Blackberry Playbook

Like a lot of people, when I heard the news of the massive price slash RIM was going to bring onto the Playbook, I got caught up in the excitement and decided to attempt to purchase one. The first few places were failures, sold out no how many will come in with the next shipment. I even went and got a raincheck but was told there were more of them then what they were expecting in the next few weeks. The message was simple, first come, first served. Then I tried Staples and discovered they had a pre-purchase plan, you put your money down and you will be guaranteed a copy. So taking the opportunity, I did that and was promised one within a week. Two days later I got a phone call, and a day after that I got my copy. This was my first serious tablet, yeah I did purchase one of those Chinese Android tablet- its not that bad an experience but you can tell it was made with inferior parts. I opened up the box, and its a cool box too, by the way, and held it with respect and awe.

It is a lovely little device. It took me a few minutes but I got the gist of the gestures and made a few quick look around on the various apps and programs pre-loaded. I mean it has a NFB of Canada app! What is that?? Any time I want I can watch some great NFB documentaries, for example. It also comes with Kobo as the ebook reader, so I can do some reading. What else about it? Well, I know there's already been a lot of reviews out there about the Playbook, most of them tend to be negative. I do sometime wonders if this whole 'iPad Killer' is a bit overdone. Listen the IPad is the standard, the gold standard of tablets if you will. It is still the best tablet out there and that is our reality. However let me say this, perhaps the best response by those companies making tablets is to simply say iPad is the best and they are not in competition. Blackberry has been hammered by a lot of reviewers and I understand some of the concerns, the odd button set-up, the overall unfinished feel, the lack of apps. I wondered about the latter, but now I can comprehend the problem; apps are good. A year or so ago I wouldn't have said that but after having the IPod Touch I get the importance of apps. So, the Playbook, what about it? Here is my quick review: the screen and multi-media is amazing. To watch some High Def video on a 7 inch screen is amazing and the sound, without headphones is very good. It's better then some laptop speakers I could talk about. Also the two cameras are good. It seems everything has to have a camera and so why not tablets. I believe 7" is about the limit of dorkness when it comes to taking a photograph on a tablet. Taking a picture witha 10" or more just looks dumb. The body of the tablet- the size is good, the rubberized back feels secure- I like. Screen responsiveness- also good. It is very fast and responsive to the gestures. Yes the glass is a fingerprint magnet, but that's why they include a cleaning cloth.

Problems: apps. 'Nuff said. Perhaps a result of the sale, it may spur developers to get moving and get some apps pushed out there. I comprehend the development of a Blackberry Apps World- but I hope it doesn't restrict people. I know Apple touts its' few hundred thousand, but how many fart making apps does a person really need? The native calendar and mail. I would care more for the former then the latter. I can access my gmail account easy but I could really used a calendar. I do plan to use it in place of my Dell Axim which one day will go the way of all flesh and so a full featured calendar would be very important. What else can I say, well I think I will now investigate purchasing a Blackberry for my next phone. I mean I should immerse myself in the environment. My overall thoughts? Positive. Am I glad I purchased it? Yes I am. Will I suffer from iPad envy? Not now. Will I become a Blackberry fanboy? There is always that danger. The price is right, the device is right, go and make the purchase.

Instagram: I Understand

I've been hearing about it for a few years, this whole app thing called Instagram. Since at the time I had a 2nd generation Ipod Touch, it really wasn't a big concern for me, since I didn't have a camera and since its was only an iPhone app, it was 'who cares'. I know it was talked about on Net@Nite a few years ago, I'm certain Leo raved about it, he was in his 'rave about everything Apple' stage of life. I wasn't sure about it, in fact I wasn't sure about the 4th gen Ipod Touch, since the camera wasn't supposed to be all that good.

Then I bought the 4th generation. I should have realized I was going to like everything about it. I had first thought I wouldn't use the camera, since I had one and also my cellphone had a 2Meg Camera, which I use a great deal in my day to day picture taking time.



Took this one today, I enjoy the fact that when the mood strikes and I see something great, a quick photograph and then some editing can do wonders.

With all this, why should I bother with the Touch. Then I bought one. All of a sudden I had another camera and I had to use it. I got a number of photo editing apps, such as befunky, which I've blogged about in the past.

However, this Instagram thing was out there and I debated. Eventually I downloaded the app. I tried it and I am hooked. You knew I would have been anyways. I think its great. Like all things in this Web 2.0 Social Media/Network world we live in, its social. I take a photograph, do some editing and post it. The social part I discovered comes from following others and having them follow you.

I started to take photographs:





And more photographs and , you get the idea.

I also found sites that help with the experience. A good place is Inkstagram, where the feeds for myself and those I follow are posted, so I can go through them all. A good way to keep in touch with all those people and see the latest works. Webstagram is another one. From that one I learned about Stickgram, instagram photographs transformed in fridge magnets, who doesn't need fridge magents?



So from a not-sure camera, to one that makes artwork and fridge magnets. You know you got to love it and try it.

Preserving the Brick Works

I was listening to CBC Radio 1, it's been a time I know, and one of the topics was the documentary "Brick by Brick", an examination of the Brick Works and the work to preserve it from the wrecking ball. Of all things that could be destroyed, or rather, renewal of the land and protection it would be a dilapidated industrial zone, a brick yard, as you will.

However, people with vision saw it as something more and the result has been a jewel near the Don Valley Parkway. In other words, someone saw beyond the abandonment and realized this could be something great and it is great.

It has festivals, it has events, its a farmers' market, it is connected with the community at large. In other words, it has found a new lease on life and is following that life with all gusto.



What it had was a garlic festival. I mean if that's not a sign of life, I don't know what is, garlic, you have to love it.

Of course such a project cost a lot of money, $55 Million worth. I suppose its one of those things that brought about a lot of questions but not now.

The real thought in my mind is Brantford, here we have a site that is comparable to The Brick Yard, 50 acres for the Greenwich-Mohawk site and 40.7 for the Brick Yard. Of course there are some differences, the building in Brantford are for the most part torn down, except for one.

Officially there is a great plan. However a few people have expressed concern because Brantford does not have a strong record when it comes to heritage buildings.

I suppose the idea should be this, keep the pressure on the mayor and council to use the land that preserves the past and brings about something, anything that will bring people to Brantford and something we can look to with pride.

A high order I know, but something that is attainable.

Pirates Victorious

So it was all over the news. A bunch of upstart 20-somethings, to quote one article managed to convince almost 9% of the Berlin electorate to support the aims of the Pirate Party of Germany. The New York Times attempted to portray the new parliamentarians as looking more like the Lost Boys from Peter Pan then proper politicians. It always intrigues me when the Mainstream try to figure things out which has to do with the Internet and the new world that's evolving out there.

Some are wondering whether or not this is a shift or a blip, something to do with the German Electoral system, which is proportional representation and all you need is to get at least 5% of the voters and you're in.

The Guardian opined:

The big questions are: is the Pirates' electoral success a culturally specific blip, or a pointer to longer-term political change? Have we reached the point where the internet is having a measurable effect not just on political discourse, but also on what happens in polling booths? And could it happen here?

