$2,000 to commemorate a UFO sighting

[Ontario Loyalist]

Amidst the massive amounts of pre-election payments being doled out are curious grants such as $2,000 given to commemorate a UFO sighting:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/National/home

Ridiculous and hypocritical...

[capricorn]

Denis Coderre and Justin Trudeau would not agree this money is misspent.

Now, it is true that the Conservatives aren't the only political party to believe in UFO's. After all, Liberal MP Denis Coderre has seen one and Liberal candidate Justin Trudeau is ready to give aliens charter rights should they choose to settle in Canada.

http://communities.canada.com/MONTREALGAZE...o-festival.aspx

Who knows what lurks....

[Canadian Blue]

I'm more concerned with Justin Trudeau's belief that capitalism will be our downfall.

[Keepitsimple]

I was curious about the $2000.....it's small amount. I did some research and there's a festival held every year to commemorate the Shag Harbour UFO incident that happened in 1967. Sure, it looks rediculous when there is no context in newspaper reports just "$2000 to commemorate a UFO sighting"....but if you read Wikipedia and look at the Festival website, you'll find that it's genuine Canadiana.....the 40th anniversary of a government investigated, unexplained UFO sighting. Quite interesting actually. Required reading for Topaz and other tinfoil hats.

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_incident

Shag Harbour Incident Festival: http://www.shagharbourufo.com/

Initial events

On the night of October 4, 1967, at about 11:20 p.m. Atlantic Daylight Time, it was reported that something had crashed into the waters near Shag Harbour, on Nova Scotia's South Shore. At least eleven people saw a low-flying lit object head down towards the harbor. Multiple witnesses reported hearing a whistling sound "like a bomb," then a "whoosh," and finally a loud bang. Some reported a flash of light as the object entered the water. Thinking that an airliner or smaller aircraft had crashed into the Sound next to Shag Harbour, some witnesses reported the event to the local Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) detachment.

The unknown object was never officially identified, and was therefore referred to as an unidentified flying object (UFO) in Canadian government documents. A Canadian Naval recovery effort immediately followed. The event is sometimes compared to the Roswell UFO incident and Kecksburg UFO incident, two other events alleged to be military crash-recoveries of UFOs.

The initial report was made by Laurie Wickens, a local resident, and four of his friends. Driving through Shag Harbour on Highway 3, they spotted a large object descending into the waters of the harbor.

Attaining a better vantage point, Wickens and his friends saw an object floating 250 to 300 meters out to sea. Visibility was good – clear with no moon. At that time, the object only had a yellow light shining from its top side.

Wickens contacted the RCMP and reported he had seen a large airplane or small airliner crash into the Sound. At first he wasn't believed. However, subsequent calls from other witnesses quickly confirmed Wickens' story. One was from Mary Banks on Maggie Garron's Point reporting similar information. Other residents also called in to report the incident, adding details about loud whistling noises and bangs. Other residents had also seen the descent and agreed the object was about 60 feet long, angled downwards at 45 degrees, and initially displayed four or five flashing and glowing amber lights.

Map of Nova Scotia showing Shag Harbour, Woods Harbour, Shelburne, and Halifax, mentioned in article

[edit] Search and rescue efforts

Assuming an aircraft had crashed, within about 15 minutes, three Mounties were at the scene along with multiple other witnesses, and also observed the pale yellow or white light bobbing on the surface of the water. Concerned for survivors, the RCMP contacted the Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) in Halifax to advise them of the situation, and ask if any aircraft were missing. Before any local effort at rescue could be made, the object started to sink and disappeared from view.

A rescue mission was quickly assembled. Within half an hour of the crash, local fishing boats went out into the Sound to look for survivors. At the location at which the object had sunk, a yellow foam was observed on the surface, about 80 feet wide and half a mile long. No survivors, bodies or debris were located, either by the fishermen or by the Coast Guard vessel, which arrived about an hour later.

