The Greater the Event, the Less we Hear ?

Silence is upon us.   Let us properly call that "selective silence".  


Why?  With the media frenzy that usually accompanies major events such as the nuclear disaster at Fukushima,  one might expect to see some expression of continued in the plight of Japan, but no.  The same strange abandonment of other man-made and natural disasters seems to disappear with with the same finesse from the media.  Is it too much to ask to be informed?  Radiation from Fukushima has already crossed North America, but officialdom, like the media, keeps it hushed.   Are we  "to glow before we know"  what is happening?  Is there a  "the greater the event, the less we hear"  edict hidden somewhere in government files?
Germany is  intelligently closing down ALL nuclear plants by 2020.  North America is strangely " silent"  about it  instead,  no such plans HERE.
  We don't have to wonder why. The invoking  of common sense itself would be an earth-shattering event that would have to be silenced.
Does wild game  in North America have to become "polluted and unfit for human consumption"  with Fukushima radiation   like the wild boars ARE ALREADY  today in Germany--from 900 miles away,  --the Chernobyl disaster 25 years ago--before it becomes a "news story" again? 


The Haiti  earthquake disaster may as well have occurred  a hundred years ago;  the "live"  victims may be healed, but they still live in tent cities,  the city, reduced to rubble  is NOT yet rebuilt,  the aid  "disappearing" into the strangling, secret pockets  of the bureaucracy.  Has that story, too, been "worn out" by the media, no longer worth contaminating a news page or computer screen?
Strange silence is emerging over the  Iraq war,   --"winding down", is it?   Or is it in fact really just another very expensive military failure that will be glossed over,  the new government just as corrupt as Saddam himself, with all the facts hidden from the public?
Never mind that war, we have NEW ones. We line them up, one after the other. 

The Talking Heads Debate : Repetitive Rhetoric, and Ominous Silence

It never fails to amuse observers of politics  how politicians defend their self-perceived  perfect records with the practiced lines of  child actors seeking perfection in a public school play, repeating the same Party rhetoric over and over whilst  accusing  one another of disrespect for Canadians and Democracy and the dignified Process of Governance.
The more likely fact is, political talking heads  collectively seem to increasingly lack any respect for Canadian voters, process,  honesty or  government itself, --and not surprisingly, Canada does not hold a monopoly on that contemporary political  phenomenon.

Politicians  seem to ooze honesty on television  collectively,   but  fail to admit the real  reason they are there,  the  really big issue,  which is not health care,   not  their concern  about Canada being misrepresented  in Foreign Affairs,  not $175M fighter jets, not the military involvement in Libya or Afghanistan,  not the Economy, even though" it's the economy, stupid" , and  certainly not  budgetary concerns including excessive waste spent in  Tony's   cute little Gazebo-infested  Conservative riding  that required  $50M  all at once just to build Gazebos and get "spruced up"  for viewing  by G20 leaders --for at least 15, maybe 20 minutes,   according to the Auditor-General's "not-to-be-trusted report"..... and  she's used to seeing stuff like that,   $2.6B wasted on an inefficient, foolish gun registry,  Multi-million-dollare fake lakes, $10M  long fences  and thousands of riot-equipped police to keep  citizens at bay,   G-8 Billion-dollar boondoggles,  being ruled in contempt of parliament,  Senator crookery  or anything of that "let's avoid that lickety-split"   nature.
We don't address.....well, we don't  REALLY want to address THOSE things on "national debate" night.

The real issue behind the  charade is the  primal driving force, well  hidden ,   which is the maintenance of an old-boy's security web, a  political party mutual admiration society  that behind closed doors,  studies diligently  the mechanics of the Prime Directive of that Society ---which is interpreted  in camera as :
" How do we ensure we're all  getting elected yet again so we get to keep our very big MP Pensions and make sure WE get tucked nice and neatly into the Senate too, even if we're crooks and scallywags ?" 
Perhaps it is written in a "mission statement" somewhere,  maybe on the back of  a brown  envelope containing big wads of cash.