The answer partly depends on which electoral system we're talking about. Germany has a strictly proportional system: once a party receives more than 5% of the vote it becomes eligible not just to hold parliamentary seats, but also to receive state financial support. So vocal minority parties that can persuade more than 5% of the electorate to turn out can expect to have a political impact. That's why green parties have done relatively better in Germany and Ireland than they have in other jurisdictions. (The last – discredited – Irish government, for example, was sustained in power by an alliance between Fianna Fáil and the tiny Green party.)

Of course that article was more to do with the first past the post system that is the norm in parliaments which follow the Westminster Model. Still, its something to consider. As I read the articles, I couldn't wonder if the same was not said when the first Green Party members took their seats. You know, a crank one policy party that is more of an protest vote rather then anything serious. Now look at the Greens, they even got an MP here in Canada. It took work but you know what, the party is no longer fringe.

That's it really. If you get a voice in Parliament or the local legislature you now have something to work with, no longer are you outside looking in, but part of the fabric.

Some may think, still, the Pirates are jokes, simply a group of people who like to download music illegally. Not anymore, there is this quote from the New York Times:

They are absolutely not a joke party,” said Christoph Bieber, a professor of political science at the University of Duisburg-Essen. While there was certainly an element of protest in the unexpectedly large share of the votes the Pirates won, they were filling a real need for voters outside the political mainstream who felt unrepresented. “In the Internet, they have really found an underexploited theme that the other political parties are not dealing with,” Mr. Bieber said.

No longer a joke. I have to believe this is the possible springboard for other Pirates to look at and consider. The Internet has become a very powerful tool, the place where much of our lives are now centering and something that is being totally missed.

Der Speigel had a fascinating look at the election results. Part of the story had to do with the way other parties and groups dismissed the Party, even the Greens took shots but none of this stopped over 120,000 people from casting their ballots.

The criticism may actually have helped drive young voters to the Pirate Party. Indeed, other parties may have overlooked the fact that the Pirate Party addressed the concerns and interests of a relevant group of voters. The party focuses not only on classic themes like direct democracy, transparency and online data protection, but also on demands that would be unthinkable to traditional politicians. The party wants to see the introduction of an unconditional basic income, for example, and the legalization of soft drugs. Both positions sit well in alternative Berlin districts such as Kreuzberg and Friedrichshain.

The Pirates also have something other parties have long since lost -- credibility, authenticity and freshness.

There is now a new sheriff on the alternative voting horizon and it sails under the skull and crossbones.

David Cameron wants to Unfriend You

The news is out, PM David Cameron of the UK has suggested that limits should be placed on social media, since its through things such as Blackberry Messenger and Twitter that the rioters are passing messages and strategies to each other.

Now understand this, when Egypt or some oppressive regime does this, its considered heavy-handed and a restriction of democratic rights, when a western nation, such as the UK does it, its for public safety.

Let's talk about the riots, already the spin is being put on it, that its just a bunch of out of control young people who should be looking for jobs instead of looting. Of course that's the second point, its nothing more then an attempt to smash some buildings and make off with some high cost clothing or electronic goods.


Of course, if that's the case, then the solution is not bring in more police or have the military parade through the streets, its to buy and distribute Blu-Ray players. Why riot and smash when the government will give it to you for nothing. While some would comment about the cost, consider this, Players are now under $100.00 and just don't bomb Libya for a couple of days, that should pay for them all.

While the direct cause was police shooting an unarmed man, no doubt it was, as is always the case, brewing for a few years now. It appears this is not a good time to be young, the UK announced austerity measures aimed at young people. This during the time banks around the globe were getting massive amounts of cash to prop them up during the financial crisis. Young people no longer feel a part of the society and have no reason to respect it. With the PM even considering cracking down on social media- which is much like his ancient predecessors cracking down on coffee houses because they were hotbeds of sedition back in the 1700's, they have fewer reasons to feel a part of the nation. If a person feels disengaged more so because the nation has turned their back or declared unofficial war, then you will have disruptions.

I came across this fascinating video interview of Cory Doctorow:


If this is true, then all this is to be expected, you cannot oppress a group for too long without them rising up and responding in similar manner.

As the global financial debacle continues and with conventional wisdom is to basically ignore the big issues and pass them on to the next generation, while all along pounding that same generation in the present, then this unrest are going to continue a very long time.

Of course the smart move is to throw out families onto the streets if any member is involved in breaking the law, smart idea that, encouraged the already dispossessed feel like they are totally being screwed over by the government.

Closing down Twitter isn't going to solve anything, because Twitter is not the problem, its short sighted governments and politicians making sure their friends are taken care of, while the rest can go pound some sand.

One Year Later

It's hard to believe that just a little more then a year ago, the demolition of the 41 buildings that made up the South Side Colborne Street commenced. There were those who cheered and those who were very angry. There were speeches, protest marches, appeals to City Council and even letters to the editors. Facebook had groups cheering on the demolition and groups who were opposed. A number of people in the community thought that it was about time and a number who thought it was totally ridiculous, a waster of money and also was going to have a negative effect upon the housing market in this city. Groups supporting looked at the buildings and considered them eyesores, groups opposing, or supporting the buildings, saw marvellous history and great potential, if only someone would have a vision and the finances to do something with these building that had suffered years of neglect.

All that ended when the first crane starting the assault.



A good crowd was on hand to watch the proceeding, including a few from the sitting Council. I don't know if a lot of people were cheering that day, there was a lot of people on hand to watch and record the goings-on, I mean how many times in a life do you get to witness a whole side of a street demolished?

We could watch building after building destroyed by the cranes, and bulldozers. We saw the material gathered up and then moved to fill landfill sites throughout the region.

To celebrate the anniversary, the Station Coffee House and Gallery is putting on a exhibition of media created during the demolition. There is a lot of pictures taken and video shot of the entire experience. It's taking place on July 2nd. Now likely it would be interesting, but perhaps in the interest of controversy, the people putting on the show have invited former Mayor Mike Hancock and former counsellor Mark Littell to the gala launch. There is a little frothing for this.

I suppose the question is now, what next? There is a plan to build a very nice athletic centre/YMCA complex, that would service both the University and the community at large. The cost has been estimated at $50,000,000. I think it will not happen very soon.

Still, we have a very nice new park in the downtown core:


It is sunnier downtown, and we have a very nice view of the Casino. All of which is worth the $30,000,000 it has cost the city to remove those 'eyesores'.

A recent linked was posted by Lloyd Alter on Facebook considering the potential decaying building can bring to urban revitalization. The writer asked the question: Can decaying buildings lure top talent?

The key paragraph is this one:

It may be overlooked, but one key incentive for creative clusters is older buildings that entrepreneurs can convert. “At a certain point you want to take advantage of something that is decaying or running down, and let new use adapt to opportunity,” says Gordon Price, director of the City Program at Simon Fraser University, and a former Vancouver city councillor. “And you may not be able to put that into a plan.”

Also, an older stock of rental housing gives young, creative people an affordable place to live. “If you push them too far from places where you’re hoping to generate a creative cluster, it’s neither fair to them nor likely to succeed,” Mr. Price says.

