Call For Positive Reform - Letter To PM And All MP's

"Today, Canadians see politicians as spinners, media grandstanders, corrupt, suspicious, duplicitous."

Well, you may not have a seat in parliament yet, but after this letter you are definitely in the ranks of politicians that are spinners and media grandstanders.

Exactly what effect do you hope this letter to have? Is your audience really the PM and MP's, because it seems to be written specifically for yourselves as a piece of CAP propaganda?

Should CAP's strategy not be to rally people to their cause? How many people will rally when rhetoric like this is being tossed out? To be certain, there is a fringe that will support every statement you made unequivocally, but in order to effect real change, you are going to need to get a seat in parliament. And you won't until you can appeal to a majority of voters (or at least 30% in highly contested ridings). As communications director, how many do you think statements like

"What happened in the U.S. on Sept.11, has never been investigated thoroughly. To create legislation as a reaction to events based on unexplained events and hype is both irresponsible and undemocratic."

play to the mainstream of people? You and the fringe might buy into some conspiracy theory, but the vast majority of Canadians think the Sept. 11 commission answered pretty much all of the questions at the time. That's why there is still overwhelming support for the Canadian participation in Afghanistan, despite Iraq.

"Is the Canadian Action Party the only political party that listens and responds to the overwhelming concerns of Canadians?" - well, if you are, then you should be able to take at least 1 riding in the upcoming election. That is, if Canadians believe that you are listening and responding to the overwhelming concerns of Canadians. I guess time will tell. But if you don't secure any seats at all, will you reflect that perhaps your views are not shared by the majority (or even a sizable minority) and that you might just be wrong?

Can't wait for the election...

"You and the fringe might buy into some conspiracy theory, but the vast majority of Canadians think the Sept. 11 commission answered pretty much all of the questions at the time. That's why there is still overwhelming support for the Canadian participation in Afghanistan, despite Iraq.

Your 'fringe' is overtaking the fabric. Please provide proof that the 'vast majority' of Canadians trust the Sept. 11 commission. I would lean towards disagreeing with you on that one. It's well known globally that there has NEVER been a proper investigation into the events of 9/11. Though I don't have stats at hand, I would argue that even the majority of US citizens are displeased with the findings of that commission. We are not all lemmings or robots, thank you very much. FACT: The Bush Administration blocked all investigative attempts into 9/11 by any group, commission or individual - for nearly 3 years after the event. What does that tell you? The biggest conspiracy is the hole-ridden one perpetuated by the present US administration. Having spent 4 years researching and reading most, if not all sides to the story, a large portion of the planet has come to the conclusion that 'at least' the US Government was complicit, if not more involved. As a Canadian that likes to look at all sides honestly before making judgement, please do not paint all Canadians with that brush you are wielding.

---
"The best place for the facts to be done is by somebody who's spending time investigating it." —George W. Bush, on Valerie Plame's identity leak.

Micheal Scott, I appreciate your attempt to decipher the purpose of my letter. Many Canadians see it for what it is, a clear concise message. Fortunately for the people, we don’t adhere to your kind of party, when you say this, ‘‘Should CAP's strategy not be to rally people to their cause’ My response is, CAP’s role is not to rally people to OUR cause, we are a vehicle and voice for Their cause!’

Main difference between us and them. The rest of your post is great opposition propaganda. No doubt your are happy with the current regime that suffers from ‘EES-excessive entitlement syndrome’, but most informed Canadians are not happy! We are responding on behalf of the many Canadians who have brought their complaints to us, in hopes that we will speak for them. We have not dropped the ball, we have not let them down. You can call these concerned Canadians ‘fringe’, but we believe educated, informed Canadians have a right to be heard. We are building hope, restoring faith in the people, and empowering them to find their own voice. Helping people to express their thoughts, not telling them what they should think. We are assisting those who do think.

Facts are not being addressed. Parents of children with Autism, know that their children have Autism, they live with it. They want answers and they aren’t getting any. Agent Orange was used on innocent people at CFB Gagetown and people are sick from it. People want answers. CODEX rules that will limit Canadians’ right to a choice of Alternative natural sources, like vitamins and minerals are tied to WTO. Those are facts. Those are just some of the facts we are dealing with, and we encourage those who hold office today to act on those facts. We are also making sure that Canadians know that if they chose not to address the issues, we are not afraid to do it.

