Secret Squirrel deals With Rising Sea Levels And Falling Land Masses

Secret Squirrel has discovered that scientists believe that New York is actually sinking, NOT that the sea is rising…so evidenced at the url here……

http://www.triplepundit.com/2016/09/new-york-city-sinking-no-one-knows/

Secret Squirrel asks, “Do you have that certain sinking feeling?” It has been decided that it is NOT the rising sea levels responsible for the rising seas, but actually the measure of all things American, is New York City, and THEY have determined that it is NOT rising sea levels, but actually New York City, SINKING, that is causing it to appear that the sea is rising.So any rulers stuck in by the sea to measure things being what they are or were or are not and will be…show the land sinking not the sea rising…..oh well one or the other……..either way have to equip with water wings and waterproof inflatable undies if we are to save our selves. But there may well be another solution, and Squirrel as you know, has suggestions, solutions for problems……

Secret Squirrel has figured out an engineering project such that we can no longer have to fear the effects of ANY global warming, if it exists at all.In short any rising seas will not trouble us at all,whatsoever, nay not even yet ever!
Isn’t it all easier to put the colony of Canada to good use, we simply excavate it all out, and then lead a trench in from the sea, but a trench joining the sea, at sea level as it were, such that as and IF the sea rises, or the lands fall, the excess will thence run into and down the trench…..this huge created inland sea will absorb ALL the excess water from any global warming effects, and also compensate for the falling of land masses such that there is an effect of the sea rising, and so not necessitate us to do anything at all else and certainly not inconvenience us further. An alternate selection to the colony of Canada is, as Squirrel likes to put forwards and present alternatives and alternates, is,of course, the trouble makers of Europe, the France and Germany……..they also could be used, individually and or in twain….but then, to be on the safe side,why not the lot of them? Eh! Whot!

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,Dunny On The Wold,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel:How To Turn A Massive Profit On The Simple Cauliflower.

Secret Squirrel discovers the headlines,

“In Canada, the 8-Dollar Cauliflower Shows the Pain of Falling Oil Prices”

Well, Squirrel knows, Squirrel is wisdom, Squirrel knows it’s not the oil prices that affect the cauliflower prices, nay, the oil prices dropped, the cauliflower prices rose, the oil rises, the cauliflower price should drop? Does the price of gold fluctuate, no, gold rises and rises and rises, the precious metals, and so too Squirrel sees the precious Cauliflower. Indeed, in Canada, steamed, sautéed or stir-fried,or as a soup,in stews,breaded,fried and whatever, cauliflower is standard fare on many dinner tables. BUT,in Canada, it is a luxury.

As prices for commodities have dropped,oil and so forth, the value of the Canadian dollar has fallen, a direct link to an economy that is dependent on oil and other resources. It makes imports, like fresh American vegetables during the dark Canadian winter, look especially costly.The drought in California, where Canadians get most of their vegetables in the off-season, just compounds the sticker shock. With less bounty in the fields, farmers’ prices, in American dollars, are higher. The Canadians have even yet taken to buying up land in Mexico, farming it, with cheap, virtual slave underpaid if at all, labour, and there they grow food, whilst the Mexicans starve, and said food is then shipped cheaply in to the USA and Canada where it is sold to feed Canadians, and Americans, all whilst the Mexicans starve.

Well now. How does this effect us, the Brits,for example? Well, our cauliflower prices are but a pittance 49pence, which is .97 Canadian cents you know, a 50% drop. BUT recall, the 8 dollar cauliflower,so 8 dollar cauliflower to pence, give or take we’ll round the figures,t’is but a pittance to us, the 8 dollar cauliflower converted to pence works out to 8 x 49pence…3.95 pound………a 3.95 pound cauliflower……. nay, but said 8 dollar cauliflower converted to pounds is 3.95 pounds, less the .49pence…a profit fully of no less than 3.46 pounds/pence….said full 3.95 could buy, garnered from a single Cauliflower sold to a Canadian, 405.70 pence, or 4.05 pounds, so , starting with a seed cauliflower,even yet a single one, sold to the Canadians………and we profit profit profit, you see, the more cauliflowers sold to them at $8 Canadian, the merrier we are in solid British pounds! We convert the currency garnered to British pounds and buy yet more and more and ever increasingly, multiplying more, cauliflower!!

Now do you really need your cauliflower, couldn’t you like broccoli for example, perhaps psychologically looking at it as a green cauliflower,really, and thence part with your cauliflower and sell it to the Canadians, growing it anywhere and everywhere we,and you, could, and should, including the system of buying Mexican lands cheaply from the Mexican government, to grow it there and sell it to the Canadians. Why we would garner huge,absolutely huge, profits.

Yes, Squirrel knows, there is profit in confusion, Canada is a confused land, there is profit in Canada,there is profit in Cauliflower! Yes, please see Squirrel’s new, going soon to production, financial film, Cauliflower:The New Hope……..I’m working on it and shall have my cousin, George Lucas, produce and create it, as he has some experience in producing films.
As they say in Canada, never let it be said, that Squirrel, gave you a bum steer, nor a cheap cauliflower. And if our laggardly government would wisely engage in this,Squirrel’s cauliflower venture, and speculation,why the massive amounts of currency so garnered, would produce a Britain as sound as the pound.