I think that's enough for today. As one member of city government said to me, you can always repair buildings. Shame he wasn't listened to.

SOCAN, Netflix and Greed

So the Society of Composers, Artists and Music Publishers of Canada has gone to the Copyright Board of Canada and filed a request for something called an interim tariff. The purpose of said tariff is:

to enable it to license the use of music on websites that profit from audiovisual webcasting and user-generated content services. While tariffs applying to the use of music in this manner are currently being considered by the Copyright Board, the interim tariff would accelerate the compensation to music creators and publishers for the use of their work and would give businesses some assessment of the royalty payments necessary to run their operations.

Many believe this is an attempt by SOCAN to get some of the proceeds from services such as Netflix, YouTube and a few other services that stream content which may contain music that was produced by members of said organization. Apparently there is a feeling that this is being done on the back of hard working musicians who again are getting stiffed. Well, let me say they are getting stiffed but its not from Netflix etc, its from the organizations that say they are 'helping' the musicians, such as CRIA. Remember that fun group, its the people who collect the tariffs from blank media and distribute it all to the members, except they are woefully behind on the payments.

I think a few things need to be understood before we proceed; music that is used in soundtracks, be they movies or television programs are licenced by the content holders. If you think for one moment that a movie is going to feature music that is not licensed, you're not paying much attention, if a studio did that, don't you think that the RIAA would go after them with all the lawyers in their fold? Of course they would. The licensing agreements can be quite good. I went to the site "How Stuff Works" and came up with this explanation:

According to the book "All you need to know about the music business" by Donald Passman, "The fees for synchronization licenses are really all over the board, and they vary with the usage and the importance of the song." For example, Passman's book mentions some fee ranges:

* Low-end TV usage (e.g. -- music is playing from a jukebox in a scene, but no one in the scene is paying any attention to the music) -- free (for exposure) to $2,000 for a 5-year license. In a film, the fee would be $10,000 in perpetuity.
* A more popular song is worth more, perhaps $3,000 for TV and $25,000 for film.
* A song used as the theme song for a film might get $50,000 to $75,000.
* Commercials fetch even more money: "a song can command anywhere from $25,000 to $500,000 plus per year. The typical range for a well-known song is $75,000 to $200,000 for a one year national usage in the United States, on television and radio."

This is why artists love to have their works featured on commercials, it can be quite a lucrative adventure for the license holder.

None of this makes it into the press release of SOCAN, they want to go on about the poor starving artist.

So what do they want? Well, another website has this:

It also appears as if SOCAN will not allow the Copyright Board of Canada to determine what constitutes an "acceptable" tax rate. The organization has created an outline that shows what percentage should be taxed, depending on the service and host "sharing" their intellectual property.

SOCAN hopes that streaming services like Netflix, Apple TV and Sony Crackle would be taxed around 1.9 per cent of gross revenues. For user-generated sites like YouTube, however, SOCAN recommends payment from 6.8 per cent of advertising revenue incurred from music videos and 1.9 per cent from all other audiovisual content.

Let's discuss the outcome of said tax, which will probably be a dynamic tax, 1.9% this year, and going up every year from now on; how they plan to go after YouTube is rather interesting, since YouTube does not have a Canadian branch at all. I have a feeling Google could just as easily block access to YouTube with people who are using a Canadian based ISP. Or they will simply ignore it. If people dont want their music used, simply ask Google to take it down.

What about Netflix? I think there is a few possibilities:

1) they pay the tariff and pay on the costs to consumers. This is usually what happens when companies are taxed. So instead of $8.00/month, figure it might be $10.00
2) Pull out of Canada. If the tariff is ridiculous and the paperwork becomes too much, close it all down. There are a lot of services unavailable to Canadians, think of Hulu, so this would be one more.

In both cases the consumer gets it in the neck.

This explains why in a lot of ways, Canada is becoming a digital backwater for these services. As I said, Netflix is legitimate, it is buying the rights to the programming it delivers. Everybody should be winning, then along comes a group that gets greedy and in the end, we lose out.

These people need to be told to butt out and let us enjoy watching what we want on what we want. Or we can wait for BestBuy to commence their service.

The Cold War has a new Front

I've been thinking baok to the Cold War. For those of you who are too young, it was a time when the two great political and economic philosophies stood staring at each other, with fingers on the button almost daring the other side to press first. It was conflict through proxy, since a war between the Superpowers would have meant the end of the world. The bad part of nuclear war is the winning side only has month or days to enjoy the victory then they too will get destroyed with the massive cloud of radioactivity that will circle the globe. The Wikipedia definition of the period of time states:

The Cold War (Russian: Холо́дная война́, Kholodnaya voĭna) was the continuing state from roughly 1946 to 1991 of political conflict, military tension, proxy wars, and economic competition between the Communist World – primarily the Soviet Union and its satellite states and allies – and the powers of the Western world, primarily the United States and its allies. Although the chief military forces never engaged in a major battle with each other, they expressed the conflict through military coalitions, strategic conventional force deployments, extensive aid to states deemed vulnerable, proxy wars, espionage, propaganda, conventional and nuclear arms races, appeals to neutral nations, rivalry at sports events, and technological competitions such as the Space Race.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, its easy to say the Cold War is open, the West won and now only the US strides the world as the only Superpower and the rest of the planet better cowtow to them or else. Now, Russia is a partial ally to the US, or if that's a bit much, at least not a full blown opponent.

You would think that and probably be right, then if you turn to RT, the Russian based 24 hours news channel. I have to admit, I am a fan of the channel. Not only does it provide news of what is happening in Russia and that part of the world but it gives me all the information I need on Vladamir Putin. The motto is, after all, "All Putin All Time". Well, not really, it does portray Dmitry Medvedev in a very nice light. He is the President after all and does wield a fair bit of power in the world. He also seems to like wearing wide ties. Of course the big news in Russia, speaking of news, is whether or not Putin will run for President in the next election.

It is also a good network to learn Russian history or the nation of Russia. It's fascinating in that regard, parts of Russia I've never heard about, there's probably a show for it.

Then there is the other aspect and that is,the cold war position of the network. Now I'm not sure how much of the content is controlled by the Kremlin, but it has a number of shows which portray the US in less then flattering light. There are a number of programs, all on during Prime Time that are based in the US and have a rather negative slant on what is happening in the West. One of their chief messages is a complaint that mainstream media tends to concentrate on fluff and forget the real news. Just this evening there was a journalist professor commenting that most of MSM is taking the time to go into great detail over 'Weinergate'. The hostess was complaining that during a time of war, this is what is taking prime time with the various news outlets. Of course RT only concentrates on real news and so you will get their slant on what is happening in Libya. I'm not sure which side RT is on this conflict, they are more complaining over the escalating of the work of NATO from making a 'no-fly' zone to going out of their way to bring about regime change.

What about the comments on MainStream Media? Is is truly that bad? Is it simply a tool of the Military-Security Complex and so it will attempt to distract rather then to instruct? If you go to the site The Aloyna Show, you will notice all the newer programs deal with examinations of what is being missed. Besides this, the network goes out of the way to discuss the growing War State that is the United States. There is also comments about the economic collapse that is happening in the US and Western Europe- almost a continuation of the cold war in a way.

