UN failing, but it was a UN failing mainly because of the Americans rejecting any of the requested for support that Delaire needed.

And anyone can go online and read the Project word for word if they want.

Where? Got a link???

WTO protests in Seattle

On that I would have to agree. The main losers would be third world countries who have their act together and are moving away from that label. A WTA would only make their resources available to the US for next-to-nothing. Hmmm… sort of sounds like Canada right now!

In fact there was an 'oil' component in the war, but it wasn't American. The french oil giant TotalFinaElf had exclusive exploration contracts worth €60bn - €75bn($120bn Cdn) to develop the massive Majnoon and Bin Umar oilfields in southern Iraq…but that was dependent on Saddam staying in power.

So why didn't Canada take part in the war? Jean Chrétien's daughter is married to the son of Paul Desmarais Sr., largest shareholder and director of TotalFinaElf. Chrétien was trying to protect his daughter's inheritence.

Don't hold any hope for significant change with Paul Martin coming into power. In 1974, Desmarais made Martin president of Canada Steamship Lines and in 1981, made him spectacularly rich by selling the company to him and a partner for $180 million. The company is estimated to be worth about $424-million – making him the 63rd richest person in Canada. Of course, he 'gave up' control of his company prior to running for Liberal leadership, but I'm sure he still owes moral debts to Desmarais. So is/was Martin's/Chretien's loyalty to Canada or France?

What's happening now is every radical Islamic group and oppresive government (Syria, Saudi Arabia)in the middle east is moving into Iraq to try to ensure there is a constant stream of bad news going to the US - trying to keep it at a dead US soldier every day. Doing that will keep all the positive stuff the coalition is doing in the country out of the news…and they don't want a sudden BIG number of US dead, because that would only harden american resolve.

These day-to-day setbacks are causing the media to broadcast stories on the hopelessness of the cause, making the situation out to be worse than it really is - which is typical of the media. During the war when the ground forces stopped for a few days due to weather, but mainly to resupply itself for what would be the final assault on Bahgdad, the media immedietly started talking about the war bogging down, and becoming another Vietnam - the media always makes the worst of those situations when it doesn't know anything about the subject it is discussing.

In 1946, George Orwell wrote an essay entitled "Second Thoughts on James Burnham", that said throughout World War II intellectuals in Britain kept changing their minds about how the war would end. Whenever they changed their minds, they were convinced of their positions. "If the Japanese have conquered South Asia, they will keep South Asia forever; if the Germans take Tobruk, they will infallibly capture Cairo…"

The tendency to predict a continuation of what is currently happening, wrote Orwell, "is not simply a bad habit, like inaccuracy or exaggeration, which one can correct by taking thought. It is a major mental disease, and its roots lie partly in cowardice and partly in the worship of power, which is not fully separable from cowardice." Indeed, "whoever is winning at the moment will seem to be invincible."

Orwell noted that while intellectuals and journalists were constantly flip-flopping between "confident" predictions that the Nazis or the Allies would "obviously" win, the British people — led by Churchill — remained confident in victory. And they won.

As a fun example, remember the episode of the Simpsons when Homer goes for a flight on the space shuttle? News anchor Kent Brockman is scheduled to interview the shuttle crew while Homer and the rest of the crew are in orbit. But just before they "switch live" to the craft, there's a mishap on board. Homer smashes an ant farm they brought with them. When Kent Brockman cuts to the live feed from the shuttle, the ants float by the TV-camera lens — momentarily appearing gigantic. Then, they lose the picture.

Brockman, like many TV newsmen, responds instantly with his gut impressions: "Ladies and gentlemen, er, we've just lost the picture, but, uh, what we've seen speaks for itself. The spacecraft has been taken over — 'conquered', if you will — by a master race of giant space ants. It's difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume the captive earthmen or merely enslave them. One thing is for certain, there is no stopping them; the ants will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to… toil in their underground sugar caves."

Even the Canadian media is guilty of dumbness. The day after four Canadian soldiers were killed in Afghanistan by an american bomb, Lisa Lafleme on Canada AM was interviewing a retired Canadian Army Officer - when she asked the dumbest question I've ever heard. The news story had said the Canadians were on a training exercise. Lisa, very passionately and sincerely, asked the Officer "What were they doing training…weren't they already trained before they went to Afghanistan?" Anyone who follows or plays any sport knows that you don't stop training just because you know you're going to the big game or the Olympics in the next few weeks…you keep training to keep your skills and professional edge up, and the military has to do the same thing.

Basically, don't believe CTV, CNN, BBC or especially CBC, which is the worst politically biased press in the western world. Anytime there is a suicide bombing in Israel, they NEVER call it a terrorist bombing, just a suicide bombing. CBC is doing all it can to make Israel appear the evil oppressor and the terrorists the poor downtrodden peoples.

Americans can put up with setbacks. The only way they will lose the war is not if some reporter declares it unwinnable, but if the American people become convinced it is not worth the trouble. And success should not be based on the media's polyanna timetable.

Sorry Pooga, I should have posted some links. Great comments about the WTO and such by the way. I was in a hurry this morning so I didn't have the time to post links. Anyway, the first link I always thought provided a good overview, and also links to the full document which is handy. However, one has to hope they don't follow through with the other components of the plan, such as creeating a space army, and messing with China. Not a good idea and is scares the crap out of me. Problem is the source of this article is somewhat questionable. It is just good because it does summarize the key points. For the full details point your way to the second link.

http://www.sierratimes.com/03/03/03/gaddy.htm
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Project-for-the-New-American-Century

And Sarge, very well put. Very interesting too. Thanks for taking the time to give some more comments. Indeed, almost all media is trouble. I've recently found out about Ode Magazine though- http://www.odemagazine.com
I think it has some amazing stories. Can you believe it, they report true good news. And no not the little human interest stories or whatever the mainstream media dabbles in. Their second to last issue had information about cancer and it contained some truly life altering and mind opening revalation about it. The info is still on the web site though and I really suggest reading the cover story.

And how about this idea, if you live outside of the few richest nations in the world, subscription is almost half price (even though it has to cost more to get it there). I think the world needs more of this kind of thinking.

Try this one that Sarge pointed me towards.

<a href=http://www.honestreporting.com/ target=_blank>http://www.honestreporting.com/</a>