By the next morning, the RCC had determined that no planes were missing. Still searching, the captain of the Coast Guard vessel received a message from the RCC that all commercial, private and military aircraft were accounted for along the eastern seaboard from Atlantic Canada down into New England.

The same morning, RCC also sent a Priority Telex to the Canadian military headquarters Air Desk in Ottawa, which handled all civilian and military UFO sightings, informing them of the crash and that all conventional explanations such as aircraft, flares, etc. had been dismissed. Therefore this was labeled a "UFO Report." The head of the Air Desk then sent another Priority Telex to Canadian Maritime Command about the "UFO Report" and recommended an underwater search. Maritime Command in turn sent another Priority Telex tasking the military's Atlantic diving fleet with carrying out the search.

Two days after the crash a team of Navy divers had been assembled, who for the next three days combed the bottom of the harbor looking for the object. One local fisherman said he saw them bringing up aluminum-colored metal, although it was unclear if this had been actual crash debris. The final report said not a trace of the crash object had been found.

[edit] Alleged military search near Shelburne

While the official story of the incident ends here, further evidence attributed to various military and civilian witnesses might imply a highly secretive military search involving a small flotilla of U.S. and Canadian ships about 30 miles to the NE of Shag Harbour near Shelburne (see map above), site of a top secret submarine detection base. According to one military witness, he was allegedly briefed that the object had originally been picked up on radar coming out of Siberia. After crashing in Shag Harbour, it traveled underwater up the coast and came to rest on top of the submarine magnetic detection grid near Shelburne, where it was supposedly joined by a second vehicle. Ships were anchored there for a week, according to the witnesses, in an attempt to recover the object. [1] A barge was said to have been brought in from the United States to assist in the recovery, as reported by another military witness. Regional newspaper stories did mention a barge with "atomic furnaces" being brought to Shelburne on October 6 for emergency repair, theorized by some as a cover story to explain its presence there. [2]

One American diver, known only as "Harry" in the book Dark Object by Styles and Ledger, stated that the object wasn't from planet Earth. "Harry" claimed photographs were taken by the divers and some foam-like debris brought up. [3] Another military witness claimed that there were actually two objects, one perhaps trying to assist the other. The naval search was suddenly called off on October 11. That night, a seemingly identical UFO was reported departing the area by witnesses near the original Shag Harbour crash site.

The most recent History Channel documentary about the incident, which aired on August 10, 2006, also reported that one of the divers involved in the Shag Harbour search did come forward during the mid-1990s, refusing to allow his identity to become known publicly. Once the researchers verified that the man in fact had served as a diver during that search, he recounted his version of what had happened at Shag Harbour.

In this recounting by probably the same diver, by the time they reached Shag Harbour, they already knew that nothing would be found there, because the target had already been located off the coast at Shelburne. He went on to further say that the Canadian military and the United States Navy monitored the "unknown objects" by radar and sonar, and that the objects were underwater. This monitoring continued for at least three days, until a Russian submarine was observed entering allied waters to the north. With that, the navy departed to intercept the submarine, and by the time they had returned, the "unknown objects" had evidently departed.

However, unlike the event at Shag Harbour, no official documentation or confirmation has yet emerged to support witness stories of a second search near Shelburne. There has been nothing to substantiate the diver's claims, with the exception of archived records that indicate a substantial amount of search and monitor activity in the Shelburne area during that 10 day period.

[jdobbin]

I was curious about the $2000.....it's small amount.

The problem is that the Tories have been making many of these small announcements so that the tune is now $9 and approaching $10 billion in election spending. And we haven't even heard the Tory promises in the election yet.

[CANADIEN]

The problem is that the Tories have been making many of these small announcements so that the tune is now $9 and approaching $10 billion in election spending. And we haven't even heard the Tory promises in the election yet.

Money to help Canadian artists travel overseas... bad. Commemorating a UFO sighting, good. Whatever.

[Wild Bill]

Money to help Canadian artists travel overseas... bad. Commemorating a UFO sighting, good. Whatever.

