maplesyrup

Next window of opportunity to make contact with the Beagle is at 10:15 tonight Vancouver time Followed by a press conference at 12:30 AM on Saturday, Vancouver time, with Professor Colin Pillinger, Beagle 2 lead scientist, Professor David Southwood, director of science for the European Space Agency, and Professor Alan Wells from the University of Leicester Space Research Centre. http://www.beagle2.com/news/index.htm

4 more US Servicemen were killed today in Iraq. If it continues, the body bag count overseas could impact negatively, on the Republican/Bush chances in the next election. Last month had the highest number of casualities since the war started. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/26/internat...ND-IRAQ.html?hp

Martin edges Chretien for Canadian Editors/Broadcasters Newsmaker for 2003 The're sure pumping him up aren't they. What is that old expression, the bigger they are, the harder.............? http://www.cjad.com/content/cjad_news/arti...asp?id=n122611A http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...555/?hub=Canada Stephen Lewis named by Mclean's magazine as their Newsmaker of the Year for 2003, for his Aids/HIV work in Africa. http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/canada/a...229_72599_72599 Stockwell Day was named Newsmaker of the Year in 2001. Let's not forget about that. Loserville: http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/canada/a...229_72608_72608 Black (Hollinger)) Copps (Cda) Boudria (Cda) Dion (Cda) Campbell (BC) Collenette (Cda) Eves (ON) Hermanson (SK) Heatherington (Lrthridge, AB)

Tracing Source of Mad Cow Case Could Take Months, U.S. Says http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/26/national...-DETECT.html?hp

Stephen Dion says he did a good job with the Quebec file. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...Story/National/

'This single case will expose the holes in the American system of meat production and disease testing.'

American Nobel Prize winner warned the US that Mad Cow was Imminent http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/25/national/25WARN.html

'Early indications for Canada's new united right party not encouraging ' Thu Dec 25,11:53 AM ET BRUCE CHEADLE http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...ear_unite_right It's probably politically incorrect to mention this, but one would think that journalists would have had something better to do on Christmas Day than write a column on politics.

From the Source Mars Express. Beagle 2's mother ship, is confirmed to be in orbit around Mars The next two opportunities to hear communication from Beagle 2 today, if my time clock calculations are correct, are: First A 40 minute possibility between 9:53 AM and 10:33 AM (PST) via NASA's Mars Odyssey Second a 5 & 3/4 hour session between 10:15 AM and 4:00 PM (PST) via a giant telescope at the Jodrell Bank Observatory in Cheshire, UK The Beagle 2 website is: http://www.beagle2.com/news/index.htm There are still many attempts in the works yet to get a signal from the little lander. This is far from over!

No Mars signal from Beagle probe http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3344693.stm

Beagle keeps scientists waiting http://www.beagle2.com/news/index.htm

The historial odds are quite slim that Beagle 2 will succeed, as there has been 30 missions and only 3 successes. Has Beagle 2 touched down on Mars? It was scheduled to have arrived approximately 3 hours ago. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3344693.stm

Copps accuses Martin's team of threatening one half of the federal Liberal women's caucus: http://ottawa.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View...t_copps20031224

Canadian Minister of Agriculture closes Canadian border to some US beef exports. This is a $175 billion industry in the USA. What will be the impact on Canada's beef industry? What are the consequences for consumers? This is turkey season this week, but what happens next week?

What is going on in this African country? What is causing the recent changes? There is an article in today's National Post, which explains perhaps what has cuased Col. Muammar Gaddifi to make some changes internationally for Libya. It has to do with terrorism, and it has to do with oil. To view the article go to: http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpos...45-df4d902f4eb8

Europe goes to Mars Mars Espress - Beagle 2 Every society has its exciting moments and tonight, Christmas Eve (6:30 GMT, so Christmas Day in Europe), 10:30 PM on Canada's West coast, Beagle 2 will possibly begin sending signals from Mars. It actually is expected to touch down at 2:30 GMT. www.beagle2.com This is going to be an extra special Christmas Eve. This European project was done with quite a small budget, and it just goes to show what one can do if you set your mind to do it. Congratulations to the Europeans, and I wish them every success this evening. And Merry Christmas to all of you, including our Canadian troops serving abroad.

