Words About Child Soldiers from Col. George Carsted

The Calgary Herald often proudly carried conservative points of view, and that is where I found this anti-Omar Khadr rant by Col. George Carsted.

He recounts how he was only 14 when he took up a gun against the Red Army as it approached his town. But although his action was similar to Omar Khadr, he feels no sympathy for him.

Here are some of his arguments, starting with the point that since he did not see himself as a child at 14, then neither was Omar Khadr a child at 14.

He says:

"I did not see myself as a "child." I may have been scared, but I knew what I was doing."

"He [Omar] did not fight for his country, but supported the aims of a fanatical segment of Islam, whose actions are abhorred by all having one ounce of decency -- regardless of religious affiliation"

"I deem it time for the introduction of a law that strips anyone, whether born in Canada or being a naturalized citizen, who commits an act of terrorism or takes up arms against Canadian troops or those of her allies, of that citizenship"

I would not call George a child "soldier" at 14, from the description he was not part of any military training, nor was he in an organized group. He was just a kid with a gun.

He says Al Quaeda is "abhorred by all having one ounce of decency", when the well known fact is that Al Quaeda was financed and armed by the US government to fight the Red Army in the nineteen eighties. Ironically, the same army he fought when he was 14.

But please, let's not introduce a law that blindly strips anyone of Canadian citizenship for taking up arms against Canadian Troops or those of her allies, because Col. George Carstead would be among those to lose his Canadian citizenship. He has publicly confessed (in writing this article) to taking up arms against the Red Army, which were our allies at that time, against the Nazis in WW2. Maybe if George had been a bit older, he would have known that to fight the Soviets in WW2 was to help the Nazis. But he was just a kid, and probably didn't know what he was doing, no matter what he thinks now.

It's not as easy as you think to write laws condemning someone for the very same thing you do yourself. Double standards are difficult to uphold in the Canadian legal system, and I like it that way.

Picture: Some more teenage soldiers, from the movie "Red Dawn", fighting the Red Army.

Is Canada Really a Better Name Brand than the U.S.A.?

A story came out today about how Canada has edged out the USA for top spot in a tourist brand survey. I'm sure that gets all us Canadians feeling good about ourselves. But let's look into this a little further, and find out why we got to first place before we take a victory lap.

Apparently the people who responded to the survey had not heard of some of the juiciest stories in the Canadian news recently. The story of the Ku Klux Klan guy at the Canadian Legion stayed home in Canada. So in the end it was a good strategy not to charge him with a crime.

Another story that didn't get out was the cross burning on the lawn of an interracial couple. Apparently the perpetrator was not in the KKK and he meant nothing by it, he just thought it was a funny thing to do. That's good for him, it'll give him a lot to laugh about while serving time in prison.

Colonel Russell Williams, of the Canadian Forces, raping and killing women near his home base, in Ontario Canada. That story didn't get out either.

We were lucky that the Canadian stories which did make it big world wide were the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, polar bear watching expeditions, and wine tasting tours. (free wine is very appealing). The polar bear story was so viral that any web sites featuring polar bear videos crashed from heavy traffic.

But all the free wine and polars bears together cannot explain how we ousted the USA from the number one spot. Americans are in shock, how could they lose such an important competition? According to USA today, it has nothing to do with people getting strip searched and X-ray photographed as they board planes to the USA. No, that couldn't be it. So according to Jayne Clarke, of USA Today, it's because "Obama has not delivered on his promises".

Daniel Rosentreter, FutureBrand's chief strategy office is quoted as saying "What we've seen this year is the shine may be off. Obama hasn't delivered what the world expected."

Excuse me, what was the world expecting again? OK I remember now. 1. "Don't bomb Iran", and Obama delivered. 2. "Save the world from total economic meltdown caused by the Republicans". Obama delivered. 3. Don't be an as*h*le. Obama delivered.

So, Jayne and Daniel, I don't think the USA brand is sinking because of Obama. It is more likely sinking because even with Obama as president, the rest of the word knows that the people of the USA are still pretty much the same as they were under Bush. And far from looking better under Obama, the Conservatives in the USA look like they are borderline insane. Not very appealing, and not surprising that the USA brand slipped to fourth place.

About Supporting the Troops, Canadian Style

I just read a headline in today's newspaper "Taliban Smell Victory". I think they could smell victory quite a while ago, or they would not have been able to recruit so many people to run around blowing themselves up and planting land mines.

The point where I realized that the war in Afghanistan was going nowhere was at a CIGI talk given by the Canadian Brigadier General Denis Thompson, April 15, 2008 in Waterloo. He gave a presentation of all the methods Canadian forces were going to employ to pacify Afghanistan. Afterwards was a question and answer, where one person asked "Since the Soviet Union lost in Afghanistan, what makes you think Canada can win?"

The Brigadier General answered "Because we were invited there." I knew right away he had made a slip up, because the Russians had been invited too. However, the Q&A was not a debating forum, you simply asked your question and the speaker replied and then on to the next questioner.

http://www.cigionline.org/events/archive/35?page=4

I'm sure if any Taliban were sitting in the room at CIGI with us, they could have smelled victory right there, too.

I do not particularly like being accused of "Not supporting the troops" when I say we are not going to win this one. In order to win, you need to know what you're up against. We lost it a long ago when we allowed the Christian Fundamentalists to make this into a Holy War against Islam. We lost it when we admitted that we could not stop the torturing of detainees. We lost it when we started thinking that we were going to advance the cause of women's liberation in Afghanistan. We lost it when the U.S. decided to pull out and go fight Saddam for the oil, instead of hunting Bin Laden. The fighting itself is now just window dressing. You can't win a war if you can't think, and we cannot think while we have our heads full of ridiculous propaganda.

But when it comes to supporting the troops, I am right there. Recently, a friend of mine died, and I went to a reception after the funeral. The reception was held at the local Royal Canadian Legion. I had no sooner walked in than somebody hissed at me that I was dishonouring the dead and I needed to remove my hat. Apparently the dead he was referring to were the war dead. Later I found out that every branch of the Legion has the same inflexible rule. Hats off to honour the dead. No headgear of any kind. I took my hat off. I want to support the troops after all.

But last week, there was a Halloween party at the Royal Canadian Legion in Campbellford, and somebody dishonoured the dead by wearing a hat. Did somebody tell him to remove it? NO. He was given a prize for his costume. Was there any talk of dishonouring the dead? Apparently not. It sounds like a double standard to me. I cannot wear a baseball cap that says "Canada" on it, but this guy can wear a Ku Klux Klan hood, and carry a noose draped around the neck of a pretend black guy, and wins a prize.

Not one article or comment I have seen about this has anything to say about the "no hats rule". I don't want to get into a ridiculous argument of whether or not this was bad taste. But apparently I'm the only one who remembered that wearing any hat at the Legion hall dishonours the dead, let alone a KKK hood. Next time, you sanctimonious hat haters, how about reminding the racists to remove their hoods, too.

I just want to follow up with the comment that if people at the Legion, presumably with some military sensibilities, cannot figure out whether this KKK guy should be kicked out immediately, then we really have no chance winning a war in Afghanistan, because winning requires some cultural smarts as well as air strikes. If we are going to be idiots, we should stay home and be idiots.

