Saturday, August 29, 2009
Robin Mathews on BC Rail: Crime in High Places, Part II
British Columbia: The BC Rail Scandal. Crime in High Places. Part Two: BC Rail in the pattern of Gordon Campbell government breach of trust.
By Robin Mathews
Breach of trust is total; falsehood a trademark. Illegitimate secrecy is a consistent pattern. Collaboration of press and media is unbroken. The RCMP is incompetent or bought. The higher courts – incompetent or bought. Political opposition (the NDP) does almost nothing in the face of growing social breakdown … in fact … collaborates. The unions … are nowhere.
The Gordon Campbell government’s active, open, naked breaches of trust can be itemized easily. Press and media failure can be traced daily. The B.C. throne speech is delivered, for instance. Next day (Aug 26 09 A1 A10) The Vancouver Sun trumpets budgetary panic, fiscal breakdown, and an empty public treasury. The Sun provides no honest analysis or reasons.
It leads with the cry of coming “public sector freezes and possible layoffs [and on] to significant reviews of health authorities, boards of education and Crown corporations”. No honest explanation.
The sun warmly greets “the welcome announcement of a freeze on public sector wages”, a “shorter leash” coming “for Crown corporations, school boards and health authorities and other independent agencies”. [“Independent agencies” like the B.C. Utilities Commission which just found the Campbell government, in fact, in ugly, manipulative, falsification of B.C. energy facts?]
The Globe and Mail, the next day, (Aug 27) editorializes in precisely the same way as The Vancouver Sun : collaboration in repressing key facts?
Why? Why do media, RCMP, the court, NDP (opposition) – even union hierarchy – cooperate with the planned, fraudulently produced destitution of British Columbians and the destruction of their reasonably fair and just social order?
Why, when the wealth is “in the ground”, the population well-educated, and a balanced structure assuring reasonable profit, reasonable return to public coffers, and the potential for increased manufacture in the province – why do the “managing” forces of the province all give themselves to the on-going destruction and falsehood?
Not without intention. Not without intention does the Gordon Campbell throne speech point to “a new economic framework”. New it may be for B.C., but it is a very old one in the hemisphere. It’s the framework of a Banana Republic – a framework purposefully constructed to strip the population of their shared wealth, to strip them of social protections, and to deliver all wealth making power into private hands…elsewhere. That program – so far – has all the people on board who should be in bitter opposition.
Why here? Why now?
The answer is at least partly global.
To the middle 1970s the post Second World War social “advances” provided moderate public security, real profit to corporations, and moderate public ownership in the “democratic” West. (Those social achievements are now propaganda-branded by the Right as “socialist theft”.)
The reactionary Right grew more confident, more greedy, more organized, more determined and more lawless - and it was let loose. At the same time the formerly “backward” huge nations (China, India) began to move, independently. South American countries (the U.S. “back yard”) began to wrest real independence for the first time in a hundred years, led by Cuba. The Middle East became permanently unstable. Iran threw off the U.S. yoke to become – the Iran of today.
Afghanistan – passed from a failing Russia to the U.S.A. – sitting on a major energy, geo-political, military cross-road – refuses to be re-colonized. The West, therefore, engages in permanent war in order “to educate young girls and free them from the Burkha in Afghanistan”.
Since a 1952 Senate Report at least, the U.S. has anchored many of its major raw material and energy needs in … Canada. Since 1952 Canada has fallen more and more into U.S. hands (NORAD, the re-write of NATO, Free Trade Agreements, Security “partnerships”, etc.) Apparent harmony with China only masks U.S. determination to secure its Western-controlled wealth and “partnerships” that assure its paramount power.
In Canada, however, “integration” with the U.S. wars daily with the need of the USA to maintain its global domination and wealth by impoverishing whole populations, using them to gather low-cost raw materials and using their countries as the source of cheap, off-shore manufactured goods. Making, in short, what we call Banana Republics.
Venezuela and Iran are major “demons” in U.S. policy. Both (whatever else) have slipped from U.S. control, repatriated oil ownership, and both have used much of the “new” wealth to provide health and security to formerly impoverished parts of their populations. The recent (U.S. involved) coup in Honduras will keep that country out of the South American free trade group and will guarantee that North American “slave economy” industries will continue to operate “in peace” there. Still very sharp, Fidel Castro just wrote, wittily, that Hiliary Clinton should get the Nobel Prize for appearing to disapprove of the illegal coup while making sure it succeeded.
Iraq is a time-bomb, ready to explode again. But its oil is being divided among Western powers through their “global” oil companies.
Pressure to maintain U.S. domination of land-connected suppliers grows. They provide special security. Overseas and South American oil is always at risk. Canada’s oil is, apparently, not. And Canadian (British Columbia’s) water-powered energy reserves are invaluable to the U.S.A., worth, as time passes, trillions of dollars.
Enter Gordon Campbell and his group intent upon destroying B.C. wealth by repeated actions of breach of trust, by handing all to “private” corporations – in fact, to U.S. “private” ownership and control. (How much is this a plan hatched on one of his many, many (Opposition-ignored) trips to New York?)
British Columbia had a golden guarantee of energy, and of transportation, to be used for the maintenance of standards of living for the population while providing secure energy resources and fair transport costs to industrial activity in the province – far, far into the future.
B.C. Gas, B.C. Hydro, B.C. Rail assured hauling and passenger service cut to B.C. needs – at the same time contributing richly to ‘general revenues’ (for healthcare, housing, senior-care, police, courts, families, etc) “forever”.
