Sandra Finley

2018-08-25 Letter to the Minister Responsible for Neonic chemicals. Bayer CropScience, Monsanto, University of Saskatchewan.

 Corruption, Genetically Modified, Health, March Against Bayer-Monsanto, Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 252018
 

There’s another round of consultations re neonic chemicals, deadline soon passed.   During the last round,  not very long ago, Health Canada received 46,000 communications.   Why we need another round I do not know.

As I wrote to one of the organizations:

Realistically, you have to call them on the corruption, if we are to make any progress.

(I’m from Saskatchewan, an agricultural province, and a graduate of the University of Sask.   I was an elected member of University Senate for six years. The neonic chemicals are understood within that framework.)

= = = = = = = = =

LETTER  TO THE MINISTER

CONSULTATIONS ON THE NEONIC CHEMICALS

 

Dear Minister Ginette Petipas Taylor,

 

A lawsuit has been launched against the University of Saskatchewan over the issue of agricultural chemicals. Imidacloprid is one such chemical, in the class referred to as “neonics”.

The posting explains why the neonics are not going to be banned.  I’ve been watching the ag-chemical corporations and how they operate for a couple of decades.  You’re engaged in unrealistic fantasizing if you believe the neonics will be banned.  At least, not without a huge fight.

The Industry has re-framed themselves as, for example, the “Global Institute for Food Security“.   Take a look at the players – – they are the ag-chem guys.  They are well-known scoundrels, liars, and corrupters of public institutions.  Hence the international “March Against Monsanto“.

The court case against the University of Sask came a week before the jury verdict in California that awarded $289 million to Dewayne Johnson  who has terminal cancer.  Monsanto knew, and knows, what its chemicals do.  Monsanto no longer exists – – Bayer CropScience bought it.

(UPDATE:  Nov. 1/18  The groundskeeper who won a massive civil suit against Bayer’s Monsanto claiming that the weedkiller Roundup caused his cancer has agreed to accept $78 million, after a judge substantially reduced the jury’s original $289 million award.)

After the verdict Bayer’s stock price dropped 14%.   There are an estimated 5,000  (UPDATE:  8,000)  other lawsuits already in progress.  Not all about cancer, also charges of false advertising.

The prognosis is good, dependent upon citizen determination.  The forced abandonment of the name “Monsanto”, the jury verdict ($289 million to Johnson), and the pending (8,000) more lawsuits bode well.   (Listen to the video of the Judge reading out the Jury’s verdict in the Monsanto trial.)

Canadians, with good reason, have little faith remaining in Health Canada (the PMRA) to protect citizens against the skulduggery of corporations like those represented by CropLife Canada, the lobbyists for the industry, infiltrators of the regulatory system and the University.    I’d be happy to fill you in on the details.

I hope you will find the  posting  brief and to-the-point – – what’s behind the lawsuit.  It explains the difficulty getting through the corruption to the actual banning of the neonic chemicals.

(2018-08-18) SIGNIFICANCE EXPLAINED: U of Saskatchewan taken to Court, Refuses to disclose Right to Know symposium proceedings.

 

In the public interest,

Sandra Finley

2018-08-23 Verizon under fire for ‘throttling’ firefighters’ data in California blaze. (Net neutrality)

 Media, public interest  No Responses »
Aug 232018
 

Canadians have reason

To be Grateful, for all the work that has gone into net neutrality (SO FAR, we MIGHT still have it in Canada).

OpenMedia  is our excellent leader (since 2008) on internet/communication issues.

Telephone service (the ability to communicate) is fundamental to health and security.  Communications are a service, like schools and roads, that citizens joined hands, decades ago, to provide through their government.

The airwaves are a component of The Commons – – they belong to us ALL.   If we lose net neutrality, it will be our own doing.

RELATED:   2017-08-07   Further concentration in the Communications industry

Canadians have reason

To be On guard  (our American friends HAD net neutrality, and then LOST it, with the consequence below for firefighters in California).

 

The battle to maintain open access to the Internet without preferential categories (“Net Neutrality”)  has been hard fought, with people in many countries pitching in (think of AVAAZ).  The battle was underway before 2009, when I first actively engaged.  It has not ended:

  • 2015 Celebrate!   the FCC (U.S.) voted protection for the Internet, after huge protests.
  • Later,  under a Trump appointee, the protection was reversed.
  • Today, California . . .  you can’t get your data through, you have wildfires to put out?   We’re sorry, we made a mistake!

RELATED POSTINGS:

The Obama-era protections had widespread public support but were scrapped last year (2017) by Trump’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with the former Verizon lawyer Ajit Pai at the helm. At the time, Pai argued that ISPs should self-regulate instead as government regulation would stifle innovation in the industry. He also said that the net neutrality rules were established on  “hypothetical harms and hysterical prophecies of doom”.

So, the Americans had net neutrality, and then lost it, thanks to Trump.  Today, in California, they experienced the throttling of the firefighters’ phones.

Canadians fought – – people from outside Canada helped us.  We were successful.