Here are the links to the rule, that requires anyone entering a Canadian Legion (an Armed Forces veterans’ association) premises to remove their hat.

http://www.aroundtaber.com/Default.aspx?alias=www.aroundtaber.com/tleg
www.openschool.bc.ca/features/samples/law12_sample.pdf

And about Sikh Turbans in the Legion???
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/moan-zone/93334-hat-etiquette.html
http://www.williamgairdner.com/poppies-trump-turbans/

Considering all the controversy about wearing headgear of any kind, how come the KKK guy gets a free pass and a prize to dishonour our war dead?

Picture: Bikers supporting troops, from this website. http://westerncanada-un-nato-veterans.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.html

Fox News North Backs Down, is Canada Safe from Brainwashing?

Apparently, after quite a battle, the Fox News North application was withdrawn.

But are we safe from the brainwashing? Not really, as they plan to launch anyway, just without the benefit of being forced on to the Canadian public. They will lose money for the short term (and hopefully the long term). And they will not even be available on TVs where the subscriber has not specifically paid for them. Which means they will not be able to work their brainwashing magic on Canadians who only see a black screen, and hear nothing on their channel.

But propaganda still has a lot of power in it, so I would not really breathe a sigh of relief. The only real defence against propaganda is a well informed public, who is also media literate. And that is becoming a real worry, even in Canada.

On the other hand, as the right wing coalition of pro-war Christians and free-market big business gains strength in the USA, they will likely win converts in Canada. And they have a lot of money to spend in spreading their message.

Here is an extreme right wing commenter on this web site, with the statement that all Canadian media is left wing and we need a chance to hear the "balanced" Fox News point of view.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/world/news/e3i050e81f63a15745dd5949ca401b230af

"Ron comments October 06, 2010:
In Canada one is only permitted to hear the left wing, politically correct version of world events. They have rewritten history textbooks to reflect that view, they have Commissions that hold kangaroo courts where there is no protection of rights or even adherence to rules of evidence. The Sun TV station threatens that control. They fear that people may actually hear news that does not fit the narrow-minded, hateful world view of the left. Free speech is dead in Canada - the Sun may get its TV station but the left will use their courts and Human Rights Commissions to curtail their broadcasts - We have one voice in Canada - the CBC/Liberal owned voice and anyone who dares to challenge it will be attacked and destroyed. The left hates the U.S. because they refuse to worship at the alter of the left --- many Canadians are quite willing to behave and bow down to that religion - The Sun must not be permitted to provide another view - there is no other view but that of the left! They must not be allowed to broadcast."

Well, in Canada we have "The National Post" and MacLean's magazine. Both are right wing extremist. Then we have on TV the CTV and the CBC and Global, and all present right wing points of view. In Ontario we have TVO which has a nightly news show "The Agenda" with Steve Paikin, who I consider to be right wing. Also nightly on my TV anyway, is the "Michael Coren" show which is about as extreme right as I would ever want to see. It certainly gets me just as steamed as Fox News does.

So I do not agree that we are restricted to leftist points of view in Canada. In fact this allegation is so ridiculous I might even consider it to be a deliberate lie in order to promote a certain right wing point of view. Could we call that comment itself "propaganda?".

The problem with the extreme right wing message, in my opinion, is that it is strongly tied to fundamentalist "Christianity", including the denial of the theory of evolution. Secondly that it is racist. Third it is pro-war, that meaning the desire that the USA should eventually conquer every country on Earth using any means possible, and then convert those countries to fundamental Christianity. And let's not forget that it is also anti-environmental, trying to brainwash people into believing that it is necessary for big corporations to destroy the environment to give us jobs, and it is not just for their short term profit.

This "Narrow minded, hateful, left wing" view that Canadians have been brainwashed into is:

• Equal access to education and health care for all
• World peace with the UN as a body to discuss issues
• World court to try war criminals
• Protection of the environment for future generations
• Freedom of religion
• Protection of democracy
• Freedom of speech (exception: hate speech).
• No racism and NO master race

Amazingly enough Fox News North really could cure us of this left wing brainwashing, if we let it. Here is a clip of the original Fox News at work doing what they do best, which is flushing out racists. Turns out it is themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=277gQDcBtMY

Picture: From a blog by Montreal Simon
http://montrealsimon.blogspot.com/2010/09/fox-news-north-pmo-connection.html

Canada's Position in the United Nations

Canada, for the first time, lost a bid for a temporary seat on the U.N. Security Council. In my mind, the reason is pretty obvious. We have a pro-war, anti-environmental government that has lost international good will by being more pro-Israeli than the U.S.A., and has no more respect for the UN than the Bush regime.

But I was surprised to find out that our Prime Minister, Harper, was blaming the Liberal opposition leader Michael Ignatieff for the embarrassment. Where can I get an explanation of the view from the right wing conservatives? I decided the "National Post" would be good. Here is the first one I found.

"Matt Gurney: Canadian Arab Federation casts its vote against Canada"

Right in the title, it's the Canadian Arabs to blame. Apparently they cast their vote against us. I wonder how that's possible, as they don't even have official recognition as a country. I understand that this is just "exaggeration" on the part of some opinionated columnist. But not everybody understands, like me, that this is impossible. It's typical for The National Post to put misleading headlines, spreading conservative ideas among people who do not read the whole article to make up their own minds.

The first thing I read in the column is that there was no actual vote, Canada actually withdrew from the final ballot. I guess the conservatives didn't want to be embarrassed, and figured they were going to lose anyway.

Even this writer admitted that Ignatieff's statements did not lose us the seat:

"..the UN may be hopeless, but it doesn’t take its cue from the Liberal Party of Canada"

Notice the statement "the UN may be hopeless" in the quote, almost like this opinion about the UN does not need to be debated. Conservatives apparently think it is now an established scientific fact that the UN is hopeless.

Hopeless means 1. having or offering no hope 2. impossible to analyse or solve 3. unable to learn, function, etc. 4. Informal without skill or ability

When you say "the UN may be hopeless, but..", you are not open to a rebuttal (Reminder, the Queen of England last summer visited the UN and said it was an institution of hope). If this person had said "I believe that the UN is without hope." it would at least imply a willingness to recognize that this is a personal opinion.

With this kind of attitude and these speech patterns, which I believe are representative of the conservative mindset, would you not expect Canada's conservative government to bow out before the final ballot?

Here is what this conservative commentator thinks lost us the seat:

"...not signing away our economy to appease the greenies cannot be tolerated. How dare we be so right-wing and, like, totally American. Ugh. How can the UN even look at us? Please, guys, don’t vote for us. Pro-Israel, pro-free-trade Westerners have no place in the United Nations until they grovel and apologize for every sin, real or imagined, ever committed by a white guy anywhere."

So apparently it's also the greenies and the anti-white guys who share some of the blame. That's what I thought too, but worded differently.