With the "unwanted"  May 2nd election coming upon us fast,  another "National all party debate" was held today, except that all of the party leaders were not allowed to participate,  to wit,  Ms. Elizabeth May, the leader of the Green Party was excluded simply  because the Green party has not a single seat in the House of Commons;  the outrageous fact that NOBODY is "sitting"  in the House of Commons once an election is called seems to have been ignored,  but we all suspect  Ms. Green Elizabeth May doesn't support big corporations, including the  crabby, nasty   media group  that  excluded her from the DEBATE.
How can we have a debate if all parties are not represented?   Ans:  " Fill debate with Canned Questions, meaningless repetitive  blather, maybe nobody will notice."
Maybe they're all afraid of  Ms. May, she's an astute type, if a bit quirky, or maybe they just don't like green stuff like spinach.
Funny, they managed to  include  Gilles Duceppe, the leader of the Bloc Quebecois, wannabe kingmaker supreme,  who is constantly vowing to remove Quebec from Canada even though he knows Quebec can be soon divided up into rather large  enclaves of Canadian loyalists  if Canada should be parted, but he carried on like a trooper anyway. 
      The Harper-Ignatieff mutual admiration and exchange Chapter of the group expressed the strongest disdain  for each other and the other members present,  but Gilles  scuffled away,  and Jack Layton calmly  representing the NDP  kept them busy slip-sliding around.   At times it seemed  Jack  was actually winning the debate with  calm and wit a la crutch,  with  Gilles  crustily  pretending his Bloc representation of Quebec in the Canadian National debate actually makes  a difference in said  National debate.
He scored  one for the Nipper  on  old Harper's  coalition-bent  letter though,  make that Harper's old coalition letter,   no doubt about that one.   Making bed with the Bloc, a paper enemy and pale-faced ghost, it was.  Stephen appeared uncomfortable with that timely reminder.
But, bottom line, no score was noted anywhere  by tired political observers; it's all been seen before, lies,  lies, promises,  loads of sheeple manure, and   Iggy's Liberal  "a chicken in every pot"  promises,  "gotta get after those guns",  ...and ....and.... and nothing has, or ever will  change.

Meantime, out in the real world,  with the Japanese Fukushima disaster now being compared to Chernobyl,  not a word was mentioned.  
Ominous silence. We don't wish to be told we're about to  be glowing in the dark anyway, do we? 

Perhaps we should  blame Ms.  May for that one too after all, she wasn't there to bring it  up.  We can't blame Elizabeth?    Excluded you say?    No  matter.  The Talking Heads have spoken and Canadian Politics is fine and well and predicable as can be. 
That's just as well, Canadians like talking heads,  high taxes, wasteful spending,  crooked politics,  $6.00/gallon gas  and predictability--and we all know nothing is going to change, no matter WHO is elected.
We'll go vote anyway, at least we get to see the neighbours  at the polling station and chat a bit.
That's my opinion  and I'm sticking to it.
#

Arab Oil States, Golden Thrones and Disproportionate Distribution of Wealth

     North Africa is shaking and rattling in the  throes of revolution.   In the last few weeks,   Egypt's  Hosni Mubarak was forced out with his vanishing billions.    Yemen is  in trouble, and  the disease of economic disparity and discontent is spreading rapidly. 
     The latest and most serious?   Libya.  Moammar Gadhafi,  the seemingly demented and murderous leader of Libya, has been  hanging onto power tooth and nail by hiring deadly mercenaries and arming civilians loyal to him.   The global community has ordered economic sanctions against Libya as  it becomes more apparent that thousands of people may have been murdered in his bid to keep power at any cost.  It is evident  Gadhafi is neither  considered  to be a "generous  humanitarian"  or  'concerned' about his people one whit.
     On the other hand, the Sultan of Oman,  Sultan Quaboos, who has sat on his  golden throne  for over 40years in an absolute dictatorship, is apparently more of a gentleman and highly regarded.  What do these two  men have in common? They are both facing  major revolts mounted against them. Why?
      The sad fact is,  the common root factor happens to be that they are dictators  hoarding absolute power,  and wealth that belongs rightfully to the people of their respective countries. There seems to be  a newly discovered awareness of  "disproportionate distribution of wealth" , to say the least.
Why is that not a surprise?  The rot of extreme and obscene greed has finally precipitated  the questioning of the ultimate form of self-defeating  capitalism, the "king", absolute ruler,  greedy dictator, and  rich despot. 

     The Sultan of Oman, being an astute man,  saw the writing on the wall as revolts took place in Egypt and Libya;  he quickly ordered the creation of 50,000 jobs for the starving and unemployed.   Each of those jobs will supposedly pay benefits of about $390.00 per month. To a man that has a starving family, it must seem a fortune.

     Nice, but does it not still  remain a disproportionate distribution of wealth? Are these people totally foolish?  No.   Do the poor have calculators and the internet?  Certainly some must do.   Shall  we shake our heads in awe  as we confirm their calculations?

$390.00 per month x50,000  = $19,500,000 U.S.D.  per MONTH.  Nineteen and one-half million dollars. That sounds like a big bribe, and a lot of money.  WOW, that's $19.5M x12 = $234 Million  U.S.D. per year --mere peanuts  for  a desperate  last-minute  "job creation"  solution  to prevent revolution. 
 That "peace offering" and job creation  "strategy" ought to quell the rebellion and keep the  starving peasants happy?    Should it really, Sultan Quaboos?  No disrespect, but think again. Is it realistic?  No. 

The fact is,  normally Sultan Quaboos  and his Omani helpers   sell off 850,000  barrels of crude oil daily,  at a heady payment of  $120.00 per barrel, using the "latest" cost  figures.