B.C. Hydro assured careful water-driven power development into perpetuity – with the same social rewards amassing to the whole B.C. community.
B.C. Gas, seen, perhaps, as smaller but filling B.C. needs adequately served B.C. and now should be the prime controller/developer of the huge, newly discovered natural gas reserves being tabbed in Northern B.C. All, instead, are being flogged for peanuts to private corporations (that are owned by or supply the U.S.) by the Gordon Campbell group.
In a spate of misinformation and deception (and probably criminal breach of trust) the Gordon Campbell group has destroyed BC Rail. The only (visible) profit and advantage from the off-load has gone to (Texas head-quartered) CN Rail. (It is recently charged with telling employees not to call it “Canadian National” but “CN Rail”!)
The BC Rail Scandal drags through a myopic and delusionary B.C. Supreme Court in which is daily exposed the reality of Gordon Campbell government breach of trust employed to fake almost all aspects of the BC Rail “sale”.
Promising to preserve B.C. Hydro, Gordon Campbell – in dramatic actions of breach of trust – has split Hydro into three pieces, in effect privatizing two parts – placing all control of future energy development in U.S. hands. One part has been passed to Accenture (of Enron Disaster fame), the deal still wrapped in secret agreements kept from the “owners” of B.C. Hydro – the people of British Columbia.
The one-third piece of B.C. Hydro that, apparently, remains in the hands of British Columbians has been, in fact, destroyed by the Gordon Campbell forces. B.C. Hydro is forbidden (A) to generate another watt of electricity. It is forced (B) to buy from Campbell-created “private corporate” suppliers at prices it cannot break-even on when selling it to British Columbians!! It MUST, by legislation, lose money. It must, too, keep pushing up costs of energy to B.C. users, public and private.
That psychopathic torture-death is forced upon B.C. Hydro by Gordon Campbell. The whole mad-house structure is created to place all B.C. water-energy wealth in U.S. hands. The B.C. Utilities Commission has just caught the Gordon Campbell forces in fact lying about B.C. energy resources in a developing private corporate system clothed in secrecy. The major press yawns and says Campbell will have to discipline “independent” agencies.
B.C. Gas is less talked about. That is because it was earlier set apart from B.C. Hydro. Then B.C. Gas was permitted to be privately-owned and headquartered in the province. The Gordon Campbell group flushed it out of B.C. and into U.S. ownership.
As it originally existed, it had every ability to move into growing natural gas development for the good of the province and its population – and to provide richly to “general revenues” for government expenditures
The chief anchors of public wealth in British Columbia, efficiently operated and returning importantly to the province’s ‘general revenues’, have been purposefully and by gigantic breaches of public trust taken from the people of the province and handed, almost free, to (largely foreign) private ownership and control.
And while that happens the forests are tragically neglected (becoming fire-bombs) and “private enterprise” (privately-owned and therefore sacred) fish farms decimate natural fish stocks.
Editors of the Vancouver Sun and the Globe and Mail apparently refuse to report why B.C. is in budgetary panic, fiscal breakdown, and facing an empty public treasury. The Gordon Campbell group has stripped the province of wealth, given it to private corporations, freed them of serious tax burden, and is in the process of loading the province’s major tax load onto ordinary British Columbians.
At the same time, the Campbell group is pauperizing British Columbians and hammering them into a Banana Republic structure that will assure the destruction of present social insurances and levels of the security of persons.
Canada has long been a sitting duck, a quiet Banana Republic, its apparently endless resource wealth sucked out on U.S. terms. But the times they are a-changin’. The greedy looters want more. They are increasingly threatened by new imperial blocs, and so they want the security of guaranteed, land-connected energy resources.
All over the world reactionary, (disguised) totalitarian and anti-democratic argument is trumpeted from almost every gilt-edged, corporate-based, private capitalist platform in order to assure that the world’s wealth will reside in the hands of a very few who are, in fact, the faces of present Western imperial domination.
Police forces tend to be “obedient” to Rightest power – and want a share of it. So they support. The military supports. Look at the soldier-eating, innocent-victim eating machines called Iraq and Afghanistan. The courts which usually support repressive regimes…support them now. (Look closely at the B.C. Supreme and Appeal courts.) Press and media owners are not called “barons” for nothing. They support the lurch to anti-democratic structures – pretending they don’t understand. (The Globe and Mail and the Vancouver Sun actively, today, misrepresent the B.C. financial condition.)
The political opposition around the world is repressed, coerced, bribed, wooed, seduced, married. Wanting desperately to belong to the Top Dog Club, opposition forces join it as Associate Members or – like Tony Blair and Gordon Brown of England’s “New Labour”, they plunge into the “rape, kill, and loot” Club, rapturous to be accepted.
Gordon Campbell is, I think, too gross, too power and greed driven to fit into anything like a club of (however evil) sophisticated people. Cunning, devious – fully willing to live by outrageous breaches of trust – he seems to fit the characteristics of a nakedly grasping psychopath. For such a one – if that is his condition – nothing has meaning but lust and power, betrayal and domination.
The great pity for British Columbians is that Gordon Campbell finds all his satisfaction in flattering, fawning upon, and delivering British Columbia’s wealth to foreign, private interests – and in the sell-out and betrayal of his own people. That is the hallmark of leadership in a Banana Republic. His mania fits perfectly with U.S. imperial designs.
Did Gordon Campbell’s life as the child of an alcoholic father make him determined to wreak vengeance on all British Columbians forever? Whatever, the sickness of Gordon Campbell (and his highly cooperative friends) is rendering the Lotus Land of British Columbia into a diseased and destitute garden.