Some have accused the network of becoming a haven and harbinger of conspiracy theories. They also bring in individuals who would be sympathetic to the point of view. This makes sense, after all most networks have their list of experts they count upon to bring some interesting facts.

Then there is Adam vs the Man. He had a brief time in which he took on the law as it pertained to dancing at the Jefferson Memorial. He and a few other people danced and got arrested.



I've was trying to think of the angle of this new front in the "Dance Dance Revolution", but I realized its as much of an attempt for publicity then making a statement. Then again, its a rather stupid law and should be challenged.

So from programs such as these it makes me wonder that Russia still views the US as the Enemy and the weapons is now 24 hour media and web presence. Of course if you saw some of the advertisement on the network the proudly flaunt themselves as Ànti-American Propaganda and declare that it can be the truth.

I still will watch because it is a fascinating point of view. Plus where else can I watch Cory Doctorow interviewed?

Read Geist

A number of years ago I picked up a sticker that I placed on a clipboard, it said simply:



That was the 20th Century, now I believe the saying of the 21st should be to "Read Geist". To read him makes one to understand what is happening in the world of copyright and how Big Media and Big Copyright Holders want to put their own interests way ahead of your interests. To them your only part of the entire thing is to give them more and more money as long as you live.

In the Toronto Star, he wrote an article regarding a new deal Big Pharma wants to enforce in Canada. It is to extend the life of the copyright of drugs. In the day when new medication is being produced which, for the most part, is bringing about enhancement in daily life, Big Pharma wants to ensure its hold on the copyright of the drug is extended.

He described the position of Big Pharma, most of them which are based in Europe and have managed to wrap the EU around their various pudgey fingers:

The intellectual property council (which counts several brand name pharmaceutical companies as members) claims the reforms would lead to increased pharmaceutical research and development in Canada. But last week University of Toronto law professor Edward Iacobucci released a study that thoroughly debunks the CIPC claims, predicting increased consumer costs and noting that there is little evidence the changes would increase employment or research spending.

Of course, they say that such protection will enhance the industry in Canada and make it wonderful place. I am surprised there was no mention about piracy in that situation, knock off drugs. Of course that is what the Canadian Intellectual Property Council would want us to believe.

What Michael Geist is concerned about is the extension of the protection ensures the costs of such medication remains high and stays high. As I thought about what he was writing about, I thought the true danger of excessively long copyright is that it becomes a monopoly. As I thought about drugs, I am reminded of the fact that generic provides both a low cost alternative and choice for the consumer. Have a headache, you are not stuck with one brand name, but a number. With medication becoming more important, I was talking to one person who was complaining they are now a pill popper, it is important to have low costs and choice. If the numbers are to be believed, it is costing the consumer and the health care system 22 Billion a year. He mentions a document written by Dr. Edward M. Iacobucci, "INNOVATION FOR A BETTER TOMORROW: A CRITIQUE". He mentions:

When generics enter, public and private plans obtain competitive drug benefit prices for reimbursement of a particular drug; competition brings pricing benefits that monopoly does not. This is especially the case after recent provincial reform of generic pricing, causing generic prices around the country to fall from 50-75 percent of the brand price to 25-45 percent of the brand price, depending on provincial market characteristics and trade restrictions (see table below). Lower, competitive prices for drugs tend to reduce the cost of private insurance plans, and bring potential social benefits by allowing public plans to reallocate resources to other aspects of the provincial health care systems, including other pharmaceutical products which are not currently reimbursed by provincial or private health care plans.

With health costs only guaranteed to increase, the issue now comes, is there places to save money that do not included restricting or rationing services for people. There is and that is make generic medication available. If it is true the cost can decrease by as much as 45% that is a sizable saving. It is easy to understand why Big Pharma wants to restrict the right of generic drugs to expand, it cuts into their profit. I know there would be those who would say that this companies have a right to a return to their investment. Of course they do, there is nothing to stop them from continuing to produce the same drugs even though there is competition, after all some people only feel comfortable with brand names.

However, it is a matter of cost; to us as consumers and to us as taxpayers. I was reading an interesting article regarding Brazil and copyright. Early in this century, Brazil decided to become a strong open source nation, and probably continues to follow that line. The article mentioned that at one point the government became aggressive in treating HIV by making the medication available. It helped but was very expensive so they decided to approach the patent holders to discover if a deal could be made, at first the pharmaceuticals refused. The the President decided to do something:

His first approach was to go to the key patent holders, the US pharmaceutical giant Merck and the Swiss firm Roche, and ask for a volume discount. When the companies said no, Serra raised the stakes. Under Brazilian law, he informed them, he had the power in cases of national emergency to license local labs to produce patented drugs, royalty free, and he would use it if necessary. Merck immediately caved, but Roche stood its ground until August 2001, when Serra prepared to make good on his threat by drawing up the required paperwork. It was the first time a poor country had even come close to breaking a drug patent - and Roche, stunned, returned to the bargaining table with a newly cooperative attitude. In return for Serra's agreement to play nice, the drugmaker would reduce the price of its drug in Brazil to less than half what it was (and less than Brazil's cost to go it alone).

The question is why does it have to become this? Simple because copyright means royalties and excessive royalties mean huge profits. If you can guarantee no competition then you can decide the costs and make them pay.

Michael Geist wants us to know about this, and this is why you need to read Geist.

Me 4 the Senate

Again the papers are filled with angry people complaining about the latest appointments by the Prime Minister to fill vancant Senate seats. As you may have read and heard, the Prime Minister decided to appoint some more eminent people to the Senate, most of them just happened to be defeated Conservative candidates. Then again, this does not make them eminent, in fact their view of politics and the nation is so important that their voide has to be heard. Now there has been a lot of anger regarding the appointments. In fact it seems to be the great unifying factor right now in Canada, with newspapers united in criticizing the appointments.

Of course, I think with the Spring we've had, it wouldn't take much to get Canadians angry. Our only hope is that the city of Winnipeg will get an NHL team and joy will return to the Dominion.

However, we do need to stop this blatant display of partisan entitlement. After all this has never happened ever in the history of Senate appointments ever! I mean, when the Liberals were in power, this never happened. All their appointment represented the cream of Canadian society, just because most of them happened to be members of the Liberal Party of Canada was just a co-incidence.

However, we need to do something and so I want to suggest and lobby myself for a Senate Seat. I know the Prime Minister regularly reads my blog (!) and so I need to present my credentials for this august position.

First of all, I am a middle-aged, white unilingual Southern Ontario male, in others words the most oppressed minority there can be. Also I probably represent the exact demographics of the average Conservative voter. The good news, I didn't vote Conservative. So my appointment cannot be seen as partisan, but rather one that will bring diversity to the Senate. I will represent the average Canadian, which is one of the most unrepresented groups in Canada. All those special interests and eminent people sorts, when we really need is a regular person up there to represent all the other regular people in the country. Seriously what does a lawyer know about being regular?

I promise I won't sit as a Conservative or a Liberal. I could sit as an independent, or a Green or even a Pirate ( Pirate Party of Canada).

