trex

All those glaciers breaking up in such a short time must be our imagination.

"Are there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?" I look at it this way, if they give you no choice but to whither and die, then you have every right to still try and live, by any means. For what have you then got to lose. Work for cash, paid under the table. Get a job in construction, painting, or whatever. There's lots of people who are forced to do this. Or sell drugs, or rob convenience stores. Jails give you 3 meals a day. Welcome to the miitary-prison-industrial complex

If as you say the majority of Canadians disapprove of the war, it would appear the army was hijacked by a leadership that has a separate agenda from the very public they represent. The fact that the public does not really understand the war, hears little about it is because the government remains tight-lipped about the situation. This does not help matters in terms of public support, but they may not care anyway. The leadership holds the cards, increasingly they tell us what to do, not the other way around. And perhaps Canadians are too smart to believe such a propaganda campaign as is necessary to promote this war. In any case it's the government that that is failing you, at home. I think the real problem, isn't so much what Canadians "want" the army to do. The more serious problem is other countries avoid meeting their commitment, and leave our soldiers out on a limb, at greater risk. I worry that Canadian troops are being used to do someone elses share of the dirty work, while others stand well back and avoid it. And now with murmurings of reconciliation between the government of Aghanistan and the Taliban, one wonders if we were just stupid to rush into war, without getting solid commitments from others and a clear exit plan. Ironically, while Harper demands consensus and equal cooperation before making any committment to global warming, he doesn't take a similar stance toward other countries doing their fair share in Afghanistan. --- There is a another bigger lesson here, about the tactics that promote lasting political change... when we are only seen as invaders, when we cannot avoid the inevitable co-lateral damage to civilians and homes, how can we not be feared and despised by the local populace? Do you not think that the enemy is smart enough to take advantage of the psychological war? They speak the language, they wear the dress, they know the people in charge. In this arena they hold all the cards. Going in with the army to attack is self defeatist. And we see this happening now, despite all the harsh stories the people still help the Taliban. Its becoming clearer that the west is taking the wrong approach.

Why was she banned... and why do you keep resurrecting her when she apparently can't reply.

It doesn't translate directly into "winning". In fact there's efforts to negotiate with the Taliban happening now, including ideas like asking them to participate in the government. This is coming from Karzai himself. I'd guess this to be upsetting to soldiers who are in the fight, knowing that the evil taliban they are supposed to be eliminating might in the end come to legitimacy. If I were there, it surely would piss me off. What are we fighting for then??? Someone ask Peter Mackay to explain it, without moving his lips. And second, its not just from one article. I also provided info about a White House Report that says virtually the same thing. No disrespect to the troops intended.

If we can't get agreement at the commonwealth conference, how do they expect to get one at the much bigger UN meeting? I think Canadians want to feel that we are doing something useful, not making excuses. Other countries like Great Britain are showing strong leadership on this issue. They're taking it much more seriously than we are. And they don't change their minds by the flavour of the month when previous committments are made. Won't be much longer and the average Canadian will get sick of this government, if not already. We need to drop these people from the CPC. Call an election, you snivelling wimps!