Only the strongest replacement government can hope to re-claim the losses. Or, perhaps, history will reveal once again that debased and determined evil can only be displaced by armed insurrection. Time alone will tell.
The BC Rail Scandal has been stripped of its propaganda and now stands as a major operation in betrayal and breach of trust. But it is only one part of a carefully planned program of breach of trust by the Gordon Campbell forces. When will British Columbians wake up? When they discover the huge breaches of trust they have been subjected to, what will they do?
Is it possible that the New Democrat Opposition knows the full, terrible secret of Gordo's Government?
And that the New Democrats are scared to death of defeating the so-called BC Liberals and finding themselves saddled with the chaotic aftermath of Gordo's Golden Era?
I simply can't see how the NDP wouldn't know. They live this story: in their home ridings and in the BC Legislature ... in the Parliamentary dining room and in smoke-filled back rooms. Don't try to tell me that NO government employee has ever come to any Opposition member and tried to "out" the evil.
So the next question is: why isn't the Opposition telling the story clearly, strengthening the people for what's coming? All their bafflegab about "come clean" and "show leadership" and "another lie" is such a turn-off, which tells us nothing. Until both sides of the House seem like the same side ... and the people are abandoned.
Shouldn't the New Democrats be standing up and telling us (at very least) what they think ought to be done ... ? In clear, decisive tones. Like Corky Evans does it.
What do others think?
The NDP not only knows about everything that has happened or will happen - they are a part of it. For whatever reason, be it money, job security, fear....they are a part of it. And should suffer the same fate as the Liberal party. Total annihilation.
Which means that somehow, somewhere, we must find a group of people willing to form a government...and we must do it soon.
I had hoped that some of the Libs in the do nothing portfolios would get smart and cross the floor to Vicki...along with a few NDP of the same stripe. What a waste of hope!
Time to start working on cleaning up the garbage in the Legislature.
Excellent work Robbin.
It is absolutely brilliant in its careful precision and in the thoughtful linkages of how BC has landed where it has.
Never a truer observation than the following:
"The great pity for British Columbians is that Gordon Campbell finds all his satisfaction in flattering, fawning upon, and delivering British Columbia’s wealth to foreign, private interests – and in the sell-out and betrayal of his own people. That is the hallmark of leadership in a Banana Republic. His mania fits perfectly with U.S. imperial designs."
It sums up so well the horrendous, and yet, recognizably familiar turning points of betrayal that have arisen during critical junctures in mankind's history - where personal weakness of character becomes political tyranny.
Robin conveys the true tragedy of that, the shocking truth of how deeply BC has been mired and utterly ruined by betrayal - an intentional course of betrayal where the resulting vastness of the devastation, (of our social infra-structure, of our autonomy, of our human rights) could be referred to as almost Shakespearean in scope.
For me, Mary, the element of "intent", of intentional betrayal, answers, perhaps, part of your question about the Opposition.
I think a process of co-option inside the NDP was implemented quite some time ago, all part and parcel of those "US imperial designs" Robin refers to.
The NDP, having been intentionally neutralized, are responding like a person in a witness protection program. Not only are they confused as to who they have become, but their former identity has been made to seem "problematic" in a corporate world.... and those in the party that try to "remember" who they once were, and try to boldly voice what they once stood for, are seen as "problematic" as well, and a threat to the party's clearly more "safe and corporate cover"... and thus, those who dare to risk that safe cover are quickly silenced.
Are you really saying that it's OK for the NDP Opposition to sit on their hands, bags over their heads, doing absolutely nothing?
I just wanted to point out that, as I understand, BC Hydro is allowed to develop new sources of electricity itself, but only by upgrading its own facilities, or possibly from Site C. Otherwise, new power in BC is to come from private generators, like run-of-river etc.
so I forwarded it ... and this is Robin's reply:
My understanding is that BC Hydro cannot increase its production but must buy from "Independents".
A piece written in the August 18 Vancouver Sun by Melissa Davis, exec. dir. of BC Citizens for Public Power states that the government energy plan: "prohibited BC Hydro from generating any new sources of energy (including Site C, presently part of a five-year review process) and, instead, directed its Crown utility to negotiate long-term Energy Purchase Agreements with private power producers."
I don't think there is any question about the Campbell position. The people's Hydro operation is, thereby, in effect forbidden to compete with the Independent Power Producers. (And we thought a Market Economy dear to Gordon Campbell would WANT competition to achieve lowest prices to the consumer.) His government does not want lowest prices of British Columbians and is manipulating derisively to prevent that.
Now you're scaring me again. Surely you don't mean that you're having a premonition of Vander Zalm actually returning to the premier's office?
And wait a minute ... isn't there some immutable law of a free society that says: when one ideology crumbles (taking a government down with it), there's always an alternative party in the wings eager and ready to take over??
Has that law been repealed? Or in British Columbia, has the virus infected everybody in the Legislature ... and there's nobody able to take over?
If you answer "Yes" to that last question -- and the current Opposition is just faking -- it seems downright awful that they should be receiving those high salaries (about $100,000. plus expenses).
Remember when there were "only" two New Democrats in a fiery, fully-functional Opposition?
And then Paul Nettleton took on the duties of an Independent M.L.A.
Truth and courage, is what we had then in Opposition. People can recognize these things.
His website is called Private Power Watch at: http://www.ippwatch.info/w/
Sometimes a picture is worth much more than a thousand words.