You can spin and ‘what if’ as long as you are comfortable doing so, but we are dealing with the issues. More and more Canadians are not comfortable with the state of affairs in this country and they are looking for responsible people to help them, naturally they are turning to CAP. That’s a fact.

There is more and more evidence that Parliament is insulated from the people and we are a hole in that insulation. If people believed the 911 explanation, we wouldn’t still be discussing it, if people believed that anti-terrorism laws made us safe, we wouldn’t be concerned. If people believed they were being represented in Ottawa, there would be no need for CAP. If people trusted the current admin, Harper wouldn’t have spent the summer trying to bar-b-q his way into the hearts and minds of Canadians, and Martin wouldn’t keep saying, ‘he’s mad as hell’ ! 'Cause the real hell is what many Canadians are living thanks to their policies! 'If if if if' , is better left to fiction, we are dealing in facts.



---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

The motives of the contributor who was so critical of your letter to parliamentarians is not clear to me. They can't be good ones. These are pretty much motherhood issues, and someone who supports government spying on us all without any reason, imprisoning the innocent for years without trial on "evidence" which, if it exists at all, cannot stand the light of day (for why else would they be so desperate to hide it?)and other similar oppresive initiatives recently eminating from Irwin Cotler's office, is someone we all should be very worried about. Quite frankly it is not someone I would want my children to associate with, or someone I would want to associate with myself. These people represent a large part of our national problem. They are very dangerous, and contribute minus zero to the well being of Canadians.

Nonetheless, even from such empty and vacuous critism we should take some important lessons. Firstly, we cannot hide from bad things. We must face them and deal with them up front. Hiding this type of comment when it is posted on this or any web-site only gives it stature it does not deserve, and makes us look more like the right-wingers who we castigate for shutting us out of their corporate controlled media. People are entitled to opinions, even blindly wrong-headed opinions like this one, and they must be free to express them and have them debated. That's what its all about.

Secondly, as painful as it is for me to say it, the Canadian Action Party has to emerge from the shadows, be heard and seen in mainstream Canada and very soon. They must soon elect someone to Parliament or at least come close (like the Greens do for instance), otherwise they are reasonably open to more justified critisism along the lines offered by this contributor.

I strongly support the CAP because I am convinced that its ideas and policies are the very best for Canada of all that I have heard from any quarter. Believe me, I have considered them all. But these ideas are no good to us unless we can translate them into action and reality. We must do that somehow. And fairly soon.

The polls show we are going to be buried deeply out of sight among the fringe parties once again this time. There are lots of reasons for that, some of them very valid. New leader, collapse of the "one big party" idea, the NDP role in the minority government, funding issues, a biased media and so on. But it can't go on for ever. Another shaky minority is coming, and it will probably last less than two years. After that, all bets are off. During that time CAP will have to make its mark, and in the election after this one they MUST send someone to Ottawa. Or else. And the "or else" is not pleasant to contemplate.

So from the nattering nonsense of this critic, let's take the right lessons, and do what it takes so that it will never be possible to find a kernel of truth in such rubbish any more.

The 9/11 Commision published its extensive findings and were not meek about citing parties negligent in maintaining U.S. national security. Claiming that the investigestion was not thorough is nothing short of a load of crap in which to warrant your disagreement with proposed Canadian security measures against terrorism. Your argument is weak and intellectually unsatisfying.

Hey Mikey
do some research if ya dont get mad at it
ya aint payin attention


By Charlotte Iserbyt


August 29, 2005

NewsWithViews.com

Important note from the author: The next time you attempt to discuss with a friend or acquaintance a serious issue (such as illegal immigration, the Iraq War, our loss of constitutional rights under the Patriot Act, or the latest Supreme Court Decision doing away with private property rights) and you get that “glazed, blank, mindless, couldn’t care less expression,” refer back to this article which attempts to explain the cause of that glazed expression: Pavlovian/Skinnerian conditioning, be it through operant conditioning programs in the schools, computers at school or at home, the television, radio, music, video games, or plain print media. It is important for Americans to become aware of the effects of conditioning, the brain and soul (conscience) killer, which is silently at work in our society 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year.