Craig....are you smokin' some of that illegal weed, or what, eh? (Just kidding.) So it's fine for Paul Martin to take a $500 million Canadian taxpayer subsidized loan, and then after he receives it, to go offshore with Canada Steamship Lines, to avoid paying Canadian taxes. There's a sucker here, for sure, and it ain't Paul Martin. Sure it may be legal (created by using high-priced tax lawyers, that most Canadians can't afford), but where are the ethics involved here? You mention taxes like they are something evil. Taxes are used to redistribute the wealth, which help to even out the playing field in our sociey, so those who are less fortunate are looked after. Taxes are actually essential in any healthy society, and should be celebrated. Wthout them, we would have no public school system, no national medicare system, no public roads, no public transportation, no police services, and no national defence, to mention a few things. That is not the kind of country I, nor the vast majority of Canadians, I presume, would like to live in. Government waste however is a separate issue, and a cause for concern. Getting back to our tax system, charity sucks. Instead of the rich deciding what the poor want, why not ask the poor what they would prefer? Or should the poor not be entitled to an opinion because they are poor? The following article that was published yesterday in the Toronto Star is enlightening: 'Tis better to give than to receive' 'Don't just give alms to the poor, give them your political support' Some years ago, I remember talking to a man who had been an alderman, and who was wondering why some of his constituents had not voted for him the next time he ran. "I gave that family a turkey at Christmas," he said about one low-income family. "But maybe they wanted you to make changes so that they could afford to buy their own turkey," I said. He did not get it. At Christmas, everyone is ready to help the poor. Buy a kid a snowsuit. Pin a star on a tree so some poor kid gets a present. Take a poor family a basket of food. Doesn't it make you feel good? Not if you're poor. The people who feel good are the givers, not the receivers. And they are going to get mad if they do not end up feeling good. I belonged to a women's organization that wanted to give away a basket one year. They asked me to find someone to whom they could give it. I knew a woman who had recently been widowed and had six children. I phoned her and asked if she would feel okay about having a food basket delivered. She said sure, and when we arrived she invited us in and gave us coffee. The next year when Christmas was coming around, one of the organizers hissed at me that the woman the year before had never sent a thank-you note. When I was poor and pregnant with one of my children, another person said she could get me a new layette, but I would have to promise to write and thank the people who sent it, as they were tired of ungrateful recipients. As if, when you are poor and pregnant and worn out, you have nothing to do but compose gracious letters thanking strangers for their charity. I declined, as I was lucky enough to have some of my other children's clothes, and I had neighbours who contributed without expecting thank-you notes. I spoke at a women's meeting about women and poverty and I mentioned a few other examples, of people stuck with three washing machines in their basement, none of which worked, which had been "donated" to them, clothing from which all the zippers were missing,and so on. I finished with a ringing cry, "Don't give us your old clothes, give us your support!" I meant politically, of course. After my speech, a woman came up to me and said she had some perfectly good enema equipment which she did not want to throw away and could I give her the name of someone who would appreciate it. I just replied "I'm afraid not." I am not advocating that you do not give to the snowsuit fund, or not put food in the food bank basket, or not drop money in the Salvation Army kettle. If that is the only way that poor children in this country can be warm and fed, then that is what we have to do. But nobody should expect to be crowned with a halo for doing that. Every time they put something in the food basket they should be thinking, "Isn't there a better way to make sure that all families can afford to buy their own food? "Shouldn't the poor be able to choose for themselves what they want to eat? Shouldn't a mother be able to count on enough money to buy her children the snowsuits and boots they need? Shouldn't the poor be able to count on the dignity of earned income and not the indignity of charity?" What we wish for ourselves, we should wish for others. By Dorothy O' Connell

Less than one year to go now before Americans go to the polls to choose their next President (via their electoral college), 1/3 of the Senate members, and all members of the House of Representatives. How are the candidates doing so far? What are the issues that will make the American voters decide who they are going to vote for? What about the Republicans? Who is going to win the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination this time? Will it be Dean, and if so, why? Will it be Clark, and if so, why? Would they run togher on the Democratic ticket, and if so, who who be the Presidential candidate, and who would be the Vice-Presidential candidate? Last election many Democrats blamed Ralph Nader and the Greens for Al Gore's loss to George Bush. Nader rufutes this giving two reasons: 1- If Gore had not lost Tennessee he would have won. 2 - The Democrats made a strategic error by not going for a state-wide recount in Florida. Ralph Nader, is not running under the Green banner in 2004, and is exploring running as a Independent candidate for President He wants to appeal to a braoder cross-section of the American public than just the environmentalists. Will Nader have an impact if he runs again? What are the polls saying? After the capture of Saddam, Bush's popularity has increased? The economy seems to be cooking as well, another good signs for an incumbent president. What about the Congress? Will the Republicans take control of both bodies, the Senate and the House of Representatives again? What could cause things to change?