The public anger was so widespread and entrenched that it eventually forced Bennett to resign....
did Baldrey really write that? Wow. 'Cause the usual Canwest spin is that Bennett successfully weathered the Solidarity Uprising and that his "restraint budget" was a big success politically.....a year or two ago, or at the opening of the bridge named for him, they touted him as an "elder statesman".
Bill Vander Zalm may have been a silly twit. But I'd prefer a silly twit to an evil one.....buffoon v. bandit, take your pick; I'd prefer the buffoon....
Could there be a group of people able to form a government, and able to convince the electorate in the necessary ridings to bring them to power? Gordon Wilson pulled that off, somehow, and WAC Bennett had done it long before....can it be done without a free press? In the age of the internet, maybe
Myself, taking the radical high ground once again, I think two things are obvious:
(1) a wholesale reform of the constitutional structure of British Columbia is necessary. If that means breakign with the Canadian Constitution, then that has to be done, and in such a way that the public goes along with it, and enough of the establishment is either persuaded to or forced to as well.
(2) if the Americans do wind up irreovcably owning everything here, including the outsourced government services they're coming in control of, then there's little point in us not subverting them by becoming a state. GASP!! See, short of nationalization and expropriation of things they've "legally" bought and contracted for - unless our courts rule that said contracts were illegal - that's the only option, or rather two options. boot out the Yanks, Chavez-style, Castro-style, or demand entry into the Union and throw a kibosh into the delicate balance of Democrat/Republican dichotomy. Not sure how many congressmen we'd get, but two senators could do a lot of damage on Capitol Hill, and while the Republicans would work hard to try and win them, my hunch is that this would be a safe state for the Democrats, or at least for lefto Republicans like those in Washington or Oregon.
Hmmmm do you think Sarah Palin quit the Alaskan governorship to prepare for a run for office in an Americanized BC? And is it just me, or do she and Lara Dauphinee go to the same optician?
I"m sorry to offend those, including probably Prof. Mathews, who are offended at my notion that statehood may be the only way to win this. If we could go it alone as a Norway-sized independent country, I'm all for it. But as long as we're saddled with the limitations and in-built corruption and neo-monarchism of the Canadian Constitution, we're screwed. The final last resort is to request a return to colonial or crown dependency status and ask the UK and the EU for protection from US domination/co-optation of our government.
Selling all that to a complacent and self-interested, mall-worshipping public, is going to be a hard thing to do. Selling statehood would be, by comparison, a lot easier to do, and could really turn US politics on its ear, as well as raise questions down there about US interference in Canadian politics.
The public needs a firecracker lit under it.
Very informative maps.
The multitude of IPP clusters look like a disease on the map of Vancouver Island ... and you can imagine the export intentions simply from looking at the locations of these installations.
What a monstrosity.
Thanks very much, N.V.G.
We have been occupied by a sinister force.
Where is the resistance?
When do we start non-cooperation with the emperor?
Yes, the "fast ferry" episode was a mess of arrogance and elite empire building. It also illustrates that the party has a right wing. In fact, every out of touch aspect of the Harcourt-Clark governments has to do with the assortment of careerists who pick a party based not on principle, but on the fact that winning is certain in some ridings. The Barrett government was mostly leftist in nature, and they added $11,000,000,000 in assets to the province in 3 years, saving Ocean Falls and keeping undoing Socred' sectorial neglect. But, they only lasted 1000 days because the party right wing insisted that Barrett face an election after putting in back-to-work legislation. That was a huge mistake and a losing choice. At the party demise, the Socreds sandbagged the new assets and set up a privatization scheme (BRIC) for failure. Privatization stock quickly went from $5 to $8, and then collapsed to zero value. Yet the media attributed no blame to the Socreds.
We are saddled with a major limitation called the TILMA, which I have always seen as an agreement intentionally designed to completely handcuff and muzzle the population of the province when it comes to corporate business having their way.
I tried (unsuccessfully) numerous times to have the NDP address this damned thing during the election, their final stance was: "It's too complicated for the average person to understand." Yet it's that agreement that will hang the American noose around our necks, while (&(#@#@ watches in glee.
As for the NDP stance of us not being able to understand it...they're wrong. Average people can and do understand it - IF - they even know about it!! 1 out of 50 might. Maybe. It's obvious to me that the NDP agrees with TILMA, they had many years to bring it out in the open, yet chose not to...nor did they fight it. They are a part of the problem, they are in NO wise a solution to it.
Perhaps as NVG said, there is no political party left in BC that wants to take over from Campbell and wear the crap he's created. None of us have a clue about how viscerally damaged we really are, and the so called budget won't enlighten us. Count on it.
In other words, the NDP left wing is also arrogant, which is no surprise to me (I hate preachy lefty ideologues....well, I'm sort of Buddhistic so I don't "hate" them, I just don't think much of them). The attitude that the public is too stupid to understand what's good or bad for it is typically parochial and also smacks of "lowest common denominator" politics, much in the same way that the rabble-language introduced into the provincial media polity when The Province went tabloid was an effort to derail intelligent discussions and replace them with the invective of the redneck class (which votes both right and left).
The reality is that a lot of those 50%+ who don't vote are the ones who feel that the politicians treat them like they're stupid. That the politicians know what's good for us, that we're all simpletons who need to be led and whose input isn't relevant, whose concerns are dictated to us rather than ascertained. Much like Leonard Krog's response to Mary and others - "only write to me in simple terms, I don't have time to listen to anything substantial, I already know what's best".