We may have won, (maybe, maybe not) but beware.   Big Money is not about public service.  They know how much money can be made when they get hold of a public good; and they know the importance of the Internet to our successes.  They got the U.S.   They will be determined to take Canada, if they haven’t already finessed it.   Can we keep the CRTC honest (“In the Public Interest”)?

This is not a call to action.   Pre-existing awareness is very helpful when help is needed.   I just sent a cheque to OpenMedia (207 W Hastings St, Vancouver, BC V6B 1H7).

= = = = = = = =  = = = =

With thanks to David:

Verizon under fire for ‘throttling’ firefighters’ data in California blaze

The incident was not the first time Verizon has squeezed the firefighters data connection. Photograph: Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images

 

Lawsuit argues the impaired emergency efforts show how loss of net neutrality protections can be deadly

Olivia Solon in San Francisco

The incident was not the first time Verizon has squeezed the firefighters data connection. Photograph: Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images
California firefighters’ ability to battle a huge wildfire was impeded by Verizon Wireless throttling their internet connection, in a moment advocates say demonstrates the high stakes of the battle over net neutrality.

Santa Clara county fire department had paid for what Verizon described as an “unlimited” data plan for various internet-connected devices, but the data flow was throttled to about 1/200th of the typical speed – unusably slow for any meaningful data transfer.

Californians watch wildfires burn their houses via home security cameras

Read more

This restriction created problems for a command and control communications vehicle called OES 5262 as firefighters battled the Mendocino Complex fire, the largest wildfire in California’s history, in late July. The vehicle – essentially a fire engine that is fitted with computers and communications equipment – gets internet access via a device that uses a Verizon sim card. It is used as a hub to “track, organize and prioritize routing of resources around the state and country to the sites where they are needed the most”, according to the Santa Clara county fire chief, Anthony Bowden, in a lawsuit over net neutrality protections, first reported by Ars Technica.

“This throttling has had a significant impact on our ability to provide emergency services,” said Bowden. “Verizon imposed these limitations despite being informed that throttling was actively impeding County Fire’s ability to provide crisis-response and essential emergency services.”

Obama-era protections would have given the fire department the recourse to bring a complaint to the FCC, which could have taken action against Verizon.

The July incident wasn’t the first time Verizon had throttled the firefighters’ data connection.

They had previously contacted Verizon in June when they were dealing with the Pawnee fire and December 2017 when they were battling a grass fire near Prado regional park.

According to emails included in court filings, in June 2018, the fire captain Justin Stockman contacted Verizon requesting that the data connection for a critical piece of communications equipment was unthrottled. A Verizon account manager responded by trying to upsell the fire department from a $37.99 plan to a $39.99 plan.

“In light of our experience, County Fire believes it is likely that Verizon will continue to use the exigent nature of public safety emergencies and catastrophic events to coerce public agencies into higher-cost plans, ultimately paying significantly more for mission-critical service – even if that means risking harm to public safety during negotiations,” Bowden wrote in a written declaration.

Internet service providers (ISPs) are entitled to throttle people who use excessive amounts of data, depending on the terms of the individual plan. However, Verizon has a policy to remove restrictions if contacted in an emergency situations.

“We have done that many times, including for emergency personnel responding to these tragic fires. In this situation, we should have lifted the speed restriction when our customer reached out to us. This was a customer support mistake,” said the company in a statement published on Tuesday.

Harold Feld, from Public Knowledge, one of the organisations bringing the suit, said: “Companies need to be liable for their actions,” adding: “Verizon’s response of ‘I’m terribly sorry your state is burning down, let me sell you this new package’ is not good enough. We need rules to prevent it from happening in the first place.”

The Observer view on net neutrality

Read more

The Santa Clara fire department’s complaint forms part of a large lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission seeking to overturn the repeal of net neutrality rules that prevent internet service providers from blocking, throttling and paid prioritisation.

The Obama-era protections had widespread public support but were scrapped last year by Trump’s Federal Communications Commission, with the former Verizon lawyer Ajit Pai at the helm. At the time, Pai argued that ISPs should self-regulate instead as government regulation would stifle innovation in the industry. He also said that the net neutrality rules were established on “hypothetical harms and hysterical prophecies of doom”.

“This should be a warning to lawmakers of what happens when there aren’t protections in place,” said Mark Stanley from digital rights group Demand Progress. “ISPs simply can’t be trusted to police themselves.”

“If Verizon was willing to do this to a fire department during the state’s largest wildfire, when public safety should have been paramount, it’s easy to imagine what they are willing to do to everyday consumers,” he added.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/22/verizon-data-throttling-wildfires-california-lawsuit?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+USA+-+Collections+2017&utm_term=284128&subid=19904009&CMP=GT_US_collection

2018-08-22 Change the world, not yourself; or how Arendt called out Thoreau. By Katie Fitzpatrick

 Change, Empowerment, Non-Violent Resistance, Occupy Movement  No Responses »
Aug 222018
 
ALSO  ARENDT:
2012-04-15 Figure me out. Figure you out. Salvation is coming. With help from Hannah Arendt.