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel On Profiting From The Confusions Of Cauliflower And Oil Barrel Prices In The North Americas.

Secret Squirrel, always scanning the world papers for global news, economic,political, and technology wise, has noticed the headlines, which state, as found in the New York Times, that Americans have noticed that up in Canada, what with their collapsing depression era economy (Two years ago, one Canadian dollar was worth 93 American cents, on Wednesday, it stood at 69 American cents),that Iceberg lettuce in the colony of Canada, sells for 3 Canadian dollars, up from the typical 90 Canadian cents. One head of broccoli goes for $4, compared with $1.50 past. Last winter, a head of cauliflower was selling for 2.50 Canadian. But NOW, Cauliflower,in the colony of Canada, costs $8…………..much more than a barrel of oil.

Of course, this is all echoed and evidenced here in the New York Times article……

Squirrel has also noticed that BOTH the Americans and Canadians actually OWN farms in Mexico, farming them and thence importing food in to THEIR nations, in short Mexicans grow and supply them with food whilst starving themselves, and providing the exceptionally cheap farming labour. Squirrel proposes that what with this revelation,that BRITAIN do the same in Mexico as well, demanding equity and equality…and so on those farms planting, growing,harvesting and shipping, not to Britain, or the USA but to Canada, CAULIFLOWER, selling it to the Canadians at the $8 value, THENCE simply, buying up barrels and barrels of oil enormously cheaply, on the world market with the acquired Cauliflower as currency, and then selling THAT to the Americans and so garnering a HUGE profit. Canada is an enormously confused state, and with it’s new Prime Minister is in a total state of confusion, and Squirrel sees all, knows all, and knows this……………..there is profit in confusion.

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,Dunny On The Wold,
Minister For Re-Deranged re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel On The Huge Canadian Dollar’s Crash.

Secret Squirrel has noticed a sharp drop in the value of the Canadian dollar…………..the Trudeau Canadian Dollar, in short they’re taken short, it’s worth 68.93 cents against the US dollar.Well does Squirrel have a solution? Yes, you just somehow know he does!! Squirrel has noticed at this URL….

http://www.colonialacres.com/product/51791/1967-canada-s-centennial-wooden-nickel-token-mega72?ref=1636

wooden nickels, 1967 offered at $4.95. The company will ship free on orders over $500…….well now with the Canadian dollar at 68.93cents…….a wooden nickle at $4.95……is very much worth to keep and go to it’s value won’t drop. So as the Canadian dollar will drop yet more, the Canadian government being enormously befuddled and duddled in the financial sector world wide…take wooden nickels,convert to wooden nickels.Also note the company printing up the wooden nickels makes financial sense and success……we most definately have to get their management to replace the Trudeau Befuddled and Be duddled Canadian government,that makes sense…….you just know it does…Squirrel knows it does,Squirrel saves Canada! Squirrel saves the Canadians!! Squirrel knows how!

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,Dunny On The Wold,
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel Presents A Plan To Run Amtrak On Time.

Secret Squirrel knows considerable about the railroads, and indeed, America’s in particular. Squirrel romped about Europe, taking trains, in Germany, Squirrel made a 5 minute train exchange, as in 5 minutes BETWEEN trains,and Squirrel noted that German trains ran on time, like clockwork, arrival and departure,the Deutsche Bahn. Squirrel has taken trains in Canada as well,The Via Rail, not stolen of course, but has rode them, and they have been on time. Squirrel has noted that there are timing problems with trains in Britain, but they are all privatized, foreign owned as such and there really is willy nilly no real control over them beyond paying ever increasing rates the government said would’nt occur when they privatized British Rail.

However, America’s AMTRAK, does really have a central authority as the passenger trains,The Amtrak, is owned by and operated by, GOVERNMENT, the Americans didn’t,haven’t and have stated they won’t, PRIVATIZE The Amtrak, as they wished Britain’s rail privatized,thinking it wasn’t a good idea for THEM, but was for the British government. Squirrel suspects the American government was up to no good for the rails, and the people of Britain when it told the British government to privatize British rail. Well, so now there is a central authority to control things, idiot or not depending on your view of the American politicians,the government.

Now Squirrel knows, what happens in America, is that each and every freight train has priority over The Amtrak where ever the Amtrak is or runs, on all rail lines.The net result is The Amtrak waits on a siding for a freight to pass it,of course, increasing the time it is late. Well, Squirrel suggests timing The Amtrak, the different routes and noting the average late time,start to end. So, knowing that, we now redo the schedules,using the sensible actual time rates, and publish those for the Amtrak schedule. Now, there are times IT MAY,be still actually late, but nowhere’s near by as much now, and the schedule can be further modified to reduce even that. Also the train,The Amtrak, may now actually also arrive ON TIME or, even yet EARLY!, In deed the latter two have a 66% odds,or 33% each on chance early or on time! And only a 33% LATE!!Huzzah!