The notion that the public isn't capable of understanding TILMA or Railgate or the offshore outsourcing of government service and the privatization of the civil service and so they all have pass unchallenged is utterly inane and insulting. It also smacks of political cowardice, as well as offends the (ahem) intelligentsia who actually do understand what they mean and will cause; some of us get riled and get into blogging (which seems a bit more productive than placard-waving) but most people, finding their intelligence insulted and the supposed opposition party not doing any real opposing, turn to the sports, shopping or science fiction channels....people aren't apathetic, they're antipathetic. With the opposition party only talking, softly, through its own ideological hat, and avoiding the serious issues in favour of cheesy catchphrases and safe positions and pandering to people who can't understand the big issues, and not stepping up to bat....well, let's just say there's a good reason the at-least-10% of voters who might otherwise have voted Campbell out just didn't bother.
As much as we might not like how the town hall meeting process in the States turns out, as with the drubbing Obama's healthcare plan is taking, consider the contrast in involvement/non-involvement of the public, and of dialogue within the public. In Canada, the public dialogue is led, controlled, vetted; in the US it's a free-for-all and everybody gets to have their say. Conider how different our polity would be if MLAs and MPs were required to face a "riding assembly" every month or two, answer to their record or non-record. And if with certain measures they were bound to the wishes of their constituents, rather than party "discipline".....
Side tangent: in the US you don't need the government's permission to sue the government. And individual citizens can press criminal charges, and not wait for the police or DA to do so.
And re why Clark got railroaded - my own view is that the Salmon War riled all the wrong people in Washington, and in Ottawa, and with the local establishment. The agenda became "Take him down, by any means possible".
The only way to take back control of our energy and other resources from the US may be to.....take control of the US.....or at least throw the lid open on the garbage can of banana republic corporate politicking that's going on here. Honduras gets more coverage in the US, and frankly, it's not as important in resource/economic terms to the US as BC is. We're the "blank spot" on the map between the Lower 48 and Alaska; they've been wanting to close that gap since 1867. Making us an economic satellite is a convenient way to "fill in the blank" without actually having to give us real democracy, which might limit corporate control of the resource base....or to let into the US a known hotbed of labour, environmental and indigenous voters who might upset the US applecart.
I think we should control the continentalization agenda instead of them getting away with it behind the public's back, letting our so-called politicians do it for us.
The alternative, as I said in my previous post, is to go all Hector Chavez on them, compleat with firebrand demagogue to get a landslide elen win make expropriation and "repatriation" of public assets possible. But then we'd be faced with an embargo.....or, as I believe almost happened in 1983, would wake up one morning with tanks and marines on every major intersection in the Lower Mainland and Ottawa approving of and/or inviting US help to put down "apprehended insurrection".
Some here may not remember that Bennett threatened on The Webster Show to use troops to put down the general strike in '83. Webster pressed him, "what troops?" continuing to say that Canada doesn't have enough troops, and there are virtually none in BC. Bennett smiled a Cheshire cat smiled and said little in response.
The next day, underneath the distorted report of the big rally outside the Hotel Vancouver, and next to the front-page picture of the CPC-Marxist-Leninist banner and all 38 members of that handy fringe element at the rally, there was a news item that two divisions - divisions - of the US Marines were "on manouevres" in Sedro Woolley......
Yes, our biggest concern here is a political fifth column.....unless we make our own. I think the Democrats would listen to the people of BC.....since the New Democrats won't.....
CANADA – BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR MARKET DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT came into effect February 1, 2009
during the Alaska Boundary Dispute I think you remember my bringing up TE Roosevelt's threat to invade and annex BC if London and Ottawa didn't give way on a settlement; BC had been pressing for a return of the HBC Lease lands in the SE panhandle, and on retaining Haines, Skagway and Dyea and Fort Stikine (Wrangell), all based on legalities and the earlier treaties with the Russians, which BC had pressed for an examination of and a border survey, right from 1867 onwards, constantly ignored by Ottawa as being too much money and not important enough etc.....
the US counter-position was the Stikine as far up that river as the Porcupine (past the Iskut) and all of the lower Taku, plus the whole Atlin District; US media coverage in 1900-1901 called it "Atlin, Alaska", and complaiend about the mistreatment of US miners by "British" officials (namely the local Gold Commissioner for that mining district).
From 1867 onwards the US harassed miners and travelers bound for British territory during the Cassiar Gold Rush (1871 onwards) and as the Russians had done during the Stikine Gold Rush (1862-63), in spite of treaty agreements guaranteeing free passage to British territories inland; Fort Tongass was created, on what under the lease with the Russians should have been British turf, expressly to press the US position on the Portland Canal, and also to exert customs controls on British subjects bound for the Stikine (which they had no right to do); Ottawa and London said "blip" and looked the other way.
The later Alaska Boundary Dispute was just "more of the same", except that the real US agenda was to make the Klondike US territory (which to this day most Americans think it WAS).
It was partly because of the denouement and sell-out of BC's interest that McBride was swept into power in 1903, though by then the treaty couldn't be overturned; and if BC had resisted, there would have been no province for him to become Premier of, this would have been made a US possession....
during the Spanish-American War places like Port Townsend were heavily fortified by the US to prevent "threats from British aggression", in other words, to prepare for invasion of BC....
The area lost to BC in the settlement (the terms of which actually caused riots in Eastern Canada, and is thought to have led to the failure of the reciprocity election) is comparable in size to the whole of Vancouver Island, or more.
And to this day, the US continues to ignore the terms of the 1903 treaty and pretends that the A-B Line boundary is unfair and irrelevant to undersea drilling rights and also fishing rights; US maps show the boundary as being in the middle of the Dixon Entrance, rather than as by-treaty only along its northern edge. It's often in this area that US officials seize Canadian fishing boats (and that was BEFORE the Salmon War....).