 The rebel. dismissed as impractical and zealous, is chronically misunderstood.  Those cursed with timidity, fear, or blindness and those who are slaves to opportunism call for moderation and patience.  They distort the language of religion, spirituality, compromise, generosity, and compassion to justify cooperation with systems of power that are bent on our destruction.  The rebel is deaf to these critiques.  The rebel hears only his or her inner voice, which demands steadfast defiance.

 

= = = = = = = = = = = =

Katie Fitzpatrick  is a writer, editor, and university lecturer based in Vancouver, Canada. She has a PhD in English from Brown University, and serves as a humanities editor for the LA Review of Books. During the 2018/2019 academic year, she will be teaching first-year reading and writing in the coordinated arts programme at the University of British Columbia.
= = = = = = = = = = = =
The article speaks well for the author, and for Aeon.   Thanks to Hart for drawing to attention:
https://aeon.co/ideas/change-the-world-not-yourself-or-how-arendt-called-out-thoreau
<p>Dr Martin Luther King, Dr Ralph David Abernathy, their families, and others leading the Selma to Montgomery march in 1965. <em>Courtesy Wikipedia</em></p>

Dr Martin Luther King, Dr Ralph David Abernathy, their families, and others leading the Selma to Montgomery march in 1965. Courtesy Wikipedia

It is not often that a neighbourhood squabble is remembered as a world-historical event. In the summer of 1846, Henry David Thoreau spent a single night in jail in Concord, Massachusetts after refusing to submit his poll tax to the local constable. This minor act of defiance would later be immortalised in Thoreau’s essay ‘On the Duty of Civil Disobedience’ (1849). There, he explains that he had been unwilling to provide material support to a federal government that perpetuated mass injustice – in particular, slavery and the Mexican-American war. While the essay went largely unread in his own lifetime, Thoreau’s theory of civil disobedience would later inspire many of the world’s greatest political thinkers, from Leo Tolstoy and Gandhi to Martin Luther King.

Yet his theory of dissent would have its dissenters, too. The political theorist Hannah Arendt wrote an essay on ‘Civil Disobedience’, published in The New Yorker magazine in September 1970. Thoreau, she argued, was no civil disobedient. In fact, she insisted that his whole moral philosophy was anathema to the collective spirit that ought to guide acts of public refusal. How could the great luminary of civil disobedience be charged with misunderstanding it so profoundly?

Thoreau’s essay offers a forceful critique of state authority and an uncompromising defence of the individual conscience. In Walden (1854), he argued that each man should follow his own individual ‘genius’ rather than social convention, and in ‘On the Duty of Civil Disobedience’ he insists that we should follow our own moral convictions rather than the laws of the land. The citizen, he suggests, must never ‘for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation’. For Thoreau, this prescription holds even when the laws are produced through democratic elections and referenda. Indeed, for him, democratic participation only degrades our moral character. When we cast a ballot, he explains, we vote for a principle that we believe is right, but at the same time, assert our willingness to recognise whatever principle – be it right or wrong – the majority favours. In this way, we elevate popular opinion over moral rectitude. Because he places so much stock in his own conscience, and so little in either state authority or democratic opinion, Thoreau believed that he was bound to disobey any law that ran counter to his own convictions. His theory of civil disobedience is grounded in that belief.

Thoreau’s decision to withhold his financial support for the federal government of 1846 was, no doubt, a righteous one. And the theory that inspired that action would go on to inspire many more righteous acts of disobedience. Yet despite these remarkable successes, Arendt argues that Thoreau’s theory was misguided. In particular, she insists that he was wrong to ground civil disobedience in the individual conscience. First, and most simply, she points out that conscience is too subjective a category to justify political action. Leftists who protest the treatment of refugees at the hands of US immigration officers are motivated by conscience, but so was Kim Davis – the conservative county clerk in Kentucky who in 2015 denied marriage licences to same-sex couples. Conscience alone can be used to justify all types of political beliefs and so provides no guarantee of moral action.

Second, Arendt makes the more complex argument that, even when it is morally unimpeachable, conscience is ‘unpolitical’; that is, it encourages us to focus on our own moral purity rather than the collective actions that might bring about real change. Crucially, in calling conscience ‘unpolitical’, Arendt does not mean that it is useless. In fact, she believed that the voice of conscience was often vitally important. In her book Eichmann in Jerusalem (1963), for example, she argues that it was the Nazi officer Adolf Eichmann’s lack of ethical introspection that enabled his participation in the unimaginable evils of the Holocaust. Arendt knew from the experience of Fascism that conscience could prevent subjects from actively advancing profound injustice, but she saw that as a kind of moral bare minimum. The rules of conscience, she argues, ‘do not say what to do; they say what not to do’. In other words: personal conscience can sometimes prevent us from aiding and abetting evil but it does not require us to undertake positive political action to bring about justice.