Not quite a true comparison! The money for the UFO sighting is going to a municipal fair or something similar. Many folks enjoy these events, myself included. The Winona Peach Festival here in my area annually draws several hundred thousand people over a weekend. Arts and crafts, rides and a midway, live music and such make for a good time.

How does the general public benefit from the older Liberal system of picking up the tab for some "artist" to visit the pot and sex shops in Amsterdam?

[Argus]

The problem is that the Tories have been making many of these small announcements so that the tune is now $9 and approaching $10 billion in election spending. And we haven't even heard the Tory promises in the election yet.

It is a problem. However, that is what minority government is all about. They're constantly in election mode - as is the opposition. That means both sides are constantly manoeuvring for position, and neither side will cut the other a break. Governments in election mode give away far too much money because they feel they have to be always pleasing people. Oppositions in election mode are ludicrously obstructive and bombastic. I hope we see Harper get a majority so we can see what he can do fiscally when he's not in election mode.

[jdobbin]

It is a problem. However, that is what minority government is all about. They're constantly in election mode - as is the opposition. That means both sides are constantly manoeuvring for position, and neither side will cut the other a break. Governments in election mode give away far too much money because they feel they have to be always pleasing people. Oppositions in election mode are ludicrously obstructive and bombastic. I hope we see Harper get a majority so we can see what he can do fiscally when he's not in election mode.

We have seen majority governments both federally and provincially do the election spending thing.

The newest thing in politics is election campaigning every single day. It isn't just the Tories but a reflection of the times and happens at various levels of government, with various parties and in various countries.

If Harper was able to get his spending under control as per his promise in the election with a majority, I'd say great news. However, we have seen enough evidence that a majority with a weak opposition is still not to curb overspending. Witness Alberta.

[Argus]

We have seen majority governments both federally and provincially do the election spending thing.

The newest thing in politics is election campaigning every single day. It isn't just the Tories but a reflection of the times and happens at various levels of government, with various parties and in various countries.

If Harper was able to get his spending under control as per his promise in the election with a majority, I'd say great news. However, we have seen enough evidence that a majority with a weak opposition is still not to curb overspending. Witness Alberta.

There are no guarantees when dealing with politicians. However, I like to think that cutting spending and smaller government have been such a big part of Harper's life prior to becoming PM that it's ingrained and shows a real desire on his part not to be wasting money on things like UFO fairs and canoe museums or whatnot. So maybe, if he gets a comfortable majority he can start slicing away at those kinds of things. Certainly there's nothing in Stephan Dion's background which would lead me to believe he's in favour of smaller government!

[Keepitsimple]

I don't have a supporting article but I believe almost all of this pre-election spending is using funds that were included in the budget. Many of these announcements are actually re-announcements to start the money flowing - over half a billion for Toronto transit for example. There is little, if any, new spending that was not budgeted for. In contrast, previous Liberal governments routinely announced new pre-election spending that was not included in their budgets - simply by pulling money out of their surplus - money that should have either belonged to the Provinces, returned to the taxpayers, or used to pay down the debt.

[jdobbin]

There are no guarantees when dealing with politicians. However, I like to think that cutting spending and smaller government have been such a big part of Harper's life prior to becoming PM that it's ingrained and shows a real desire on his part not to be wasting money on things like UFO fairs and canoe museums or whatnot. So maybe, if he gets a comfortable majority he can start slicing away at those kinds of things. Certainly there's nothing in Stephan Dion's background which would lead me to believe he's in favour of smaller government!

Dion's background is as a cabinet minister in a government that actually cut government and taxes.

I sure hope you are right about Harper because if he wins and doesn't do what you say he will in majority, it is going to leave a bitter taste in people's mouths.

[Keepitsimple]

Dion's background is as a cabinet minister in a government that actually cut government and taxes.

I sure hope you are right about Harper because if he wins and doesn't do what you say he will in majority, it is going to leave a bitter taste in people's mouths.