Gotta love the home page caption beside a smilin' Paul Martin's picture which states: 'Hey kids! I'm suing PaulMartinTime.ca on Christmas Day!' Their deadline is today, Christmas Eve, at 5 PM, and if it is not shut down, or changed by then, legal action has been threatened against its owners/creaters. This is a huge issue which involves, among other things, concentration of media ownership, and freedom of speech, in Canada, and trying to close it down could really backfire on Prime Minister Paul Martin and the Liberals. Greg makes an excellent point in his 9:32 AM, Dec 23, 2003 post when he states: Quote A classic example of a overlooked domain was gwbush.com, during the last Presidential campaign. Georgewbush.com was the official website of Presidential candidate George W Bush. Gwbush.com was the parody site of a raving anti-bush activist/profiteer. The site become a huge thorn in the side of the George W Bush and the Republican party during the campaign. After repeated attempts were made to shut the site down, Bush's people realized that attempting to fight this out in court did nothing by increase the overall exposure of the site and the person behind it. Unquote I agree. By threatening legal action, the mainstream media, and a lot more Canadians, are now getting intersted and involved. Sometimes it is better just to ignore things. Hmm, I wonder what our Canadian constitution, laws, or charter say about freedom of expression or free speech. The creators of this website www.paulmartintime.ca are from the Maritimes and were just interviewed on TV. These young men have already received 8,000 hits on their website, including many from the international community. They are not backing down, saying it is a free speech isuue. www.paulmartintime.ca is obviously having an inpact, and the internet is definitley changing the dynamics of power and control in our society. The Canadian establishment is concerned, and no wonder, as they no longer are able to completely control what we read, listen, and watch, for our news sources any more. Don't get me wrong. Canada has many excellent journalists, many of whom labour under difficult working conditions, but nothin' like some healthy competition, eh? Have we lost our sense of humour in Canadian politics? Is it now politicaly incorrect to poke fun at our politicians? Over to you Prime Minister. Yesterday's edition of the Toronto Star had an article about it entitled: ' Liberals threaten suit over Web site' To view the article go to: http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/Conte...d=1072134611705 Spunky fellows.

Which flag of convenience does Prime Minister Paul Martin's Canada Steamship Lines fly? Check out this web page to see for yourself, and also to express your point of view at: http://www.flyourflag.ca/ I wonder what the average Canadian taxpayer thinks. Very interestin' subject!