Thoreau would likely accept the charge that his theory of civil disobedience told men only ‘what not to do’, as he did not believe it was the responsibility of individuals to actively improve the world. ‘It is not a man’s duty, as a matter of course,’ he writes, ‘to devote himself to the eradication of any, even to the most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it…’ Arendt would agree that it is better to abstain from injustice than to participate in it, but she worries that Thoreau’s philosophy might make us complacent about any evil that we aren’t personally complicit in. Because Thoreauvian civil disobedience is so focused on the personal conscience and not, as Arendt puts it, on ‘the world where the wrong is committed’, it risks prioritising individual moral purity over the creation of a more just society.

Perhaps the most striking difference between Thoreau and Arendt is that, while he sees disobedience as necessarily individual, she sees it as, by definition, collective.

Arendt argues that for an act of law-breaking to count as civil disobedience it must be performed openly and publicly (put simply: if you break the law in private, you’re committing a crime, but if you break the law at a protest, you’re making a point). Thoreau’s dramatic refusal to pay his poll tax would meet this definition, but Arendt makes one further distinction: anyone who breaks the law publicly but individually is a mere conscientious objector; those who break the law publicly and collectively are civil disobedients. It is only this latter group – from which she would exclude Thoreau – that is capable of producing real change, she implies. Mass civil disobedience movements generate momentum, apply pressure, and shift political discourse. For Arendt, the greatest civil disobedience movements – Indian independence, civil rights, and the anti-war movement – took inspiration from Thoreau but added a vital commitment to mass, public action. In sharp contrast, Thoreau believed that ‘there is but little virtue in the action of masses of men’.

‘On the Duty of Civil Disobedience’ is an essay of rare moral vision. In it, Thoreau expresses uncompromising critiques of the government of his era, while also capturing the powerful feelings of moral conviction that often undergird acts of civil disobedience. Nevertheless, it is Arendt’s account of the practice that is ultimately more promising. Arendt insists that we focus not on our own conscience but on the injustice committed, and the concrete means of redressing it. This does not mean that civil disobedience has to aim for something moderate or even achievable but that it should be calibrated toward the world – which it has the power to change – and not toward the self – which it can only purify.

A Reason, a Season, or a Lifetime

 Health  No Responses »
Aug 202018
 

People come into your life for a reason, a season, or a lifetime.

When someone is in your life for a REASON, it is usually to meet a need you have expressed or just felt. They have come to assist you through a hard time, to provide you with guidance and support, to aid you physically, emotionally or spiritually. Then, suddenly, the person disappears from your life. Your need has been met; their work is done.

Some people come into your life for a SEASON, because your turn has come to share or grow or give back. They bring you an experience of peace or make you laugh. They give you great joy. Believe it; it is real. But only for a season.

Lifetime relationships teach you lifetime lessons—things you must build upon to have a solid emotional foundation. Your job is to accept the lesson, love the person and put what you have learned to use in all your other relationships.

Think about the people in your life over the years. Whether they were there for a reason, a season or a lifetime, accept them and treasure them for however long they were meant to be part of your life.

And when they are gone, be thankful for the gifts you received from them when they were here—for a reason, a season or a lifetime.

–  Author Unknown

Or as Dr. Seuss once wrote: “Don’t cry because it’s over. Smile because it happened.”

 

= = = = = = = = = = =

https://psychcentral.com/lib/reason-season-lifetime-accepting-impermanence-in-relationships/ 

Reason, Season, Lifetime: Accepting Impermanence in Relationships

By Edie Weinstein, MSW, LSW
~ 4 min read

It has been said that people enter our lives for a reason, a season or a lifetime.

  • Reason (a project or one time activity, a “guardian angel” encounter when someone steps in and moves you out of a dangerous situation, a fleeting/swoop by lesson)
  • Season (a short term; perhaps a few months or years, interaction that teaches you lessons that you may not have learned otherwise.)
  • Lifetime (long term connections that may begin at birth or anywhere along the timeline, that endures, perhaps despite challenges, or may even strengthen thus)

The reality is that one day someone will die or leave you, or you will die or leave them. Sound morbid or maudlin? It need not. Instead, it calls for an awareness of the precious and often-times fleeting nature of relationship.

It begins with a desire for connection. According to scientist, Matthew Lieberman, the author of Social: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Connect, we are social creatures with an inherent need to engage with others.

Everyone you now know and love was once a stranger. When you gaze back over your timeline, can you recall a time when many of these people were not in your life? Some have been with you for so long, that it might be unimaginable.

Sara shares her experience, “Throughout his life my son would look at me puzzled when he would see me smile or greet ‘strangers.’” He would ask, “Do you know that person?” When I would respond, “Not yet,” he would continue, “Then why are you saying hi to them?” My answer was always, “Because they are in my world.”

Continuing, “How sad it would be to have missed the opportunity to connect with certain people who grace my life and how rich I am to now know and love them. It is hard to imagine what it was like before they stepped on stage. I have had fleeting encounters with folks whose smile or comment have made my day. I have lifelong relationships that I treasure. I anticipate connecting with anam cara (Gaelic for soul friend) as each day I set an intention for having extraordinary experiences and meeting amazing people.  And each day I do.”

“Walking through my door will be people I will love for decades and look forward to embracing as new links in those overlapping soul circles that so delight me,” she adds poetically. “I am grateful for my far-flung tribe, wherever it is that they are living and breathing now.”