Canada and the Kyoto Protocol On December 17, 2002, Canada ratified the treaty that came into force in February 2005, requiring it to reduce emissions to 6% below 1990 levels during the 2008-2012 commitment period. Having signed and ratified the treaty, the government proved incapable or unwilling to actually reduce emissions. At that time, numerous polls showed support for the Kyoto protocol at around 70%. Despite strong public support, there was still some opposition, particularly by the Canadian Alliance, precursor to the governing Conservative Party, some business groups, and energy concerns, using arguments similar to those being used in the US. In particular, there was a fear that since US companies would not be affected by the Kyoto Protocol that Canadian companies would be at a disadvantage in terms of trade. In 2005, the result was limited to an ongoing "war of words", primarily between the government of Alberta (Canada's primary oil and gas producer) and the federal government. There were even fears that Kyoto could threaten national unity, specifically with regard to Alberta [citation needed]. As of 2003, the federal government claimed to have spent or committed 3.7 billion dollars on climate change programmes. By 2004, CO2 emissions had risen to 27% above 1990 levels (which compares unfavorably to the 16% increase in emissions by the United States during that time). In January 2006, a Conservative minority government under Stephen Harper was elected, who previously has expressed opposition to Kyoto, and in particular to the plan to participate in international emission trading. Rona Ambrose, who replaced Stéphane Dion as the environment minister, has since endorsed some types of emission trading, and indicated interest in international trading. On April 25, 2006, Ambrose announced that Canada would have no chance of meeting its targets under Kyoto, and would look to participate in U.S. sponsored Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. "We've been looking at the Asia-Pacific Partnership for a number of months now because the key principles around [it] are very much in line with where our government wants to go," Ambrose told reporters. On May 2, 2006, it was reported that environmental funding designed to meet the Kyoto standards had been cut, while the Harper government develops a new plan to take its place. As the co-chair of UN Climate Change Conference in Nairobi in November 2006, Canada and its government received criticism from environmental groups and from other governments for its climate change positions. On January 4, 2007, Rona Ambrose moved from environment to become Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. The Environment portfolio went to John Baird, the former President of the Treasury Board. Canada's federal government has introduced legislation to set mandatory emissions targets for industry, but it will not take effect until an estimated 2050. The government has since begun working with opposition parties to improve the legislation. A private member's bill was put forth by Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, aiming to force the government to "ensure that Canada meets its global climate change obligations under the Kyoto Protocol." With the support of the Liberals, the New Democratic Party and the Bloc Québécois, and with the current minority situation, the bill passed the House of Commons on 14 February 2007 with a vote of 161-113 and is now being considered by the Senate. If passed, the bill would give the government 60 days to form a detailed plan of action. The government has flatly refused to abide by the bill, which may spark a constitutional crisis, lawsuit, or non-confidence motion once the bill becomes law, as is expected. In May 2007 Friends of the Earth sued the Canadian federal government for failing to meet its Kyoto Protocol obligations to cut greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming. This was based on a clause in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act that requires Ottawa to "prevent air pollution that violates an international agreement binding on Canada,". Canada's obligation to the treaty begins in 2008.

I agree it is very sad. Kids are vulnerable to external stimulus and can't easily differentiate between whats real and whats "entertainment", if you can call it that. Its not just in media fantasy, but in reality too in which we respond to problems with violence, show it on the tv news, and sing praises of it at our national games, at sports events showing the military in their fatigues, pounding home messages of "support the troops". Other things, like Don Cherry's style of "Rock 'em Sock 'em hockey" (the so-called New NHL) sends messages that its ok to use violent force to win at any cost, and to hell with the rules of fair play. This is mass indoctrination towards accepting violence as a successful way of life. When young people come to the realization that our society is propped up on these falsehoods, that hypocritical authority figures can change laws and treaties as they see fit, for the concentration of their power, and that they are just meat for the grinder, some lose all hope and faith. Some will snap. Yet only a small percentage of people are truly violent. We tend to hear about the bad news much more than the thousands of selfless acts that also take place daily. Thats the nature of the beast.

Kyoto is not dead, it's only sleeping. And with a new player in the game we may see its beneficial impact. Doing something is better than doing completely nothing. And Harper's mouthpiece is now saying on the radio how wonderful it is to have achieved an agreement from the recent conference. An agreement to disagree... Australia's new PM Rudd acts swiftly on climate Nov 25 BRISBANE (Reuters) - Australia's new prime minister, Kevin Rudd, made climate change his top priority on Sunday, seeking advice on ratifying the Kyoto pact and telling Indonesia he will go to December's UN climate summit in Bali. Rudd, 50, presented himself to voters as a new-generation leader by promising to pull troops out of Iraq and ratify the Kyoto Protocol capping greenhouse gas emissions, further isolating Washington on both issues. Rudd, a Mandarin-speaking former diplomat, said he discussed Kyoto ratification with his British counterpart Gordon Brown, as well as Indonesia's President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. "President Yudhoyono formally invited me to attend the Bali conference, which will of course deal with climate change and where we go to now on Kyoto. I responded positively," he said. Rudd, a staunch Christian, attended church on Sunday and planned talks with officials and advisers about administrative arrangements for ratification of Kyoto as soon as possible. Rudd also pledged unity at home and an end to controversial offshore detention of illegal immigrants.

