Business: Spirituality: Connecticut business notes increase of at-work spiritual consideration of all faiths

The website conntact.com, a statewide infobank search engine for business periodicals online published in the state of Connecticute, archives yesterday's article by Karen Singer of Business New Haven (Hat Tip to Business Reform magazine).

Singer's article surveys the rising practice of businesses taking into account the specificities of employees' different religious practice and needs - from attire to days off for religious holidays to prayer observances to simple acknowledgement that a religion may be important in any employee's life. The accomodation of religious differences and the need for sensitivity to various spiritualities, as all part of a business' internal culture that can have positive effects for the atmosphere of workaday daily existence. And, hence, one mite add: however intangible, also a positive effect on the company's bottom line.

On the other hand, insensitivity practiced by an owner or manager, or by employees who tease fellow workers who are noticeably religiously observant or just religiously different, these can be serious problems for the conduct of a business; they can lead to workers quitting, and to lawsuits against a firm for tolerating a circle of employees teasing a fellow employee. What's more, some religious practices can be deterimental to the business culture and the firm's peace - prescribing a prayer, obtrusive evangelization or "witnessing," and injecting a dogmatic version of "the truth" into the business discourse or just the milieu can work mischief. And, again, as a result of lawsuits, can become expensive for a firm that does not monitor such phenomena and constrain abusive zealotry by some.

But more important than these negative possiblities, Singer's report presents a series of anecdotal items which tell of individuals who are active in making room for spirituality at work, a number of them being owners or managers.

In the greater New Haven area, there's actually something of a loose and open business movement engaged in the process of accomodating spiritualities in the workplace, and networking about these developments. One important feature for the area is the existence at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, of the Center for Faith and Culture at Yale Divinity School. David Miller, executive director of the Center, explains that "There's a long tradition of philosophical thinking about how religion functions in the world. It's only natural that the human soul is yearning to be integrated, rather than split by false dichotomies that stem from the enlightenment era in Western history, which led to a separation of facts and values." - Owlb
.



Link

Politics: Canada: 'Elite few routinely and for ruling party advantage abused a system that buckled and then failed'

A blockbuster article by Jim Travers in Toronto Star (Hat Tip to Norman Spector) outlines what he says we should expect in two weeks from the Gomery Commission in the first of its reports. In Justice John Gomery's target-scope are a gaggle of loyalists devoted to former Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, who apparently engineered the siphoning off of $250 million mostly to advertizing firms in Qubébec in cahoots around the Chrétien scheme to influence the referendum on the province's possible secession from Canada and, thus, to establish an independent French-speaking nation with its own state.

While many of us are quite glad that Québec is still among the Canadian provinces and its citizens still Canadian citizens, the pall cast by the so-called Adscam Scandal, bringing into question whether advertizing funds tipped the outcome of the vote and thus lessens the sense we have of its authenticity, the pall cast by that salient feature of l'affaire Chrétien is by no means the only one.

Part of the reason for additional and somewhat contradictory outcomes of the $250 millions' disappearance is that some significant part of the money did not pay for referendum advertizing by stealth, but actually bawt no product or service at all of a bona fide advertizing nature. Apparently, Chrétien's elite loyalists arranged for money to go to firms (and perhaps others) to be kicked back to the Feds who allocated it in the first place - that is, if not to top-tier loyalists in the Prme Minister's Office, then either to Liberal Party coffers directly or as donations to the Party via middlemen, bagmen of the Party perhaps. The net result could have been largely a way to pay people to work for the Liberals on the No side of the referendum (No to separation). In that case, the devious route of the funds would have been part of funneling the means to enhance the actual No Campaign. No excuse, of course, But still we mite note how the political will of the federal Liberals thru its PMO elite would stop at nothing to prevent separation of Québec.

On the other hand, it seems obvious from watching the hearings of the Gomery Commission on TV some months ago, that some companies also received largesse that slopped off to them - due to past financial support of the federal Libs, thru the ad companies' owners, or more simply due to the Fed Lib's need to keep everything in this would-be clandestine operation quite hush-hush.

Hush hush, slush slush. Apparently again, Gomery will have none of it. - Owlb


A crackerjack set of recommendations by Norman Spector on reforms in the lite of Adscam appeared yesterday. The recommendations need to be sifted critically, however; particularly Norman's notion that the Clerk of Privy Council (the key member of the Prime Minister's Office official inner circle) should be an official civil-service office, not subject to a new Prime Minister's appointment or re-appointment. This bizarre notion displaces the need for qualifications for the office, to the false unionization of what is a management job of the most delicate kind, demanding political service in loyality to the Prime Minister. Norman is over-reacting on this point to the Adscam mess. - Politicarp

Juridics: Canada: Shocking 'reform' of Canadian Supreme Court appointments

The newswire service Canadian Press has produced a fine summative article (unsigned) that I found in The London Free Press yesterday, an article loaded with relevant information that provides an overview of changes that have occurred in the Canadian executive's procedures in its previously obvious arbitrariness in making Supreme Court Justices. Now, that arbitrariness, I conclude, is somewhat veiled, but remains arbitrary in the most monarchist sense - except that the Prime Minister is the monarch while in office. (By the way, there is no indication that the Governor General could step in on her own clout, to veto a Prime Ministerial appointment to the Supreme Court, so that monarchist element is further veiled by the institution of the office of Governor General, while the true monarchical function here is the present minority-government party leader of the Liberals, default Prime Minister Paul I, successor to Jean I.)

Now, appearances can be deceptive. As when Martin's Justice Minister, Irwin Cotler (by now well-known for past shenanigans in the destruction of the uniqueness of marriage and creatng a g(eneric)marriage in the place of the authentic precursor to this later conceptual monstrosity) - well, this Cotler "asked Canadians to submit their ideas on who should fill the next vacancy on the Supreme Court." A factoid worth scrutiny and questioning. I'm wondering whether "Canadians" includes only inidivuduals, individuals grouped by commonly signing a petition circulated by some hub-person or group (such as an NGO or an association of corporations or an institutional community of juridic values distinct from the mainstream), or a legislature of one of the provinces, etc. ? In contrast to such possiblities, in contrast, the Cotler offer sounds very much like a TV contest, and perhaps serves a similar purpose, such as advertizing the "democracy" of participation by suggestion, again an appearance only to render less stark the monarch's choice of a new Justice. The CP/LFP article is itself disingenuous in characterizing Cotler's ploy as effectuating a case where "the public has been given a formal role in the selection process for Canada's highest court" [my italics - Owlb].

Formal role, really? Only in the sense of setting up a smokescreen of mere formality; something I would more accurately term a "nicety."

Not everyone thought Cotler's move will open up Canada's judge-selection process. Some critics called it "window dressing" because the final decision remains firmly with Prime Minister Paul Martin.

Indeed, it does. And in Canada, one can't give the authority of "advice and consent" (confirmation of the monarch's nominee) to the Senate because the Senate does not consist of elected Senators but of folks appointed by the monarch and his dynasty. Nor can one give the authority of "advice and consent" meaningfully to the House of Commons; because while the Commons is elected, the monarch is not in a distinct executive-role necessary to a meaningful nominaton, because he is himself an elected Member of Parliament, the leader of his party, the ultimate disciplinarian of the MPs of his party who would vote on his nominee (nominator controlling some MPs votes for the nominee), and at the same time the same person is the head of governement - so there is no distinction of the overall executive role from the legislative, no distinction of the nominator from that of the confirmers/nonconfirmers.

Martin first promised parliamentary review of Supreme Court nominees when he was running for the Liberal leadership in 2002. He said it was time to reform the 127-year-old system in which the prime minister has the only say.

But after appointing Louise Charron and Rosalie Abella to the nine-member bench a year ago using little more than the traditional method, Martin has been under increasing pressure for systemic reform.