Huzzah!Huzzah!Hooray for Squirrel, solving The Amtrak lateness problems!No need for the American government to thank Squirrel, hands across the puddle eh whot!!! Of course Squirrel mentions, that the same could be applied in Britain for notably late,always late,British trains, but then Britain doesn’t own them,as the Americans do,so the British government can do nothing about it, UNLESS, the British Government, wisely follows The American lead, and PRIVATIZES British Rail, come now,the Americans can hardly object.
Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering.

Secret Squirrel On Quebec’s Proposed Anti Religion Charter

It has come to Squirrel’s attention that the government of the province of Quebec, a province within the
nation known as Canada,has decided that it wishes to propose and introduce a law such that it will not allow
public servants to wear Muslim headscarves, Jewish skullcaps or other obvious religious symbols under a new
charter,more over it will also impose a strange hard to define limit on the size of religious symbols
displayed,usually such as neck chains.Official documents give the nod to discreet religious symbols, such as a
small crucifix or a ring with the Star of David, but not to veils, large crucifixes or turbans.The enormous
crucifix protruding from the public property above Montreal’s Mount Royal will be spared.So while politicians
continue to enact laws underneath a giant cross, low-level public employees would have to tuck their Christian
symbolism away, as would Muslims, Sikhs and Jews with their religious headwear.

The Quebec government,presently a ruling minority government,claims that the presentation and enforcement of such a Charter Of Quebec Values will cement a secular society,that it will help create a distinct identity for it’s 8 million people.The rest
of the nation of Canada,however,also takes a secular approach,a multicultural approach, which encourages
different communities to keep their faiths and traditions.One Harvey Levine, president of the Quebec branch of
the Jewish organization B’nai Brith,said “They’re trying to remove religious freedoms. They’re trying to
impose rules on religious values,” and there he’s unquestionably correct. It is an attempt at
repression,suppression of the many mutlicultural values and rights of the peoples of Quebec, to display
those,regardless of faith. Indeed it is purely and simply a broad spectrum religious intolerance imposed, or  at least to be imposed,by the Quebec minority government.Bernard Drainville, the Quebec minister of democratic institutions,said a large crucifix in the National Assembly would stay in place, since it was part of Quebec’s history. Christmas trees would be allowed in offices because they reflected the province’s culture, he added.But then that’s hardly democratic, indeed allDrainville grappled with questions about other inconsistencies.What about courtroom witnesses and elected politicians who, in this staunchly secular state, still swear an oath on that decidedly non-secular document, the Bible? Drainville appeared caught off-guard by
the question: “Oh, my God,” he replied, slowly, “we’ll get back to you.”

And how about city council meetings which begin with prayers, in places like Saguenay? Would this secularism
policy allow that? Drainville declined to answer the question.Would elected officials be subject to these rules? No, he replied, arguing that voters have a right to choose their representative. That means Quebecers could, in theory, elect a cabinet minister or premier with a hijab — who would then force her employees to remove theirs. should be so allowed to display their religious
symbols, symbols they are each like and in kind,rightly and justifyably proud of of,proud to wear and display.The new plan would ban overt religious symbols to be worn by “judges, police, prosecutors, public daycare workers, teachers, school employees, hospital workers and municipal personnel.” These symbols would include large crosses or crucifixes, turbans, hijab, and kippas. Smaller jewelry (such as Star of David earrings) would be allowed.

There were reactions of course, to the proposal, here are some found at

http://blog.acton.org/archives/59857-quebec-ponders-banning-public-employees-wearing-overt-religious-
symbols.html

Quote……..

This proposal has caused uproar, both in the Quebec government and in the public. Here are a few reactions:

    As a Canadian-Muslim woman, I proudly wear my hijab, a choice that is completely my own and not influenced
by others. Wearing my hijab does not cause any physical or psychological harm to anyone so than why should I
be forced to remove it, if I want a good job working in Quebec? Have we really become so intolerant and
insecure of ourselves that even the sight of a religious symbol has become unbearable and strikes fear in our
society? The proposed charter is an infringement on my basic rights as a human. What I choose to wear is my
personal choice; a freedom I thought I had as a Canadian citizen by birth.

    –

    I think the proposed charter is excellent. I’m a high-school teacher and I find it very insulting to see a
teacher that teaches science or ethics (the French course teaches common values and is an introduction to
different religions in the world) wearing a hijab, for example. A teacher has to be neutral in front of their
students, has to be equal with his or her co-workers, and more specifically has to respect the dress code of
the institution he or she works for. If somebody believes in God, great, but they don’t have to show it,
especially when in a position of authority.

    –

    I am Buddhist and wear Mala beads during specific days of the year. It is important for me to feel free to
present myself freely in the workplace, and my religious faith is a big part of whom I am. I find that it is
important that my workplace reflects the multiculturalism of the society that we live in. It also helps to
create a discussion in which we are able to get rid of prejudice and ignorance toward people and their faith.