If the reader of this article wants to go to what author considers the crown jewel related to the subject of conditioning, he should read “The Leipzig Connection”, ISBN 0-89739-001-6, by Paolo Lionni, a slim 103- page paperback.


---
"The cost to the good people for their indifference to their public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
I don't make jokes. I just watch the governmen

ah yer mudder wears army boots LOL
i suppose the Reichstag Fire wasnt a setup and Washington didnt know about Pearl Harbour.

Everything is relative to perception isn't it, 'The 9/11 Commision published its extensive findings and were not meek about citing parties negligent in maintaining U.S. national security'

'extensive findings' might have held some weight if it would have been an extensive independant investigation, - say sealing the crime scene, examining all the evidence before shipping it out of the country?

As for not being meek, well I have yet to hear a legitimate reason for flying all the Saudi's out of the U.S. before they could be interviewed?

If it was so extensive and the public was given all the details, and were satisfied, they would not be asking why did they bomb Iraq and have tea with the Saudi's? Why did they bomb the hell out of Afganistan and never find Osama?

I have never heard a logical explanation for the third building falling down?

I have never heard any concrete evidence to a threat from Canada or a connection to Canada, or any valid reason to imprison people without charge, have you? Are you suggesting that the anti-terrorism laws are making anyone feel safe? Do the majority of Canadians even know what the new laws mean? When was there public consultion?

So even if the entire security system failed in the U.S. on 911 and nobody was at their post, and somebody failed when they let these guys into the states, and even if somebody really knows who they were, and even though there was great loss, shock and awe, and horror on that day, and many say the intricate high tech world power somehow failed to protect her people; where does any of that give legitimacy to Canada passing our anti-terrorism laws as they read today?