Many of our interactions seem “meant to be,” or in Yiddish, “beshert.” Consider people who show up in unexpected ways as if scripted. You may have thought how wonderful it would be to have someone help you with a task and within short order, a person crosses your path who is ready, willing and able to be of assistance. A desire arises for a new friend who will engage in fun activities with you and later that day you hear about a meetup in your area that focuses on the very thing that peaks your interest.

Once a relationship is established, you may find yourself taking the person for granted; assuming they will fit into the “lifetime” category. Relationships need to be cultivated and tended to like a blossoming garden. With neglect, they will wither and with loving attention, they will flourish. This is so, whether we are speaking of platonic friendships, family relationships or romantic partnerships.

 

How to maintain the garden:

  • Keep the lines of communication open. People are not always mind-readers and can only respond to what they imagine you are thinking or feeling.
  • The same behaviors that drew you to each other can be maintained. Keep courting each other with kind and loving words and gestures.
  • Don’t let the fire get doused. Feed it with fun, attention and the fuel that lit it initially.
  • Speak to this person as if they are someone you love and would like them to remain in your life.
  • Start with the ending and imagine that the relationship is over, so that the pressure is off and you can speak the truth about who you are, rather than hiding your shortcomings to make a good impression.
  • We can think about the concept of, “If I had a year to live, what would I do in that period?” An even more revealing question might be, “What if I knew my parent/child/partner/friend had a year to live, how would I treat them?” Would you be more patient and understanding? Would you spend more time together creating memories that will carry you through the loss?
  • Don’t sweat the small stuff and it is mostly all small stuff. Richard Carlson, the author of the beloved series by that name, had it all going for him. A wonderful marriage to Kristine, two thriving daughters, a solid career as a writer and speaker. On board a plane, headed to New York from California, he had a pulmonary embolism and died on December 13, 2006 at the age of 45. Would you be better able to accept what comes your way if you knew that each breath could be your last?

What happens when the show is over and the curtain comes down on the relationship?

Sometimes, despite your best efforts and that of the other person, the relationship dynamics shift and the person leaves your life either by your choice, theirs, or by agreement. Conscious uncoupling has become a more commonly spoken about concept, with the split between actress Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin; lead singer of Coldplay. How do you maneuver those sometimes-treacherous waters?

It would be understandable to harbor emotions of sadness, anger and resentment in the wake of the loss. Allow yourself to feel it all, but be aware that permitting them to take up residence in your mind, might keep you trapped in a downward spiral. Find supportive people to be on your recovery team as you heal your heart.

Some relationships have toxic qualities (such as abuse, untreated addiction, lying, infidelity, criminal activity) that are better left, lest they pull you down into the abyss. Even if love remains between the two of you, there are times when it is safer to love from a distance.

Remind yourself that you had a life prior to meeting this person and will have one following the changing of the relationship dynamics. Once the relationship completes (as much as any relationship can be fully over), take a pro-active and self-loving stance as you decide who you truly are, outside its structure. Even as it can be a painful process, shedding the layers of who you were with this person, ask yourself who you are without them.

Thank the person, either aloud or in your mind, for the lessons that came as part and parcel of the relationship. There is always a gift in every interaction, even if it might not seem so at the time. Gratitude has a way of easing the pain and smoothing away the rough edges.

Regardless of the ways in which relationships change, be compassionate with yourself and the others involved, to help heal any residual wounds. Honor and appreciate it for what it was as you open the door for even more to enter and enrich your life.

2018-09-13 An evening with Kevin Taft, author, “Oil’s Deep State”.

 Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Corruption, Non-Violent Resistance, Oil & Gas  No Responses »
Aug 202018
 

Return to  INDEX, Salish Sea

Takeover of our democracy by Big Oil. 

You are invited:  presentation. . .

Kevin Taft, former Liberal member of the legislative assembly in Alberta will be promoting his latest book “Oil’s Deep State“.

He draws on his personal experience as the leader of the official opposition in Alberta to expose the deep influence that big oil has on government decision making.

David Suzuki says “Read the book, get mad, then take action to restore democracy.”    . . .

= = = = = = = = = = =

(Sandra, addition):   EXCERPT, Wikipedia, KEVIN TAFT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Taft)

Post-political career

In January 2012, just before leaving office, Taft published Follow the Money, his fourth book. Research for the book was supported by two economists: Professor Melville Macmillan and Dr. Junaid Jahagir. Drawing heavily on economic data from Statistics Canada, the book challenges the notion that the Alberta government’s spending on public services is far higher than other provinces. Taft shows that total Alberta corporate profits are consistently double or more the rates in the rest of Canada or the United States. In contrast, spending on public services in Alberta is in the normal range, and the government has failed to increase the value of the Heritage Trust Fund.[38] Like its predecessors, Follow the Money topped local bestseller lists.[39] The book was also shortlisted for the Alberta Book Publishers Association Trade Non-Fiction Book of the Year in 2013.[40]

Between 2011 and 2012, Taft, his wife Jeanette Boman, and two other partners designed and constructed a three-home net-zero ready infill residential project in Edmonton called “Belgravia Green”. Boman called it “our one small way of saying we believe that we can make a difference as individuals.” [41] The homes are designed and built with the aim of reducing net energy use to near zero.[42] The homes were built by Effect Home Builders, and one of them won the 2012 Canadian Home Builders’ Association National Green Home Award.[43]

Taft spent 2012-2017 as volunteer chair of a team overseeing the $1.6 million re-development of Belgravia community hall in Edmonton as a fully accessible, multi-purpose, solar-powered community centre.[44]

After his retirement from politics, Taft continues working as an author, consultant, and public speaker while volunteering substantial time in his community.