The real problem is that Canada deserves a seat on the UNSC, but not until we get a government that represents the Canadian people. Today, Canada has an extreme right wing, pro-war, pro-Republican, anti environmental, and religious fundamentalist governing party that has grabbed on and held power through our flawed electoral system, and our equally flawed checks and balances (one word "prorogation"). And until we get our government back, we should not be taking up space on the UN Security Council. Let Portugal have the seat. They represent Canadian opinion as well as the Conservative Party of Canada does.

Quebec Bashing from MacLean's Magazine

MacLean's Magazine recently ran a front page titled "The Most Corrupt Province in Canada", with the picture of Quebec's Carnaval Snowman mascot carrying a briefcase bulging with cash. At this point I have lived about half my life in Quebec, and half in the province of Ontario, (plus a few years in Sierra Leone), and I would like to share my perspectives on corruption.

There is an article about it in the Globe and Mail here.

I do not subscribe to MacLean's because of all their hate propaganda. I happened to read part of it when I saw it at a coffee shop. Apparently MacLean's is taking time off from bashing Moslems and the Canadian Human Rights Commission to have another go at the bad, bad province of Quebec and French Canadians.

I have never been able to find a reference to confirm this, but I remember many years ago reading an opinion piece by Barbara Amiel in MacLean's, which was then owned by Conrad Black, her husband. In this article, she claimed (I'm paraphrasing) that French Canadians were genetically unsuited to democracy. Of course, Conrad Black is the same one who recently got sent to jail in the USA for fraud worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and obstruction of justice. He no longer owns MacLean's, but I still see Barbara's opinions in there occasionally, along with articles by one of Conrad's supporters, Mark Steyn.

Now getting back to corruption in Quebec, and the inference that it is much much worse than Ontario, and as Andrew Coyne (National Editor MacLean's) has said it has something to do with "political culture rooted in nationalism and state interventionism."

My one and only experience with corruption, growing up in Baie Comeau, an isolated paper mill town in Northern Quebec was this. My father, a French Canadian, had an English speaking boss of Scots background. He hated his boss, let's call the boss MacLeanson, just to avoid any lawsuits against me, and to incidentally reinforce the ethnic stereotype of the magazine. The company would hire outside contractors to perform many functions including cutting wood, and maintaining the logging roads. All contracts were awarded by MacLeanson. All the contractors were independent French Canadian businessmen. My father noticed a few things going wrong in the woods department. One was that the roads were not being maintained, which annoyed him because of the pounding he took driving a pickup truck from camp to camp. Second he noticed Macleanson had a brand new luxury car every year. My father claimed that Mcleanson was totally corrupt and taking bribes to enrich himself, but my mother argued to not make any accusations down at the company offices, because she assumed this was a simple case of my father not liking his boss and inventing this whole conspiracy. After all, he could have been fired, and with a grade four education in northern Quebec, there were no other places to work. I personally heard about these stories as a young teenager, and tended to side with my English mother, as she was by far the most level headed of the two.

About 12 years after, I was back in Baie Comeau, as a teacher at the English high school. At one parent-teacher meeting, I happened to get into a conversation with the father of one of my students. He was telling me how he ended up living in Baie Comeau. The company had sent him up to Baie Comeau to investigate the books. It seems that the head office could hardly believe that the Baie Comeau division was losing money every year, and wanted to send an independent auditor to figure it out. This parent said that he had uncovered a huge amount of corruption in the woods department at Baie Comeau, enough to explain the lack of profits of the entire division. And one man had singlehandedly taken the company into the red. It was Macleanson. Following his "forced retirement", profits picked up again.

I never encountered any other corruption in either Quebec or Ontario that in any way personally affected me. All I know is what I get in the news and from various official inquiries. I assume that there might be a fair amount going on that is not being investigated, and I do not equate amount of corruption being investigated with amount taking place. In fact it might even be the inverse, as far as I know.

I do not want to be bashing other ethnic groups, like MacLean's does, but I have a question. Given that MacLean's is pushing the idea that this is a French Canadian/left wing thing, are they forgetting that the Mafia, even in Quebec, is from a background of Italian and Sicilian immigrants, whether they speak French or not?

Last night on TV I happened to tune in to the Michael Coren show on the Christian channel (another one I don't subscribe to). They were discussing the MacLean's Magazine article, and it was not long before one opinion was put forth that "all French Canadians supporting the Bloc Quebecois party should be hung for treason". As I recall, no one in the panel felt it necessary to belabour the point or to rebut it.

One more issue is the use of the Bonhomme Carnaval, the mascot of the Quebec Carnaval on the cover. Apparently MacLean's was given written permission by the Quebec Caranaval, although obviously MacLean's was negotiating in bad faith. I suppose French Canadians could be forgiven for thinking that any dealings with English Canadians would involve bad faith negotiations. But they don't. They see this as being just one small group of people at one magazine with questionable ethics, that resulted from the negative influence of convicted felon Conrad Black.

About Heather Mallick's Article on Fox News North

Heather Mallick wrote a commentary in the Toronto Sun "Fox News North is a Rancid Idea". In it she slams Quebecor's project of starting a Canadian right wing 24 hour news channel, and in the article she mentions the one time she was invited to appear on Fox News.

Bill O'Reilly has a popular US TV show where he often invites liberal guests and then "crushes" them in a debate. I don't think I have ever seen any liberal hold their own against Bill O'Reilly (maybe Richard Dawkins was close even though Bill called him a fascist). Conservatives love to watch the dismemberment, but to me it illustrates why we do not need a news channel like that in Canada. The tactics Bill uses include making up facts and statistics (otherwise sometimes called "lying"), and famously cutting off the microphone of the interviewee. Basically the interviewee has no chance. But Bill continues to attract new liberal guests, who naively hope to convince Bill he is wrong and present an alternative point of view to the rabid Fox viewers.

Here is a small part of Heather's interview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbX-2X7_h-M

My blog on O'Reilly-Dawkins debate on teaching evolution:

On the one hand, the argument for why we need a Fox North (a Canadian version of Fox News), is based on freedom of speech. In other words, to have freedom of speech, we must have an outlet for right wing views. That's because the mainstream media like the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and CTV, are both allegedly biased and show only the left wing point of view.

I don't think we need Fox News in Canada, because Canadian mainstream media is not propaganda. And it is not right that Fox News is demanding special status where it must be included in popular packages on cable TV. Third, that Fox News is in the business of propaganda, not presenting news, and they get caught lying so often to support their right wing point of view, that independent fact checkers are suffering from shell shock. And finally, Fox News has an agenda that is not good for the country, an agenda of promoting racism, hatred, anger, anti-science, war and violence.

In the post 9/11 atmosphere in the USA, Fox News has done remarkably well, but the USA as a country is worse off for it, in my opinion anyway.

Yesterday, the face in front of the Fox News North push, Kory Teneycke, resigned. Kory has a bombastic style that would be well suited to Fox News South. Maybe it is a sign that this type of over the top hate propaganda is not welcome in Canada, I can only hope. Because if we do ever get a Fox News North, freedom of speech wins, but freedom of truth and decency loses. It's really too bad that we even have to make such a decision.