Charron and Abella were appointed to stack the Supreme Court with jurists who were known to be desirous of dismantling the traditional definition of marriage. They were rammed-thru appointments, without public hearings or any kind of real reform as promised in the campaign which put his minority government in power. To have granted public hearings on Charron and Abella would have brawt up the ideological nature of their appointments, and allowed at least MPs to question them closely - among other things, in regard to why lesbian couples and 2men unions couldn't be accomodated without the simultaneous dismantling of the name, priority, historical place in society, and unique status of marriage as a union of one woman and one man.

Of course, once Martin hoisted these brainy ladies to court membership, when the time came, the court with them now in membership was canny enuff to send the issue (of dismantling marriage and replacing it with gmarriage) back to Parliament to decide one way or another, on its own - otherwise the process of monarchical stacking of the court would have been just too obvious for the appointed Supremes themselves to live with the palpable absurdity. I'm waiting for the Supreme Court to follow thru on its new precedent, and recurring to the court's earlier send-back to Parliament the courts' own decisions striking down Parliament's legislation governing abortion, a matter which Parliament (that is, the Prime Minister) has never dealt with. The new precendent of send-back apparently under the influence of the brainy ladies is one that leads to a courtly preference for Parliamentary decision-making, while yet the court always holds the trump card of possibly declaring any decision violative of some concocted extra-constitutional right, thus null and void.

Under the new process, Cotler will consider people nominated by the public along with those from more traditional advocates such as law societies. Candidates must either be barristers with 10 years at the bar or sitting judges from provincial and territorial superior courts.

The justice minister then compiles his own list of up to eight candidates. A nine-member committee -- comprised of an MP from each federal party, a former judge, a law society representative, a provincial representative and two government-appointed lay people -- will whittle that list to three, from which Martin will make his choice.

Here the Minister's description of the process is disingenuous, in the extreme. It doesn't seem to matter to him, as reported, that the Prime Minister will already have a list of eight, perhaps developed thru conversations with Cotler, and that members of Cabinet will also have conversations with Cotler, perhaps even in Cabinet meetings and in the minutes, why not? Then, of course, to the formalities. Cotler investigates the PM's 8 as well as any others he picks for the short list, then he presents them formally - publically? or in secret? Well, the justice minister compiles his "own" list of up to eight candidates.

As to the qualifications: Note that while there are two laity on the bargaining committee, there is no room for a person qualified simply as a philosopher of law. So, if a community of concern from within the public seeks to play out its vaunted role of "democratic" participation by suggestion, to suggest a publically-published philosopher of law - who perhaps never had an academic appointment as such - he would not qualify no matter how informed regarding the Canadian legal system and Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Thus, the exercize in public particpation, as long a shot as it would be in any case, would be in advance an exercize in vain.

Of course, the important list is that of the justice minister, his top eight (even if each one of them were first whispered in his ear by the PM of the day). Then would come the secret meetings of the committee of nine who would bargain and fuss, form cliques and negotiate chips, to "whittle." We now would have a sanctioned secret whittle process to determine the threesome from which the Prime Minister would choose a new justice from the eight he had listed in his pre-determinations to the very Minister that the Prime Minister himself had appointed to the Justice Ministry in the first place. In short, we move from the former straightforward monarchian approach in a Copernican mode, to the 'updated' approach which is in reality a regression to epicycyles, wheels within wheels, deals within deals in a new Ptolemaic mode for choosing the members of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Needless to say, this new absurdist arrangement is all extra-Constitutional. In Canada, there is no real Constitutional remedy for the arcane legalistics of appointments, nominations, and confirmations to the Supreme Court, at least on the Federal level - because in large part, the Québec / Canada relationship historically precludes any actual amending of Canada's Constitution since repatriation of the British-North America Act and the addendum of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As to the judiciary, what fundamental changes may come are, therefore, limited to those the courts and eventually the Supreme Court can concoct by arbitrarily implanting post facto meanings into the actual words of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, etc. - Owlb

Human Rights : Canadian corporations: Canadian businesses out of control in DR Congo, need for Cdn regulation

Below is the complete text of an email newletter received and treated here as a news release.

TITLE: D R Congo: Kilwa massacre highlights need for regulation of Canadian businesses overseas
GENRE: Press Release, Montreal
CATEGORY: Resource Extraction
DATE: 10/14/2005
SOURCES: Entraide Missionnaire; Rights & Democracy
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Anniversary of Kilwa massacre in R D Congo highlights need for regulation of Canadian businesses overseas 

Exactly one year ago, in the remote town of Kilwa in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Army suppressed a small-scale rebellion by killing dozens of people. Anvil Mining Corporation, which is registered as a Canadian company on the Toronto Stock Exchange and operates the Dikulushi Mine nearby, admitted it provided the troops with “logistical assistance,” including planes, vehicles, drivers, food and even some payment.

The human rights violations that took place between Oct 14 – 16, 2004 in Kilwa are well-documented, most recently by a report from the United Nations Mission in the Congo (MONUC) as well as by local and international human rights organizations (ASADHO-Katanga, Rights and Accountability In Development – UK, among others) Anvil says it had no choice but to respond to the DRC government’s request for assistance. However, international human rights groups think otherwise, and question the adequacy of Anvil’s reporting to the Canadian and Australian stock exchanges as well as to the World Bank which approved a $5 million (US) in political risk insurance a few months after the event.  

“If companies are going to operate in conflict zones, it is imperative that they take steps to ensure they are not complicit in any way with human rights violations,” said Jean-Louis Roy, President of Montreal-based Rights & Democracy.  “Certainly this is what is expected internationally, in standards such as the Global Compact and the UN Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regards to Human Rights.   From the evidence gathered by the UN investigators, it seems that Anvil did not take the necessary steps to ensure that its legitimate mining investment would not be used to strengthen the hand of those who systematically violate human rights.” 

Denis Tougas of Entraide Missionnaire, who has observed the evolving situation of the DRC for many years,  states: “In many regions of the DRC, Canada is known first and foremost by its mining companies, especially the juniors who are known to take risks to make money. The Congo is a destination of choice for such enterprises. Regulation regarding human rights and environmental matters are notoriously weak.  This has to change.”  

The Canadian Government is expected to respond to a June Parliamentary Committee report on mining and human rights next week. The report contains several recommendations including passing new legislation to make compliance with international human rights standards compulsory for Canadian companies operating overseas.  

Rights & Democracy and Entraide Missionnaire are prepared to respond to media requests on this issue, as well as to provide journalists with additional background materials.

Contacts:  
Denis Tougas,
Entraide missionnaire:  514 – 270 - 6089

*Entraide missionnaire is an organisation sponsored by Francophone religious communities that works to train and educate people on questions of international solidarity.

Entraide Missionaire
15 De Castelnau Ouest
Montreal, Quebec H2R 2W3
Canada Voice: (514) 270-6089
Fax: (514) 270-6156
Email: emi@web.net

------------------

Steve Smith,
Rights & Democracy:     
514 – 898 – 4157

*Rights & Democracy is a Canadian institution with an international mandate. Created by Parliament in 1988, it is an independent organization that promotes, advocates and defends the democratic and human rights set out in the International Bill of Human Rights.

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

I don't agree with the strong leftist rhetoric that saturates both of these organizations. However, on this issue of conduct abroad of Canadian businesses, especially those in the extractive industries and the mining industry in particular (tho the complicity of oil company Talisman (still a Canadian player in oil, but has sold its interests in Sudan where it was implicated in human rites violations), nevertheless the gross behaviour of some Canadian companies remains so subChristian and so subhuman that both Entraide Missionaire and Rights & Democracy should be praised for following thru on this case. - Politicarp

Juridics : US Supreme Court: Harriet Miers' nomination stirs up strong, usually blinkered opinion

Reporter Dante Chinni ("Why many conservatives misjudge Bush's choice," CSM, click title above) recounts the development of an outspoken narcissistic conservative reaction to the Prez nomination of Harriet Miers. A clip from Chinni's text follows with my comments interspersed in brackets:

What has been harder to grasp in the past week is the anger from the political right on Miers not being conservative enough. The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol was "disappointed, depressed and demoralized."