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

It is no great irony not everyone is swallowing the official version of the "extensive findings" <br />
<br />
for the full article<br />
<a href="http://tvnewslies.org/html/where_the_hell_is_your_9_11_pr.html">http://tvnewslies.org/html/where_the_hell_is_your_9_11_pr.html</a><br />
SO?<br />
Where the Hell Is YOUR Proof?<br />
<br />
Jesse, Editor - TvNewsLIES.org - October 2005<br />
<br />
THE BACKGROUND<br />
<br />
To this day, there has been no independent official inquiry into the attacks of September 11, 2001. The Kean Commission, with which most Americans are familiar, was based on the Bush/PNAC version of events. It was charged with probing the breakdown of intelligence prior to the attacks and making suggestions for improving communications among the competing agencies involved. The Commission, formed after more than a year of opposition by the Bush administration, did not…repeat...did NOT…investigate or report about the causes of the attacks.<br />
<br />
Far more important – to this day there has not been a single piece of evidence presented to the public that corroborates the official government version of the most devastating attack in our history. Think about that. For more than four years, scores of credible experts have challenged the explanations offered by the Bush administration, and yet not a shred of evidence has been offered by the US government to support the official version of events they claim took place on that day.<br />
<br />
Even more absurd is that fact that not a single official inquiry has attempted to respond to, discredit, or refute the questions that have been raised. On the contrary, both the American government and the complicit media have dealt with the every single challenge to the 9/11 explanations in two ways. They either totally ignore them or dismiss them out of hand as ridiculous conspiracy theories. Most of the well-researched and revealing findings by independent investigators are unknown to the vast majority of Americans.<br />
<br />
THE BELIEVERS<br />
<br />
Time and time again, when I come across close-minded Bush supporters, I witness the effects of an unexplainable phenomenon: a highly dangerous variation of HIV – a condition I call the Hypocrisy & Illogic Virus. Strangely, the most severe symptoms of this condition seem to manifest themselves during any and all discussions of the events of 9/11,<br />
<br />
The disease is easily diagnosed by the appearance of two disabling features: the need to approach all issues of national importance with an air of shameful hypocrisy, and the absolute inability to use any form of logic during discussions of such matters<br />
<br />
Collectively, people afflicted with this disorder approach 9/11 as one person. They all blindly believe what they have been told by their government. They all adamantly refuse to listen to any questions that have been raised about inconsistencies in the official version that simply don’t make sense. And if they engage in any dispute about these discrepancies, their arguments are illogical to an extreme, and they are simply unable to follow any rational argument to its conclusion.<br />
<br />
The sad reality is that there is no way to convince these brain-washed believers that there may be something more to the story of 9/11 than what they have been told. That’s not too surprising, since most of these people still buy into the Bush/PNAC reasons for invading Iraq. They blindly accept whatever they are told and close their minds tightly to any other information, no matter how factual. They cannot be reached. There is simply no way. The disease is far too endemic to treat with any ordinary approach. They believe as they do, and that’s all there is to it.<br />
<br />
So, let’s turn the tables and put the burden of proof on them!!!<br />
<br />
I believe that I, and every single person involved in the independent 9/11 research community must ask one question of the people who still believe the official 9/11 story. We must demand that those who accept the Bush/PNAC explanation of the events of that terrible day answer a single question: <br />
<br />
“WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR PROOF?”<br />
<br />
You claim that the President and his handlers have told you the truth. You refuse to consider the information we show you that punches huge holes into the official version. You refuse to check out the information for yourself. You tell us what we have uncovered is false. Okay, we’ll buy that, we’ll concede that you’re right...and that all of us are wrong.<br />
<br />
In fact, we’ll take it all back and admit the errors of our ways IF you do something first. Show us YOUR proof. Tell us why we should believe the story you have swallowed, and show us what you have to back up your claims! You’d better have something more than a borrowed smirk when you tell us we’re way out in left field. You better be ready to answer just one simple question: <br />
<br />
Where the Hell is YOUR proof, true believers? Where the Hell is it?<br />
<br />
THE BATTLE<br />
<br />
I’m not sure why the independent research community has not yet taken this approach. Why does the burden of proof always fall on the researchers when the evidence they present is ignored? Why is it their burden to convince the non believers that there are legitimate questions about 9/11 that remain unanswered and hard evidence that we’ve all been fooled, big time?<br />
<br />
The facts about 9/11 that has been uncovered are dismissed by people who apply unbelievably skewed logic to their opposing argument. They believe a story when the only proof they use to validate the story is the story itself. That’s it! All they know is what they have been told. News reports, video, witnesses, whistle blowers, their own eyes and even common sense contradict their beliefs. Still, these people continue to accuse the researchers of being either crazy or traitorous. What kind of convoluted reasoning has infected such a large segment of the nation?<br />
<br />
This is a battle for truth. It’s not a debate over conflicting philosophies. It is a battle between those who are searching for facts and those who choose to deny that a search is necessary. How long do those in blinders have to be engulfed in flames before they believe an independent researcher who warns them of the increasing heat? <br />
<br />
The level of denial and resistance can only be explained by understanding a very basic human response: sometimes truth is too painful for people to deal with. In this case, the perpetrators of 9/11 understood that most Americans could not permit themselves to consider the involvement of people within their own government in the dastardly attacks of that day. They could never allow themselves to even consider such a possibility, even though people within the administration had openly professed that just such an event would benefit their cause! <br />
<br />
Those responsible for the tragedy clearly understood this aspect of human psychology. That is why they can hide in plain sight without fear of discovery, regardless of how much new evidence is uncovered, and regardless of how many legitimate questions are raised about their connection to the attacks. <br />
<br />
As a result, the only effective battle cry at this point must be: Where the Hell is YOUR proof?<br />
<br />
I take part in or observe countless discussions on 9/11; often in Internet forums. I read the posts and hear the responses of thousands of people who have not spent five minutes looking at the four years of evidence that has been uncovered by independent researchers. Amazingly, the same people feel fully qualified to dismiss new evidence with an insult or to present their own un-researched, amateurish conclusions. They know nothing about any information that might have been revealed while their heads were buried in the black hole of the mainstream media. But they constantly and vehemently insist that they do.<br />
<br />
Without requiring a thimbleful of supportive evidence, these people continue to accept the official story of 9/11. That hypocrisy simply has to end just as our silence in the presence of that hypocrisy has to end. And it has to end now.<br />
<br />
THE BLINDED<br />
<br />
<p>---<br>"The cost to the good people for their indifference to their public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato<br />
I don't make jokes. I just watch the governmen