I think I have all the qualification, perhaps got to find that $4,000 worth of land, which shouldn't be difficult. If anyone has a lot to lend you will have a job in Ottawa.

I promise to show up on time, to vote when I'm supposed and not involve in any treason, indictable offense or even infamous crime. I will work hard for my $132,000 a year salary which I will pull in until I turn 75.

So Prime Minister Harper, next time you need a Senator, I am your Man.

The SD Card Tax

The title of the recent ZDNet blog says it all: Canadian SD card buyers are all Criminals. The people who run the non-profit (alledgedly) Canadian Private Copying Collective has decided that because you can download content onto SD cards, including micro SD cards then people MUST be copying music onto them, after all, what else would Canadians use such devises. After all, we are a nation of thieves and cutthroats. This group are the ones that collect all the levies from blank cassettes and CD-R to distribute to the various drug dealers and pimps, oops, sorry to the artists, performers, writers of music. In fact they have a whole document on the distribution plan, you can read it here. If you look closely, you can discern the groups that get the money are the artists, the songwriters and publishers AND, a big surprise, the Record Labels. There is also the methodology for the calculations, which is based upon airplay and sales. So you can believe its slightly slanted to major artists and major recording labels. Now of course they try to distribute it fairly, although a look will reveal the last year data indicates the group didn't distribute near half their gain to artists. So what happens to that which isn't given out, another blog posting.

The big news from this group is they have decided to included blank SD cards, the wording of their requests is:

blank audio recording medium” means
(a) a recording medium, regardless of its material form, onto
which a sound recording may be reproduced, that is of a kind
ordinarily used by individual consumers for that purpose and
on which no sounds have ever been fixed, including
(i) recordable compact discs (CD-R, CD-RW, CD-R Audio,
CD-RW Audio),
(ii) electronic memory cards, and
(b) any medium prescribed by regulations pursuant to sections
79 and 87 of the Act (« support audio vierge »);

The last lines is left blank so they can add anything they want. if there is anything else they can think of as possibly being used for piracy could fall under that catagory. This is the same group that wanted to place a levy on all ipods and, one presumes, iphones.

Here is the amount they want"

3. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the levy rates shall be
(a) 29¢ for each CD-R, CD-RW, CD-R Audio or CD-RW
Audio;
(b) 50¢ for each electronic memory card with 1 gigabyte of
memory or less, $1.00 for each electronic memory card with
more than one gigabyte of memory but less than 8 gigabytes of
memory, and $3.00 for each electronic memory card with
8 gigabytes of memory or more.

Michael Geist had the following post to consider the danger of this possible levy. His concern is the levy is awful for a media that keeps dropping in price. I went to Factory Direct and discovered you can purchase a microSD card, 2GB for $3.88. Well, not any more, the levy would add another dollar, which would represent a 25% increase in the price, plus the tax that would be calculated on the levy. The problem the levy would remain the same even though the base product is going down in price. The other issue is that for the most part, SD cards are used for photography. They are used in digital cameras and camcorders. Yes they are used in cellphones but usually for taking videos and photographs. Cameras are not MP3 players, they are used to create media, not download it for use later.

I have a number of cards, some I still use, others are 'retired'. For the ones in my camera and camcorder, there is no music, only pictures and videos. I have a few mp3 of songs from my CD on they one in my cellphone, but for the most part I use it for storing my media, not anyone else's.

So this group wants even more money from Canadians. They alledge to give to artists, but their own charts reveal this is false.

So what are we to do, well one would be to write:

gilles.mcdougall@cb-cda.gc.ca

The other might be to, if this levy happens, to find alternative sources for your SD cards, ebay comes to mind.

If there is any hope, the Conservative Government has not been interested in listening to the CPCC in the past and hopefully they won't with this one. It's just ridiculous enough to engender enough anger to make the government decide to ignore this one and refuse to budge.

It's the least we can do.

The Riding of Brant

Well tomorrow is the big day. The first thing I want to write is for all of you who can vote to do just that. It's simple, it's straightforward and makes you feel good. The only problem we have in Canada is we don't get any stickers that will get us a free coffee at Starbucks or Tim Horton's, although I doubt if the latter would ever happen. Still you can vote and feel good in yourself. I should say that some talk about electronic voting, to appeal to the younger an hipper age groups-because we know the younger generation can't figure out to put a pencil to a piece of paper. It's simple to do, come on why make the simple complicated. Plus the problems of electronic voting is that it will probably be proprietary software and we would never know if the system was hacked or not.

Let's talk about Brant riding. What do I think of the local candidates? Here we go:

Phil McColeman

Since I have met and know him I can say he is a good person and sincere in his efforts to serve the people of Brant. He did a few things which got under the dander of his critics, such as putting his website address on the Canadian flags he sent in the mail. This was an effort to help Brantford win some title as the place with the most Canadian flag on display. Ours is on the front door. It could be a rookie mistake, still a bit of a tempest in a teapot.

He likes to point out that the government did start on the road of settling land claims with the negotiation and signing of an agreement with the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation. When one considers the challenges of land claim settlements in this region a start is still a start and hopefully it demonstrates these issues can be settled in an honourable way that satisfies all parties. As well, he talks about his involvement with the local Laurier Brantford campus and how the Conservatives are putting money into post-secondary education. He also points out he can call up the Prime Minister and present the concerns of Brantford to high office.

There was someone in our neighbourhood passing out flyers. Also he keeps sending the address to the polling booth to Jo-Anne.

He is liked by the people of the riding and is spoken of highly.

Lloyd St. Amand

I can say this is another candidate I know personally. I have sat down and broken bread with him at a few Rotary meetings. He is a gentleman. He is also the former MP of the Riding. Like Phil he is well-known and well liked.

He does bring a lot of parliamentary experience and does have the right pedigree. He also does have the experience to represent the region to government and likely would be a very strong voice for Brant in the House of Commons.

As I said, I have met and talked with him, both in formal and informal encounters and I would say that if I ever thought of voting for a Liberal, it would be Lloyd St. Amand. Talking with people I hear the same message, they like Lloyd, they would vote for him, but the one problem they have is the leader of the Liberal Party. It seems Iggy is a bit of a boat anchor to him.

He has also canvassed personally in my neighbourhood.

Marc Laferriere

This is the only candidate I have not personally met, so I can only discern about him from what I've read and heard. I should start by saying he is a person who has used the Internet and Social Media to the best way of getting his message out. He post pictures of the groups and events he has been a part of and of the workers of the campaign. He has a twitter and facebook page. He uses all the strategies made famous by George Smitherman and his successful run for the Office of Mayor of Toronto. These methods proved very successful for Mayor Smitherman (tug-tug) oh excuse me (whisper whisper whisper) he's not the Mayor of Toronto? But didn't he use social media effectively (whisper whisper). Well, who's mayor then?(whisper whisper) Rob Ford? Well, he used social media effectively didn't he? (whisper whisper whisper) No? Oh, well, I see. Excuse me ladies and gentlemen, Marc is using the same methodology used by George Smitherman and his unsuccessful bid for mayor.

He's been campaigning for the NDP since 2009, he came up with the brilliant idea of having a $0.90 dinner to meet the leader of the NDP. This was done during the time Prime Minister Harper was having $90.00 a plate dinners.