OK, it's time to start paying attention about what's happenin' here, as there appears to be some concerns with getting this leadership project off the ground. Prime Minister Paul Martin, in one of his end-of-the-year interviews let it slip - 4 months folks, from the time he was sworn in as PM we are going to have Canada's 38th election (99.9% for sure). Who has definitely decided whether they are running or not running? Who is still sitting on the fence? What do the polling numbers say? What are your forecasts about who is going to win? Let's start things off with a breaking news story today from the Globe and Mail, Canada's most wide-read newspaper: Belina Stronach mulling united-right leadership Field widening as Strahl, Lord also urged to run By BRIAN LAGHI From Wednesday's Globe and Mail OTTAWA — The race to lead Canada's new Conservative Party galloped off in all directions yesterday as auto parts magnate Belinda Stronach was touted by confidants as a possible surprise candidate and former Ontario premier Mike Harris began pushing key allies to support Bernard Lord. In addition, Canadian Alliance MP Chuck Strahl also expressed deepening interest in the post, saying the race needs a strong slate of candidates who can unify the party. So far, only Canadian Alliance caucus leader Stephen Harper and Calgary lawyer Jim Prentice have said they would run, leaving many concerned that the race will look like an Alliance takeover should Mr. Harper win. Sources close to Ms. Stronach, who is president of Magna International Inc., said she has not closed the door on a possible run and wants to ensure that the new party is seen in a positive light as it gets off the ground. "She wants to see this thing succeed," the source said. "She knows it needs people who can break it out of the way people are coming to think of it." Ms. Stronach had originally told those wooing her that she was not interested in the job, as had Mr. Lord. But the New Brunswick Premier is reconsidering, given the lack of candidates, and now Ms. Stronach is as well. She has been a strong supporter of merging the Canadian Alliance and the Tories and acted as a facilitator over the summer in bringing together emissaries from the two parties. Sources said yesterday that Mr. Harris urged a group of close supporters on Thursday to back Mr. Lord, who is not expected to decide until the new year whether or not he will throw his hat in the ring. Mr. Harris, who has ruled himself out of the race, attended a corporate lunch where several members of his former team were present -- including Tom Long, Paul Rhodes and Leslie Noble, each of whom played integral roles in his ascension to the premiership. Sources said, however, that the team is divided on whom to support. Mr. Long, for example, is said to be leaning toward Mr. Harper. The potential entrance of Ms. Stronach into the race could also complicate the situation for Mr. Harris, who is close to the Magna president. Representatives of Magna were not available for comment yesterday. Meanwhile, Mr. Strahl said in an interview that he has been told by a number of individuals to take the plunge. "I am encouraged and I am being encouraged," he said. Mr. Strahl said that the race needs a full complement of contenders to ensure a vibrant discussion. He also said that the new leader must successfully stitch together both sides of the party. "The person that wants to lead the party has to ensure that he brings together the old Alliance and the old Progressive Conservative Party and engage them actively," he said. "It's not going to be enough to build a team on one side." Mr. Strahl might be able to fashion some appeal to both camps, given his leadership of a breakaway group of Alliance MPs who sat with the Tories in the latter part of 2001 and early 2002. Others who are considering a leadership bid include Tory caucus leader Peter MacKay and Alliance MP Brian Pallister. Some party members are concerned that Mr. Harper has not reached out fully enough so far to former Tories. One senior Tory, who asked not to be identified, said Mr. Harper has paved the way for others to enter by not adequately touching base with the Tory crowd. The source said the winner must do everything possible to build a common front.

We have had the corporate elites running trhis country through their hidden lobbyists for quite some time now, and as usual we get the same old, same old. It seems like this time around, in the next election, we actually are going to be debating some substantive issues, if the following article in today's Globe and Mail is any indication: 'I have decided to seek a seat in Parliament because the Liberal government under the driving social and economic policies of Paul Martin has turned Canada into a deeply unequal society. During the 1990s, the Liberal government followed the United States in claiming that we must choose between social justice and economic efficiency. They decided on a multibillion-dollar cut to social programs. During the same period, other leading democratic countries — Germany, Sweden, Austria, Norway, the Netherlands — managed to retain high levels of social programs and overcome deficits. Paul Martin shows every indication of continuing with the false choices as Prime Minister that he began as minister of finance. While announcing yet another freeze on the public sector, he is proceeding with a $4.4-billion reduction in corporate taxes, scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1. What have been the consequences of the biggest cut in social and environmental spending in Canadian history? The number of children in poverty is over the one-million mark — up, not down, from the time of Mr. Martin's 1989 promise to eliminate such poverty. Meanwhile, during the same period, five other countries virtually eliminated child poverty. Real incomes of the typical Canadian family remain at the level they were at in the mid-1970s, while those of the rich have gone through the roof. Cuts of billions of dollars in transfers to the provinces have meant cancer and heart patients in virtually every province have not received the care they deserve, and we can afford. Average fees for university students have more than doubled (in France, Germany, Spain and Ireland — and many other European countries — university is free). The number of food banks has increased 300 per cent from 1989 to this year (an increase from 1,100 to 3,287). These results are Paul Martin' s legacy to average and low-income Canadians. In the midst of this, the most disastrous social impacts since the Second World War, the Martinites incredibly boast that they have run surpluses in the billions of dollars in each of the six past budgets, provided tax cuts in which the top 2 per cent (those earning more than $200,000) got 19 per cent of the cash. The government has also continued to collect millions in excessive Employment Insurance charges from workers and companies, charges that the Auditor-General claims are completely unwarranted. The crucially important point, ignored by your resident neo-con John Ibbitson, is that this massive onslaught on equality was not necessary to obtain national economic efficiency. During the 1990s, a significant number of Western European countries in the same context of globalization and deficit pressures as Canada relied on a lower-interest-rate policy, economic growth and an equitable mix in taxes and cutbacks. Results? In these countries, deficits were overcome. In Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, productivity increases in the 1990s equalled or exceeded those of the United States and Canada. Participation in voting and all kinds of other citizen activity in Scandinavia (which has the highest level of social spending) is higher than in the United States and Canada. Instead of slashing social programs such as education and health to compete, as Mr. Ibbitson would recommend, these countries correctly see such expenditures as providing a competitive advantage. General Motors and Ford, among other reasons, choose to invest in Canada over the United States because, as a result of publicly financed health care, they don't have to provide their workers here with health-care benefits. If I'm nominated and elected, I will work flat out with Jack Layton to rid Canada of the pre-1940s economic and social policies currently being pursued. Jack Layton's priority on the cities did not wait for an election year. He has also shown how we could be combining environmental and economic concerns by building fuel-efficient cars. While Paul Martin was evading a clear answer on Kyoto, Mr. Layton actually led the battle in Toronto to put the new wind turbine on the city's waterfront. While Mr. Martin conducts seminars on the "politics of achievement," Jack Layton acts. Innovative social-democratic policies in continental Europe, and Manitoba and Saskatchewan, have rejected the moral and intellectual barbarism of the new right. At the federal level, we should too. Paul Martin was correct when he said, while in opposition, that it was "garbage" to claim we must take "a broad axe to the social safety net" to have an effective economy. Regrettably, he and Mike Harris wielded that axe. We've seen the disastrous social consequences. It's time to remove the axe and replace it with brains and compassion.' by Ed Broadbent Ed Broadbent is the former federal leader of the New Democratic Party and founding president of the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development It doesn't matter what one's political persuasion is. What is constructive is to put your ideas out in the public domain for Canadians to reflect upon, and discuss.