Most of the hatred in the world is based on ignorance of the other person we are in conflict with, we need to
understand each other if we are to live in a truly free society. The proposed charter is one of exclusion that
will make certain people feel attacked. I also think that it is a diversion tactic to make people forget about
the current government’s poor record with jobs, education and other important infrastructures.

Christian Lépine, the Catholic archbishop of Montreal, says the charter is “excessive”, adding that it
attempts to control people’s freedom of expression.  When you want to contain the visibility of faith, you are saying to people: ‘You cannot be all you are,” he said in an interview with Global News. Lépine said that the charter’s proposal for religious neutrality and secularism is simply another name for non-religious values that would be imposed by a few on everyone. Such a move would not be respectful nor democratic, he said.  “Normally if you talk about a charter, it’s about a charter of rights that gives space to different belief systems, so in that sense I don’t see this as a charter, it’s more of a credo,” he said to CBC News.

Unquote.

Unquestionably this also means no Christmas Trees, no Easter Bunny, no dreidels or menorahs, no crosses. The
symbols don’t hurt anybody, regardless of how much politicians think they do. Religious freedom is one of the main basses that Canada and Quebec was founded on. Being able to come here and be publicly Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Islamic, Buddhist, etc. is one of the biggest freedoms in. The Quebec government people who argue “Separation of Church and State” clearly either don’t understand the question, or don’t understand what separates church from state. The STATE (meaning the government) should not use the CHURCH (meaning religion) to justify any actions,any Church, it should not support one Church(religion),over another.
 Jefferson made it clear in his letter to the Danbury Congregation that the separation of church and state was to be that government would not establish a national religion or dictate to men how to worship God.Pauline Marois has a different definition of the seperation of church and state,a far different one.Government was never meant to be our master as in a ruthless monarchy or dictatorship. Instead, it was to be our servant.Now the “Religious Right”,the religious right of the people, is just a straw-man to hide a REAL and very active movement – the very much anti-religious form of of the present minority government,of Quebec,that of Pauline Marois,”the Athiest Left!”

“Separation of Church and State” is just a myth.  But it’s a myth that if allowed to continue will continue to
daily chip away our religious freedoms.  We just cannot keep quiet about it any longer.  Christians must be
taught on this subject now – before it becomes illegal to do even that!  All evil needs to flourish is for
good men – to do (and say) nothing!    

When Adolph Hitler took power in Germany, he recognized immediately that the major threat to his tyrannical
designs would come from the church(s),[the religions present in Germany]. If he could neutralize the voice of
the church, he correctly reasoned, there would be no one else to stand in his way,there would be no opposition
to his thoughts,statements, and policies,he reasoned that he must weaken the underpinings of the churchs(the
religions), the religious beliefs of the people of Germany.

Consequently, he immediately cranked up the Nazi propaganda machine to develop slogans designed to silence the
voice of the church, slogans which were then relentlessly hammered into the minds of gullible Germans of all
religions, and their pastors, who meekly complied.

Hitler crafted two slogans in particular,and here they are, straight from the mind of Adolph Hitler:

“Politics do not belong in the Church.”

“The Church must be separate from the State.”

If they sound eerily familiar, it will only be because you instinctively recognize in these words the voice of
tyranny and repression.And so today’s church is still paying the price for this small-minded politician’s
petty and vengeful ability to use the power of the federal government to punish his adversaries.

“Do you know, where does this phrase ‘separation of church and state’ come from?”American
Tea Partier Glen Urquhart asked at a campaign event last April. “It was not in Jefferson’s letter to the
Danbury Baptists. … The exact phrase ‘separation of Church and State’ came out of Adolph Hitler’s mouth,
that’s where it comes from. So the next time your liberal friends talk about the separation of Church and
State ask them why they’re Nazis.”

Why is a cross, a Maguen David, or a head scarf a problem in society?Besides jewellery never annoyed anyone
before. It doesn’t force their beliefs on anyone, therefore no atheists or other believers from different
faiths should force their non beliefs or different beliefs on anyone else. The European Court of Human Rights
has found in favour of BA employee Nadia Eweida being able to wear and display a Christian symbol at work, is
it not about time that Quebec accept that any person has the right to wear and display any religious symbol
wherever they like?Clearly it infringes on civil liberties in a part of Canada that has already seen years of
tension over accommodation for religious minorities, particularly those from immigrant communities.”They’re
trying to remove religious freedoms. They’re trying to impose rules on religious values,” said Harvey Levine,
president of the Quebec branch of the Jewish organization B’nai Brith.Quebec would become the only
jurisdiction in North America to impose a sweeping ban on religious clothing for public employees including at
schools, hospitals and courthouses, under a “Charter of Values”.It once was taken for granted that religious
expression went hand-in-hand with the preservation of our society’s values and culture. Standing up for
religions rights in Canada,and Quebec, these days  means upholding the rights of Muslims, Jews and Sikhs to
wear specialized religious garb at work, in court, or in a voting booth.In Quebec the Commission des droits de
la personne and des droits de la jeunesse sent out a reminder that individual rights, including the right to
freedom of religion, is protected under the Quebec Charter of Rights,meaning such that Marois proposed Charter
is in direct violation of an enshrined right of the people of Quebec.The right to freedom of religion is
guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, adopted in 1982, as well as by the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — ratified by Canada in 1976 in consultation with the provinces.