Globe and Mail article: "10 things you need to know about Fox News North" by John Doyle

Here is a "Canadian" conservative blog, a taste of what a "Canadian" Fox News could be like. Actually, you can Google Barack the Barbarian, and take a look at some of the pages from the comic book if you are interested.

http://thecanadiansentinel.blogspot.com/2009/04/not-another-obama-superhero-comic-book.html

An Apology to Hunters and Conservatives

Last blog I quoted from a comment that was left on the Fox News website. I really should not have left a troll's comment without explanation, because doing so actually puts conservatives and right wingers in a bad light. And by doing that, I am simply generating left wing propaganda. So now I am going to explain it further and remove all the BS and propaganda from it.

Here is the quote again, from libtardhater67

Sept 2, 9:28 AM on Fox News (previously quoted on my "Survey of the Press" blog.)

"This guy was a worthless libtard! Too bad he is dead, I would have wanted him to know the last time I went hunting I took my last 4 oil changes from my pickup and my last 2 from my ATV and dumped them in the stream where I was. I was visualizing some crying libtard's face when he saw it. Then I killed two more bucks than I had tags, kept the largest and left the other two to rot. Take that, libtards! I hate the "environment"! We humans have the right to do anything we want to the environment."

To state the obvious first. Libtardhater67 does not represent all conservatives. I know some conservatives myself, and they would be shocked that he was dumping used oil into forest streams. And even the most extreme conservative "ant-environmentalist" would at the very least dig a hole and pour the oil in rather than have it float away on top of the water on a stream that could potentially be used by fishermen, or would be necessary to attract deer to a good hunting place. The oil stinks (especially to animals), coats the banks and is generally icky. So this statement by Libtardhater67 is obviously either designed to provoke anger, or make conservatives look bad, or if true, was the act of a not-very-bright person acting under the delusion that this was a political act to further the cause of conservatism. Ironically, exactly the same type of "worthless libtard" behaviour that Libtardhater67 was condemning on the part of a deranged gunman taking hostages at the Discovery Channel. The fact is, that oil spills are not a left wing/right wing issue. All sides come together on the need to prevent and to clean up oil spills. No side wants wanton destruction of the environment as part of their image.

Then, about killing three bucks and taking the largest, I can actually imagine that happening. But once again it is nothing to boast of, even to other hunters. Or maybe especially to other hunters. A good hunter takes a certain amount of pride in what they do, or they would not do it. That means they take pride in their ability to aim a gun (if they are using a gun, I know some who consider bow and arrow a real test of hunting skill). And they take pride in bringing in the biggest buck. But everybody knows there are ways to cheat, and there are some people who can neither hunt, nor aim a gun, who go around bragging of their "expert hunting skills" and their huge kills, while all they do is pay to sit in a prepared blind and wait for thoroughly tamed deer to come and eat food that has been set out for them months in advance. That, my friends is not hunting, that is a firing squad in a petting zoo. Even if they miss, someone else will finish it off with a good shot. Yes it offends some liberals - those that are also animal lovers. But there are also conservatives that are animal lovers.

I have done a little hunting myself when I was a kid, (very little), and I know that some hunters can hardly tell the difference between a deer and a cow, and often wound an animal with a poor shot rather than kill it with a clean accurate shot. The animal then might get away and dies later and rots because the hunter does not have the skill to follow it any more than they have the skill to shoot straight.

And finally I am pretty sure that even the most conservative of right wing extremists does not advocate that any human, no matter how retarded, has the right to do "anything they want" to the environment, no matter how destructive, no matter how dangerous. I'm thinking setting forest fires, but there are other issues too.

So libtardhater67 is just a troll. I'm guessing some 12 year old kid with a bad attitude (it happens!) who has liberal parents who he hears talking about things.

Anyway I want to correct any mistaken impressions I might have left with that last blog of mine. Conservatives are not as stupid as this troll makes them look.

Picture: Taken from this forum, (it is not me or anyone I know) the picture is set on Anticosti Island. Over a hundred years ago, my grandfather hunted deer for food, when he lived on Anticosti. There are still 200,000 deer on Anticosti Island, and many of them are so tame they come up to beg for food at picnic tables.

We Really Need Election Reform in Canada

Stockwell Day put his foot in his mouth again. As a minister in Canada's ruling Conservative Party, he want us to build more prisons. But the press was making fun of him for his reasoning that, although crime stats are down, "Unreported crime" is up.

Conservatives are very big on crime, and as I recall a few years back, at a press conference with our Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, TV personality Geri Hall was subdued and led away in handcuffs. (Geri Hall is a comedian on the fake news show "This hour has 22 Minutes", which Conservatives apparently don't think is very funny.)

"Law and Order" is an issue that Conservatives take very seriously, and they use the issue to win votes. "More Jails" is a popular theme with conservative voters.

I don't want to get into a debate whether or not we need extra jails to lock up reporters for telling Harper they love him in press conferences, to me the real problem is that Canada is a "liberal" country being run by a Conservative government. In other words, Canada is mostly about freedom of religion, but we have a Christian fundamentalist government. Canadians mostly want peace, but we have a pro-war government. Canadians want the government to help run the economy, but we have a government that believes in "Laissez Faire" economics and the invisible hand of the free market. Canadians want a government that takes a lead internationally on human rights, but we get a government that abdicates support for international justice. Canadians want a government that protects the environment, but we get a government that obstructs international efforts to combat global warming.

How did we get into this ridiculous stranglehold that the Conservatives have over us? It is because our voting system is archaic. So, the unified Conservative party, with only 32% of the vote,  uses our archaic voting rules to defeat four disunified left wing parties. (and calls it treason when the opposition parties attempt to form a coalition).

Most democratic countries have ways of dealing with this, by using a runoff election between the top two parties after the first ballot. The UK and the USA (and Canada) do not have a runoff system, but the US is basically a two-party state, so rarely has the problem of runoffs (notable exception in 2000). And in the UK, there is a tradition of coalition governments that apparently we are losing, or have lost in Canada.

Recently, the province of Ontario had a referendum on election reform, which was soundly defeated. Why? I think it was because the new (and complicated) system required over 40 additional members of the provincial legislature, that was unpopular with all sides.

The easiest solution would be to have an automatic runoff system, based on a two choice ballot. When you vote, you can put your first choice, and your second choice right away, on the same trip to the polls. Then the vote tabulating computers can work out not only who the top two candidates are, but within seconds of the final count, could also tell us who wins the runoff. That way we eliminate the long and expensive second round vote, and have something resembling a second round runoff.

Best of all, it would give us the kind of government that represents most Canadians, instead of this travesty of Canada as a right wing militaristic police state (albeit a nice one) run by religious fundamentalists.

Photo June 26, 2010. (AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis)
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100629/100629_fence_mislead_secret_law/20100629/

Bikers Guide: Port Stanley to Port Dover at Sunset

Port Stanley to Port Dover, Ontario is a good motorcycle road, despite some "problems". The first one being, there is no road. Instead, you need to navigate a confusing series of interconnecting roads, following the coastline. And even then you are not usually close to the lake. The problem with this coastline is that in many places it is eroding inland at a rate of about a metre a year, so it is impossible to build a road along the coast, and in places, where old roads have been abandoned, you must detour even further inland. People do not often attempt to build cottages along this stretch, because first the erosion problem, and next, the high clay cliff that overlooks lake Erie makes access to the beach difficult.