Latest work (Oil’s Deep State)

In 2014, Taft was invited to spend three weeks at the Whitlam Institute at Western Sydney University in Australia, to write and speak on the effects of the fossil fuel industry on democracy in the context of global warming. In September, 2014, he published the paper “Fossil Fuels, Global Warming and Democracy: A Report from a Scene of the Collision,”[45] in the Whitlam Institute’s Perspectives series.

Developing his ideas further, Taft published his fifth book, Oil’s Deep State: How the Petroleum Industry Undermines Democracy and Stops Action on Global Warming — in Alberta, and in Ottawa, (James Lorimer Publishers), in September 2017.

The book, written for a general audience, draws on numerous sources for a wide-ranging and unprecedented look at the effects of Canada’s petroleum industry on democratic institutions such as the civil service, political parties and academia. His analysis uses theories of democracy and institutional capture to advance a theory of the “deep state,” arguing that the petroleum industry in Canada has captured so many democratic institutions that it has blocked the capacities of the governments of Alberta and Canada to effectively address global warming.

2018-08-20 A New Era: Abandoning Defunct Nuclear Reactors Press Release. You should know.

 Gordon Edwards, Radioactive waste  No Responses »
Aug 202018
 

Media Advisory – Press Conference – Tuesday August 21, 2018

 

A New Era: Abandoning Defunct Nuclear Reactors

 

The Government of Canada is spending billions on such projects and there are no national policies to stop this from happening.

 

Who:

Chief April Adams-Phillips, Mohawk Council of Akwesasne

Gilles Provost, Ralliement contre la pollution radioactive

Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility

Theresa McClenaghan, Executive Director of the Canadian Environmental Law Association.

 

Where:  National Press Theatre, 150 Wellington St. Ottawa

When:  10:45 am – Tuesday, August 21, 2018

N.B.  The press conference will be preceded by a briefing session starting at 10:00 am. Cameras are permitted for both the briefing and the press conference. 

Why:  One small item on the agenda for a meeting of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on August 22, 2018 in Ottawa has far-reaching and insidious implications.

At 1:30 pm, the Commission will discuss  “Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) – Progress Update for CNL’s Prototype Waste Facilities, Whiteshell Laboratories and the Port Hope Area Initiative”.  CNL is the multinational consortium that was contracted in 2015 by the previous Conservative government to quickly and cheaply reduce Canada’s $10 billion worth of federal nuclear legacy liabilities. With CNSC support CNL is turning federal nuclear reactor sites into permanent nuclear disposal facilities that flout international guidelines. This is a betrayal of earlier government promises to carefully dismantle reactors and return reactor sites to green field status.

Canada has no national policies for nuclear reactor decommissioning or associated nuclear waste management.

Forty First Nations, citizens groups, and NGOs are writing to the Auditor General of Canada to request an investigation into spending by NRCan, AECL and CNSC on nuclear decommissioning.

 

Additional Events:

 

 “Into Eternity – Is Canada ready for the Age of Nuclear Waste” a public information session and Photo exhibit will be held on August 21from 4:00 to 6:00 pm at the Ottawa Public Library, Main Auditorium, 120 Metcalfe St.

 

A “Red Canoe March for Nuclear Safety” will begin in the public courtyard on the west side of Bank Street, between Laurier and Slater on WEDNESDAY August 22 at 10:00 am. First nations and NGO speakers will be available for interviews.

-30-

Contact:  Eva Schacherl, Media Liaison, Concerned Citizens ~ 613-316-9450

(date?) Roundup Class Action Suit for False Advertising is Going National. Monsanto

 Corruption, Genetically Modified, March Against Bayer-Monsanto, Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 192018
 

Update: Roundup Class Action Suit for False Advertising is Going National

In follow-up to

2015-04-21 Class Action LawSuits Against Monsanto (false advertising, glyphosate)
—– Original Message —–
From: Rae
Sent: Mon, 19 Oct 2015
Subject: CBC Radio Announces Class Action Suits Against Monsanto

Just announced on CBC Radio that class action suits against Monsanto are being commenced in the states, due to the harm caused by Round-up.  False advertising . . . .  Monsanto claims/advertises that glyphosate in Round-up kills enzymes in plants but not in animals.  Studies that substantiates this were funded by Monsanto. However, Independent studies are confirming such a link in humans.  As a result, people developing Hodgkins and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in areas where Round-up is sprayed are joining in class action suits against Monsanto.  More news about this should be forthcoming.