Article 18 of the covenant reads: “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion. This right shall include freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or
private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”
Quebec’s governing Parti Quebecois (PQ) is trailing in the polls and, with only a minority of seats in the
legislature, needs support from other parties to pass bills, casting doubt on whether the charter will survive
in its current form.

Jason Kenney, a federal government minister, said he was “very concerned” by the proposed legislation and said
the federal government will challenge any law in courts if they deem it unconstitutional.The federal Canadian
government announced that it will seek the advice of the Department of Justice and then head to court if the
proposal is deemed to violate fundamental rights. Lawyers say the law may infringe constitutional rights on
freedom of religion and expression.Canada’s Supreme Court gave an indication of its view of religious symbols
in a 2006 decision that allowed orthodox Sikh students to carry kirpans, traditional daggers, to school.The
early reaction suggests the plan will not pass in the current legislature, in its present form, which leaves
two likely outcomes: it will either be watered down for adoption now, or be kept intact for later use as an
election issue when the Parti Quebecois seeks a majority government.Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney
said Justice Department lawyers will be consulted and, if the plan is found to violate fundamental freedoms,
“we will defend those rights vigorously.” Montreal mayoral candidates Denis Coderre and Marcel Cote were also
unsparing in their criticism.

The NDP and Liberals also denounced the idea. Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau did so during a visit to Montreal,
where he was opening his party’s byelection office in one of Quebec’s most multiethnic ridings.Perhaps the
most important reaction came from the Quebec legislature’s third party, which appears to hold the swing vote
on the issue.

The Coalition Avenir Quebec called the PQ plan “far too radical” and demanded that it be scaled back to apply
only to those public servants, like police and judges, in authority positions.To illustrate one of the party’s main criticisms of the plan, the CAQ critic at a news conference held up a tiny crucifix necklace next to a larger one.Who would go about measuring these crosses, she asked, before warning of an impending bureaucratic boondogle where the $1.9 million ad campaign is just the beginning.
“Will this require a religious police?” said the Coalition’s Nathalie Roy.
“This will be hell to apply.”

Fortunately the Parti Quebecquois government of Pauline Marois is in a minority, the proposed legislation can
be voted on and rejected entirely from outside of her own party and of her dictates to her party.It also,for
Pauline Marois, opens a door whereby an election can be forced, and a new legitimate government installed and
a government of sanity once again restored to the province of Quebec.

Secret Squirrel Berates Canada On The Removal Of The Penny

Here’s Secret Squirrel’s two cents worth of opinion,taking note that Squirrel has never nickled and dimed you with his opinions,no indeed.And what is Squirrel’s two cents worth concerned with? Squirrel is concerned with the Canadian government’s remoival of the cent,the penny,,their pence as it were.It just makes no cents to do so as Squirrel sees it,just makes trouble for the Canadian population on the whole, the Canadian government treating them like so many holes,on the whole.Squirrel has a penny worth of thoughts on this subject and her shares them with you.

Firstly let’s look at the history of the early pennies, as they were created for proper use,and right use, so very many centuries ago, by those far wiser than Canadian politicians…….
 

First pennies

Through the end of the 7th century, no Anglo-Saxon coins had been minted in any metal besides gold.

In Northumbria, pennies made of silver were being minted in the name of Bishop Eadbert (consecrated between 772 and 782, died between 787 and 789), some in
the name of his brother Archbishop Egbert (the shilling is one of the oldest of English coins, preceding the penny).

Pepin the Short, in about 735, minted the novus denarius. The novus denarius was based on the denarius and the penny was based on the novus denarius. He declared that 240 pennies or pfennigs should be minted from one Carolingian pound, approximately 326 grams (11.5 oz), of silver, so a single coin contained about 1.36 grams (0.048 oz) of silver. (As of December 2011, this would cost about £0.98).

Circa 790 Charlemagne instituted a major monetary reform, introducing a new silver penny with a smaller diameter but greater mass. Surviving examples of this penny have an average mass of 1.70 gram (although some experts estimate the ideal theoretical mass at 1.76 gram). The purity is variously given as 0.95 or 0.96.

The penny was introduced into England by King Offa, the king of Mercia (from 757 until his death in July 796), using as a model a coin first struck by Pepin the Short. King Offa minted a penny made of silver which weighed 221/2 grains or 240 pennies weighing one Saxon pound (or Tower pound—equal to 5,400 grains—as it was afterwards called), hence the term pennyweight.(Besides introducing the penny in to England, Offa was wise enought to wall dyke in the Welsh surrounding Wales with a huge earthworks dyke to be seen to the present day,to keep the Welsh in as it were, and so out of England as it was,he can’t possibly have been ignorant there for by logical reasoning.)