"Very Bad"? How'd I get that? I asked a couple of questions in a very polite manner, and was returned with a whole bunch of vitriol, and I'm the very bad poster? <br />
<br />
The single greatest thing about the internet is that anyone can put anything on it. Nobody can stop you and it is not often that anyone is sued for defamation or printing lies/untruths/deceit. Unlike newspapers/TV there are no ethics tribunals or editors to answer to. <br />
<br />
Diogenes... Your sources don't list facts... just opinion. Their "facts" change from site to site (more on this later) and that is because unless there is a real background that can be tapped, the lies unravel. <br />
<br />
I've spent several hours looking over your 9/11 conjecture in absolute astonishment that you would ask me to produce facts when your "facts" are sourced from opinion pieces. Websites quoting other websites. And they don't even quote each other accurately. <br />
<br />
I love your arguements against the "official" version of events. I especially love how I am to provide proof without citing any official sites (presumably because these, as opposed to venerable sites listed by your sources, are packs of lies meant to lull sheep like me to sleep). That is crap, and you know it. Anyone who agreed with the official results are automatically disqualified from being considered... so unless I was in the planes when they hit, had interviewed the terrorists myself and was present personally in every conversation with the president and others, my sources are considered part of the "corporate media spin". Quite convenient for you. <br />
<br />
Instead, I'll examine some of your sources. After all, if mine are so deceitful, and yours are beyond reproach, let's take a closer look at them.<br />
<br />
Let's take one tiny example. The "put" options placed on AA and UA prior to 9/11. Let's quickly examine some of the sources and the numbers here.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.htm">http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.htm</a><br />
This site among others, tells us that 4,744 put options were placed for United Airlines, and American Airlines' 4,516 - done through the Chicago Board Options Exchange.<br />
<br />
Problem 1 - United and American options can't be bought through this board (did you check that out?). They are not even listed as options as far back as the year 2000... oops. Maybe whoever wrote this crap should check their sources thoroughly for a change. And maybe you should be a little more careful about the crap you place on the web as fact. Just like you can't buy every stock through the Nasdaq, you can't buy every option through a single board and those options are not available through the Chicago board. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/6/2/62018.shtml">http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/6/2/62018.shtml</a><br />
This article (as well as others) tells us that 2,075 put options were made on United Airlines and 2,282 put options were made on American Airlines. No mention of the source in this case. <br />
<br />
Problem 2: the numbers don't match! Your sources can't even agree on who did what! Why is that? <br />
<br />
Hmmm...

Catherine,

I'm sorry you took my post as opposition propoganda. I also thank you for responding. I was truly just trying to figure out what you were trying to say and what effect you were trying to elicit.

As you said, CAP is the voice for a particular cause. For the most part, this is a cause most people can get behind. A lot of social justice programs and legitamite inquiry. My question is still - if CAP intends to make progress with your ideas and solutions, the best way to do so (I believe) would to become a polically viable party. And to do so, you need to secure a minimum number of votes in the general population. Thus far, CAP does not attract sufficient votes to garner a seat in the house, and thus is denied various funding opportunities. To correct this, what is CAP going to do in order to solicit funds and make a determined run for an electoral seat in parliament? Or, if CAP is the voice for this cause, but this cause does not elicit the voting strength to provide political voice in parliament, how does CAP intend to make positive change relative to the issues raised by your members and supporters?

I would agree that facts are not being addressed as you say. But what in your original letter helps to get those ommissions addressed? What does that letter do to penetrate that insulation of parliament from the people?

I shoulda known better Michael.

I shoulda spotted the bait to pull the original topic off point.



What I do “Know” is governments and their minions are subject to lobbyers and many politicos are members of the same organisations who either lobby or pay for through donations and “contributions” to have agendas entrenched in law.



That is the question!



Your expressed opinions in your opening paragraph were not held by those whoe voted your post down, differing perspectives will do that.

Catherine’s post points to “facts” within the legislative process,

“Mr. Cotler's office representative explained that there was no public inquiry into the 'Anti-terrorism Act' because it was a matter of national security and an all party initiative.”