He has caught the eye of people beyond Brant, one article talks of one of President Obama's campaign team members supporting his campaign. Even the National Post has taken notice of him and concludes the Brant is one of those riding the NDP could win on May 2nd.

As of this evening, no NDP canvasser has been in the neighbourhood, I suppose they didn't want to face the Powerline North Park Posse.

Nora Fueten

Another good candidate. Seems to be going with the strength of the party, which is the rural area and not so much the urban place. Even though I support the Green Party of Canada, she really hasn't had a high profile presence in the north end of the City.

One comment and article is her call for support of a high speed rail link, which would go through Brantford. This would do well for the city and its infrastructure. Also make commutes to major cities such as Hamilton and Toronto easier for the people of Brantford.

So this is my round up of the candidates.

Just remember, Vote May 2nd

What if the NDP wins

There are three things that can happen when you throw a pass, and two of them are bad.
attributed to Woody Hayes

I should say that in this blog the phrase "Socialist Horders" or "Red Menace" will not appear.

Since last weekend, we have witnessed an incredible surge of support for the NDP. I'm not talking up to 20%, we talking at least the Official Opposition or even, dare we say it, Government. Will we really say "Prime Minister Jack Layton" after the 2nd of May? Some have dismissed the surge as an invention of media in an attempt to spice up an otherwise dull election. Whether this is true or not remains to be seen, still there is something happening; even the Toronto Star has come out in support of the NDP. Now that is a shock, the Official Organ of the Liberal Party of Canada comes out to support the third party. Impending sign of the apocalypse I am sure.

So what will happen if the NDP wins on Monday night. I want to suggest there are three possibilities, as as the quote from Woody Hayes says, two of them are bad

Scenario #1 The NDP decides to go ahead and as a party of principle and implement as much of their election platform as possible. Some of them include giving Quebec a guarantee 25% of the seats in the House of Commons. Even though the province is home to 23% they will be weighed a bit more then the rest of Canada. I believe was part of the Meech Lake Accord, which as memory serves, was rejected by Canadians, sorry that was the equally maligned Charlottetown Accord. Then there is the cap and trade, or the cash and grab, which fills government coffers with money and establishes a new market of trading carbon credits- think corruption. Of course the idea will be to punish the major polluters and force them to pay, which they will immediately pass on to the consumers, so we get almost no reduction of carbon and higher prices, a sure win-win scenario. You can read my thoughts about cap and trade in the blog before this one, remember I'm a supporter of the Green Party. Other promises will cost money and while laudable, it has to be realized, its costly to get more doctors and nurses. While the Star comment talks about the fiscal responsibility of many provincial NDP premiers, one name is oddly absent and that is little Bobby Rae, the NDP Premier of Ontario. Anyone want to remember Rae Days?

Then there is the issue of a lot of neophytes in the place of power, hopefully the party is full of quick learners because they will need to be. The problem is as a party of ideology, there may be many who will refuse to compromise and will go ahead with their agenda irregardless of the consequences. An important part of politics is compromise and will this be a skill many in the NDP can exercise, especially when given the reins of power?

Scenario #2

The NDP comes to power having excited a new portion of the electorate. They are inspired by the vision given by Jack Layton and the Platform. There are videos on YouTube from inspired people, think "Yes We Can" by Will.I.Am. They win and then the cold light of reality shines its bright cold ray upon the platform. The party leadership realizes it can't keep the promises, even right now there is some backpedalling. The question is, what happens when it becomes prominent. I think we have the example of this when we look down south. I noticed the NDP has tried to hitch their wagon to President Obama, but look at his track record, the US is still stuck in Afghanistan with no exit strategy, Gitmo is still open and doing a booming business and the health care, IE Obamacare is the dog's breakfast. The result is a lot of supporters of Obama, especially those of the fabled 'Generation O' are disappointed and will probably not bother to come out in the next election. I want to suggest that if the Republican Party could nominate a candidate that is intelligent, articulate and a war hero, such as, oh I don't know, Colin Powell, instead of freak shows such as Sarah Palin and Donald Trump, they would be in control of the White House after November 2012. Even when it carries out promises, it ends hurting rather then helping. Consider the cap and trade, it will effect the major polluters, those same polluters are corporations that employ a lot of the core supporters of the NDP, such as the Auto Industry, it gets hammered and the companies either inform the unions of huge lay offs or demand major concessions, its like the 90's all over again.

Scenario #3

On May 3rd the Dominion wakes to the reality of Prime Minister Layton and for some reason the Sun decides to rise in the East. The party under the wise leadership of Jack Layton is able to maintain a nice balance of compromise and remaining true to core beliefs. Even though the markets react at first badly, over the course of months they realize Canada is stronger for the NDP and things improve. People are supported and overall there are some increase in taxes but a lot of the social programs generally protect people. Seniors are protected and the health care system finally has the funds to provide people with a first rate system. Yes there are some hiccups along the way but the overall strength of Canada is such that the early teething problems of the government are soon forgotten. The Party becomes a moderate social democratic party and all is made stronger.

So those are some of my thoughts for this evening.

Cap and Trade

Much is now being made on the promise of the NDP to institute a 'cap and trade' to deal with carbon emissions in Canada. There are a number of voices that are speaking out against this plan stating it is a bit of madness and will only hurt the economy and do nothing for the environment.

That's not my problem with the scheme. If that was the only issue, that is was opposed by those on the right I would not feel against it. I know that I'm standing against a lot of green political philosophy, but I feel I am correct in this.

My main problem with cap and trade is that I'm not at all confident that it will actually do anything to solve the problem. The number one problem is that it keeps the carbon based economy in place, yes it wants to lower carbon emissions, or does it. The idea is that governments will set the cap that it will allow all industry to release into the environment. The belief is that the governments of the world will set the cap lower and lower with each passing year. Those industries that are above the 'cap' will be penalized by a 'tax'. Some call it a carbon tax, I realize that's not for the entire project, but it exists as part of the plan. Of course there is always a loophole and that is the second part of the phrase 'trade'. If company 'A' is a large polluter they could always buy the credits from a energy efficient and a clean energy company, so company 'A' can keep on polluting because its not doing anything to harm the overall cap of carbon. To make sure this happens, there's got to be a way to buy the credits and of course there are various markets that will do just that.