Considering the difficult geography, and complicated road layout, the route itself is very good motorcycling. Much of the rest of southern Ontario is fairly flat, and many of the roads are laid out in a square grid through farmland.

So, to us motorcyclists in southern Ontario, the route from Port Stanley to Port Dover has a few very welcome hills and curves. Unfortunately, most of them are in 50 kph zones, due to the geography. Some creeks run out to lake Erie along this shoreline, and each one has eroded a fairly deep valley as it approaches the lake. This is what creates opportunities for the road builders to get creative and throw in a few curves, with rapid changes of elevation. But these creeks are also the places where the various towns and villages are located, because these are also the just about the only places that it is worth while building on the shore of the lake. So most of the curves are in villages and towns. It's a bit frustrating, but the towns are also picturesque, and have beaches, outdoor cafes, and facilities. However, gas stations and Tim Horton's are sparse. But if you can hold on till Port Dover, you can get both.

I suppose a GPS might be useful here, but I don't have one. Although I have done this route many times, it still occasionally has thrown me off. But if I was doing it the first time, and had no GPS, I might just check Google maps first and write up a note card to slip in a map pocket.

This was a sunset ride. I started out from Port Stanley at about 8:00 PM, but because it was July 12th, the sun was still up, and better still, was behind me. With this angle of the sun, the scenery is also more dramatic, and it's a little cooler. Actually this is better than mid-day in many ways, but you end up in Port Dover when a lot of places are closed and people are going home.

In each coastal community, I drive right down to the middle of town, as this is the most interesting part, even though in most places, you need to double back to get on the road to the next place. The road rarely forces you to go through the beach/shopping/cafe areas of these towns. I start off with Port Stanley, driving right down to the beach where there is beach volleyball going on in about four courts, and people sitting around eating hot dogs or sitting at outdoor cafes. A lot of people are still in the water, even at 8:00 PM because of the heat. To get out of Port Stanley, I cross the lift bridge, and go up the hill across from the main traffic light. At the top of the hill is a confusing three-way stop, where I have to figure out that I need to turn left (the road ahead is marked "NO EXIT"), and that I am the only vehicle without a stop sign. There are three stops signs, with a car waiting for me at each one. Then I drive to the base of the Port Stanley water tower and turn right to follow the coast road to the next place, Port Bruce.

In Port Bruce, if you turn right, you can get to the waterfront park, surrounded by beach, canal, and some outdoor eating places. Just make a complete loop counter clockwise around the park and you will return to the main road, where you can take the bridge across the creek, and head for Copenhagen, where you can turn right toward Port Burwell.

The road to Port Burwell has many wind turbines. If you hate the sight of wind turbines, you might find this part of the trip painful. However I think they are about as beautiful as any other man-made structure I have ever seen, and a lot more appealing than some. So it's a plus for me, might be a deal breaker for you.

In Port Burwell after the bridge, I always go straight down to the beach, where there is a turnaround and a hot dog stand (closed at this hour). Then back up the road and turn right on 42, also Wellington Road, at the Lighthouse restaurant. Soon I end up on Lakeshore Road, heading for Long Point.

Long Point is 40 km long, and I do not usually attempt to travel down it. Instead I pass through the towns of Port Royal, and Port Rowan on the mainland. In the shopping section of Port Rowan, if I remember, (but I didn't this time) I make a right turn on Wolven Street, which will keep me near the lake. This time I just keep following 42 to the end, turn right, and I end up right back on Lakeshore Road anyway. Port Rowan does not have a bridge, being built near a sandspit instead of on a creek.

Next is Turkey Point, which is very easy to miss and is far off the road. But for me it's worth while and I do have a shortcut. Turn right at Turkey Point Road, turn left at the beach, and follow the road past the beaches and concessions until it says "No exit". Turn left and follow the road up the hill to the stop sign, turn right, and you are back on Lakeshore Road toward Port Dover again.

The road now goes through Normandale, Fisher's Glen, and Port Ryerse. I don't take any dead end loops in these towns, as the shortest way through is scenic enough for me. But coming out of Normandale, on Spooky Hollow Road after you are back on top of the cliff in farmland, don't forget to make a right on Front Road or you will end up back on 24 and miss the last bits of excitement before Port Dover.

Front Street takes you through Fisher's Glen, and once again, coming out of the village, you need to make a right on Front Road, or it's back to Highway 24. If you have a GPS, you will figure it out even though it seems unmarked by any signs. Otherwise, it's the first right after the top of the hill.

Now the same trick happens a third time at Port Ryerse, which is starting to get tiresome. I suppose that the road builders just don't like to encourage through traffic, but enough is enough. Anyway, leaving Port Ryerse, at the top of the hill, you need to make a right on to Port Ryerse Road, or you will end up back on highway 24. Once on Port Ryerse Road, continue to the stop sign, and turn right on Radical Road, which takes you into Port Dover.

Now it should be 9:30 PM and dark, but Tim Horton's and the nearby BB Gas Bar are both open. If you do get lost, there's always highway 24 to Simcoe. It's easy to find.


Picture: I forgot my camera, so Sunset at Port Stanley is from this website http://www.panoramio.com/photo/21062091

Different Opinions on the G20 Summit Riot

In the wake of the G20 summit held in Toronto, there are conflicting headlines in the newspapers, concerning the police actions. I am going to pick four papers from Toronto and contrast their stories, mainly looking at the titles rather than the content. I got the titles from looking at each paper's web page this morning and clicking on the story I saw about the summit controversy,

The Toronto Star:
"Outraged protesters rally against police"
[sub title] "Female protesters strip searched by male officers, detainee says"

The National Post
"Police work was ‘commendable,’ Mayor says"

The Globe and Mail
"Police chief offers no apologies for G20 tactics"

The Toronto Sun
"Anarchists were 'stupid' — Blair" [explanation required: Blair is the police chief]


There is a theory in spreading propaganda that you can get your readers to think a certain way by your choice of title, so I chose only the title rather than get bogged down in the content of the article, which you can read if you want to, by clicking on the links. But don't be surprised if the content does not exactly convey the same message as the title, that's part of the technique.

If this theory is correct, each paper will pick a title to get the readers to think along the lines dictated by its overall editorial approach.

I think it is agreed that the Toronto Star is a liberal, if not left-leaning paper. So their title seems to match their left wing slant, and appears to sympathise with the left wing protesters.

I am pretty sure most people know the "National Post" is a right wing paper, and by definition, would be on the side of the riot police. I am making the assumption that conservatives and right wingers are in favour of "The Man", the police, who are working for the governments and/or the corporations.

The "Globe and Mail" is the most widely respected paper in Toronto, and considered more neutral than the previous two. And the message of the headline, I feel, is somewhat in between the left and right wing views. Their headline manages to simultaneously suggest that apologies were in order, and that none were needed. Maybe you also noticed, the only title that did not quote someone.

The "Toronto Sun" is a tabloid, and tries to appeal to the average working class guy, as you can tell by the scantily clad Sunshine Girls in every paper. Their intended audience is looking for a simple, easily understood opinion.