Over time, I have begun to believe that the gord's condition is one of truly lacking empathy for others, and that he may never have empathy. I see him as only being able to see others for their use to further his own narcissistic needs of domininace and manipulation. This is not a diagnosis, mind you, just my own curious wonderings and thoughts. I have never held an interview with the man, but I doubt that I would have the stomach for it. I think he would be quite the slippery client to contain in a psychologist's chair. It would take a very skilled therapist and a gord with some willingness to expose himself, to have some humility.
That's because they have NO clue what the hell it is. The agreement was fully enacted on April 1st, 2009...April Fools day...the perfect day in his sick mind. Read it and weep.
Oh yeah, and remember while you're reading it that your Federal government is trying to get a NAFTA deal with Europe pushed through asap. The TILMA will be a kicker for that one too. I think we need a damn blog about that agreement! Now, back to what this blog is really about :))
I dunno about that "only" part; it's a bit of a cliche, and certain events fly in the face of it - Velvet Revolution-type stuff, Solidarnosc etc. Mass protest, yes, but "armed" not necessarily. And sometimes, as with the execution of Charles II, it can be accomplished by court proceedings (not that Charles was "debased and determined evil").
True, in Czechoslovaki and Poland and Portugal the regimes were old and sclerotic. but we don't have a Havel or Walesa or, ahem, a Yeltsin, and times before (as in '83) the mass uprising has stood down in face of the threat of force.
And I'd not so much worry about talk of armed insurrection leading to charges of sedition, as to the usual spin of using such talk to discredit those talking about it as "un-Canadian".
The best weapons we have are our words and thoughts; unless we want to enlist those in this country who do have guns (the underworld, and the "hunting class") there's little point in talking about it, and much danger.
But how to mobilize mass public outcry/protest? How to galvanize a new party, and who to coalesce its agenda, who to speak for it?
And it's not just a party that's needed; it's a whole process of reform - an end-run on the led-by-the-nose constitutional discussions of the First Ministers Conferences, or the Citizens' Assembly for that matter.
A draft constitution, whether as a "revised province" or "distinct society/polity" within Canada, as an independent state (for legal-mechanism reasons, I'd say "independent principality"), or as a protectorate of somebody.....or, as previously suggested, a statehood proposal.....it has to be convincing enough to get people off their duffs and support it.
And to support whoever's gonna be leading the charge....and I'd be looking around at who's supposedly retired but might be restive about the direction the NDP is clearly not going in (Glen Clark, Corky Evans, for starters....and dusting off Rafe Mair as a candidate and getting Bill Tieleman to run etc.....though "new blood" is really what's called for....as is somebody with big bucks and a belief in BC to bankroll the whole thing....someone who could be brought 'round road-to-Damascus style, e.g. Jimmy Pattison....or some expat investor like Kyle Washington, Yank though he may be, likewise Craig McCaw....).
Getting young people riled/inspired, even the junior business-degree set, is also what's called for. I can think of individuals who are leadership amterial, if they hadn't already grown cynical about politics in the course of their education and/or inculcation into the business/financial sector. But first they have to have something to believe in, even more than some one. It's from their ranks I believe the new leadership has to be drawn, if there's any hope of real democratic change.
One thing: party politics isn't the answer, nor are the usual type of strident p.c. poiticos (such as those who got involved in the Greens and so on).
can anyone tell me if the BC Govt is picking up the legal fees for the defence on this one too?
One thing: party politics isn't the answer, nor are the usual type of strident p.c. politicos (such as those who got involved in the Greens and so on).
Another thing is that "unity politics" of the kind called for means somehow bringing to an end the fractiousness of BC society; indigenous peoples vs visible minority/immigrant factions vs the urban/rural Interior/Lower Mainland/Vancouver Island hippie/redneck split. "Divide and conquer" has been one upshot of all the attention and polarization on native issues and things like the Head Tax.....brings to mind Franz Kafka's parable "The Building of the City", about the building of the Tower and who all the groups involved got to quarreling amongs themselves, until the city was "finally destroyed by five successive blows by a gigantic fist".
"Intellectual apartheid" between the native political environment and the so-called "white" (or "settler") one vs the "new Canadian" element vs the diehard "Canada is better than anywhere else" don't-change-the-system-since-it's-so-good-and-keeps-us-from-being-Americans element....all that has to be scrapped; a new way of thinking, some new ideas as to how to run a society, how to select a government is needed.
In some way that won't have the troops sent in from Washington and the banks cut off the money supply.....and the food.
I've thought about it for years, and still don't have an answer. But maybe someone else does, we'll see.....
Without a doubt, SOMEBODY knows when Jim Duncan and Anthony Young will join Dave Basi to face the music over the Agricultural Land allegations ... but I sure don't know.
I check the Supreme Court listings for Victoria each day ... so far, nothing.
But that's why I have a cautionary word posted on the masthead: check daily.
I can tell you that tomorrow is expected to see another Basi Virk pre-trial hearing in Vancouver Supreme Court on the topic of: did Gordo's dog really eat those Executive e.mails?
It might also be one of the last times we see Elizabeth Bennett presiding over this case. A bad omen, in my view.
Former Israeli PM, Ehud Olmert, indicted in three corruption cases - charges include, "fraud, breach of trust, registering fraudulent corporate documents, and concealing fraudulent earnings".