Your response to Catherine’s post was more to do with the short comings of CAP .

If you have any suggestion on how CAP can appeal to Canadians as A membership driven organisation they will be appreciated


---
"The cost to the good people for their indifference to their public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." - Plato
I don't make jokes. I just watch the governmen

Michael, I appreciate your apology,(I didn't see the post above ealier) but you must admit this statement, ‘Well, you may not have a seat in parliament yet, but after this letter you are definitely in the ranks of politicians that are spinners and media grandstanders.’ If not propaganda, it was not intended to flatter, which is fine.<br />
<br />
In your next post, you say: ‘ My question is still - if CAP intends to make progress with your ideas and solutions, the best way to do so (I believe) would to become a polically viable party. And to do so, you need to secure a minimum number of votes in the general population. Thus far, CAP does not attract sufficient votes to garner a seat in the house, and thus is denied various funding opportunities.’<br />
<br />
On that I concur with Diogenes, “If you have any suggestion on how CAP can appeal to Canadians as A membership driven organisation they will be appreciated”<br />
<br />
On the rest of your post which was: “To correct this, what is CAP going to do in order to solicit funds and make a determined run for an electoral seat in parliament? Or, if CAP is the voice for this cause, but this cause does not elicit the voting strength to provide political voice in parliament, how does CAP intend to make positive change relative to the issues raised by your members and supporters? <br />
<br />
I would agree that facts are not being addressed as you say. But what in your original letter helps to get those ommissions addressed? What does that letter do to penetrate that insulation of parliament from the people?”<br />
<br />
Canadian Action Party has at its very core, one mission which all other issues are tied to and dependant upon, and that is restoring Canada’s sovereignty, control of our nation, by our citizens through our elected officials, in the best interest of the people and our environment. To ask me what are we going to do to increase CAP’s profile or create awareness, or solicit funds from the people to support their cause, is a complicated question. The letter I wrote which you refer to is but one of many letters I have written and which has received much attention, and approval. First because people appreciate the intention of my statement. I am saying what many would like to say but don’t because they are afraid to, or feel they are not able to. That is why CAP is the voice of many people. We are speaking for those who cannot. Why expose it on vive? Because it dispels the fear that we cannot speak, when we can and should. It also reminds MP’s that they are seen, their actions are exposed and that Canadians will have a viable choice in the next federal election. That is a hole in the insulation that encapsulates the ‘EES’ (excessive entitlement syndrome) sufferers of Ottawa.<br />
<br />
Your statement that we don’t have a seat in parliament and until we do we can’t make a difference, is untrue. We have made a difference already. Many of the issue we address are being read and responded to positively by people all over Canada. <br />
<br />
I agree, we do need funding. There is no denying that as soon as Canadians realize that their money invested in CAP, (tax deductible like all political donations) works for them, and not corporate or union interest, they will begin to feel the importance of funding that vehicle. If CAP’s purpose was only for political gain, or the candidates were looking for a career guarantee, we would look to corporate and union donors, but that is not our mission, when we have elected members in Ottawa, they will be sent by the people to work for the people. No undue influence will be possible because we have eradicated the source before it could root! <br />
<br />
Two recent examples of our efforts gaining importance in Canada, is the recommendations we made to Government on Health issues, which has resulted in a radio interview tomorrow on <a href="http://www.animalvoice.org">www.animalvoice.org</a>, a Vancouver radio show. The second is the letter I wrote to Senators on the anti-terrorism laws, which resulted in a positive response from one of the Senators on the committee. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and the Roman Empire didn’t fall overnight. CAP did not form the government last election, or get a seat, but that was past, and we are working on today and tomorrow. If you want to help spread the message, or fund the party please go to our website, <a href="http://www.canadianactionparty.ca">www.canadianactionparty.ca</a> You can become a member, read articles, print out posters to spread the message in your neighborhood. The one thing you can’t do, is say we aren’t working and using all resources available to get the message out. We cannot force mainstream media to cover the important issues we are talking about. When they realize how serious the issues are and how determined we are to expose them, they’ll find us. Mainstream media does not validate us or the issues, we give them legitimacy. <br />
<br />
<p>---<br>If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?