    The coinage of Offa’s lifetime falls essentially into two phases, one of the light pennies of medium flan comparable to those of the reign of Pepin and the first decades of that of Charlemagne in France, and another of heavier pennies struck on larger flans that date from Offa’s last years and correspond in size to Charlemagne’s novus denarius introduced in 793/4. But the sceat fabric survived in East Anglia under Beonna and until the mid 9th century in Northumbria, while the new-style coinages were not merely those of Offa, but were stuck also by king of East Anglia, Kent, and Wessex, by two archbishops of Canterbury, and even in the name of Offa’s queen, Cynethryth.Henry III in 1257 minted a gold penny which had the value of twenty silver pence. The weight and value of the silver penny steadily declined from 1300 onwards.

And so the penny was, in wisdom, born, so very early on.And so what of the day, the present day………..what have we to say, but………

A penny for your thoughts, a popular saying, a popular request, the politicians, the Canadian politicians, thought it far too cheap for their thoughts, swelled head that they have, so they thought they rewrite it to A Nickel for your thoughts,well their thoughts and actions aren’t worth a cent really, t’is true, subconciously they knew it, but their ego’s wouldn’t let them drop it to half a cent,and they certainly think your thoughts aren’t worth a cent.Scots now ridicule Canadians openly saying, “Eye y’a ‘av na got a penny fur ma tots.”,and the Irish say “Ah begoran ya ‘ave no got a penny fer ma thoughts.” as well.Sadly tghis Canadian move has sorely affected Scottish and Irish thoughts but of course Canadian politicians don’t care a rats arse for the thoughts of Scots nor the Irish.
 

Further their egos drove’em on, knowing there was the expression,bad penny, knowing that politicians were referred to as bad pennies,so the penny just had to go.Well they can still be called and referred to as bad nickels if things come to that,as they shall.
 

Another expression they’ve done in is A penny saved is a penny earned.Well now Canadians can’t be said to earn a penny,it’s destroyed the nation what the politicians have donenot that they knew, or know, or could possibly know that that”s exactly what they’ve done,that’s what they were dooing, nay,not themwhy they’ve gone and turned the Canadians in to a bunch of penniless sad sacks doomed to lives of penury without a penny.Top it all off now the Canadian government won’t give two cents to their complaints.
Even kids have gotten nickled and dimed by the Canadian government as this means the end of their fav penny whistle candy, and horrors, no more penny bubble gum balls, no doubt the politicians realizing this are moving in on the gum ball machine racket.I never put it past them.
 

And so too are gone penny ante busineses,for the politicians have now decided to undoubtablye come out of the closet and go hard core with their arranged businesses,organized crime it all is.
 

Gone now too are the days of the Penny Arcade, sad pasing for the Canadians, victims of the politicians.Gone too are the days that foreign nations got a red cent from Canada, now not even yet that for them. The Canadian government just has no cents and centsibility.Why just look at the wisdom of the British, the Euro and the pound et all, and through it all the Brits kept their pence,it can’t be said that the Brit PM hasn’t got his pence, but it can be said that the Canadian Prime Minister hasn’t got any cents.Let’s just look at how things have changed now that Canada has eliminated the penny, at least in Canada…….

Well, first of all, I’m worth every penny.
Howard Stern

A penny is a lot of money, if you have not got a penny.”yiddish quote

a penny saved is a penny earned-ben franklin

“Penny wise is often pound foolish.”
penny wishing well, now more expensive, lest wishes to the buck.

  “I told the Inland Revenue I didn’t owe them a penny because I lived near the seaside.”

 Ken Dodd“Sex in a woman’s world has the same currency a penny has in a man’s. Every penny saved is a penny earned in one world and in the next every sexualadventure is a literary experience.”

 Harry Golden       
 
    I Like this quote I dislike this quote“I won’t play for a penny less than fifteen hundred dollars”

 Honus Wagner    
                   
 A penny saved is a penny earned.
— Benjamin Franklin.

Find a penny, pick it up, and all the day you’ll have good luck.
Find a penny, leave it lay, and you’ll have bad luck all the day.
— Proverb

Look after the pennies, and the pounds will take care of themselves.
— English proverb

In for a penny, in for a pound.
— English proverb

Every time it rains
it rains pennies from heaven.
— “Pennies From Heaven,” lyrics by Johnny Burke

Pennies do not come from heaven. They have to be earned here on earth.
— Margaret Thatcher

Just ponder how it has affected all of these quotes………well it has paid book to Howard Stern’s value.but let’s not go there, pluses don’t count in this desertation on the removal of the penny in Canadian circulation……

Now what value and use and importance has the penny……

To “spend a penny” in British idiom means to urinate. The etymology of the phrase is literal; some public toilets used to be coin-operated, with a pre-decimal penny being the charge levied. The first recorded charge of a penny for use of a toilet was at the The Great Exhibition of 1851.But then the Frenchman Depardieu,(also know as the Ridiculous Flying Fatman) hans’t any need of a penny as he pees anyhere without paying,true, and noted.