Even this looks like small potatoes compared to what is going on here - he didn't even fraudulently sell one river, let alone hundreds of them, or a railway, or a ferry system, or Israel's main energy resource, or all of his people down the road.
Do they give 990 year prison terms?
There's a particular German city, or one in the old German or Austrian Empires, that has such a blazon, I'm not sure which....
And to Leah about the US reaction: it would sure pique their interest, wouldn't it? Especially if it was presented in terms of a last-ditch effort by "British Columbian loyalists" to protect the province's assets from corporate takeover by subverting the very shallow "democratic" institutions left over from British/Canadian colonialism.
It's worth noting that drives for statehood in the US territories, and in places like California and Hawaii and Texas, were galvanized by protecting the fights of individuals against those of empires and corporate money; that those got subverted by Dole and Standard Oil, respectively, is another matter. Oregon, like other states, also eyed independence, but the best vision for control against overwhelming outside force was to join that force - and also to use states' rights to assert local control; this is how Idaho - and Washington - were split off from Washington Territory, and why western Montana joined up with Montana Territory to form the state (it had been part of Washington Territory). I think a similar story about "Alaska for Alaskans" is what brought that territory into statehood. To increase the rights of citizens, and to embrace the constitution with the rights of statehood.
That we would use such an agenda to overturn US imperialism would certainly provoke an interesting series of analyses, and probably some alarm, inside the Beltway, and some inteersting copy from everything from Mother Jones and The Village Voice to the New York Times and Washington Post. It would be interesting to see the gyrations by Rush Limbaugh, FoxNews and CNN trying to rationalize how Canadian nationalist radicals were trying to use the statehood process to subvert God's Democracy.
(Continued ... )
It certainly would get their attention, though. One thing we don't have right now. It might also - might - get Ottawa to smarten up and move to dmocratize, at risk of losing its "Pacific Gateway" to the love 'em-and-hate 'em Yanks.
It wouldn't be long until I-15 was extended up the Rocky Mountain Trench to Whitehorse and Fairbanks and there was a highway from Atlin to Juneau. We might even get the Cascadia MagLev built, and funding for a bridge across the San Juans to Vancouver Island.
And these are people who spend $500 for military toilet seats, rather than cutting corners on budgets they tend to fluff them up.
It would also open up an interesting cast of characters to send to Washington....Senator Vander Zalm sends a chill down my spine, but it would be good press copy, for sure; ditto Senator Glen Clark. And there'd be no way the Gordo & Lara story could be kept from the paparazzi.....
I'm getting a little tongue-in-cheek here, but only barely.....there'd be a lot of Americans - a lot who would be enthusiastic about it, including those wanting to liberalize t he US; our new state(s) would come with constitutional guarantees on public health, setting precedents for the other states...
"States" plural, because there's also an opportunity here to do the long-talked-about - separate jurisdictions for the Coast/Island, Lower Mainland and Interior. Why have only two senators if you can have six? And I say we give the so-called Stikine Region (which barely includes the Stikine, now that Telegraph Creek and Dease Lake are in the RD of Kitimat-Stikine) to the Yukon, so they can be a state, too....
All pie in the sky. But the nuts and bolts of statehood, and of states' rights, we should all take a long hard look at. Even as a theoretical exercise, or as a draft blueprint for actual independence/sovereignty, there's a lot to consider.
yes, I don't want to "be American" either. But what's "being Canadian" mean if it only means being subject to governments that can run roughshod over hte public interest, and over individual rights? The Charter hasn't protected us from Campbell, or from abuses by the RCMP; the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence just might. Even if we don't join them, they serve as useful models for study and development.....
As much as I might not like the idea, it truly IS the best idea for gaining surer control of government AND our resources. Time to do it. So I'll be the first to ask you to take this to the next step...provide a forum for serious discussion of issues on both sides of the fence. I'm not sure what I can do to help, but whatever it is - I'll be there.
All during the successful efforts to unseat Clarke I did my damnedest to have BC Voters recognise the consequences of electing Crooked mouths crowd and got shouted down for it by some here.
I called it because I did my homework on Campbell
And that is what we all must do, our homework. 20/20 hindsight never appealed to me
Mary, the service to British Colombians you have provided makes you Woman of Exemplary Honour. I fully support a Citizens Award to be present to you.
you can certainly write a very nice compliment. Thank you for saying I should have a Citizens' Award. Nice thought.
Here's a seriou question: Do you think we collectively could do our homework if we had the help of "Human Rights Watch" or "Democracy Watch" ... or something like that?
Why is Vancouver the hub that harbours all these "alledged" thieves and murderers, sexual offenders, and corruptions cases? Why can't Victoria law courts deal with BVB?
Why doesn't Vernon and Burnaby Courts do their own work there instead of here?
Is it a case of a Fair trial? or is it trying to find a Jury or Judge that hasn't been tampered with, touched with, the exploits of these individuals doings?
Of course we could! What’s to prevent us?
You have within your readership people of the caliber that is required for the job. That is, if they have the courage and internal fortitude to do it.
I envision a nonpartisan watchdog group that will do the job the Citizens Assembly was set up to do to. (And what happened to them anyway?) However, such an organisation must be independent of all party influences.
I see people taking the study of law into their very being and out of the control of the BAR and Law Societies. What I propose is so revolutionary that it will shake the afore mentioned to the point of cries of “Sedition”
What? wrest law form the Charted Innes of Court?
The question remains,
Who will bell the cat?
I have been out in front enough times to know that all I have behind me is the vanished.
Who will put their name to a Proclamation of Right?