Incidentally, I am not trying to promote the "Globe and Mail", although I suppose it might look like that from this post. I subscribe to none of these papers, I do not even live in Toronto, and I do not work for the Globe and Mail company. If you feel my assumptions about the Globe and Mail (or any of the other papers) are misguided, your comments are welcome.

Destination Port Dover: Apple Fritters and Tall Ships

I finally got to the Fritter Place in Port Dover for my first half dozen fresh apple fritters of the year. Mary Ann didn't come because I was stopping a couple of times on the way to Port Dover, first for a motorcycle gang meeting at Tim Horton's and next to take a peek at the last day of the Paris Vintage Motorcycle Rally, 2010. Neither of those interest her.

We all showed up at Tim Horton's on time as usual. We are a punctual gang, if nothing else. The main item on the agenda today was verbally bashing Bob's Intruder 1400. As we were getting into it, a Harley rider parked next to us and remarked that we seemed to be picking on Bob, and one of our members (The V.P in Charge of Motorcycle Judging) took the time to point out that our actual favourite object of verbal bashing was the 150 cc Kymco scooter, but that we have grown bored with 6 weeks of steady abuse of the scooter.

After the meeting adjourned, I headed for the Paris rally, but there were only three tents left and they were all being taken down. So I took the opportunity of riding my motorcycle through the show grounds, in order to introduce my Kawasaki Vulcan to the tire tracks of legendary motorcycles such as the Rudge, as featured on the T-shirt commemorating the 38th Annual Paris National Rally of 2010, and the 100th anniversary of Rudge. Check out the top photo on this page of my motorcycle website, with my mother and all her brothers and sisters in 1939 with both my uncles on Rudge motorcycles. (Click it to enlarge)

A quick lap of the rally site, and back on the road this time to Port Dover. Because of the nice Sunday weather it was packed with beachgoers and motorcyclists. I parked my bike near Tim Horton's along with maybe fifty other bikes, and walked over to the Fritter Place. This year the Fritter people are only going to open three days a week in the summer, and they have a new cashier to help out, and a bigger machine for peeling the apples. After looking at this machine in operation, I asked exactly how new is this machine, and I don't remember the exact date, but it was a four digit number and the first two were 18. I commented that Tim Horton's apple fritters were probably being made on a much more modern machine, but then realized that the apples in Tim Horton's "apple fritters" would not need to be peeled, as they were mostly imaginary apples. (That is not a type of apple, it is when you think there is an apple but there is no apple)

Tied up at the dock near the door of the Fritter Place was the "St. Lawrence II", a training ship with square sails. Beautiful to look at. Scary to change the sails.

So to summarize the ingredients of a perfect day: A motorcycle club meeting where my motorcycle is not on the agenda, a ride across the field of motorcycle dreams, a new Rudge T-shirt, a half dozen real apple fritters (I only ate three, three for Mary Ann), a square sailed tall masted ship, 25 degrees C and sunny weather.

Picture: The Dock in Pt Dover, I took this picture today at 3:00 PM.

Quebecor Readies "Fox News North"

Apparently we can soon expect to have a new channel available to Canadians that will promote a right wing agenda, similar to what Fox News does in the USA.

Jacksnewswatch

MacLean's

If this is going to happen, I certainly hope they do not descend to the depths that Fox News in the USA has, which is a level of journalism barely above infomercials and grocery store tabloids. I'm not sure that type of TV would attract the huge audience in Canada that it has in the USA. After all, only about 35% of Canadians vote conservative. But that could gradually increase I suppose, if this channel caught on.

For the last 12 years we have had the right wing newspaper equivalent, the "National Post". It has never been able to make money, and has softened its hard line right wing stance over the years, as ownership changed and new owners tried to turn a profit and build market share.

I read an opinion piece in the National Post just this morning that gives a great idea of what we can look forward to on TV if this deal goes ahead.


It's called "Destroy the Liberal party--for its own good" by Jonathan Kay, who writes many columns for the National Post.

The article itself is based on an idea that is not so bad, to destroy the Liberal Party. I could even get behind that idea if it was promoted as a way to oust the conservatives and return to a government that values the environment and peace. But there is a whiny tone to the article, extreme rhetoric, and the lack of any  substantial ideas.

I guess that when your stated goal is to push one point of view, it is very hard to focus on a search for the truth.  Although propaganda can sometimes be good, the the lowest common denominator of all propaganda end up in finding scapegoats to blame for our real or imaginary misfortunes, and to falling back on war as a means of recruiting people to a sponsor's cause.

Other than pure greed, one of the most basic conservative ideas is that liberals are ruining the the country, and eliminating them will benefit the "good people". This article fits right in with that theme, in the destroying the Liberal Party is assumed to pave the way for an unchallenged reign of the Conservatives. My own assumption would be that it would actually strengthen and improve the NDP and Green parties, and the Conservatives could be defeated.

But from the look of some of the passages in this article, this is low brow conservative propaganda.

"The Liberals could run a monkey draped with a Liberal sash, apparently, and he would get the Grafstein vote, too -- so long as the monkey endorsed monkey bilingualism and monkey equalization."

"This Liberal fetish for quasi-religious self-veneration has been around so long in this country that we have lost track of how weird it is."

"The most common is the one about the Liberals being "the party of Laurier" -- as if the party affiliation of someone who's been dead for a century should have the slightest bearing on how anyone today should vote."

"the selection of Michael Ignatieff -- a nominal Canadian who hadn't lived in this country since 1978, the era of the Bee Gees and Grease-- was an act of stunning arrogance that would be unimaginable for any other major Western political party."

"young Liberals already internalize their party's trademark self-regard as God's Chosen Party"

"just make sure that, at the end of the day, something called the "Liberal party" no longer exists as a vessel for vapid self-hagiography."

Well there is the mix of propaganda you can expect from "Fox North", if they are anything like Fox News or National Post. And of course references to the CBC and CTV as the delusional left wing  "Mainstream media" while "Fox North" will be the only "fair and balanced" network. (if they can get permission from Fox to use the trademarked term)

The strange but original argument about liberals who think they should rule because they are the party of Laurier. I never heard that one before, although I have heard many other straw man arguments..

Fancy words to make you think this is intelligent stuff - I didn't even bother to look up self-hagiography.

Reference to the arrogance of the Liberals, even though they are no longer in power. Usually the ruling party is the one accused of arrogance, but I guess name-calling habits are hard to break. Actually, not just arrogance, it was "Stunning" arrogance.

Another thing about hard core propaganda that gets on my nerves is the trick of turning reality upside down. (also calling black white, and white is black. War is peace, etc.) In this article, it is inferred that the Liberals are religious fanatics. The liberals are apparently "a quasi-religion" and "God's chosen party". Closer to the truth is that the Liberals believe in freedom of religion, while it is the Conservatives under Harper are quietly supported by religious conservatives, who are one step away from wanting to join the USA and Israel in a holy war against Muslims.  In the USA, Evangelical support for the conservatives is out in the open, but in Canada it is kept quiet as we are nowhere near ready for a theocracy yet.