Dobbin....have you read the book on Stephen Harper by William Johnson? It really does give you a good idea of what the guy is all about. If you understand the fundamental convictions of Harper, you can get a pretty good grasp of his middle-of-the-road approach. It's worth ordering on Amazon - probably pretty cheap if you get a used version.

[eyeball]

I hope we see Harper get a majority so we can see what he can do fiscally when he's not in election mode.

I trust if this happens we'll get to see what Harper can do socially. I can hardly wait.

[jdobbin]

Dobbin....have you read the book on Stephen Harper by William Johnson? It really does give you a good idea of what the guy is all about. If you understand the fundamental convictions of Harper, you can get a pretty good grasp of his middle-of-the-road approach. It's worth ordering on Amazon - probably pretty cheap if you get a used version.

I have read the book and that the writings of Tom Flanagan. It surprises me that Harper has turned into an overspending prime minister. I am quite skeptical that he can change his ways.

[jdobbin]

I don't have a supporting article but I believe almost all of this pre-election spending is using funds that were included in the budget. Many of these announcements are actually re-announcements to start the money flowing - over half a billion for Toronto transit for example. There is little, if any, new spending that was not budgeted for. In contrast, previous Liberal governments routinely announced new pre-election spending that was not included in their budgets - simply by pulling money out of their surplus - money that should have either belonged to the Provinces, returned to the taxpayers, or used to pay down the debt.

I'm afraid that the CTF has indicated the majority is not in the last budget. Canadian Press reported the same thing last week.

The budget has routinely blown past the budget each year. It has always gone past Flahety's numbers and broken Harper's promise not to let it surpass certain thresholds.

The but the Liberals argument ignore Harper's own commitments on the subject.

Edited September 7, 2008 by jdobbin

[eyeball]

Dion's background is as a cabinet minister in a government that actually cut government and taxes.

I sure hope you are right about Harper because if he wins and doesn't do what you say he will in majority, it is going to leave a bitter taste in people's mouths.

I don't know about that, it seems to me that Harper's supporters have had no problem swallowing just about every single sugar-coated promise and position he's offered up to date.

The real bitter taste will come if a minority of 60% or more of Canadians don't vote for Harper's majority.

[Smallc]

I don't have a supporting article but I believe almost all of this pre-election spending is using funds that were included in the budget. Many of these announcements are actually re-announcements to start the money flowing - over half a billion for Toronto transit for example. There is little, if any, new spending that was not budgeted for. In contrast, previous Liberal governments routinely announced new pre-election spending that was not included in their budgets - simply by pulling money out of their surplus - money that should have either belonged to the Provinces, returned to the taxpayers, or used to pay down the debt.

I think you're correct. The Conservatives said again today on CTV that everything they have said so far in the last two months was to deliver on the budget.

[jdobbin]

I think you're correct. The Conservatives said again today on CTV that everything they have said so far in the last two months was to deliver on the budget.

And that budget included higher spending each year?

As I said, Harper has blown past spending projections each year. Not by a little but by a lot.

[Smallc]

And that budget included higher spending each year?

As I said, Harper has blown past spending projections each year. Not by a little but by a lot.

I realize that, but they say its in the budget. Maybe its not, but they claim it to be so.

[jdobbin]

I realize that, but they say its in the budget. Maybe its not, but they claim it to be so.

Unfortunately, it is whatever the government claims it is. I have seen the same thing from provincial NDP, Liberal and PC governments where they say always say that their announcements are budgeted.

As far as I'm concerned though, if the spending exceeds what the cap is for that year, the spending is over the budget.

[Ontario Loyalist]

I think you're correct. The Conservatives said again today on CTV that everything they have said so far in the last two months was to deliver on the budget.

But for the average Canadian who doesn't pay much attention and may have missed that or won't come to that conclusion themselves, it makes no difference; all they see is billions of dollars having been spent in the weeks leading up to Harper's illegal election...