Interesting following our discussion at the Senate yesterday, Monsanto’s proclivity to self-funded research is coming home to roost. We will have to follow this study, and perhaps raise this finding at the next meeting where Ernie Barber (Senior Administrator at the U of S) is to report back to us regarding regulatory reforms with respect to Monsanto and Peter Phillip’s research.

Kudos to (- – )  for raising the issue of self-funding in this case, at the Senate.

– – – – – –

Do you know which CBC program reported Monsanto lawsuits?
I posted April report, http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=15545.  (URL above, 2015-04-21)  But would like CBC (Canadian) report.

/Sandra

2017-10 Book, Oil’s Deep State, How the petroleum industry undermines democracy and stops action on global warming – in Alberta, and in Ottawa, by Kevin Taft

 Climate, Corruption, Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Oil & Gas  No Responses »
Aug 192018
 

RELATED:

2018-04-19 Kevin Taft on what turned Rachel Notley from crusading critic to big oil crusader, National Observer

2018-09-13 An evening with Kevin Taft, author, “Oil’s Deep State”.

 

Oil's Deep State

look inside

https://kevintafttour.ca/   –  Who’s in Charge?

 

Oil’s Deep Statew the petroleum industry undermines democracy and stops action on global warming – in Alberta, and in Ottawa

By Kevin Taft

Why have democratic governments failed to take serious steps to reduce carbon emissions despite dire warnings and compelling evidence of the profound and growing threat posed by global warming?

Most of the writing on global warming is by scientists, academics, environmentalists, and journalists. Kevin Taft, a former leader of the opposition in Alberta, brings a fresh perspective through the insight he gained as an elected politician who had an insider’s eyewitness view of the role of the oil industry. His answer, in brief: The oil industry has captured key democratic institutions in both Alberta and Ottawa.

Taft begins his book with a perceptive observer’s account of a recent court casein Ottawa which laid bare the tactics and techniques of the industry, its insiders and lobbyists. He casts dramatic new light on exactly how corporate lobbyists, politicians, bureaucrats, universities, and other organizations are working together to pursue the oil industry’s agenda.

He offers a brisk tour of the recent work of scholars who have developed the concepts of the deep state and institutional capture to understand how one rich industry can override the public interest.

Taft views global warming and weakened democracy as two symptoms of the same problem — the loss of democratic institutions to corporate influence and control. He sees citizen engagement and direct action by the public as the only response that can unravel big oil’s deep state.

2018-08-16 Winnipeg firm defends $1M deal to send sniper rifles to Ukraine, CBC

 Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials), Non-Violent Resistance  No Responses »
Aug 172018
 

Ottawa approves deal between PGW Defence Technologies and the Ukrainian military

CBC Radio ·

PGW co-owner Ross Spagrud shooting one of the LRT-3, .50-calibre BMG bolt action rifles his company is selling to Ukraine. (Submitted by Ross Spagrud)

Listen7:08

Asked if he’s concerned that selling weapons to Ukraine would escalate the conflict there, the owner of a Canadian arms company said: “It may sound callous, but not particularly.”

“Since the dawn of time, mankind has been engaged in war, and part of that is equipping yourself properly,” Ross Spagrud, co-owner of PGW Defence Technologies, told As It Happens guest host Matt Galloway.

The Winnipeg company has signed a deal to export $1 million worth of LRT-3 .50-calibre BMG bolt action rifles to the Ukrainian military as it continues to battle Russian-backed separatist forces in the Donbass region.

The firearms come equipped with suppressors to reduce sound and muzzle flash, and are designed to reach a target up to two kilometres away.

The deal appears to be the first concrete product of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s new policy of allowing the sale of deadly weaponry to Ukraine’s military.

Global Affairs Canada declined to comment, citing “an obligation to protect confidential commercial information,” but Conservative defence critic James Bezan confirmed to the Ottawa Citizen that the federal government approved the deal last week.

CBC News was unable to reach Bezan for comment.

‘Strong support’

Ukraine, a Canadian ally, has been at war with the rebels since 2014. Russia, which annexed Crimea from Ukraine in March 2014, backs the separatist forces.

The United Nations estimated in 2015 that nearly 8,000 people — including soldiers, rebels and civilians — had been killed in the war. That number climbed to more than 10,000 by 2018, the Kyiv Post reports.

Spagrud wouldn’t speculate about who might be the intended targets of his company’s sniper rifles.

A woman cleans up debris near her house damaged by shelling in the rebel-held town of Yasynuvata, Ukraine, on Dec. 21, 2017. (Alexander Ermochenko/Reuters)

“They’re being purchased by the Ukrainian military. I think we can probably assume a few things from that, but that’s not part of our negotiations or contract discussions with the Ukrainian military,” he said.

“The Ukrainian people that I’ve spoken to in respect to this, they’ve all expressed a strong support for this. They, as a community, are not pleased with the situation in the Ukraine.”

Saudi weapons fell into the wrong hands

PGW made headlines in February 2016 when the LRT-3 .50-calibre rifles it sold to Saudi Arabia ended up in the hands of Houthi rebels.