  Let us tickle those those calculator buttons one more time:     850,000 barrels x $120.00 U.S.D. ( per bbl )  = $102,000,000   --per DAY.
 ONE HUNDRED AND TWO  MILLION  dollars each day?   UNbelievably, it will take only TWO days of oil production to pay for the  cost of the entire ANNUAL  BRIBE, a.k.a  "job creation"...a.k.a. desperate move to retain the Sultan's throne.... 

  Where is the REST of  money going, other than into the Sultan's  treasury?

Who is kidding who?  Oman has been considered the "peaceful kingdom" but it is not surprising the people of Oman are angry.  At least SOME of them have calculators.  The fact is, oil wealth and other resources  belong to the citizens of that country.   Resources are no longer the exclusive property of  the rich and powerful, or of foreign interests.
Is there a lesson to be learned here?  I think so.

---------
Meantime, back in my neck of the woods in Canada during this same crisis,  we are paying $1.30/litre for gasoline,  the price of which has not even  yet peaked. That horrendous price translates to almost $6.00 USD per imperial gallon (4.56 liters) --- which is nothing but gouging and shameful for an oil-producing nation. 

At the same time, Canada  (a.k.a. Big Oil )  exports 1.3M barrels of  dirty crude oil to the USA  every day.  Let's calculate THAT while we are at it:  1,300,000 x120 =  $156,000,000 dollars per DAY.   That is One-Hundred and fifty-six MILLION dollars each DAY.   
We seriously must question  who has the keys to the  golden vault THAT huge pile of loot is being hauled to.  It sure isn't in MY back yard.   It is not in pollution control.  It is not in infrastructure, or in tax reduction. Where is it? 

The fact IS,  in times of international crises,  Canadians should be at least partially shielded by  Canadian production.  Are we, at some time in the future,  to inherit ONLY the stripped,  contaminated land,  water, mutant fish, societal cancers,  and dead soil left from the dirty oil extraction from the  Athabasca tar sands? 

In fact, there is no excuse for gouging at the gasoline pump.   Gasoline at $1.30 a liter  is made with the same process and equipment that gasoline was made with 40 years ago, back  when gasoline was 0.30 per  GALLON .    Nobody has to work too hard to figure out that was about 6-1/2 cents a liter.
It seems to me there's something seriously wrong with OUR  OWN systems of golden thrones and disproportionate distribution of wealth,  never mind those  of madman Gadhafi or gentlemanly Sultan Quaboos.

##

Mad Dogs, Desert Heat and Political Correctness

It is sad to note the furious and seemingly  demented leader of Libya,  Moammar Gadhafi  has unleashed  military might  against  innocent civilians in recent days, and sworn in endless publicized rants that he would  die a martyr, rather than step down.  Not surprisingly, the citizens of Libya have been protesting and calling for change, much like the rest of the Arab world. 
 Any sane, otherwise genuine leader  in a  country populated by people calling for change in the real world  would remember that any leadership holds ONLY  a mandate to do what is best for, and to protect the civilian population, but Gadhafi clearly  thinks otherwise.  He believes he can murder  unruly segments of his population with impunity and without recourse. 

At his orders, crowds of protesters  have been shot, --not with rubber bullets, but with live ammunition.   Gadhafi's  military, henchmen and even reportedly foreign mercenaries have killed hundreds of innocent people and the Libyan air force has bombed civilian targets  with  military aircraft.  
The pointed question must be asked:  
Why is the response of the civilized world not  one of immediate action instead of political correctness? Are we, yet again,  limited to  merely "condemning" crimes against humanity?

In CIVILIZED CANADA,  Prime Minister Stephen Harper said it was "outrageous and unacceptable" (1) .   Since when is murder of  hundreds of innocent people  merely "outrageous and unacceptable"?  
  It is, in  the real world,  mass MURDER.  Let us call it what it IS, an ongoing criminal act that must be stopped.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff was  equally  "politically correct", saying in a statement: 
"The brutal attacks on the Libyan people by Libyan security forces are an affront to every standard of human rights," .
Again,  that description is hardly strong enough;  we believe we should call such attacks  what they ARE, the blatant and inexcusable,  abuse of power,  murder and a crime against humanity,  --and insist upon a global response. Political correctness is not sufficient.

Innocent protesters being killed viciously by their own military is outrageous, unacceptable, and  indeed "an affront to every standard of human rights", but the result, of that " affront" , is clearly mass murder,  genocide, and a crime against humanity which needs to be addressed immediately by the global community.   

Millions of people in the  so-called ' modern, civilized world'  have watched and  tolerated this rabid,  mad dog wandering around in the desert heat long enough.  Is the world to stand by mute, and watch another instance of mass genocide? 
In the real world, the time for political correctness has ended.  The "man" in Libya with "an alternative reality",  "anger management issues" and "delusions of grandeur" --- to be "politically correct",  must be removed from any position of authority and brought to justice by the global community,  and soon.  


That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it, politically correct or not.


(1) cbc.ca.news.yahoo.ca