There is a very interesting documentary called "The Story of Cap and Trade", there is a teaser:



There is a few other problems and here are my thoughts,

the moment you make a tax on a thing you effective remove any incentive to get rid of it. This is especially true with governments, for so many years governments have told us that taxation is a way to change attitude and behaviour. The primary is the so called 'sin tax', this is special taxes and levies on things such as cigarettes and alcohol. After all the taxes on these items I am sure you will agree the taxes have worked, consumption of both have decreased dramatically. The actual answer is 'not at all'. Governments know that no matter how high they put the tax, they make more money, in fact the few that decide to quit don't put a chink in the armour of money made through these taxes. In fact, it is in the vested interest of government for people to keep smoking and drinking because they get more money. Yes put the taxes up too high and it will encourage smuggling- think the smoke shacks on the Six Nations Reserve. However for the most part, people will keep buying cigarettes. It is in the best interest of governments, therefore, for people to smoke and keep smoking. As for alcohol, think of how the Liquor Stores have changed from places to restrain the purchase of alcohol to the fun places to go to buy your spirits. They want to encourage the sale of alcohol because the more sold means more money and more for the coffers of the government. Now take this same mindset and turn it into carbon taxes, it is in the interest of governments to perhaps tinker with the amounts of carbon emissions on an annual basis but it will maintain a carbon economy because the money is there to be made. Let's get back to cigarettes, everyone agrees smoking is bad for your health, this is given. It is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt- to the point of, is the government was truly serious and this is a suggest I heard a long time ago, they should declare cigarettes dangerous products and not for consumption by people. A person who said this suggested that for those who simply can't quit smoking and the government should make quit smoking strategies free to those who need them, would be to make them available through a prescription. I know there would be those who would argue that smuggling would go through the roof, well, let it be. One of the purpose of governments is to protect society and there are a lot of things that are declared dangerous to human consumption. We don't allow arsenic our food, we don't take those foods that contain arsenic because its that dangerous.

So now the government catches onto a huge source of money, cap and trade. It makes them money- which ultimately comes from all of us, since corporations pass on their cost to us. What incentive is there to get rid of carbon emissions, none, because it brings in revenue. Who knows, will we see statements such as 'Pollute Responsibly'? After all, that's the notice in Casinos and Liquor Store, there is no attempt to stop, rather enjoy so you don't harm yourself and others.

There is nothing to inspire the work to get the planet off the Carbon Economy. Forget cap and trade, we need to re-think how we run this planet. What is the dynamite energy source that is clean and green? I know some may think or say, that is the purpose of cap and trade, providing funds for future inventions. Yeah. Right. We need to kick this diet of fossil fuel and find the next source of energy.

Do we need cap and trade? In my mind is no, it is only a masquerade that looks good but in the end hides what always has been and changes nothing.

One Week to Go

That's all there is, one week until election day. You can almost sense the excitement in the air. People are talking about nothing else then the election, providing you count 'when are they finished?' as election conversation.

Still I thought about the leaders of the various parties and wondered what they think of this final week. So here's some thoughts:

Stephen Harper- since the last election he developed a layer of Teflon in that nothing sticks to him at all; contempt of parliament, please; G20 scandal, big yawn, big honking fighter jets, yawn yawn yawn. I think he wants to get through this final week with as little pain as possible. He has been running a flawless campaign, no major gaffes, no comments about culture that cost him Quebec. It's looking like he might get his majority after all. If he wins, he will spend time in his secret lair with his pals from the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group. As leader of them all, he plans to control the world and it starts in Canada.

Michael Ignatieff- less then one week and the nightmare ends. The pain will stop and he can go back to doing whatever he does when he's not trying to run for Prime Minister of Canada. The question is when will he resign? I suspect there will be discussions with Liberal leadership and all the people who want his job. No doubt they will promise not to stab him too much if he leaves right now.

Jack Layton- hasn't this past weekend been interesting for the NDP. I've often written that Jack who is very popular with Canadians was never able to have a halo effect, well was I wrong. It seems the party has come from its usual doldrums of 13-16% to nearly tied with the Liberals. If that wasn't exciting enough, he's leader of the pack in Quebec. I believe he hopes the week ends with the momentum either growing or consolidating. He's also hoping it ends before he has to renege on any more campaign promises and people start asking too many hard questions, like 'where's the money coming from'? He's already starting to gut his green policies. Could be interesting.

Gilles Doucette- he's going to have a tough week because he's actually going to have to campaign. With the surging NDP on his home turf he's got to give people a reason to actually vote for him. I mean usually by now he's crabbing about how rotten the rest of Canada is to Quebec, which is usually how he starts the campaign. This is good enough, but now he's got some competition. It's new territory for him, will be interesting to see how he reacts.

Elizabeth May- it's time to win at least your seat and maybe a couple more.

The Electorate. In a week we will decide the outcome of the election. We will enter that little polling station and receive a small piece of paper. With pencil in hand we shall vote for the person to represent our riding. If enough from one party win, that party will form the government and the party leader will be prime minister. If one party gains a majority then we will enjoy the fact that as much as they will ignore us, we can ignore them. Politicians are like all officials, they do their best work when we don't notice them, for when we notice them, it means they screwed up.

Don't forget to Vote

The Race for Second

There's still a lot of electioneering to happen and a lot of things can go right and or wrong for the various political parties, but as I look around the Dominion today I think there are a few truisms taking form; the next government will be formed by the Conservatives under the leadership of Stephen Harper, the campaign is rather boring and the real race is starting to heat up. You may ask what race is that? The race for the position of Official Opposition.

I've noticed recently a few changes in the advertisement that is filling up my television screen, mainly the Conservatives are positioning themselves as looking governmental and Harper as Prime Ministerial. The Liberals, almost non-existent and the NDP has now got Ignatieff in their sights. It's interesting how the latter has happened. For the last few elections, the Liberals have been trying to take votes away from the NDP- after all it is the compassionate progressive party, not the NDP that's for sure- they're a bunch of dirty commies, after all. However, things have changed, the debate gave Layton, whom a lot of Canadians like an opportunity to shine and shine he did. What he did was go after Iggy. I know some could suggest that is an easy target, but that makes me think they, the NDP know something that there is an opportunity for breakthrough. Just today I got in my email some mail from Jack- he's going after a breakthrough in Newfoundland & Labrador.

Could it be we see the NDP take both votes and seats from the Liberals. This will be a great assistance for the Conservatives because if the Centre-Left is split it will guarantee the Conservatives picking up a few seats, perhaps enough to form a majority government? Let's remember that the Chretien era back to back majorities was marked by a split of the right. It wasn't that Canadians loved the Poutine, its just he rode a split in the opposition. So we could witness Harper reaching his dream of a majority on the basis of a surging and strong NDP.

I haven't said anything about the Green Party so far, let me correct it- they have a great platform. In fact I would put their platform up with any party. To give a few examples: regarding the Internet and Net Neutrality

The Internet has become an essential tool in knowledge storage and the free flow of informationbetween citizens. It is playing a critical role in democratizing communications and society as a whole. There are corporations that want to control the content of information on the internet and alter the free flow of information by giving preferential treatment to those who pay extra for faster service.
The Green Party of Canada is committed to the original design principle of the internet - network neutrality: the idea that a maximally useful public information network treats all content, sites, and platforms equally, thus allowing the network to carry every form of information and support every kind of application.

Then there is this comment on public transporation:

Urban sprawl means commuters crawl. More roads don’t solve the problem; they make it worse. Gridlock means more air pollution and more greenhouse gas emissions. A transition to efficient light rail transit and coordinated buses will take cars off our roads, breaking the cycle of an increasing number of cars on increasingly-crowded roads to make our cities more livable.
We must build our way out of the problem of clogged roads and smog-choked cities, not by building more roads and bridges and more distant suburbs, but by building “smart growth” infrastructure.
Excellent public transit and efficient housing in high-density nodes along existing transit corridors will make cities more livable and people-friendly. The federal government must take the lead in funding the “greening” of Canada’s cities. (see Section 1.14 Infrastructure and Communities for more on federal municipal
relations.)