Our country, Canada, used to be admired around the world for peace and tolerance. Not just under the Liberals, but under the Progressive Conservatives, too. Under the new [non progressive] Conservatives we are starting to be seen as the last holdouts of the Bush era. With our own Fox North, if it broadcasts in the tone of Jonathan Kay's article, that negative world perception of Canada could become permanent.

Picture: http://www.caglecartoons.com/

Danny Williams Bashes Quebec at the Canadian Club

This morning I saw Danny Williams, at the Canada Club in Ottawa, speaking out against Quebec's arrogance on CPAC television. Although I am aware that Newfoundland has been attacking Quebec for many years, this was the first time I think I have heard one of these attacks on television, although it was only CPAC, which I assume almost no one watches.

The current issue is about transmitting power from a new proposed hydro project in Labrador through the existing transmission lines in Quebec. According to Quebec's regulatory commission, the existing power lines do not have the capacity to transmit this much extra electricity (1.5 million homes) without an upgrade. Newfoundland does not mind paying for a modest amount of upgrade, but balks at the cost. So now Danny is going on the offensive, and I mean very offensive.

A brief recap of the history of this bitterness, which is really all about Labrador. Labrador is a large area from mainland Canada, that was in dispute between Quebec and Newfoundland. As part of the deal for Newfoundland joining Canada in 1949, the Canadian Government signed a deal that Labrador, and a large area of the mainland, claimed at the time by the province of Quebec, should be ceded forever to Newfoundland. So Newfoundland got a huge territory in mainland Canada, at Quebec's expense, which is larger than the island of Newfoundland itself. Quebec was opposed to this deal and remains annoyed by it it, although by now the deal is pretty much closed. In fact, Newfoundland has recently renamed itself "Newfoundland and Labrador" in order to show how Labrador will always be joined to Newfoundland.

http://lostmotorcycles.blogspot.com/2009/05/quebec-and-labrador-dispute.html

The geographical location of Labrador is such that it cannot get electricity or roads in or out without going through Quebec. And not just a little bit of Quebec, but nearly a thousand kilometers. Newfoundlanders cannot even build power lines from Labrador directly to Newfoundland. (or let's just say it has not been done yet, I suppose with enough money it could be done going under the sea).

Danny Williams was not complaining about the decision to give this large territory to Newfoundland, of course. Although he did very briefly mention it in his speech, giving the impression he thought this particular part of the deal would not need to be disputed.

There is another deal that he complained about, which is a 65 year contract Newfoundland signed to sell electricity from Labrador to Quebec at a fixed price. The deal was signed about 1976, and today the price is well below market price for electricity. Danny Williams wants this deal, which he says is unfair, to be cancelled and replaced with a deal which gives Newfoundland a fair, current market price for the electricity.

This dispute has gone on for at least twenty years, but Danny Williams delivered this speech yesterday (June 9, 2010) in Ontario. As far as I could tell, it was a one man show, there was no representative from Quebec to give the other side of the coin. And Danny's attack was far ranging, and possibly more damaging than any previous verbal attacks have been. In it I heard these points (I didn't hear the whole speech).

1. - That Quebec has an arrogance , sense of entitlement and greed. And it is the "Tail wagging the dog" (reference to Canada being the dog and Quebec being its tail)"
2. - That the contract locking in rates for 65 years was unfair to Newfoundland.
3. - That Hydro Quebec takes power at night from Ontario (which is cheap) and selling it back the next day during peak hours at 4x the price of what they paid for it.
4. - That Quebec is cheating on its equalization payments. (Equalization payments are the equivalent of welfare for provinces). Quebec cheats by reducing the electrical costs to Quebecer consumers, and also reducing university tuition (for Quebec residents only), to make it look like the provincial government has less income, which is to boost equalization payments from Ottawa.
5. - Quebec is blocking a national electrical grid, which could bring power from Nunavut, and northern Manitoba, and other remote places (such as Labrador, I guess, but was not mentioned)
6. - Quebec is blocking the Lower Churchill Falls project, another proposed hydroelectric project in Labrador.

As usual, you do not hear the Quebec side of the story. In fact it's probably better for Quebec to not get involved in the mud-slinging from Danny Williams, who as he says, likes nothing better than a good scrap. The hydro electric deal has been to court several times, and every time it has held up against all legal challenges. After arguments from both sides are made, the essential point always seems to be that according to our legal system, and in our system of commercial contracts, it is valid and enforceable to sign a 65 year contract at a fixed price, regardless of the fact that one party may change their minds at a later date and want out of the contract. Historically, contracts have even been signed for more than 65 years.

From the one course of commercial law that I took many years ago, I believe that there are several ways to get out of a contract. Both parties can agree to terminate it, which means of course that Newfoundland would need to cut some kind of side deal with Quebec, which they have never done. Or it could be proven that one party has not held up their part of the bargain in some way, for example if Quebec had neglected to repair the hundreds of miles of downed transmission lines during the famous ice storm that destroyed large portions of Quebec Hydro's grid. But no court of law has ever ended this Quebec/Newfoundland contract in spite of all the challenges. In fact, with this latest challenge, it's starting to look to me more like legal harassment than a true legal case.

Newfoundland is not even losing money on the contract, they are making about 63 million a year. Considering the fact that Labrador has about 25,000 residents, that works out to about $2400 per person per year. And the contract only has thirty years to go now, before they can charge Quebec whatever they like for the electricity. So it's not exactly "milking Newfoundland dry"

The Province
The Montreal Gazette (English Language Paper)


On the CTV website:

"Newfoundland premiers have long complained that a mid-1960s financing agreement that made development of the Upper Churchill hydroelectric project possible is now transferring billions of dollars of wealth from what once was one of Canada's poorest provinces to Quebec."

Well, another way to frame that statement is "transferring billions of dollars from what was once Quebec, to what is left of Quebec."

And by the way, with offshore oil discoveries, Newfoundland is no longer Canada's poorest province.

Not that I am trying to split hairs, but all through the speech, Danny kept mentioning that this was a "Green Energy" project, but I believe that the USA has not decided that hydroelectric projects such as this, and the similar ones in Quebec are "Green Energy". I don't agree myself, but the greenness is obviously in dispute. Especially when Danny says this is the greatest green energy project on the continent

http://www.cleantechlaw.org/2010/05/senate-bill-finds-power-is-renewable.html

Picture: taken by me on our 2007 road trip, Driving through Quebec on the way to Labrador. This is pretty typical of our whole day driving. Just to illustrate Labrador is a remote place.

Bikers Guide to Floradale, Ontario

Floradale is about a 15 minute drive north of Waterloo, and is such a low-key place that I have never even driven through there, and I've lived here for thirty years.

So Mary Ann decided we would ride there for breakfast this morning. She heard that was a small cafe called Bonnie Lou's now opened in the old general store. We took her scooter for a ride to Bonnie Lou's, which was easy to find, even though it is not on Google Maps, it was smack in the middle of town. Just where you might expect an old general store to be located. And the town has a population of only about 500, but looks very well established. We circled around to the back to park, and found there was an outdoor patio and an entrance at the rear.