Isn't this pain ever going to stop? Now the Conservative party is going to have to endure the public spectacle of another court case, once again reminding Canadians how messy this merger really is. "I have been an independent observer in elections in some countries that are trying to embrace democracy, and I have never seen this type of thing happen . . . and yet here in Canada, we're witnessing it." The above quote is from an article in today's Toronto Star: http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/Conte...ol=968350116467

This website is so effective that Paul Martin is threatening to sue the webmaster if is not closed down by December 24. Do you get the impression there are two laws for freedom of expression in our society, one for the rich and powerful, and the other for the average Canadian? Check it out at: http://www.paulmartintime.ca/ This information came from the following webpage: http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/Conte...ol=968350116467

Does anyone else get the feelin' something is wrong concerning Lord's decision to enter the leadership contest of the Conservative Party? Last week we were told it was just about to happen, and that he just wanted to confirm some weekend polling results. Why the hesitation? Do you think that the numbers aren't there for him? What was being polled anyway? Did it have to do with how much or how little support the Conservative party has with Canadians? So even if he runs, and does get the leadership, not much is going to change. Or was the poll about how much support there is for him from the Conservative members? And maybe Harper already has a lock on it. Another thing Lord mentioned last week is that he wanted to discuss things with Peter MacKay first. Now why would he want to publically ally himself with MacKay who, for all intent and purposes, is toast with the Canadian electorate, let alone a certain percentage of the PC members, and probably will have difficulty to win his own seat again in Nova Scotia. Another complication is the Sinclair Steven's lawsuit? I'm no lawyer but it sounds like he may have a case. What happens if the PC party is revived due to a court ruling? Why would someone who has a certain amount of credibility at the moment, want to get involved in such a mess? Two other points: 1 - I'm not aware of any Canadian politician who made the jump successfully from premier to prime minister. Federal politics is very very different than provincial politics, and success in one does not ensure the success in the other. 2 - A lot of Canadians are perceiving that the Liberals are now on the right of Canadian politics. Is there really room for another party from the right in Canada? I just don't understand Lord's hesitation. After all, one would think that if he was to have a chance at all, getting delegates (I presume there will be a convention of sorts to choose the leader), he should have already announced his going ahead. Listening to him talk yesterday I did not at all get the impression that it was a go. I wonder what is really going on behind those closed doors. It could be quite devestasting for the Conservative party if he decides not to run, don't you think? Maybe all the eggs should not be in one basket. And for all the Lord fans here's something I just read, that you can sink your teeth into. in today's Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Art...3/TPColumnists/