"Intelligence analysts acknowledge the battlefield victories, but they highlight the Taliban's unchallenged expansion into new territory, an increase in opium poppy cultivation and the weakness of the government of President Hamid Karzai as signs that the war effort is deteriorating." White House Afghanistan Report Why do they call it the "White House"? Further on- Overall, "there doesn't seem to be a lot of progress being made. . . . I would think that from [the Taliban] standpoint, things are looking decent," the intelligence official said. Senior White House officials privately express pessimism about Afghanistan. There is anxiety over the current upheaval in neighboring Pakistan, where both the Taliban and al-Qaeda maintain headquarters, logistical support and training camps along the Afghan border. While U.S. and other NATO forces have maintained a firm hold on major cities, they have been unable to retain territory in the vast rural areas where 75 percent of Afghanistan's population lives, several sources said. Ground hard-won in combat has been abandoned and reoccupied by Taliban forces, which establish dominance over local governmental bodies. In last year's Operation Medusa, Jones said, Canadian combat troops fought hard for control of the Panjwai district, south of Kandahar. "Four weeks ago," he said, "the levels of Taliban in Panjwai . . . were back up to pre-Operation Medusa." Experts said the Taliban's control has extended beyond the group's traditional southern territory, with extremists making substantial inroads this year into the western provinces of Farah, Herat and others along the Iranian border even as they regularly challenge eastern-based U.S. forces. "We're seeing definite expanded strongholds," said a U.S. official who declined to be identified by agency. "That's not going to stop in 2008. . . . If anything, it's gaining momentum." The former senior U.S. commander said suicide attacks are a "hugely effective tactic" that has been imported from Iraq to Afghanistan, terrorizing the population and convincing Afghans that the coalition cannot protect them. "The idea that [suicide bombs] are a sign of desperation, that's ludicrous," he said. In Washington, Afghanistan policy has often seemed to be on the back burner since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Republican presidential candidates rarely discuss it, while Democrats generally bring it up to criticize the administration, saying officials are paying too much attention to Iraq at the expense of a "forgotten" war. ‘It’s getting worse’ "Unless we resolve the safe-haven issue, this is not going to succeed," said Henry A. Crumpton, a CIA veteran who led the agency's successful 2001 Afghanistan campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. "It's getting worse." Others said the problem is not Pakistan or a lack of military or financial resources in Afghanistan. It is the absence, they say, of a strategic plan that melds the U.S. military effort with a comprehensive blueprint for development and governance throughout the country. -------- While Canadian troops march on. This mainstream source echoes the same concerns by the senlis council report, to repudiate any armchair nay-sayers who challenged its credibility. Peter Mackay, read the news. Of course, we all know when the politician is lieing.