[First time I've had a view of Kristol with wits lost, the dean of neo-cons now in devolution to pudding in a way that has little to do with "the Bush Revolution in foreign policy" which K had critically support, most of the time- the neo-Wilsonian revolution in foreign policy I had thawt was the foundation of neo-con strategic thinking about American's role in the wide world bedevilled by terrorism these days. Was/is Kristol simply spoiling for an all-out polarization, an all-out Left vs Rite fite to recap the last election, all this around Bush's second Supreme Court nomination? Shame on Billy K! - Owlb]

Rush Limbaugh was uneasy on his radio show in an interview with Vice President Cheney.

[Never heard the guy's radio show, but maybe RL has gotten a more nuanced analysis of the value of this nomination in the meantime since he had interviewed the pokerish VP. - Owlb]

Many want her nomination withdrawn. [Ain't gonna happen, and the "want" is not well-motivated, unethical, on the part of the gang on the Rite advocating a dump of Miers. Keep her on the programme! Let this play out as it will reveal as much about the Left and this mean-spirited element of the Rite, as it will tell us about the nominee herself. - Owlb]

They want a more conservative nominee in the mold of Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas. They've been waiting a long time for this opportunity to get "their" court and they don't like the way this is unfolding. [They want ... They've been waiting ... they don't like .... that's their problem, not Bush's, the Senate's, or the nation's.]

That's reasonable, of course,

[No, it's not reasonable. The Constitution does not give the President's erstwhile supportive groups the task of "advise and consent." The groups, their leaders and the punditocracy that eggs them on, simply have no constitutional standing to determine the nominations, or to decide the Prez's strategy in putting a nomination forward to the Senate in these days. Many of these bitching and whining gentlemen (a few ladies, too, I would imagine) have been sniping at Bush for a long time, are part of the problem generally of an over-politicized Supreme Court nomination process and are not part of the solution, pretend they own the voters they may have influenced (they seem to regard the voters merely as manipulated and further manipulable targets who actually are presumed incapable of taking responsiblity for their vote for Bush in the last round ... when they give him the constitutional authority to nominate and seek the Senate's "advice and consent"). On the litmus test of abortion, many of these voices are simply exploiters of a woman's dilemma's once she's pregnant and may think an(other) baby is an unbearable prospect - that's why so many of this gang are absolutists and want absolutist prefab Justices who won't work to ameliorate the Roe vs Wad expansionary situation. Rather, they should support a Justice who follows the Laura Bush doctrine that at least points to a modicum of compassion in certain Court-specified circumstances. A Supreme Court that would enfroce legislated bans on Partial-Birth Abortions within a year's time would be a great incremental advance, for instance. Those who want all or nothing are playing a dangerous game. - Owlb]

if you are on the political right

[It's not reasonable no matter with what wing you fly ... a Supreme Court nomination is not a case of "Birds of a feather flock together."]

- to want a more conservative nominee, to want another Scalia or Thomas,

[This type of absolutist conservative wants Scalia/Thomas clones and isn't getting one from Bush - good! They back cloneyism! - Owlb]

to want to get what they've waited for so long. But wanting is about wishing, not reality. And the reality in Washington right now is that over the past few months the temperature has changed where the Bush administration is concerned.

The latter point is the point. Bush correctly discerned that he couldn't draw the lines from dot to dot of the testy conservatives' fanciful pictures of a Court prefabricated to the dimensions of their absolutist dementia. - Owlb


•Prez says religon a criterion for selecting Miers for hi court

Bush didn't actually say what the headline writer claims and places above reporter Nedra Pickler's AP article.

"People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers," Bush told reporters at the White House. "They want to know Harriet Miers' background. They want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions. And part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion."

Bush ... said that his advisers were reaching out to conservatives who oppose her nomination "just to explain the facts."

But here Bush is apprpriately disengenuous in not pointing out the sociological-jurdical vital significance of appointing a persons who

1.) is an Evangelical Christian, a huge community in the USA much larger than the Catholic population, let alone the Jewish, Buddhist. Islamic and secularist demographics represented or not, on the Court; while there won't be another Black or a Hispanic on the Court as a result of the coming Miers confirmation, also there won't be another non-Evangelical, another man, another law-scholar rather than lawyer, another justice ignorant of business law - with which all the latter sociological categories the present Court is stacked;

2.) is a woman, and one who would not allow Ruth Bader Ginsbug, a radical feminist on abortion and many other life-issues, to have a monopoly of representing the diverse female half of America's population;

3.) is a lawyer who brings knowledge of the reality of court cases, suits, prosecutions, and defenses to the bench of the Supreme Court where experience as a practicing loawyer is distinctly lacking at present; in addition, Miers is an Evangelical Christian woman who has broken thru the lawyerly barriers to become President of the Texas Bar Association and has been named as one of the top 100% lawyers in the country by the American Bar Assocation;

and 4.) would bring enormous knowledge of the complexities of business law in the 50 states and the jurisdictional issues each has, and cumulatively, with Federal business law - something that is also grievously lacking among the present membership of the Supreme Court which just recently approved a hideous precedent on Eminent Domain that allows political jurisdictions to conspire with mega-stores and institutions to take the properties of a neighbourhood of home-owners, for the profit and benefit of others.

• Bush's unconventional choice

A key Democrat, no friend of Bush, has recommended Harriet Miers, that Democrat being no less than Senate minority leader, Harry Reid. "Senator Reid, in fact, acknowledges that he recommended Miers for the nomination." Further, "In a statement after Bush's announcement, Reid said, '... the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer,'" according to CSM's reporter Linda Feldmann and her co-authors (Feldmann is one of my favourite daily newspaper journalists.

The following text brings out the professional, sociological, and political aspects of Miers' nomination, but it still misses the key religio-sociological-demograqphic factor embedded in Bush's notice that the huge Evangelical Christian community is grossly under-represented on the Supreme Court due to blindspots governing previous appointments. Such a religiodemographic presence in the membership of the Court is necessary, I would argue, because, inter alia the other woman on the present Court is devoted to the abortionist ideology pure and simple, which presumably Miers would not be, no knee-jerk support for the unfettered ultra-feminist KillBabiesAsYouPlease stance - with an entire abortion industry to back it. Also, were Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia to influence the Court to adopt a less than 100% reaffirmation of the until-now expanding application of Roe vs Wade (for instance, the presently expanding legitmation of chopping viable babies into pieces within the womb to abort them with "greater ease" very late in a pregnancy), then a significant advance would be made. And with Miers among the Justices, we could perhaps be spared a Catholics-only duo (Roberts, Scalia) judging in a way supportive of the restraints-on-abortion faith-constituencies in the USA. An Evangelical woman strengthens the possiblity of halting the expansion of Roe vs Wade around a hedonistic doctrine of a pregnant woman's pleasure to abort at any stage or state of her pregnancy. A good possbility is that Laura Bush's rubric that "abortion should be legal, but rare" may well be what guides Miers' judicial philosophy on this de facto litmus test for Supreme Court appointments, a stealth test applied by both radical Liberals and some absolutist pro-life Conservatives, pulling the law in opposite absolutist directions.

While it's true. says Feldman. that

Harriet Miers, the White House counsel, has never been a judge and is not a recognized expert on constitutional law, in sharp contrast to the new chief justice, John Roberts. Still, she has diverse experience, including many years in private law practice, and political experience that none of the sitting justices has, both as a member of the Dallas City Council and, for the past five years, as a member of Mr. Bush's White House inner circle. Before being named counsel 10 months ago, Ms. Miers had served as assistant to the president, staff secretary, and deputy chief of staff.

As the replacement for the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman justice, Miers would maintain the presence of two women on the court, and perhaps also present a counterweight to the liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

• Conservatives split, strong voices against Miers

This Voice of America radio-broadcast text by Steve Ember says Miers has been making the rounds of Senators on behalf of her confirmation as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

Miz Miers is sixty years old. She is from Texas. She received her bachelor’s and law degrees from Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

Miz Miers has received high praise as a lawyer. She was the first woman president of the Dallas Bar Association. Later she became the first woman president of the Texas State Bar Association. The National Law Journal has named her among the one hundred most powerful lawyers in the nation, and the top fifty women lawyers.

Dallas voters elected her to a two-year term on the City Council.

Some critics say her loyalty to the president could present a conflict of interest on future court decisions. Harriet Miers worked for Mister Bush when he was elected governor of Texas. She joined the White House in two thousand one as an assistant to the president. She has served as his personal lawyer since February.

Besides the near-excellent thumbnail bio, this article makes another important point, in my opinion. This point certainly is important to me personally.

This week, the court heard arguments about cases including one about the rights of the dying. The Bush administration wants to punish doctors in the state of Oregon who help patients end their lives. This assistance is currently legal under state law.

Lacking a family for whom to hang around when my life is no longer viable in my considered judgement. I'm hopeful that I can be assisted by a medical doctor and a clergyman of my choosing to terminate my earthly pilgrimage, enter the Interim State, and await the coming of the Lord Jesus in my dreamings, to prepare me for everlasting life under His Rule on the New Earth, according to the Biblical idea of "asleep in Jesus." My variation from Calvin, usual Reformed thinking, and the Evangelical Christian mainstream, has to do with what nowadays happens to people like me when we grow too old and are institutionalized, with only complete strangers around us/me, and bossed by caretakers who have no affinity to us/me, who watch the clock, who all too often neglect and abuse us/me. A compassionate conservative on the Supreme Court mite fathom the implications of these changed conditions in comparison to yesteryear, at least for family-less folk like us/me. Harriet Miers may just be such a Justice when the time comes for us/me "to shuffle off this mortal coil." - Owlb

Industry: Autos: Auto-parts company's belly-up generates '30% chance' General Motors will file for bankruptcy

You may have heard about the very recent demise of Delphi, a huge auto-parts manufacturer that was spun off as a separate corporation from GM. But GM had come to regard itself as "paying $2 billion a year in above-market pricing when it buys parts from Delphi.

"A billion here and a billion there adds up," he said. "In the long run, a restructured Delphi could supply GM with parts at lower prices." David Healy, a Burham Securities auto analyst says on the Delphi / GM relation.

Part of the cost is the longterm payout load GM still carries for retirees of Delphi and for its own workers, since the spin off. The United Auto Workers, which has a monopoly of labor representation at GM and Delphi, due to North American winner-takes-all and checkoff-of-dues unionism, may surprise us all by compromising to approve at least a partial write-off of retirment payouts for former employees of the companies, in order to protect the jobs of current GM workers.

The main point of the viability of the auto industry is its continuing to produce oil-fuelled vehicles (a tremendous political deficit for the USA), and its continuing to produce air-poisoning exhaust-generators (the same vehicles, which are the main health hazard in all of North America). The province of Ontario is a major auto manufacturer, including GM products. Both the Federal Canadian Prime Minister, Paul Martain, and the Provincial Prime Minister, Dalton McGuinty, will be opening a major new Toyota plant in the province, and there's no word of a single alternatively-fuelled vehicle rolling off the assembly line. I think this is a crime against humanity. - Owlb

Homeschooling: Internet: How homeschooling parents, religious and secular, advantaged by Internet explosion

Homeschooling remains a bit of a mystery to those of us who weren't homeschooled by our parents (and for some that fact was/is a blessing), or who as parents haven't tried homeschooling our own kids, leave alone those of us who have no kids. Obviously, if you do have kids yourself, but are a professional teacher in either government schools or faith-based schools (in some jurisdictions, the state does support one faith-based school system, as in Ontario wehre Roman Catholic schools are state-financied, but no others ... a gross inequity).

As Cathy Zimmerman points out in her excellent set of vignettes from homeschoolers (parents and their kids), for many it's a rich and productive feature of their life-style and parenting relation, whether the household be secular or religious. ["The Homeschool Bug," by Cathy Zimmerman, The Daily News, Longview, Washington, Oct 8, 2005.]

One element that Zimmerman brings forward tellingly is how the developments on the Web now offer a plethora of tools of hi-quality learning teaching.

As to the economics and politics of the other major alternative to government schooling of your kids, the Vouchers Idea holds the greatest promise; perhaps it should be extended to homeschooling parents for each of their students.

The Cato Institute presents its thinking on the Voucher Idea and the current post-Katrina economic situation in the USA in its Daily Dispatch, Oct 11, 2005.

Katrina Offers Opportunity for Education Reform

"As Hurricane Katrina put the issue of poverty onto the national agenda, many liberal advocates wondered whether the floods offered a glimmer of opportunity. The issues they most cared about -- health care, housing, jobs, race -- were suddenly staples of the news, with President Bush pledged to 'bold action.' But what looked like a chance to talk up new programs is fast becoming a scramble to save the old ones," The New York Times reports. [This free-view page expires soon, and registration may be required; NYT articles, when archived, are available only on a pay-for basis- Owlb].

"While the right has proposed alternatives including tax-free zones for businesses and school vouchers for students, Mr. Butler said, 'the left has just talked up the old paradigm: 'let's expand what's failed before.'"

Neal McCluskey, an education policy analyst at the Cato Institute, comments: "An important step in recovering from this calamity is for the children to reclaim a level of normalcy in their lives, and going to school enables them to do just that. Now is the time to help people whose lives were turned upside down by Katrina, not by forcing them into government schools, but by letting them choose the schools they actually want their children to attend, whether public or private."

In Voucher Wars: Waging the Legal Battle over School Choice, Clint Bolick, writing for the Cato Institute, recounts the dramatic 12-year battle to finally give families a choice in education and looks ahead to a future when every child can get the best education possible. While the battle over educational freedom is not over, Bolick notes that school choice "will begin to help our nation finally deliver on its promise of opportunity."

A fine news source for homeschoolers and for those exploring the possibliities of doing so will find that Home Schooling News is a great resource. - Anaximaximum

Economy: US/Canada Trade: Martin's anti-US NAFTA speech draws Lib ire

Canada's Prime Minister Paul Martin is now drawing considerable flack, not only from the opposition parties, but from within the ranks, even the Ministers of his own Cabinet. The nervous outrage mixed with dispair comes from Martin's explicit linking American anti-Canada softwood-lumber policy with a forthcoming Canadian anti-American oil/gas supply policy, now linked in the minds of the trade assembly he addressed in NYC recently and later that nite in an interview on CNN. ["Martin's U.S. speech draws fire," by Michael Den Tandt, Globe&Mail, Toronto, Oct 8, 2005. Click the blue headline above for a live-link the article.]

Ralph Goodale, Martin's Finance Minister, and John McCallum, Energy Minister, went into denial to spin no linkage and no threat. On the other hand, former Cabinet minister under Martin's predecessor, hailed the PM's manoeuvre. The nub of the issue was a recent decision of a panel of the North American Free Trade Association which ruled against Canada on softwood lumber, while subsequently a ruling of the world Trade Organization ruled in favour of Canada. But the NAFTA Treaty (US, Canada and Mexico) has a clause making its rulings on issues between its parties as final. Canada's appeal to the WTO ruling is just irrelevant.

Still, tho Canada does subsidize its softwood industry, Martin's move must be recognized as gutsy. It did get attention. But it simply will go nowhere because of the stranglehold the US softwood-lumber industry has on the US Congress on the issue. The NAFTA panel is influenced by all the forces at play, to the definite detriment of US softwood consumers - which include individual home renovators and builders, emergency home-building nonprofit groups in the Hurricane zone, and profitmaking home-construction firms there and thru-out the USA.

Canadian business leaders outside the lumber industry were quick to point out the gimmickry and election-oriented aspects of the PM's move. - Politicarp

Canada: Media: CBC has got to go, says CSM writer Rondi Adamson

The spectacle of a major comment piece in the American daily newspaper, Christian Science Monitor out of Boston, recounting how the largely-American National Hockey League prompted the Canadian Media Guild (a bully union objecting to increased 'contract work' being farmed out by its employer) and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - English Section (said employer) was too much for the piece's Canadian author, and for me. ["Just pull the plug on CBC already," by Rondi Adamson, Christian Science Monitor, Oct 11, 2005. Click the blue title to live-link this article.

Just this Fall, I was able to breakout of the Liberal stranglehold on Canadian television news and opinion by resorting to the pay-for broadcasts of Fox News Channel on cable TV, as lately rendered by Rogers Cable in my area of Toronto. For these tender mercies, I am no longer subjected to the censorship against American-, Christian-, and conservative-originated news that had been imposed by the Canadian Radio & Television Commission. You see, Canadian TV news had been monolithically leftwing, liberal, and socialist in editorial orientation and reporting - even the free-enterprise broadcasters like CTV, and the Asper chain Global Network with its Kevin Newman hosting the 6:30 PM Global National news show has been a carrier of the CBC-style slant - majoring in sneering clichés against America, President Bush, and most everything else sneered at by the dominant carrier, which has long set the ideological tone in news professions in Canadian media. Which dominant is, of course, the CBC.

Now the difference between the leftwing free-enterprise broadcasters and the leftwing state broadcaster (in English, at least) is the nearly billion dollars paid annually to the CBC by taxpayers, who in the case of pay-for subscription to Fox News on cable get no tax-discount whereby one could avoid supporting a news force inimical to one's values. Indeed, I must pay thru my taxes, like the GST, and must pay again thru the subscription fee monthly just to evade total brainwash via TV news and opinion. I'm enjoying Fox, while also taking in on occasion that Rogers Cable offers with no additional fee - BBC, CNN, and even a few stops on the remote at othr Canadian newsmongers of the Line. That state-sponsored news Linet is unbelievably dismal and uncritical, but I like a taste of all views available.

Oh yes, the apparent reason why the CRTC finally let us subscribe to <'b>Fox<'b>, is that it had already greenlited the Islamofascist pro-terrorist TV channel, Al-Jezeera!, I've heard. But, bless them, Rogers doesn't include Al-J on its pay-for menu. The state could provide a basic allocation of monies to a truly pluralist list of newsbroadcasters, with each taxpayer being permitted to choose to which broadcaster one's portion of funding would go. But that's too obvious and too fair for the Canadian political system even to contemplate. I'd have my portion passed on to Fox if it added a Canadian news show, and to a Christian newscast were one generated of professional quality, instead of supporting the news mediocrity of Crossroads TV in its present form. By the way, why can't Crossroads compete against the CBC for the NHL media contract?- Owlb

Politics: Germany: Christian Democrat Merkel country's first woman Chancellor; Socialist Schröder out

In a historic deal ending a stalemate lasting 20 days marked by intense negotiations, Germany's two leading parties worked out a shared-power agreement that put Angela Merkel in the Chancellorship, while a majority of the cabinet ministries were assigned to the Social Democrats.

USAToday / AP reports the distribution of responsibilities:

Under the terms of the agreement, the Social Democrats would head the foreign, finance, labor, justice, health, transport, environment and development ministries.

Merkel's Christian Democrats and their Bavaria-only allies, the Christian Social Union, would get the defense, interior, agriculture, families and education portfolios. The CSU leader, Edmund Stoiber, would become economy minister. Other than that, officials did not say who would occupy which ministerial post.

It was not immediately clear if Schroeder would have any role in the new government.

But other reports claim emphatically that former SDP Chancellor Gerhard Schröder would not be included in the cabinet at all.

While the Socialists gained the Foreign Affairs ministry, Merkel has been emp[hatic that Germany under this new coalition government would repair its relation with the USA, and support the reorientation of the world's democracies in the struggle against terrorism. On one point, Merkel was known to want Turkey excluded from EU membership, favouring some kind of special relation for that state instead (Germany has numerous Turk immigrants and a second-generation of Turk-descent Germans). Why Merkel's fastidiousness on Turkey in EU? She is among those who still want a mention of the EU's Christian heritage in the EU Constitution, if one is ever to be adopted. Turkey presents a problem to that recognition of Europe's religio-cultural heritage, since it is officially secularist in the face of its own huge popular forces that want an Islamic Turkish state. The present Turkish governtment makes a careful distnction between an Islamic party that leads a secular neutral state, and an Islamic state. Between such an Islamic party, and an Islamicisit theocratic party.

In addition to the EU problematic, others in Germany (perhaps including Merkel) feel Turkey would and should be the mainstay of any future emergence of a pro-democracy federation in the Middle East, one that would include Iraq, a re-oriented Lebananon, Jordan, Israel and Palestine, if the Road to Peace emerges from the fog of terror there. Turkish full-membership in EU could perhaps become an obstacle later to Turk leadership of MidEast pro-democracy federation.

In any case, Merkel has more than relations with the USA and Turkey to concern her and her SDP Foreign Minister (who replaces Jakob Fischer, former BaaderMeinhof terror-group implicateee, more lately of the Green Party in Germany's former ruling coalition under Schröder). Altogether and in stark contrast to the Schröeder years, Merkel offers a hi symbolic function for Germany, being both the first Chancellor from Germany's former Communist-dominated East where she figured importantly in the anti-Communist Christian opposition, and also the first woman to hold the country's hi-est office.

Her position and accompaniment in the cabinet by Edmund Stroiber as Economy Minister will at once give a strong leadership to the unpopular necessary reforms of the languishing German economy, a process in which the cooperatlon of the SDP is vitally important. Merkel's occupancy of her new possition will also encourage all the Christian Democratic Parties of Europe and their representatives in the European Parliament. Mr. Stroiber heads the CDU's affiliated Bavarian party, Christian Social Union. - Politicarp

CNN's report

Pakistan: Earthquake Disaster: Northeast Pakistan, Kashmir, India experience heavy-duty Quake - world rallies relief, offers

Over 20,000 persons are said to have died in the 7.6-Richter-scale Earthquake. Thousands are thawt still to lay buried under the debris, yet some of the buried are undoubtedly still alive -- as the report just minutes ago on Fox News tells of a boy just dug out alive, and then how his mother too emerged from the apparent grave of rubble. Pakistan's Prez Musharraf has appealed for donors of goods to put their priority on food, blankets and helicopters. The USA is deploying Blackhawk choppers to aid and rescue in the remote mountain towns of northern Pakistan, and India which has also been hit by the quake, but not as extensively, is sending assistance to its erstwhile enemy, Pakistan. A dozen other countries have quickly responded to help amid the Quake disaster.

If readers of refWrite want to send money to help in the Pakistani disaster-relief project, we are supplying the link to the American Red Cross (this ARC newspage gives an excellent map of the quake's epicentre in Pakistan's north), affiliated with the Red Crescent agency on the ground in the country. Also see ARC's summary-&-donation page. - Owlb

Philosophy: Ethics: Person, Practices, Society - from the immediate and local, to the structural and global

A major international academic symposium was held this summer 2005, August 15 thru 19, sponsored by the Association for Reformational Philosophy and concerned with the broad theme of Ethics. It was held in Hoeven, the Netherlands, and may be called the Hoeven Ethics Conference, 2k5. The conference produced a concluding statement which follows. I recommend it, and suggest it for study and reflection, not least of all by secular Humanists who authentically want to be in dialogue with a dialogical but committed Christianity in the public square and the interface of civil concern and the spheres of private life. - Owlb

Ethics: Persons, Practices and Society

Centre for Reformational Philosophy, the Netherlands
Website has Dutch and English sections. Click on this blog entry's title to visit.

FINAL STATEMENT

The background

We came together as Christian philosophers from five continents, conscious of the importance of a Christian response to the ethical problems of today's world. We recognized these problems existing on a personal level (e.g., as a disconnection from sources of truth and morality), on the level of practices (e.g., as a subordination of human values to technical procedures) and on the level of society (e.g., as a mounting anxiety about failing communal relationships and bonds of solidarity).

We proceeded from the conviction that, from a biblical standpoint, the good to which we find ourselves drawn is deeply connected with the world as it was meant to be. Ethics cannot be considered as a set of rules apart from the deep purposes and callings given by God in the order of creation and renewed in redemption through Jesus Christ. From such a standpoint, questions of ethics are not confined to certain ‘values’ that we bring to created reality, but concern the ways human beings respond, in many particular situations, to the normed reality of a created, broken, but redeemed world. Thus we have identified what can be called an ‘ethics of listening and response’ as a key concept in Christian ethics: it reminds us that we are called to ‘attend to’ and ‘take care’ of such a world. Such an ‘ethics of listening and response’ also enables us to discern common ground with our fellow human beings. Our ethical motivation, and our understanding of the content of the norms guiding human life, should certainly reflect an authentic Christian confession. Yet because we confess that the whole of reality is God's creation, we confidently expect to find many areas of shared concern and cooperation with those of other faiths. Our vision has particular roots, but its scope is universal. Thus, it is possible for us to recognize many valid insights in the ethical conceptions of those of other faiths, and why some of our ethical conceptions and stances can be recognized as valid by others.

Reformational philosophy has always considered ‘the ethical’ as something that pertains to all kinds of human actions, relationships and practices. However it has been recognized that reflection on ethics has been relatively undeveloped in our tradition and that there is more to do (and other traditions to learn from) as we seek to make reformational insights more fruitful for our contemporary situation. For example, many Christians still see their work or profession as something separate from their ethical convictions. In the meantime we allow technological and economic forces and global processes to distort God's good creation. We have also identified the need to reflect more fully in our philosophizing both the depth and scope of human suffering and human evil, and the call to respond attentively and with compassion to victims of suffering and evil. An ‘ethics of listening and response’ is, in part, an attempt to respond in a more radical way to this need, even as we were reminded of the limits of the possibilities for change and healing in a broken world - a world in which we always bear the mark of the Cross.

Our Symposium has enabled us to take some steps in responding to the challenges just described. We explored ethical challenges in philosophy, theology, anthropology, and ecclesiology, but also in many concrete sectors of social and professional life where acute ethical challenges arise.

What did we gain?

1. In an ‘ethics of listening and response’ we focussed on the human capacity to respond to the presence, needs, and ‘otherness’ of all God's creatures. We also reflected on the structure of and need for deep moral sensitivity, something which we identified as a precondition for the way we act in particular situations. This human capacity needs to be discussed and formed, through practical experience, educational encounters, inter-cultural dialogues, and so forth. It was suggested that what is often talked about as personal ‘virtues’ can be understood in relation to this moral sensitivity.

2. We reflected on the role of the church, the worshipping and believing community of Christ's disciples. We were reminded that the church is called to receive, proclaim, discern and concretely embody the summons and call of the Word of God in its own common life and in the virtues thereby formed in its members, and to witness to the truth and shalom offered by that Word in the world.

3. A new and creative element in our discussions was the consideration of normative social and professional ‘practices’ and the integral role of ethical considerations in those practices. In panels and workshops we addressed urgent questions arising in practices including business, education, medicine, social work, family life, politics, media and information technologies, and agriculture, and issues arising from environmental degradation, multicultural tensions, and religious and moral conflict. We also recognized that, underlying many of these questions are deeper and often destructive cultural and religious forces and patterns. Thus, in each of these areas, not only are new approaches to specific ethical problems required, but a new ‘ethos’ - a new basic orientation - is called for. Profoundly damaging consequences will follow if our societies persist in distorted ways of acting and thinking.

4. We also highlighted the importance of a global ethics, acknowledging the ever-widening circles of responsibility to which we are now increasingly called. Here also the appeal of the ‘golden rule’ of Jesus Christ was heard - His call upon us to do more for the other than we are merely obliged to do. Our global experience of encounters with other very diverse cultural and religious contexts also commanded our engagement. Such a response will involve a careful `listening' to and recognition of the ‘otherness’ of our many, diverse, fellow human beings. Then also the call to faithfulness to a Kingdom vision, through compassionate and sensitive discernment of normative pathways, were sounded clearly.

What next?

We were conscious of not being able to address many important questions adequately (for example: the status of the discipline of ‘ethics’ within reformational philosophy in which it has long had an ambiguous position; the possible place of ‘virtue’ within a reformational ethics; the continuing challenge to articulate a biblically and philosophically compelling account of ‘creational norms;’ the need to integrate a creational ethics with an ‘ethics of the Cross’). Yet participants came away inspired to work further on these and other challenging issues, in future conferences, study groups, and publication projects, by offering our specific expertise as philosophers seeking to work out of the inspiration of the Gospel.

19 August 2000, Bovendonk, Hoeven.

The drafting group (Peter Blokhuis, Jonathan Chaplin, Gerrit Glas, Young Ahn Kang, Roel Kuiper, Bennie van der Walt)

A few further thawts: This statement of communal orientation of the Christian, coming especially from a Protestant milieu and a Reformed originating movement of Christian scholarship, does not in itself solve all problems. For instance, it does not solve the problems of journalism; it does not solve the problems of political possiblity in regard to war and peace (among other mattters). On the latter pair, refWrite remains resolutely neo-Constantian as against pacificist for the ethical horizon of those in power and under oath to protect the survival of democratic nations and way of governance, as well as the expansion of democracy where its lack threatens world stability. Thus, the reality that people die in war, has to be shouldered by refWrite's versoin of Christian ethics and the writing of fact and opiinion that touches on the condcut of a war (Iraq, for example), the preservation of a peace (the countries of the former Yugoslavia), the work to overcome impasses (Israel / Palestine) - and, of course, many others in areas of armed conflict around the world today. Journalism, and a Christian practice of blogging such as refWrite seeks to pursue, need not cast asside the tools of satire, sarcasm, and praise, and outrite loyal support for various trends, policieis, and persons. It's this edge that makes a somewhat-journalistic blog indeed a blog. Enuff said for the nownce! - Owlb

USA: Judiciary: Chief Justice US Supreme Court sworn in, again on Monday

Yes, it's official now. After a 70-something vote out of 100, the United States Senate confirmed the appointment of John Roberts as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. If you want to see what any particular Senator did when his name was called, you can check out the Senate Roll Call Vote on Roberts.

Buzz has it that of the 12 nay-sayers, including Hilary Clinton, all are dependent upon the financial contributions of wealthy radical leftwingers like George Soros and Barbra Streisand, and also upon the membership of the radical groups who besides financial contributions often donate their hate-Bush services as volunteers in poiitical campaigns.

With hindsite, we can now say, bracing ourselves, that the real battle is coming around the President's next appointment to the Court to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Conner. She has given notice of her desire to leave the bench as soon as the President nominates and the Senate confirms her replacement. We can expect Pres. Bush to name that new member of the Court rather soon. Tomorrow? Next week?

Undoubtedly, there will be another round of organizational fever both Yes and No to that second nominee to the Supreme Court, a very fallible process among the citizenry and within the news-and-opinion media to be sure. But compare that democratic process in the American Republic to what happens in Canada with the kingpin Prime Minister making all the appointments with no confirmation vote and no hearings and no public slugfest, where a Supreme Court Justice does not go into office with a Bang, but with a whimper and the public be damned.

I prefer the American way. - Owlb

World Investment & Trade: China & Canada:Govt supine as China poaches Canadian industries

Suddenly, official statistics in Canada reveal that the USA is no longer Canada's chief trade partner (you can click-up a pay-for article on the subject), while China has slipped into that top category, with the balance of trade figures pleasantly favouring the Communist Chinese corporations. Many of these companies are known for human-rights abuses and financial shenanigans. This is "the Robber Baron" phase of China's industrial development, all under the auspices of a totalitarian Communist government which practices slave labour, religious oppression, and outlaws a free labour movement independent of the puppet union sponsored by the Communists.

The most recent case of China's investment strategy vis à vis Canada is that of EnCana, a Canadian oil coporation, which has just sold its assets in Ecuador, in the form of Andes Corporation, to a consortium of the Chinese government's oil companies - China National Petroleum Corporation, Sinopec, and Sinochem - with Andes Corp, carrying a price tag of US$1.4 bn that the Chinese were pleased to ante up.

China e-Lobby took note of The Washington Times brief item on the above matter on September 20, and the pro-democracy Lobby then referred its readers to two earlier Communist China investment manoeuvres in Canada. The first (June 2 edition China e-Lobby):

Communist China gets another chunk of Canadian resources: The Communist-run oil firm Sinopec “took a 40% stake in a $4.5-billion Alberta oilsands project” (Edmonton Sun). The acquisition “comes after China National Offshore Oil Corp. bought a 17% stake in MEGEnergy Inc. of Calgary for $150 million in April” and as Communist-owned Minmetals is in talks to buy out Noranda – Canada’s third largest mining firm.

The second (August 22 edition of China e-Lobby):

Woe Canada! PetroKazakhstan agrees to CNPC takeover: Canadian oil firm PetroKazakhstan chose the China National Petroleum Corp (parent company to Petrochina) over two other takeover suitors (BBC). It was yet another move forward in Communist China’s Canada energy grab.

If you click-up the links I've removed from the second, in quoting these two capsules of info on ComChina's world investment strategy, you can detect for yourself a huge pattern in the Mainland Chinese investment component of its international trade strategy, around the critical development of oil sources to meet the explosive growth of demand to fuel its industries. But, further, each one of these state-run companies in each of the foreign countries becomes a host for parasitic espionage and political practices for the Chinese state and its totalitarian dominant Communist Party.

Why Canada goes supine in the face of these realities when they show up on Canadian soil, has to do more with the fevered visions of Prime Minister Paul Martin, than with a wise and realistic assessment of China's "investment" motives. Martin does not acknowledge, besides desire for profits, either the additional factors of China's human-rights absues and of Canada's own internal security-concerns. Martin has no moderate approach to Canadian investment in China, or to Chinese investment in Canada. On this subject of China, Martin is indeed an extremist, extremely nonchalant.

From the Chinese side, if you click-up the article live-linked in blue at the top of this refWrite blog entry, China View gives us a larger picture and emphasizes other aspects the Going Global industrial policy of the Chinese state in the one-page report "Outward direct investment to increase". The developments specified in our blog entry here, can be found in outline in the text of the page we've cited from China View (part of Xinhua). But the emphasis of the Outward Direct Investment report probably derives (thru this latter state-run news source amidst the severe rise of censorship of news under Hu Jintoa's régime), derives from politically-instructed writers perhaps themselves well aware of and constrained by the political and espionage functions of Chinese corporations in Australia, the USA, and Canada. - Politicarp

Politics: Latin America: Colombia's Prez, Uribe, initiates peace talks with ELN guerilla group, amnesty offered to 38 FARCs

At the same time he is trying to disarm and demobilize 20,000 rightwing "counterterrorists" some of whom have operated to "protect landowners and drug kingpins," Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe has opened talks aiming for peace with the leftwing militant group ELN whose members he had labelled "terrorists" in the past. More surprising yet, Uribe has offered pardons to ordinaries and amnesties to leaders of the even more violent farleft FARC. What precise conditions obtain in both cases is not yet clear to this refWrite commentator.

Uribe has yet to publicly invite the FARC to the negotiating table in Colombia. But under pressure from the hundreds of families of kidnapped citizens, he has been gradually softening his attitude towards a so-called humanitarian accord that would swap jailed guerrillas for about 60 high-profile political prisoners, including three Americans. And he no longer demands a cease-fire or that the talks take place outside of Colombia.

The president's sudden willingness to negotiate with both left-wing groups may have more to do with outside pressure than a major shift in Uribe's beliefs. He has been the object of intense international criticism concerning negotiations with the paramilitaries.

A so-called "Justice and Peace" law passed in June has been called a sham by human-rights groups because it pardons large groups of the fighters and may protect top commanders [among the "counterterrorists"], often accused of being drug dealers, from extradition to the United States.

The Christian Science Monitor's Rachel van Dongen reports that an electoral campaign in 2006 frames developments now, and that Uribe maintains a phenomenal 3-year 70% popularity level since he entered office. - Politicarp

Disaster: New Orleans: The City of Jazz bamboozles a rebuild, but jazz itself was hurt, more than a below-water urban insanity

There's a lot of bamboozling going on right now about rebuilding the City of New Orleans. Not a good idea. But let's parse what we mean by "City" in this instance, and for starters let's distinguish 1.) the City, 2.) the Port, and 3.) the Cultural Capital of Jazz as a now world-artform.

My idea is that the City not be rebulit. On the other hand, the Port of New Orleans should be reconstructed and enlarged as the down-Mississippi world-port of national and international trade. Beyond that, the Old City which went relatively unscathed because it sits on hi-ground, and the transMississippi zone of Algeria both should also be restored - perhaps in conjunction with one another, the complex being explicitly re-designed as a tourism mecca around Jazz, its musical parents, its sibs, and its cousins (leave rap out, as it has other civic matrices and points of origination). And, when I say "jazz," I definitely do not have songs and lyrics in mind, but instruments and instrumentalists, and the styles the instrumentalists invent, proliferate, and perpetuate.



Let's support the Port and all that Jazz!

If you want to donate to relief for jazz muscians in New Orleans, and to do so thru the fund for that purpose set up by Preservation Hall in the Old City, you can do so at the Hall's relief website. Thanks to Jason Kottke for the Hat Tip! - Owlb

My earlier comment on New Orleans, Katrina, the response, and rapper Kanye West has been rewritten a bit.

World Poverty: International Monetary Fund & World Bank : Debt cancellation for 18 states with hi-poverty (14 African,4 Latino)

Yep, the efforts at the top of the world economic organizational system to enact G8 proposals for debt cancellation have rumbled on a step further toward fulfillment. These are bureaucratic moves, but moves that are absolutely essential in the real world, despite the sneers of the anti-globalizationists and negative-anarchists that decry both the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

We have them, we need them, they aren't perfect, and just how much they function in your interest and mine is questionable, tho clear answers are slow to arrive.

Still, we can applaud this rumble-shuffle forward as it will take a certain unsolvable pressure off the following countries where, no matter how irresponsible the state apparatus of each may have been, the people in large part are desperately poor on a daily basis:



Debt cancellation must be accompanied by other steps, among which are (yet not limited to) what's outlined in this statement from the Treasurer of the US:

'Successful conclusion'

The World Bank gave its blessing to the debt relief deal late on Sunday, at the end of the lender's annual series of meetings with the IMF in Washington.

The IMF had already given its backing, and the two international lenders will now ask their executive boards to rubber stamp the agreement.

US Treasury Secretary John Snow said the World Bank's development committee had "strongly endorsed the proposal for 100% cancellation" of debts.

"We expect the executive boards of the IMF and World Bank to swiftly give final approval and move on to implementing it," he said.

Eighteen nations stand to have $40bn in debt written off initially, while $55bn could be released eventually, UK Chancellor Gordon Mr Brown said.

Oops!, only $40bn out of a total of $95bn? From the 18 most-disastrous national economies in the world? - at least in Africa and the Western Hemisphere? More info is needed to understand the parameters of what actually has been written off, and what hasn't. Because we know if it's the same 18 countries, then they're still stuck in the revolving door - and thus we'd be confronted with another half-way measure with no guarantee of actually helping anyone. - Owlb

Baseball: Blue Jays vs Red Sox: After a game this afternoon, the teams will meet again tonite - Jay spoilers of Sox fortunes?

BLUE JAYS WATCH

Blue Jays fans! - don't miss the game with the Boston Red Sox tonite (telecast, I presume). Game starts at 7:05 PM. As the item from the Ottawa Sun indicates, tonite's game follows on an earlier game this afternoon (a sequence called a "day-niter"). As we come to the end of the Baseball season, Toronto's Blue Jays have the chance to become spoliers in the battle of the Yankees and the Red Sox for the lead in the American League East.

At Boston, the scheduled game between the Blue Jays and Boston was postponed by rain Monday night, forcing the Red Sox to play a day-night doubleheader in the middle of a tight pennant race. The game will be made up today at 1:05 p.m., and the teams will play again at 7:05 p.m. as scheduled -- so Boston must rearrange its pitching plans for the week. The Red Sox entered yesterday tied with the Yankees atop the AL East with seven games to go. Curt Schilling, slated to start last night, will now pitch tonight against the Blue Jays and then in the regular-season finale against New York at Fenway Park on Sunday -- instead of Saturday. Tim Wakefield, originally scheduled to pitch tonight, will start the day game for the Red Sox.

There's an inning-by-inning updated scoreboard for tonite's game at the Sun Sport site. - Owilie Scowlie

Music: Live 8 concerts: Live 8 DVDs to be released Nov 8, says Geldoff, says Fox 411 entertainment alert

Live 8, the series of concerts that were part of the worldwide lobby effort on behalf of reducing Africa's extreme poverty at last summer's G8 Summit in Gleneagles, Scotland, will be releasing a set of 4 DVDs of the mega-music event on November 8, 2005.



While the special Technorati webpage that updates Live 8 developments hasn't yet taken cognizance of the super-release, Fox 411, a daily entertainment email newsletter, has a full account (along with on rapper Kenye West's new album, and one by Tim McCarthy as well).

According to Sir Bob Geldof's press release, "EMI and the Live 8 organization have agreed that a generous royalty from sales of the Live 8 DVD will go to the Band Aid Trust for the relief of hunger and poverty in Africa." The Fox 411 coverage explores the questions arising in regard to who will give what to whom in line with the charitable purposes of the Concert Event/s. "The four-disc set includes all of the big performances from London, Philadelphia and Edinburgh. Separate discs from the Paris, Berlin, Rome and Toronto shows will also be available." Do the royalties that are hived off for the owners of the songs become profits for the writers and/or subsequent owner who bawt them from writers, thus compromising the principle of charity in a separate category from the "royalties for the discs sold?," Fox 411 asks.

Watch for further developments as November 8 approaches. And watch the Technorati Live 8 by means of our badge in the right-hand column, to follow how quickly its front page gives attention to this latest emergent issue in the relief movement against extreme poverty in Africa. - Owlb

Canada: Fed politics & foreign policy: What's on Norman Spector's mind Friday AM?

Having been away from blogging, news analysis, opinion-crafting, and even news surfing - I was truly surprised now that I'm starting up again, surprised to find these three items on the hi!ly-reputed daily newsurvey of Norman the Great. I add enumeration of Mr Spector's three points and bold to held the points stand out, because of my interspersed comments, sarcasm, and word-plays - which complicates the text further.

1.) Paul Martin did not refer to his great innovation of last September--"asymmetrical federalism"--even once in his vision speech on Tuesday.

And, three days later, I've not been able to find a single analysis of the speech in English that mentions the air-brushing of the "a-word" [assymetrical - an assymetrist measures how much of an ass a public official is - Owlb].

2.) As readers of this press review know, I'm no fan of Pierre Pettigrew of Paris [Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs]. That said, Kevin Libin will be very fortunate if the Minister's chauffeur doesn't sue* him for his posting about you-can-guess-what.

* [Norman live-links the word "sue" to his own quote from Glen McGregor's article in The Ottawa Sun that makes the unanticipated remarks that follow. - Owlb]

Glen McGregor

The Ottawa Citizen

The chauffeur who accompanied Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew on government-funded trips abroad is considering legal action after an item on a conservative magazine's website questioned whether they had a romantic relationship.

Kevin Libin, editor-in-chief of the Calgary-based Western Standard, wrote in a web log entry this week that the media should have asked about the nature of Mr. Pettigrew's relationship with driver Bruno Labonte following a report that they had travelled together to Europe and South America.

If you wander over to the Western Standard website and scroll down, you can still find the posting as well as the comments it has elicited.

[Besides Pettigroom's (he's known for his dandified hair-dos) role in l'affaire pettigruesome, one can't help but note in passing that the intellectually-insipid Civil Marriage Act rammed thru by Prime Minister Paul Martin is having further consequences (recall the two heteromale friends who announced they'd marry to get the newly-available benefits now up for grabs under the generic-marriage concept of the Act), further consequences which the neo-jerkidicism never anticipated, here brawt home - rather, to Paris and other hotspots visited by the twosome Prettigruesome and his car-driver Labonte. O, the bounties of the public troff at which even Mounties must duly scoff!]

[McGregor continues quoting and commenting on the notables, making the point to which I referred in my bracketted paragraph just above. - Owlb]

"Mr. Labonte is discussing these attempts on his personal reputation with his lawyers," Mr. Pettigrew's press secretary, Sebastien Theberge, said in an e-mail.

Mr. Theberge emphatically denied there was anything improper between the two men.

"Mr. Pettigrew's relationship with his driver is and has always been strictly professional," he wrote. …

Mr. Libin said he had not heard from Mr. Labonte's lawyer.

"I cannot imagine that, in a country where same-sex partners have the same rights as heterosexual couples, that suggesting a romantic entanglement between one man and another man would qualify as any sort of slander," he wrote in the blog.

Mr. Libin has been editor-in-chief of Western Standard since it launched last year. The magazine, published by former Canadian Alliance [political party now merged with the Conservatives] strategist Ezra Levant, describes itself as "the voice of the New West."

3.) No mention of the Canadian ambassador [to the UN?, to the US?, to France?] in this report:

The United States and Europe sought support Thursday for a tough new resolution they are circulating at the International Atomic Energy Agency accusing Iran of "noncompliance" with treaties governing its nuclear program but not immediately referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council.

But the new draft proposal, which signaled that Iran's case would be sent to the Security Council eventually, was meeting the same resistance from Russia and other countries as an earlier draft that would have referred the case right away, European diplomats said….

In another development Thursday, European Union diplomats walked out on a march in Tehran marking the anniversary of the beginning of the war with Iraq in 1980 after ballistic missiles rolled past carrying anti-American and anti-Israel banners, Agence France-Presse reported.

West Presses for Nuclear Agency to Rebuke Iran, Russian Dissent (NYT)

What do you call the sequence of news-surfing from source to source, some kind of journalistic enthymeme? In any case, I want to Hat Tip all three sources in the sequence Pettigrew/Labonte. Thanks to Norman Spector's Daily Press Review, to Glen McGregor of The Ottawa Sun, and to Mr Kevin Libin's quick uptake in Western Standardon the imps of the gmarriage law for the likes of Ambassador Pettigrew and his driver Labonte who seem able to fleece the public of its tax-moneys while remaining strictly outside the bonds of gmatrimony (in which case, some jerkidical Canadian court would probably find grounds to approve the fleecing). As to the initiative against Tehran's nuclearization, so ably written up by Simon Wiesman in today's New York Times: why isn't Canada on board? This too is pretty gruesome. - Owlb