Let’s look at the penny versus the nickel,and also the effects of the removal of the penny,leaving the nickel………
 

  Consumers and the Economy — Penny elimination would be bad for consumers and the economy, and the alternative to the penny – rounding to the nickel – will negatively impact working families. Research by Penn State University Economist Ray Lombra shows that were the penny to be eliminated, consumers would be hit with a multi-billion dollar rounding tax.  In addition, the penny is a hedge to inflation.
 

    Popular support — An overwhelming number of Americans want to keep the penny. A poll conducted March 22-25, 2012 by Opinion Research Corporation International found over two-thirds (67%) of those surveyed favor keeping the penny in circulation. These results confirm the strong and unwavering public support for the penny.  The poll results showed that over two-thirds of adults (67%) favor keeping the penny in circulation; 77% are concerned that if the government implements a rounding system for cash purchases, businesses might raise prices; 66% of Americans oppose eliminating the penny and establishing a price rounding system.
 

    Demand for Nickels — According to the U.S. Mint, rounding to the nickel would also lead to a demand for increased production of nickels, costing around 11 cents to produce. Applied to FY 2011 cost and shipment data, the Mint would have incurred an additional net loss of $10.3 million without the penny in 2011.
  

  Charities — The penny aids charities in raising hundreds of millions of dollars each year for important causes and clearly demonstrates the coin’s value.

Notable charities like Ronald McDonald House Charities , the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, School and Youth Programs , Pennies for Patients, and countless

local groups rely significantly on small penny contributions. On Lincoln’s birthday in 2009, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society celebrated the 15 billionth ($150 million) penny collected by school students across the country for their “Pennies for Patients” program.
    Charge of lost worker productivity — Retail workers are not paid according to their productivity. It is difficult to link time wasted with pennies to a dollar equivalent productivity loss.
Prices will increase – If we eliminate the penny, everything will have to be rounded to the nickel. Merchants will probably round everything up in their favor, costing us more for everything we buy.

The poor pay the most – A corollary to the above argument says that the poor will be affected the most, because they are most likely to make more frequent, smaller purchases, thus suffering the rounding up more often.

Charities need pennies – There are thousands of small charities that depend on penny drives to bring in donations. People think nothing of pouring out their old penny jars to support these drives, but they won’t part with nickels so easily.

Nickels cost even more to make – If we eliminate the penny, we will need more nickels in circulation. Nickels cost 7.7 cents to make, (2.7 cents over face value, as opposed to 0.26 cents over face value to make a penny,) so making each nickel costs 1.44 cents more than making each penny. Since the penny costs 0.26 more than face value to make, the Mint can make 5 pennies and still lose less money than making 1 nickel. And, of course, if we eliminate the penny, we’ll need a lot more nickels, which will offset the savings of stopping penny manufacture.

And so, remember, the luck of the penny, the Canadian government having left Canadians, as it were,are and is.luckless……….
 
Finding a penny is sometimes considered lucky and gives rise to the saying, “Find a penny, pick it up, and all the day you’ll have good luck.” This may be a corruption of “See a pin and pick it up, all the day you’ll have good luck” and similar verses, as quoted in The Frank C. Brown collection of North Carolina folklore and other places.

It is also believed that one may get rid of bad luck by dropping a penny on the ground. The bad luck will go with the coin and be acquired by the next person to pick it up.
 

Every thoughtful penny believer must sometime pause to ponder the great questions with which we are presented by our penny faith: How came this lucky penny here in my path for me to find? Does it come to me (and I to it) by mere accident, by random chance? Or, could it be that my finding of this penny necessarily had to be, that it was determined by a complex web of inexorably linked events? And just what do I mean by luck, anyway?
Consider the difference in meaning when we say that to find a penny is lucky. Clearly it is not because we are now one cent richer. Rather, it is because the found penny exerts an influence on subsequent events.Lacking the penny, we have no luck,we are.lucked out,out of luck.in short in great trouble,being so deserted then by lady luck who then throws herself upon those who still have pennies.Pennies are blessed because they are of no practical value in a money-grubbing, namebrand-worshiping society. Unbelievers put them in little bowls by cash registers to expedite the purchasing of stuff. By contrast, nickels, dimes, and quarters are money; no one yet gives them awayFrom the person who lost the penny. Luck can be neither created nor destroyed, but is distributed—very unevenly—throughout the living cosmos. Luck continually flows from one living entity to another and back again. When you are dead, you are out of luck,you have no pennies.in short the government wishes us dead.Penny is made from copper, which is one of the oldest metals used by humans. It has played an important role in mythology. Its primary use has been as a specified metal in rituals, but it has also represented the Greek God Venus and to the Greeks, it could protect against evil and attract love. Find a lucky penny means you are being protected against any evil energy, and you can use it as a lucky charm.Many people believe it’s best to find pennies heads up and that finding and picking up tails up penny is unlucky. This is based on Manichaeism, a system of religious doctrines based on a supposed primordial conflict between light and darkness or goodness and evil. Centuries ago people believed in polar opposites of good and evil, body and soul, dark and light. With coins, specifically the lucky penny, heads were seen as good while tails was seen as evil.A penny may be tossed overboard when one sets out to sea, in hopes of appeasing the marine gods and thus ensuring a safe passage. Similarly a penny (or other coin) may be tossed into a well or pool in the belief that so doing will cause one’s wish to be grantedIt may seen a low tech accessory for a $2.5bn spacecraft, but Nasa has revealed the key to ensuring the Curiosity rover, which landed on the red planet this morning, can see clearly.