Excerpts from the article: A Generalized Meltdown of Financial Institutions Global Research, November 24, 2007 Reality has finally caught up to the stock market. The American consumer is underwater, the banks are buried in debt, and the housing market is in terminal distress. The Dow is now below its 200-Day Moving Average -- the first big "sell" signal. Anything below 12,500 could trigger program-trading and crash the market. The increased volatility suggests that we are watching a "real time" meltdown. The credit storm that began in the United States with subprime mortgages has spread to markets across the globe. In fact, the train has already crashed. What we're seeing now is the boxcars piling up on top of each other. On Tuesday Chinese government officials ordered a complete halt to bank lending to slow the speculative frenzy that has created an enormous equity bubble in the stock market. According to the Wall Street Journal: "Chinese authorities are slamming the brakes on bank lending, in their latest attempt to curb the runaway investment threatening to overheat what is soon to be the world's third-largest economy. In recent weeks, regulators have quietly ordered China's commercial banks to freeze lending through the end of the year, according to bankers in several cities. The bankers say that to comply, they are canceling loans and credit lines with businesses and individuals." ("China freezes lending to Curb Investing Frenzy" Wall Street Journal) The move illustrates how concerned the Chinese are that a slowdown in US consumer spending will trigger a crash on the Shanghai stock market. It also shows that the Chinese are having difficulty dealing with the inflation generated by the hundreds of billions of US dollars absorbed via the trade imbalance with the US. China is awash in USDs and that surplus is causing a steady rise in food and energy costs. This could be mitigated by allowing their currency to "float" freely. But a sudden, steep increase in the Chinese yuan's value could also send the world headlong into a global recession. In California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has joined with four mortgage lenders to freeze adjustable interest rates (ARMs) for some of the state's highest-risk borrowers; another unprecedented move. The Governor hopes to avoid a collapse of the California real estate market which has gone into a tailspin. Home sales have plummeted more than 40 per cent for the last two months. Prices have dropped sharply---roughly 12 per cent statewide. New construction has slowed to a crawl. Layoffs are steadily rising. Jumbo loans (mortgages over $417,000) have been put on the "Endangered Species" list. Even qualified borrowers can't get mortgages. Nothing is selling. California housing is "off the cliff". Schwarzenegger's plan to keep over-extended subprime mortgage-holders in their homes faces an uncertain future. What incentive is there for homeowners to continue paying exorbitant monthly rates when their payments are not applied to the principle? The homeowners would be better off bailing out, accepting foreclosure, and starting over with a clean slate. It's unrealistic to thinks that Schwarzenegger can stop the tidal wave of foreclosures that are sweeping across the state. An estimated 3 million homeowners will lose their homes nationwide. If you want to blame someone; blame Alan Greenspan. He's the one who created this mess. According to the economist Mike Shedlock: "The Fed caused the credit crunch by slashing interest rates to 1 per cent to bail out its banking buddies in the wake of a dotcom bubble collapse. All the Fed did was create a bigger bubble. This bubble is so big in fact that it cannot even be bailed out. It's the end of the line for a serially bubble blowing Fed. "So not only was this the biggest credit bubble in history, this was also the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the already enormously wealthy. That is the real travesty of justice regardless of whether or not the price tag is $1 trillion, $2 trillion, or $10 trillion." (Mike Shedlock, "Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis") The problem has gotten so serious that even Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson, is putting up red flags. Last week, Paulson ignited a sell-off on Wall Street when he made this statement: "The nature of the problem will be significantly bigger next year because 2006 [mortgages] had lower underwriting standards, no amortization, and no down payments....We're never going to be able to process the number of workouts and modifications (to mortgages) that are going to be necessary doing it just sort of one-off. I've talked to enough people now to know that there's no way that's going to work." Like Schwarzenegger, Paulson is trying to get mortgage-lenders to provide a safety net for struggling borrowers who are defaulting on their loans. Paulson is calling for emergency legislation that will allow the Federal Housing Administration to play a greater role in the relief effort. The FHA has already expanded its traditional role by taking on hundreds of billions in extra debt just to keep a few "private" mortgage lenders and banks from going bankrupt. Of course, when Paulson's plan goes kaput and the debts pile up; it'll be the taxpayer that foots the bill. "Paulson also called the Senate's failure to pass legislation overhauling mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac frustrating," saying that the two government-sponsored entities need to be playing a bigger role in the housing market. Fannie and Freddie, have already posted enormous quarterly losses and don't have the capital reserves to put millions of subprime mortgage-holders under their "government-sponsored" umbrella. Paulson is just grabbing at straws. Similar troubles are brewing in the broader market where late-payments and defaults have spread to credit card debt and new car loans. Every area of "securitized" debt has suddenly veered off the road and into the ditch. Last week the Fed injected more credit into the teetering banking system than anytime since 9-11. No one has predicted the downward-spiral in the market more accurately than Nouriel Roubini. Roubini is a Professor at the Stern School of Business at New York University. Last week's prediction was particularly dire and is worth reprinting here: "It is increasingly clear by now that a severe U.S. recession is inevitable in next few months...I now see the risk of a severe and worsening liquidity and credit crunch leading to a generalized meltdown of the financial system of a severity and magnitude like we have never observed before. In this extreme scenario whose likelihood is increasing we could see a generalized run on some banks; and runs on a couple of weaker (non-bank) broker dealers that may go bankrupt with severe and systemic ripple effects on a mass of highly leveraged derivative instruments that will lead to a seizure of the derivatives markets... massive losses on money market funds with a run on both those sponsored by banks and those not sponsored by banks; ..ever growing defaults and losses ($500 billion plus) in subprime, near prime and prime mortgages with severe knock-on effect on the RMBS and CDOs market; massive losses in consumer credit (auto loans, credit cards); severe problems and losses in commercial real estate...; the drying up of liquidity and credit in a variety of asset backed securities putting the entire model of securitization at risk; runs on hedge funds and other financial institutions that do not have access to the Fed's lender of last resort support; a sharp increase in corporate defaults and credit spreads; and a massive process of re-intermediation into the banking system of activities that were until now altogether securitized." (Nouriel Roubini's Global EconoMonitor) ------------------------------ What could be the outcome of such a collapse... that paper money becomes useless and mortgages go into the double-digits? Those who do a lot of borrowing are the most at risk. But if you own your home and car you might be ok. Just remember to keep your guns clean, and watch the night fires burn.

It is good news. Lets just hope he has the courage to stick to his promises.

No doubt he does.

Australia’s Labor Party sweeps to power Nov. 24, 2007 Conservative Prime Minister John Howard suffered a humiliating defeat Saturday at the hands of the left-leaning opposition, whose leader has promised to immediately sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming and withdraw Australia's combat troops from Iraq. Labor Party head Kevin Rudd's pledges on global warming and Iraq move Australia sharply away from policies that had made Howard one of President Bush's staunchest allies. Rudd has named global warming as his top priority, and his signing of the Kyoto Protocol will leave the U.S. as the only industrialized country not to have joined it. Rudd said he would withdraw Australia's 550 combat troops from Iraq, leaving twice that number in mostly security roles. Howard had said all the troops will stay as long as needed. It was an embarrassing end to the career of Howard, Australia's second-longest serving leader. At home, Rudd has pledged to govern as an "economic conservative," while pouring money into schools and universities. He will curtail sweeping industrial reforms laws that were perceived to hand bosses too much power, turning many working voters against Howard. The change from Howard to Rudd also marks a generational shift for Australia. Rudd, a 50-year-old former diplomat who speaks fluent Chinese, urged voters to support him because Howard, 68, was out of touch with modern Australia and ill-equipped to deal with new-age issues such as climate change. ------------ The people have spoken with one voice. Good riddance to the old guard! Howard, that old white-supremacist, wanted to go further down the fascistic road, the move that lead to his eventual undoing. Thanks to God (or was it Plato) for bestowing upon us democracy, and for people intelligent enough to know how to vote. Now bring some of it this way...

Commonwealth reaches consensus on climate The Commonwealth's leaders have agreed to an action plan on climate change that doesn't set out binding targets or timelines for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The statement released Saturday does call for greater co-operation between developed countries like Canada and developing nations, CTV's David Akin reported from the summit in Uganda. "It simply calls for 'aspirational' targets. In other words, these are things the Commonwealth countries just hope will happen," he told Newsnet. Canada opposed language that would set firm, Kyoto-style targets. Environmentalists and Commonwealth sources claim Canada stood only with Australia in opposing firm targets. The Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said it would like to see flexible targets with more emphasis placed on improving technology to deal with climate change issues. That is very similar to the stance of U.S. President George Bush. Until recently, Australia's Prime Minister John Howard had been an ally of Harper and Bush on the climate issue, but he lost power in Saturday's general election. Labour Leader Kevin Rudd has promised to ratify Kyoto, something Howard refused to do. Bush refused to ratify Kyoto and Harper opposed ratification as Canadian Alliance leader. Australia, Canada and the United States are three of the world's biggest per-capita emitters of greenhouse gases. ------------ In other words Canada, via Harper, screwed the pooch in this conference. Harper adapted a Bush-style "all or nothing" attitude. I hope he gets well paid for it. Is this what we expect from leadership in our country? Is this the message we want Canada to send to the rest of the world? Canada... just for the money

That may be, and even though I don't think he's completely wonderful, he's the best game in town right now, comparatively speaking. Personally I think it would be extremely refreshing if Canada moved to the left in this current day and age where right wing fascism in bed with corporate interests is politically stylish. Or am I the only one to question how it is that most western countries had a booming economy for the past years and yet the standard of living for average people, everywhere in the world, has gone down?? Ask yourself, were is the money going?

No, there is another way besides military intervention, and it doesn't include us leaving or turning our backs to the problems that are there. It doesn't involve nuking the country either. Maybe you should consider this alternative before you tell us that you know it all.

I'm sure they do care, or else they will be the ones who are harmed by this fiasco. But there seems very little doubt here that Mulroney lied under oath. It's not just what Schreiber is saying, its the fact that it has come out recently that Mulroney did, indeed, receive money from Schreiber and failed to claim it until many years later. Why? I say it could be because he knew the story may yet come out, and if it could be proven that he accepted the money without paying his taxes, thats criminality right there. By paying he closed the door on that one, but opens the door to self-perjury. The lessor of two evils, one that he might be able to duck out of in a court. If this is true then Mulroney is a despicable crook, as I and many other Canadians felt him to be and he should go down in history in complete and utter disgrace. And if Harper knew... then its bye bye Stevie. I hear that they are testing out the old cannons on the hill lately, they want to get two of them working once again...

Interesting interview. I liked in particular his comments on how political parties have changed since the 1980's- "one clear change is the growing strength of those large corporate interests most threatened by social democracy. They’re consolidating control over cultural and political resources. Their think-tanks have excelled at framing regressive policies in compelling moral terms. Their political parties are feeling freer to slide further right." In essence he's saying that these parties are simply an extension of corporate power grabbing, whose sole interest is in the consolidation of wealth. Think about that next time you vote right-winger.

The UK is not a warm country. It may be third-world but its not warm.

The report is by the Senlis council in Afghanistan, not from a newspaper. And all mainstream news sites carried this story. But today it was hard to find, I wonder why? Something they don't want to be well known right now, and hopes it quietly goes away.

Wed 21 Nov 2007 Taliban controlling much of Afghanistan, warn experts The Taliban is back in control of "vast swathes" of Afghanistan and its influence is growing fast, an influential think-tank warned today. Despite the massive international financial and military effort, insurgents have established a permanent presence in more than half of the troubled country. The situation is so bad that it is a question of "when not if" the Taliban will reappear in Kabul, and there is a "serious" danger they could regain control of the state. The damning assessment comes in a report by the Senlis Council, one of the few research groups with a base in Afghanistan. The think-tank warned that the security situation has reached "crisis proportions" and the Taliban's resurgence across the state has been "proven beyond doubt". The report said: "The insurgency now controls vast swathes of unchallenged territory including rural areas, some district centres, and important road arteries. "The Taliban are the de facto governing authority in significant portions of territory in the south and east, and are starting to control parts of the local economy and key infrastructure such as roads and energy supply." ----------------------- I wish they'd make up their minds - one week the Taliban are reported as getting trounced, and the next week, they control almost the whole country

CTV News 24/11/2007 Canada is reportedly holding up a resolution at the Commonwealth summit in Uganda which calls for binding climate change targets, sources have confirmed. Environmentalists and Commonwealth sources claim Canada has problems with the resolution despite virtually all other countries in attendance, except Australia, supporting it. CTV News reporter David Akin says many countries frustrated by Canada's stance have gone to the media in an effort to put pressure on the Canadian delegates. "Mr. Harper presented his views (to delegates) and they weren't very well received," Akin told CTV Newsnet's Mike Duffy Live on Friday evening. --------------------- Leave it to Harper and his Cons to ruin our reputation as progressive leaders in the world on environment. Oh yes, they did drop the progressive part from their name. It's just one more nail in the coffin, dear.

There is other evidence that these energy weapons can be dangerous. Cops need a safe effective tool to disable crazy people, without causeing harm to them. I believe thats what they wanted to do in this case, I doubt that they wanted him to die, but maybe they went too far. They got reckless and did not have any respect for this individual and even seemed to have unprofessional regard for the seriousness of their actions. I do not trust their self-investigations. Politics and truth do not mix well. Sadly these tragic events happen sometimes, but the good thing is if they can bring about some change, to improve the way the Taser works or the way its used, and improve the training of people using it, should include proper emergency response. Perhaps the Taser should not be used if there is no CPR equipment avaialble, such as heartbeat monitor, or even defibrillator as part of the standard equipment that must accompany it. Anyone using a Taser must be trained to use this equipment. Only activists can bring solutions, not those who sit about and wait for them to hold their inquiry. They'll just sweep it under the big old rug.

Let the heads roll... I understand bowling is a popular sport in Vancouver