The waitress was wearing Mennonite dress. Well, maybe I should qualify that. I'm not sure it was Mennonite, because maybe everybody in town dresses that way. And she wasn't really a waitress because you ordered your food at the counter. But she did come over to our table to ask us if we were new and if we had come in on the scooter, which she saw come down the main street then drive to the back of the building. A good guess, I thought, as we left our helmets on the scooter. But in a town this small, and non-touristy, it is very hard to remain incognito. Floradale is in Mennonite country, and many old order Mennonites use horse and buggy to get around, instead of a car. And during breakfast Mary Ann was musing on how she probably wouldn't mind being a Mennonite, and I think she's got that just about right.

Anyhow to get back to our waitress, she told us that we needed to go to the counter to order, which we did. We both got a 2-egg breakfast with bacon and toast. Then I got a coffee and rhubarb torte for dessert. The food all seemed home made and very fresh, and later on I found out why. After breakfast, Mary Ann wanted to take a walk over to the dam, because there is a trail called the Lion's Trail around the dam and reservoir. But just when we got our jackets and helmets locked up, Mary Ann remembered that she needed to ask what day they were open for dinner. Usually they are breakfast and lunch only, but it turns out Friday they have dinner too, which they call supper. On the way back inside, she met a Mennonite looking lady coming out, and as Mary Ann is wont to do they struck up a conversation which led to the Mennonite Lady, who I will simply call ML, leading us through the back yards of Floradale back to her house to show Mary Ann her vegetable garden, which is of huge interest to Mary Ann. Also of some interest to me, as many of the sticks used to tie the row strings are old brushes, spatulas, and even old steel wrenches! As ML said, they don't throw anything out.

I was more interested in ML's garage, where there was a buggy parked, and behind that was a horse. ML also does repairs to soft topped buggies and she took us in to show us her workshop which included a commercial electric sewing machine, and lots of Naugahyde and velour, and what looked like leather. Also she had a buggy body in for restoration, and was showing me the work she had done so far and it was fantastic with the velour cloth inner liner finished already. I got a chance to really appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into the buggies, which rivals that of bikes found at custom bike shows (in some cases). From a distance the buggies all look kind of similar but apparently there are huge differences close up.

ML also showed me several diaper bags she was making out of Naugahyde, and honestly they looked as good or better than any commercial motorcycle luggage, including the standard saddlebags on my Vulcan 900 LT. She also sells those at the market. I would be tempted to buy them to use as motorcycle saddlebags but they were a bit small.

We also looked at the horse, and I was told that this was a new horse they purchased just two years ago, as the other horse was a bit small for this buggy. The way she talked it was almost like listening to a Harley rider discussing why he swapped the motor in his 883 Sportster for a 1200 cc V-twin. She also explained that the bigger horses were very much sought after by the younger men, because they "like to go faster". I guess people are the same everywhere.

Then she gave us a lettuce head from her garden, took us upstairs to see a quilt she was finishing for sale at the market, and gave me a review from the Kitchener Record, by Andrew Coppolino, about Bonnie Lou's Cafe. And she told us that the rhubarb for the torte came from her own garden, and that she made pies for Bonnie Lou, and was starting to make butter tarts as well.

We never did see the Lion's Trail, but that fits in with Mary Ann's travel philosophy of "Go with the flow".

Picture: As usual, I didn't have my camera, which was actually a good thing as I'm sure it would have spoiled the experience completely. Anyhoo, this here is a picture of a Mennonite buggy in West Montrose. Except that ML's horse was black, it's about the same.

Travelling to a Small Town in Ontario, Canada, in 1914

In the last year, Mary Ann and I have made efforts to discover our local area in day trips by car, motorcycle, walking or bicycling. Yesterday, we found one of those places that I would put near the top of the list. It's a place I pass by every time I go to Port Dover, or almost anywhere actually, called Doon Pioneer Village. I did visit the place about 30 years ago, and have not been back since then. In fact I used to enjoy visiting pioneer villages, and have seen several including Drummondville Quebec, Upper Canada Village, and Black Creek Pioneer Village in Ontario. 

But the occasion yesterday was much better than I remember, and possibly hard to match at any time. First of all, it was free for us yesterday. The new Waterloo Region museum will be opening soon on the site of the village, and this is actually quite a big museum, of the size you might normally only find in larger cities. So the museum held an open house for the Historical Society and their guests, and lo and behold it appears that Mary Ann got invited and that was extended to include me. Not only free admission, but free punch and snacks at the museum, and free access to the Pioneer Village.

At some point Mary Ann and her friend were talking shop, and I decided to go outside to check out the steam locomotive parked at the edge of the outdoor cafe patio. I am somewhat interested in trains, I guess part of my mechanical interest that also draws me to motorcycling. When I finished looking over the engine, I noticed a restored train station beside it. It looked like there was no one around, and the door to the main waiting room was unlocked so I decided to poke around. I went in and was looking at some of the posters on the wall when I was startled by a voice behind me asking "Would you like to purchase a ticket to somewhere?" I recovered enough to look around and found that there was actually a woman behind the ticket counter, dressed in an old fashioned costume. I said "Maybe, where does the train go?". Then she showed me a map of the Grand Trunk railway tracks in Canada in about 1914, and a similarly dated schedule of passenger services and fares. It seemed like I could probably get to Vancouver, British Columbia for about $5, which I had in my wallet, and this price was quite a bargain.

After we talked for a while about the history of the Grand Trunk railway, I made my way back to Mary Ann and told her the strange tale of this women trying to sell me a ticket on the train. According to Mary Ann it was nothing supernatural, it was merely one of the tour guides for the pioneer village. I said there is nobody in the village, I think it's closed today. So the three of us decided to go out and stroll about the village, and although we didn't see any other tourists, every building was fully staffed with costumed guides. All we needed to do was walk in to a building and talk to them. All three of us were interested in history so we had lots of questions. For example, I was asking about the unusual electric light bulbs in the general store. Apparently, they were supposed to look like they dated back to about 1914, which was about the time that this area first started getting electricity. I'm pretty sure they were not original pieces, as they were all working, and all turned on.

Another place we visited was "Peter McArthur House". He was apparently quite a famous writer for the Toronto Globe in 1914, and lived in this house near Appin, Ontario. The house was moved to Doon Pioneer Village some time ago. I never heard much of this Canadian writer, but I took a look at some of his work, and I like his style, which was a blend of Stephen Leacock-like humour and serious political commentary. He tried to promote farming as a way of life, and was an informal spokesman for the "back to the land" movement, at a time when farmers were heading for the cities in droves. Looking back from 2010, he was apparently not that successful in his quest to stem the tide.

I found a long article about him here.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3683/is_200704/ai_n19432203/

It was like a trip back to 1914, the target date set by the pioneer village. I'm not sure how much I would like visiting the village again with bus loads of schoolchildren around, but it is a place we will go back to see again, especially if we have some out of town visitors staying with us. Or maybe even some in-town friends or relatives (like my grandchildren maybe, except they keep saying they have already seen everything I take them to - they have been on many class trips).

Picture: The Stanley Steamer club photo, when they visited Doon Pioneer village in 1999.