Spagrud said his company did “nothing untoward or illegal” with respect to that arms deal.

Global Affairs spokesman John Babcock told As It Happens the Liberal government is amending Canada’s arms export legislation so that “our government, and future governments, will not allow the export of a controlled good if there is a substantial risk that it could be used to commit human rights violations.‎”

“The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that human rights, peace and security are central to arms exports,” he said in an emailed statement.

Peggy Mason, a former disarmament ambassador to the United Nations and a security adviser to the federal government, told the Ottawa Citizen that Canada selling arms to Ukraine will only serve to exacerbate the situation the ground “because each side feels it must respond to a show of force by the other.”

Spagrud dismissed those concerns, saying the product no more “lethal or worrisome” than the missile systems and satellite technology being developed for the battlefield by other Canadian companies.

A Ukrainian soldier looks through the optical sight of a sniper rifle on the outskirts of Marinka, Donetsk region, eastern Ukraine. (Evgeniy Maloletka/Associated Press)

“In fact, I would argue that this particular sniper technology has far less potential for collateral damage on a battlefield than missiles and artillery and such things that, where you hit a building and kill 50 people, two of which maybe they want to kill,” he said.

“It allows people to identify targets in a discriminate way and engage them and just them.”

Written by Sheena Goodyear with files from CBC Manitoba. Interview with Ross Spagrud produced by Kevin Robertson.

Related Stories

2018-08-14 Dewayne Johnson “I never would’ve sprayed that product on school grounds or around people if I knew it would cause them harm.”

 March Against Bayer-Monsanto  1 Response »
Aug 142018
 

Monsanto to pay $289 million to cancer patient

“This case is way bigger than me. I hope it gets the attention that it needs.”

– Dewayne Johnson, former school groundskeeper awarded $289 million from Monsanto
A jury in California has found that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicides contributed significantly to Dewayne Johnson’s terminal cancer. Mr. Johnson, 46, was a school groundskeeper who repeatedly sprayed Monsanto’s Roundup and Ranger Pro glyphosate-based herbicides. The verdict also found that the potential risks were known by the scientific community and Monsanto failed to adequately warn of the danger.

“I never would’ve sprayed that product on school grounds or around people if I knew it would cause them harm.”

 

After an eight-week trial, the jury deliberated for three days and found that:

  • Roundup contributed substantially to the plaintiff’s cancer and awarded him $39.3 million in pain and suffering and economic damages;
  • Monsanto acted “with malice or oppression” and awarded an additional $250 million in punitive damages.

“The jury’s verdict found not only that Monsanto’s Roundup and related glyphosate-based brands presented a substantial danger to people using them, but that there was “clear and convincing evidence” that Monsanto’s officials acted with “malice or oppression” in failing to adequately warn of the risks.” – from The Guardian article “One Man’s Suffering Exposed Monsanto’s Secrets to the World” by Carey Gillam.
Monsanto, a leader in genetically modified seed technology, is now owned by the chemical and seed company Bayer. On Monday, Bayer’s shares plunged as much as 14%, losing about $14 billion in value. Monsanto faces more than 5,000 similar lawsuits in the US over claims that it did not warn of cancer risks. Bayer will appeal the ruling.
Glyphosate is the world’s most common herbicide. The use of glyphosate has increased dramatically with the widespread adoption of genetically modified (GM) glyphosate-tolerant crops.

  • In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an agency of the World Health Organization, concluded that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen.” 
  • The European Commission recently granted glyphosate another five-year license but the French President is seeking a national ban by 2021 and the German government is discussing a similar measure.
  • Earlier this month, a Brazilian judge suspended registration of all glyphosate products in the country until the government reevaluates their toxicity. The government is contesting the decision.

Watch the jury’s verdict being read out.   [INSERT, S:

  • interesting to see the process in the court vis-a-vis the jurors, judge and lawyers – – the reading of the Verdict.
  • I scrolled through the “Comments”, also interesting.
  • be patient at the beginning of the video,  there is shuffling about (mostly silence) before things get rolling.]

“This verdict is without question truly historic. What Mr. Johnson has done, taking on this massive corporation, the courage, the tenacity and the willingness to speak out against what he believed was a real problem is truly spectacular” – Brent Wisner, one of the lawyers for Dewayne Johnson, speaking on Democracy Now! August 13.
Organic farming prohibits the use of synthetic pesticides and genetically modified organisms.
Check www.cban.ca/pesticides for more information and updates.
Consider becoming a monthly donor to CBAN. Donate today.

Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator

Phone: 902 852 5555

coordinator@cban.ca

www.cban.ca

Check out the six reports
in the GMO Inquiry!

The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) brings together 16 organizations to research, monitor and raise awareness about issues relating to genetic engineering in food and farming. CBAN members include farmer associations, environmental and social justice organizations, and regional coalitions of grassroots groups. CBAN is a project on Tides Canada’s shared platform.

Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) 

PO Box 25182, Clayton Park, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3M 4H4

Phone : 902 852 5555

Donate >

Having trouble reading this mail? View it in your browser.
 Older Entries  Newer Entries