Somewhere within the Law of Contract there most likely exists a violation of the Common weal: commonwealth done by elected representatives.
That will be the basis for action.
The people, insufficient numbers, are compelled to overthrow criminal regimes and try them in courts convened (sp?) by us and not them. (BAR or Law Society members)
Our trust has been betrayed
But it has been betrayed because we are culpable by our own lack of vigilance on matters in which we have a stake (in) what government does in our stead.
There exists in countries operating under British Common Law a movement towards self-ownership: personal sovereignty. Therefore what I propose in not new and certainly not without merit.
It is from this foundation the taking back of a captured power arises
I will quit here, for now to let the full weight of what I am saying settle into consciousness.
Those so far uninitiated in personal sovereignty may have difficulty in the concept
1) Would you give yourself a UserName so that I can tell whether it's you speaking or someone new? "BC Born" would do nicely, in fact.
2) Would your coalition have anything like the reception we got when we approached the Opposition Justice Critic asking for his guidance in the BCRail anniversary emergency?
3) Is your proposal anything like an injunction?
Thanks again ... very much.
in fact that was the idea
“Would your coalition have anything like the reception we got when we approached the Opposition Justice Critic asking for his guidance in the BCRail anniversary emergency?”
No. I can well imagine any reception to be one of dismissal by all opposition concerned
One must, as fully as possible, grasp the concept of what it is to be Sovereign.
Please do not take this question lightly, As you know Queen Elisabeth is Sovereign. Does the Queen (Sovereign) Ask for receptions?
My proposal is radical in as much as we too are Sovereign We demand our will be served in the interests of civility.
Now, Having said that, I expect the rest of the readership here to pitch in with well thought out strategies as well.
I am not seeking anything but recognition for a good idea if it is one. If not, I accept full responsibility for any wrong headedness. Fair enough?
“Is your proposal anything like an injunction?”
No, My proposal Stands under Remedy and Recourse
See http://en.mimi.hu/law/remedy.html http://www.loveforlife.com.au/node/6314 perhaps these are not the best resources but they are an introduction.
Nota bene: the writer, Steven Montgomery, addresses the issue from an American perspective, but Locke’s words hold overall in matters of the BAR. That noted please, use as an overlay, of BAR matters in joinder , in The BC Rail Affair
“As John Locke put it:
The great and chief end, therefore, of men uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property; to which in the state of nature there are many things wanting.
Firstly, there wants an established, settled and known law, received and allowed by common consent to be the standard of right and wrong, and the common measure to decide all controversies between them. For though the law of Nature be plain and intelligible to all rational creatures, yet men, being biased by their interest, as well as ignorant for want of study of it, are not apt to allow of it as a law binding to them in the application of it to their particular cases.
Secondly, in the state of Nature there wants a known and indifferent judge, with authority to determine all differences according to the established law. For every one in that state being both judge and executioner of the law of nature, men being partial to themselves, passion and revenge is very apt to carry them too far, and with too much heat in their own cases, as well as negligence and unconcernedness, make them too remiss in other men's.
Thirdly, in this state of Nature there often wants power to back and support the sentence when right, and to give it due execution. They who by any injustice offended will seldom fail where they are able by force to make good their injustice. Such resistance many times makes the punishment dangerous, and frequently destructive to those who attempt it. 22
So according to Locke therefore, men would be justified by Natural Law, in organizing a body of men with executive, legislative and judicial powers to defend their freedom. This concept of Natural Law and its derivative, Natural Rights, was transmitted to the Founders through several sources: Classical Greek and Roman political thinkers, philosophers and statesmen 23; English law and tradition 24; Enlightenment Rationalism 25; and the Christian or Biblical tradition. 26 In utilizing these sources the Founders were everywhere referring to Natural Law, and Natural Rights in their pamphlets, newspapers, sermons, speeches, etc.”
BCB. Or Busy Bee if you prefer.
The very first step is to have explicit and common definition of the, and forgive the pun, BAR Code. The BAR have dictionaries solely dedicated to their Craft. I use the word Craft in the same sense as it is used to describe - the Black Arts.
Those in the Practice of Law have a language of their own making which they are entitles to under the societies act. It’s Private Club.
Please realise, That the court officers; lawyers, judge, and prosecution are members of a club you do not belong to but must engage to seek Justice
* Blogger BC Mary said...
* "Oh come on, BC Born ... this is a Starbucks take-out franchise of U.S. law!"
Not so, BC Mary< Not so! British Common Law was exported to Canad as well as the US of A
But have it your way.
One must understand the levels and depths of the subject we call Law and the whys and wherefores of its complexities.
Under English Inns of the Court there are four major ones;
Over the centuries the number of active Inns of Court was reduced to the present four*: Gray’s Inn, Lincoln’s Inn, The Temple Inn, The middle Inn.
The language of law is precise and exquisite, although the tongue is English the definitions are separate and distinct to the Bar and require dictionaries with definitions quite unlike those of standard English.
I believe that our indifference to the knowledge of the subject of law due to what might be perceive as it daunting nature is similar to that of any other craft to which one has to be a member of to fully benefit from its, law’s, esoteric nature. Such indifference to the very essence of social structuring goes a long way in explaining the control law has over us.
Sitting in court rooms witnessing the proceedings without knowledge of the proceedings, nuances, and definitions is about as exciting as watching paint dry, But … study of the three aforementioned aspects of law will for some of us give zest and insight to how we are sometimes manipulated.
My call for the readership of BC Mary’s blog to make law their business should not go unheeded when true Justice is tobe served back to us.
Links to this post: