When was the last time you signed a contract and then never bothered to fulfill your obligations without any sort of implications?
How often does the government forgive you for not paying your taxes? Although taxes are more of a suggestion anyways.
My point is how absolutely mind boggling it is that our government (others too) doesn’t bother to live up to its contractually signed obligations. I know this isn’t the most articulate statement but it seems most appropriate: WTF?
We certainly aren’t forgiving third world debt, so why are our prior commitments utterly worthless?
Since pledging to reduce greenhouse gases 6% from the amount emitted in 1990 by 2012 (this works out to be a 5.2% reduction per year) with the Kyoto Accord. Yet Canada’s emissions continue to grow (a big shout out goes to Alberta’s tar sands for helping with this one), with Harper insisting that cutting emissions would be seriously detrimental to our economy.
Personally I think not being able to breathe would hurt our economy more.
Although we have signed Kyoto, we’ve decided to now set our own levels of reductions…due to begin around 2020.
Canada is also among 7 other industrialized nations that participate in annual summits and other meetings as a member of G8. This committee discusses world events such as the economy, health, the environment, and law enforcement. Among the goals that these countries have committed to is aid for Africa. Unsurprisingly there are now rumors that among other countries Canada is trying to back out of this commitment as well:
http://www.one.org/international/g8/
Canada prides itself on being a first world country that boasts seemingly endless natural beauty, so how come we look like complete tools on the world stage? It doesn’t matter if the Liberal party signed the Kyoto accord; the conservatives are still obligated to fulfill their responsibilities.
Our government is making us look like an insolent child that keeps promising to clean their room ‘tomorrow’.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Bill C-517
Recently a little bill called Bill C-517 was turned down in both federal and provincial parliament. People might be familiar with it since Greenpeace has been spearheading a campaign to have it passed along with a handful of other organizations however their efforts proved unsuccessful.
For now.
What’s the deal with Bill C-517? Well it called for mandatory labelling on genetically engineered food. For those of you who are unfamiliar, GE foods are food that have had their genes altered with (an example would be taking a gene from a seal to make your corn more resistant to the cold), which is a very simplified explanation. Passing the bill should be simple, right? Well it’s not.
Studies have shown that 85-90% of Canadians want to know if their food is GE and I personally helped Greenpeace hand over 22,000 signatures in support of the Bill before it was about to be voted on. Again however, this proved to be ineffective. When I wrote my MP asking what the deal was, he wrote back with this:
“Although I support labelling on GE foods, I don’t think this bill will accomplish that.”
A response that ridiculous doesn’t require me to elaborate.
With such overwhelming support of such that bill, you think politicians would jumping all over themselves to endorse it and take credit for it. But that’s not the case, why?
As always, there are giant corporations with big money involved and continuing with our current prime minister’s agenda, we are going to do whatever keeps the U.S. happy (see Bending Over for Bush post).Many people have heard of Monsanto, which is the largest or at least most public supplier of GE seeds to farmers. Older people will remember Monsanto as the creator of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War. To quickly summarize, Monsanto eventually got into the seed business after the war and began manufacturing weed killer. However the product became so strong that it was killing not only weeds but crops as well. As a solution, Monsanto began selling GE seeds that would not be killed by their weed killer. Essentially if you sprayed your crops with this killer everything would die except for the GE crops, this is the only visible difference between natural crops and GE ones.
So for people that oppose GE foods that’s problem number one, I don’t want to ingest any food that has been sprayed with such strong fertilizer that it would be dead without changing the DNA of the seed. And it is estimated that around 70% of the food Canadians eat are either GE foods or contain GE ingredients.The next concern is an obvious one, with such a new product we don’t know the implications of eating GE foods. There are no long term studies. However most countries aren’t taking chances, China, Mexico and most of Africa are among nations that have banned GE Foods.
The next issue with labelling is that without it, there is no way to trace any health effects back to GE foods. If I have a violent reaction to something I ate and it had GE ingredients, there is no way for me or my doctor to document it without the labelling. So it is easy for opponents of the labelling to argue that GE foods are exactly the same when it’s impossible to link any side effects to it.
Organic farmers have a problem with GE foods as well, because it is almost impossible to avoid contaminations. Wind, birds, and pollination are all ways that natural and organic crops can be contaminated by GE foods.
And here’s where it gets really, really messy. For the first time in history, Monsanto and other companies are able to copyright their seeds. It used to be that no one could have a copyright on anything living, however now that GE foods are on the market this has changed. Monsanto has taken advantage of this by saying that farmers who buy their seeds can only use them once; forcing them to re-buy seeds every year or face a lawsuit.
So what happens if you are an organic farmer who has had their crops contaminated for one reason or another by GE seeds? Who owns the crops and who is responsible? A recent landmark case involving Percy Schmeiser was brought all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada and it was decided that if your farm gets contaminated by GE seeds, it is your fault and your responsibility to pay Monsanto or whoever infringement fees. Unless you want to pay every year for new seeds, it is your responsibility to keep GE foods away from your land.
Another way to look at it is, if you have grown a tree on your land even for a hundred years and it gets contaminated by GE seeds, it is now property of Monsanto or whoever owns the right the GE seed.
The scary part about all this is not just the ramifications for Canadian farmers, but for farmers in third world countries. What happens when GE products inevitably end up contaminating farms in Guatemala for example? Most farmers don’t have the resources to keep GE foods out (which almost impossible anyways) or to pay settlement fees to buy their crops back.
Monsanto is a really powerful corporation however this doesn’t immediately mean that it can stop bills from being passed in parliament. Although it helps to have former Monsanto employees now working in parliament and former politicians working for Monsanto. It’s a little bit like Bush’s government, which is full of former oil company executives. (http://www.purefood.org/monsanto/revolvedoor.cfm)
This is all a very brief and simplified explanation of the facts involving GE foods and getting them labelled. Anyone looking for more information, I encourage you to click on the links below and check out the documentary “The Future of Food”.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805
http://www.gefreebc.org/gefree_tmpl.php?content=home
http://www.thefutureoffood.com/AboutFOF.htm
For now.
What’s the deal with Bill C-517? Well it called for mandatory labelling on genetically engineered food. For those of you who are unfamiliar, GE foods are food that have had their genes altered with (an example would be taking a gene from a seal to make your corn more resistant to the cold), which is a very simplified explanation. Passing the bill should be simple, right? Well it’s not.
Studies have shown that 85-90% of Canadians want to know if their food is GE and I personally helped Greenpeace hand over 22,000 signatures in support of the Bill before it was about to be voted on. Again however, this proved to be ineffective. When I wrote my MP asking what the deal was, he wrote back with this:
“Although I support labelling on GE foods, I don’t think this bill will accomplish that.”
A response that ridiculous doesn’t require me to elaborate.
With such overwhelming support of such that bill, you think politicians would jumping all over themselves to endorse it and take credit for it. But that’s not the case, why?
As always, there are giant corporations with big money involved and continuing with our current prime minister’s agenda, we are going to do whatever keeps the U.S. happy (see Bending Over for Bush post).Many people have heard of Monsanto, which is the largest or at least most public supplier of GE seeds to farmers. Older people will remember Monsanto as the creator of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War. To quickly summarize, Monsanto eventually got into the seed business after the war and began manufacturing weed killer. However the product became so strong that it was killing not only weeds but crops as well. As a solution, Monsanto began selling GE seeds that would not be killed by their weed killer. Essentially if you sprayed your crops with this killer everything would die except for the GE crops, this is the only visible difference between natural crops and GE ones.
So for people that oppose GE foods that’s problem number one, I don’t want to ingest any food that has been sprayed with such strong fertilizer that it would be dead without changing the DNA of the seed. And it is estimated that around 70% of the food Canadians eat are either GE foods or contain GE ingredients.The next concern is an obvious one, with such a new product we don’t know the implications of eating GE foods. There are no long term studies. However most countries aren’t taking chances, China, Mexico and most of Africa are among nations that have banned GE Foods.
The next issue with labelling is that without it, there is no way to trace any health effects back to GE foods. If I have a violent reaction to something I ate and it had GE ingredients, there is no way for me or my doctor to document it without the labelling. So it is easy for opponents of the labelling to argue that GE foods are exactly the same when it’s impossible to link any side effects to it.
Organic farmers have a problem with GE foods as well, because it is almost impossible to avoid contaminations. Wind, birds, and pollination are all ways that natural and organic crops can be contaminated by GE foods.
And here’s where it gets really, really messy. For the first time in history, Monsanto and other companies are able to copyright their seeds. It used to be that no one could have a copyright on anything living, however now that GE foods are on the market this has changed. Monsanto has taken advantage of this by saying that farmers who buy their seeds can only use them once; forcing them to re-buy seeds every year or face a lawsuit.
So what happens if you are an organic farmer who has had their crops contaminated for one reason or another by GE seeds? Who owns the crops and who is responsible? A recent landmark case involving Percy Schmeiser was brought all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada and it was decided that if your farm gets contaminated by GE seeds, it is your fault and your responsibility to pay Monsanto or whoever infringement fees. Unless you want to pay every year for new seeds, it is your responsibility to keep GE foods away from your land.
Another way to look at it is, if you have grown a tree on your land even for a hundred years and it gets contaminated by GE seeds, it is now property of Monsanto or whoever owns the right the GE seed.
The scary part about all this is not just the ramifications for Canadian farmers, but for farmers in third world countries. What happens when GE products inevitably end up contaminating farms in Guatemala for example? Most farmers don’t have the resources to keep GE foods out (which almost impossible anyways) or to pay settlement fees to buy their crops back.
Monsanto is a really powerful corporation however this doesn’t immediately mean that it can stop bills from being passed in parliament. Although it helps to have former Monsanto employees now working in parliament and former politicians working for Monsanto. It’s a little bit like Bush’s government, which is full of former oil company executives. (http://www.purefood.org/monsanto/revolvedoor.cfm)
This is all a very brief and simplified explanation of the facts involving GE foods and getting them labelled. Anyone looking for more information, I encourage you to click on the links below and check out the documentary “The Future of Food”.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805
http://www.gefreebc.org/gefree_tmpl.php?content=home
http://www.thefutureoffood.com/AboutFOF.htm
It's Tradition
There are very few arguments that rival ‘tradition’ as the most annoying, irrelevant, and inconsistent defense (except for the ‘It’s what god intended’ justification). Examples of when this argument would be used are debates involving whaling, bullfighting, or the annual seal hunt.
I won’t go into detail as to what my arguments are regarding each of those topics but my point is that the ‘tradition’ argument falls flat which is probably why it’s only used when people are really reaching.
I wouldn’t go so far as to dismiss traditions completely; I know that most contribute to cultures and bind us to our history. However, traditions can end because of new education, social acceptance, or even because of inconvenience. Which is why saying “it’s the way it’s always been done” really doesn’t mean anything.
Many of our ancestors had some fun little traditions that could have been maintained for traditions sake:
• Owning slaves
• Marrying your cousins
• Chastity Belts
• Foot binding
• Offering human sacrifices
Therefore I believe that if ever in an argument someone justifies their reasoning with ‘it’s tradition!’ they immediately lose all credibility, dismissed from the debate, and immediately stoned (just kidding).
I won’t go into detail as to what my arguments are regarding each of those topics but my point is that the ‘tradition’ argument falls flat which is probably why it’s only used when people are really reaching.
I wouldn’t go so far as to dismiss traditions completely; I know that most contribute to cultures and bind us to our history. However, traditions can end because of new education, social acceptance, or even because of inconvenience. Which is why saying “it’s the way it’s always been done” really doesn’t mean anything.
Many of our ancestors had some fun little traditions that could have been maintained for traditions sake:
• Owning slaves
• Marrying your cousins
• Chastity Belts
• Foot binding
• Offering human sacrifices
Therefore I believe that if ever in an argument someone justifies their reasoning with ‘it’s tradition!’ they immediately lose all credibility, dismissed from the debate, and immediately stoned (just kidding).
Aquariums
As someone who is adamantly opposed to aquariums (and zoos but that’s for another rant), I hear the same tired arguments all the time:
“It gives people a chance to appreciate ocean life first hand”
Actually I think it does the opposite, by turning the complex workings of an ocean into a sideshow. I think that keeping wild animals captive insults and patronizes how intelligent these animals are (and they are intelligent, whales are just behind humans and apes in intelligence).What kind of respect for nature is being taught when keeping animals in confined spaces for personal motives is the example being set? (Just to be clear, I’m not talking about starfish or algae rather the larger animals that are forced to live in tanks)
“It provides priceless education”
Not buying it. Does every single man, woman and child need to go into space to learn about or understand it?
“Aquariums serve as a sanctuary for rescued animals”
This one is outright laughable. The mortality rate is high for animals that are captured for captivity, both during the capturing process and during their life in captivity. In addition, how are we determining what animals need to be rescued? The Vancouver Aquarium for example, is allowed to capture or import wildlife if it is in ‘distress’ however there are various definitions for distress. The animal could very well be in distress due to the enormous boat chasing it. Then animals are only kept if they can not be rehabilitated, although the larger mammals are rarely released (it might have something to do with their value, an orca whale is worth approx $25,000).
I’ve never heard anyone argue that these creatures are happier in their tanks because I guess not even the biggest tools believe that anymore. Whales and dolphins spend their lives covering thousands of miles while travelling in groups, singing and composing songs that they will repeat every year. This a lifestyle that is completely denied to them in an aquarium. And although it’s very nice of aquariums to ‘rescue’ animals in ‘distress’, their track record argues that they can’t provide a healthy life environment: http://www.straight.com/print/151900, or http://www.peta.org/factsheet/files/FactsheetDisplay.asp?ID=63
“The animals have trainers that love them”
I have no doubt that trainers love the animals that they work with however it’s beside the point and completely naive. Isolation and withholding food are common methods to train these animals despite how much they love them.
I guess my biggest gripe is not with the people who capture these sea animals, the selfish trainers, nor is it with the fat cats who run aquariums; it’s with the people creating a demand for such a spectacle. Paying money to see a lonely animal confined to swimming circles in an empty tank isn’t my idea of entertainment. It just seems like a sad paradox that we consider ourselves the most advanced species on the planet but forcing a depressed animal to jump around in the water for food is what will still consider entertaining.
“It gives people a chance to appreciate ocean life first hand”
Actually I think it does the opposite, by turning the complex workings of an ocean into a sideshow. I think that keeping wild animals captive insults and patronizes how intelligent these animals are (and they are intelligent, whales are just behind humans and apes in intelligence).What kind of respect for nature is being taught when keeping animals in confined spaces for personal motives is the example being set? (Just to be clear, I’m not talking about starfish or algae rather the larger animals that are forced to live in tanks)
“It provides priceless education”
Not buying it. Does every single man, woman and child need to go into space to learn about or understand it?
“Aquariums serve as a sanctuary for rescued animals”
This one is outright laughable. The mortality rate is high for animals that are captured for captivity, both during the capturing process and during their life in captivity. In addition, how are we determining what animals need to be rescued? The Vancouver Aquarium for example, is allowed to capture or import wildlife if it is in ‘distress’ however there are various definitions for distress. The animal could very well be in distress due to the enormous boat chasing it. Then animals are only kept if they can not be rehabilitated, although the larger mammals are rarely released (it might have something to do with their value, an orca whale is worth approx $25,000).
I’ve never heard anyone argue that these creatures are happier in their tanks because I guess not even the biggest tools believe that anymore. Whales and dolphins spend their lives covering thousands of miles while travelling in groups, singing and composing songs that they will repeat every year. This a lifestyle that is completely denied to them in an aquarium. And although it’s very nice of aquariums to ‘rescue’ animals in ‘distress’, their track record argues that they can’t provide a healthy life environment: http://www.straight.com/print/151900, or http://www.peta.org/factsheet/files/FactsheetDisplay.asp?ID=63
“The animals have trainers that love them”
I have no doubt that trainers love the animals that they work with however it’s beside the point and completely naive. Isolation and withholding food are common methods to train these animals despite how much they love them.
I guess my biggest gripe is not with the people who capture these sea animals, the selfish trainers, nor is it with the fat cats who run aquariums; it’s with the people creating a demand for such a spectacle. Paying money to see a lonely animal confined to swimming circles in an empty tank isn’t my idea of entertainment. It just seems like a sad paradox that we consider ourselves the most advanced species on the planet but forcing a depressed animal to jump around in the water for food is what will still consider entertaining.
Where will Santa live?
Apparently the North Pole could very well be melted by the end of this summer:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/weather/06/27/north.pole.melting/index.html
This is one of those rare occasions where I don't have anything to say. I mean, is anyone surprised? We are constantly reminded of the dooms-day consequences of our actions and the actions of generations before us, so is this a shock?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/weather/06/27/north.pole.melting/index.html
This is one of those rare occasions where I don't have anything to say. I mean, is anyone surprised? We are constantly reminded of the dooms-day consequences of our actions and the actions of generations before us, so is this a shock?
Japan Needs a PR Agent
You know that feeling you get when you discover something that is a complete outrage and you’re not the least bit surprised? Well, the honor of that feeling today goes to the Japanese government (not unfamiliar with causing these emotions).
Japan is notorious for its whaling laws and moratoriums that they don’t bother to enforce, claiming that the thousands of whales they kill annually are for ‘scientific research’. If this is true then Japanese scientists are the biggest tools in the shed. Researchers reporting on an animal species don’t usually decimate them in the process, but hey, I’m no scientist.
Well, Japan has repeatedly tried to defend itself by insisting that they are not exceeding the yearly whaling quota despite various reports and evidence that the industry has just gone underground. However Greenpeace recently provided indisputable proof that the government was lying while using tax payer’s dollars to support an unsustainable and corrupt industry.
Now, if Japan were a celebrity a PR expert would step in and give some image advice to the country. First we would hear a heartfelt apologize which would be followed by a stint in rehab, a promise to make amends by community service and then maybe a picture of Japan kissing a baby at rally against global warming.
However Japan doesn’t have a PR person giving them good advice, which is why they proceeded to arrest the Greenpeace activists that exposed them. So if you have a minute I encourage you to follow this link and send a letter to Japanese officials letting them know that their bonehead decisions aren’t going unnoticed:
http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/recent/outrage-greenpeace-whale-meat
Japan is notorious for its whaling laws and moratoriums that they don’t bother to enforce, claiming that the thousands of whales they kill annually are for ‘scientific research’. If this is true then Japanese scientists are the biggest tools in the shed. Researchers reporting on an animal species don’t usually decimate them in the process, but hey, I’m no scientist.
Well, Japan has repeatedly tried to defend itself by insisting that they are not exceeding the yearly whaling quota despite various reports and evidence that the industry has just gone underground. However Greenpeace recently provided indisputable proof that the government was lying while using tax payer’s dollars to support an unsustainable and corrupt industry.
Now, if Japan were a celebrity a PR expert would step in and give some image advice to the country. First we would hear a heartfelt apologize which would be followed by a stint in rehab, a promise to make amends by community service and then maybe a picture of Japan kissing a baby at rally against global warming.
However Japan doesn’t have a PR person giving them good advice, which is why they proceeded to arrest the Greenpeace activists that exposed them. So if you have a minute I encourage you to follow this link and send a letter to Japanese officials letting them know that their bonehead decisions aren’t going unnoticed:
http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/recent/outrage-greenpeace-whale-meat
Bending Over for Bush
Have you heard of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America? If you have no idea what I’m talking about then I don’t blame you, because our government isn’t taking great pains to enlighten the people on the small ‘teakings’ our country’s regulations.
The SPP brought together Prime Minister Harper, President Bush, and President Calderon (of Mexico) in order to achieve “a better quality of life for you and for businesses.” Hmm… I don’t know about you but it’s been a while since I’ve seen people demanding their government provide a greater quality of life for businesses, especially since I doubt this is going to be helpful for the Mom & Pop shops down the street.
The official SPP website says:
“The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing.”
This description, like the entire website is vague and feels slightly ‘Big Brother-esque’ but the SPP essentially means that we as Canadians can’t really do anything without the U.S.’s permission first. We are essentially aligning our environmental, trade, immigration, and terrorism policies with our southern neighbors.
The U.S. hasn’t had the most impressive track record with their ‘War on Terror’, so I find little satisfaction in knowing that my tax dollars will be supporting it. Plus it means that if my name resembles a suspectived terrorist then I can be barred from air travel(although I have attended a vegan potluck so I think I’m tagged myself…see previous blog)?
And of course, if we are dealing with President Bush we are dealing with oil. The SPP gives the US better access to oil from both Canada and Mexico and I know that most Canadians are very concerned about who we are going to GIVE our oil too. And you know what? Why don’t we throw in some clean Canadian water in that deal too? Because the SPP discussions included giving large amounts of water away too, although the tar sands are ensuring that we won’t have much clean water left anyways… but that’s another blog.
The ‘Fact vs. Myth’ page on the official SPP page boasts that ‘no agreement was ever signed’. Um, does anyone think that is a good thing? It’s as if the leaders of our countries are laughing at us saying “Oh, all that paper work was such a pain in the ass so we just skipped it!” Without a signed agreement how do we know if anyone has breached it? Without anything in writing how do we citizens know what our governments are committing to? Without anything in writing, how do us citizens or the people we elect vote against it?
However we can all take comfort in knowing that our leaders have chosen some outside representatives to participate in SPP discussions, leaders of huge corporations and military officials have been included to voice their opinions.
Excluding public opinion was no mistake because if people had been allowed to vote on it, it would have been dismissed immediately. According to the Council of Canadians, most of us completely disagree with the SPP:
(http://www.canadians.org/integratethis/backgrounders/notcounting/index.html)
Although statistics show that we are completely disagree with pretty much everything the SPP sets out to accomplish, it’s still being implemented. Does anyone else think this is absolutely LUDICROUS? We like to think ourselves a democratic society but our government does whatever the hell they want and seem to just give its citizens the finger when it comes to public opinion.
Which makes me when are we going to stop bending over for Bush?
The SPP brought together Prime Minister Harper, President Bush, and President Calderon (of Mexico) in order to achieve “a better quality of life for you and for businesses.” Hmm… I don’t know about you but it’s been a while since I’ve seen people demanding their government provide a greater quality of life for businesses, especially since I doubt this is going to be helpful for the Mom & Pop shops down the street.
The official SPP website says:
“The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing.”
This description, like the entire website is vague and feels slightly ‘Big Brother-esque’ but the SPP essentially means that we as Canadians can’t really do anything without the U.S.’s permission first. We are essentially aligning our environmental, trade, immigration, and terrorism policies with our southern neighbors.
The U.S. hasn’t had the most impressive track record with their ‘War on Terror’, so I find little satisfaction in knowing that my tax dollars will be supporting it. Plus it means that if my name resembles a suspectived terrorist then I can be barred from air travel(although I have attended a vegan potluck so I think I’m tagged myself…see previous blog)?
And of course, if we are dealing with President Bush we are dealing with oil. The SPP gives the US better access to oil from both Canada and Mexico and I know that most Canadians are very concerned about who we are going to GIVE our oil too. And you know what? Why don’t we throw in some clean Canadian water in that deal too? Because the SPP discussions included giving large amounts of water away too, although the tar sands are ensuring that we won’t have much clean water left anyways… but that’s another blog.
The ‘Fact vs. Myth’ page on the official SPP page boasts that ‘no agreement was ever signed’. Um, does anyone think that is a good thing? It’s as if the leaders of our countries are laughing at us saying “Oh, all that paper work was such a pain in the ass so we just skipped it!” Without a signed agreement how do we know if anyone has breached it? Without anything in writing how do we citizens know what our governments are committing to? Without anything in writing, how do us citizens or the people we elect vote against it?
However we can all take comfort in knowing that our leaders have chosen some outside representatives to participate in SPP discussions, leaders of huge corporations and military officials have been included to voice their opinions.
Excluding public opinion was no mistake because if people had been allowed to vote on it, it would have been dismissed immediately. According to the Council of Canadians, most of us completely disagree with the SPP:
(http://www.canadians.org/integratethis/backgrounders/notcounting/index.html)
Although statistics show that we are completely disagree with pretty much everything the SPP sets out to accomplish, it’s still being implemented. Does anyone else think this is absolutely LUDICROUS? We like to think ourselves a democratic society but our government does whatever the hell they want and seem to just give its citizens the finger when it comes to public opinion.
Which makes me when are we going to stop bending over for Bush?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)