I think its time for Canada to vote in a Green MP. If Australia and the UK could do it and survive, so can Canada. It is time for a fifth party.

Much Depends upon the NDP

A couple of articles in two different newspapers brought some interesting and different points of view. The first comes from the National Post, the headline read; "Tories, NDP get top marks for national campaigns". On the same day, the Toronto Star, the in-house organ of the Bloc Toronto (aka Liberal Party of Canada) declares: "NDP fortunes falling fast in latest poll"

Of course, the National Post is a rather right leaning newspaper that would be rather sympathetic to the claims of the Conservative Party of Canada and Stephen Harper. Consider the election strategy of the two main parties, for the Liberals, the best way to ensure election victory would be for the NDP to implode. They believe that if they can catch the votes of disgrunted or disillusioned NDP'ers, then they stand a chance to win, if not a majority then at least a minority government. They need the NDP to go away. You might remember Buzz Hargrove, he joined the Liberal team and told his, I suppose, his former NDP friends to vote Liberal. So the Star has to have headlines that state support of the NDP is collapsing, they want those now disappointed NDP'ers to vote Liberal. They know there is no way for NDP'ers to ever think of voting Conservative. Never going to happen. The startegy is to get them to think the Liberals are the next best thing and the place to put their vote.

As for the Conservatives, they need a strong NDP. Now let me say this, they know there is no way disgrunted Conservatives will go that far to the left. Conservatives will not vote NDP just as NDP'ers will not vote Conservatives. I don't think their thoughts is that Liberals will go over to the NDP, although I supposed more left leaning Liberals will go NDP. But, the votes can't go the other way. The supporters of the Conservatives need a split on the Centre-Left vote. Much like during the days of Chretien, the right was split between Conservatives and Reformed/Alliance group. Chretien was able to coast to a few majorities because of the split. Now the shoe is on the other foot, with a strong party left of the Liberals, that vote won't go to the Liberals.

It wouldn't surprise me if some with the Conservatives think it might be a good idea to completely ignore the Liberals and concentrate on the NDP. They need a strong NDP and a weak Liberal Party.

Should be interesting.

Branding Terrorism

I was coming to the end of the book Zero History by William Gibson, when I read this quote from one of the people involved in the story. It was during a discussion when Garreth says:

Terrorism was almost exclusively about branding.

First of all, let me say, Zero History is an excellent book. It has been considered the third and final book in the Bigend Cycle, which started with the book "Pattern Recognition". Let me say, there is, near the end of the book the introduction of a character that was important in the first book. I'll say no more because I don't want to spoil the story. In fact the purpose of this blog is not to review the book, except to say, it's an enjoyable read. So either buy it or borrow it from your local library.

The quote is what interested me, in fact I stopped reading to write it down. This way I could think about it. It has been in the mind of other readers as well; during my research for this blog I came across this interview with William Gibson. He is asked about the comment and gives this:

If you’re a terrorist (or a national hero, depending on who’s looking at you), there are relatively few of you and relatively a lot of the big guys you’re up against. Terrorism is about branding because a brand is most of what you have as a terrorist. Terrorists have virtually no resources. I don’t even like using the word terrorism. It’s not an accurate descriptor of what’s going on.

Terrorists are now, if you believe that quote and comment is more interested in developing brand awareness and branding rather then the overthrow of whatever government or interest the terrorist is attacking. If this is true, then this is quite a change, I remember years ago being involved in a discussion about terrorists. To give you the time, terrorists were groups such as the Red Brigade and the Baader-Meinhof Group. The story discussed was called, the Wasp. It dealt with a wasp that had flown into a car and was bothering the driver. The driver would react and attempt to swat the wasp, in doing so, brought about a car crash. This was the purpose of terrorism, to overthrow the state. It was involved in bombings, suicide as means to this end. Now with Mr. Gibson, terrorism is on the same level as Tommy Hilfiger, Old Navy or Nike. As I typed those names, I could see each of them being the template for modern day terrorism. It is all about getting into the public eye. Oddly enough, terrorists probably wear Nikes, Old Navy and Tommy Hilfiger shoes and clothing.

As we look at the major terrorist organization, al-Qaeda, it becomes fascinating to change the mindset. It seems no longer involved in directly overthrowing or destroying the enemy. In fact the article from Wikipedia gives the five strategies of the group:

1. Provoke the United States into invading a Muslim country.
2. Incite local resistance to occupying forces.
3. Expand the conflict to neighboring countries, and engage the U.S. in a long war of attrition.
4. Convert Al-Qaeda into an ideology and set of operating principles that can be loosely franchised in other countries without requiring direct command and control, and via these franchises incite attacks against countries allied with the U.S. until they withdraw from the conflict, as happened with the 2004 Madrid train bombings, but which did not have the same effect with the 7 July 2005 London bombings.
5. The U.S. economy will finally collapse under the strain of too many engagements in too many places, similarly to the Soviet war in Afghanistan, Arab regimes supported by the U.S. will collapse, and a Wahhabi Caliphate will be installed across the region.

Interesting how ideology does not enter the equation until step 4, prior ideology was the motivator for the terrorists. Terrorism was either extreme left or extreme right, all for overthrowing the government. Now it is more interested in developing franchises and regions, more like McDonald's then the successor to anarchists groups.

This brings to the thought, is all this a relevant for global events or a lot of spacious writing. This is the crux of the matter as well, by reading the strategy there is no attempt to turn the US or the West for that matter into a part a new and global Islamic Empire, they just want them out of their area. So all they have is the desire to keep the heat up and their names in the media.

If all this is the case, then terrorist acts are part of brand awareness and a suicide bomber is more a marketer or a cool brander.

Election? Election!

All right, the Budget has come down and the Opposition Parties are in a right froth over it. All claim it is doing nothing for the average Canadian. Although some would say there is going to be some nice savings for the average Canadian. One article stated there are no new taxes for the average Canadian. It's amazing how much ink is split dealing with the average Canadian. In fact we are usually the best treated part of society, until reality hits and its usually the middle class that gets hit.

I wondered though, with all the opposition if this wasn't a ploy by the Conservatives. They've got the nastiness of the contempt of Parliament charges, which will not be good.

Yet, I wondered, then I thought about the reasons for the election. The Liberals probably figure it will be a good way to get rid of Iggy, without the messiness of a palace coup. Best that on election night, he simply stands up and concedes the election and announces he is stepping down as leader of the Liberal Party. While the Liberals have no problems knifing people in the back, it's far better and cleaner this way.

The BQ, well, they're never happy.

The NDP, again, this is the enigmatic party of Canadian politics. Jack Layton is personable, respected and likeable, but he can't break the 18% mark, in fact I believe the last poll put the party at 13%. What can they get out of an election, perhaps the chance to break through to Leader of the Opposition. If the Liberal strategy consists of getting rid of Iggy, then the centre-left is open for them to manoeuvre.

So unless people come to their senses and realize they are being exploited by Stephen Harper, we're going to have an election.

Should be fun.