It is Curiosity’s own lucky penny.

Rather than rely on hi-tech cameras and sensors, the space agency has revealed it secretly hid a lucky penny on its latest craft headed for the red planet.So was it and is it wise for the Canadian Government to have robbed,removed, stolen, the penny from the average Canadian Citizen? No, says I,Secret Squirrel, for any and all of the above reasoning.

Secret Squirrel,
MRL,MP,(Dunny On The Wold),
Minister For Re-Deranged Re-Engineering)

Secret Squirrel On The Canadian Internet Billing Crisis

Secret Squirrel has had his attention aroused by a second attempt,in Canada, by the CRTC( Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission) at initiating a monopolistically financially dictated cap on internet use, i.e. to have a dictated global provider plan for UBB,Usage Based Billing of the free Canadian Internet,to the behest of the heavily monopolistic consortium of Bell/Rogers to the detriment of the Canadian people, the Canadian internet user, we, the people. Why does anyone need to make laws about the internet at all. Everything has been working fine up to this point, and the internet and all it’s technologies that it’s producing have been growing at a fantastic rate.Why do people need to work so hard to try and not only control the internet but to make a profit from it? This is getting to the point it’s absolutely retarded!But so too is the system.Presently Bell/Rogers Canada’s rather large media monopoly,controlling heavily cable and cable services(including internet access through cable,through Rogers)and Bell controlling the phone lines,used for
interne(by Bell and anyone else) and including internet access via satellite services)wish to force on consumers what is called an internet cap, or UBB, short for Usage Based Billing, on all consumers basically, by attempting to go through the CRTC to achieve this, broad spectrum.You see, they could easily do it themselves,and so heavily line their pockets,quite obviously, and greatly increase their already humungous and guaranteed monopolistic profits,but if only they do it themselves, then their internet customers,who are not yet fed up with them already, and their conduct,would flee to other providers you see, the basic independents, and others who are in whatever fashion allowed by government to run internet services in direct competition with and against them,such as AOL.Competition allows for a good deal for the consumer, a choice,but The Bell/Rogers idea is to in a sense remove this and force ALL internet providers to go to usage billing through the dictates of the CRTC,whose members are appointed,SHOULD the government follow the ruling of the CRTC.So, who then really
is the government watch dog,the CRTC really working for,Bell/Rogers, or Canadians?

This is not the first attempt at this,the Canadian government(Conservative at that time, and once again incumbent THIS time) reversed a controversial ruling that was seen as hurting Internet video and competition,which of course it is, especially forcing all internet providers to the same ends,as in applying usage billing.The policy, which would have then taken effect March 31,2011, centered on the amount of data that consumers can view or download and for what expense. Not surprisingly, it’s the bigger ISPs that supported the new fees supported by the policy. Many have already been charging users in accordance with how much data they access – and now, the new law would have smaller ISPs do the same. That’s because smaller ISPs lease bandwidth from larger telecommunications firms such as Bell Canada, Rogers Communications, and Shaw Communications. Despite their small size, the lesser-known ISPs (Internet service providers) have typically been providing both greater bandwidth and lower fees than have the bigger ISPs such as Bell and TELUS. Following a Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission decision that would not only allow but in some cases require usage-based billing for independent Internet providers, the Conservative Party and Prime Minister Harper and Industry Minister Tony Clement had already settled on overturning the CRTC’s
new rule. The regulator would have a chance to do so voluntarily but would be forced to make the change if it disagreed.While the Conservatives have often been pro-business, the party is concerned enough about the anti-competitive nature of the ruling to take action. “A decision like this is clearly not in the best interest of consumers,” the anonymous official said.Clement in a Twitter conversation with a CBC reporter suggested it was virtually certain the CRTC measure would have to go back to the “drawing board.”,and so too it was and so too it did happen.

Public reaction also likely played a factor. A petition with over 200,000 signatures, along with tens of thousands of e-mails to Clement and increasingly high-profile media coverage, may have signaled broad public opposition. A federal election is considered a possibility this year and could have seen usage-based billing as a major platform issue. Both the opposing Liberals and New Democratic Party were the first to formally object to the CRTC’s ruling.Imagine, all parties agreed that USB,Useage Based Billing was NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.The Public, yes, I,you,me,we all Canadians,NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST,that said decision was monopolistic, anti-competion,not in the best interest of consumers,of we,the people.
Critics rightly argued that Bell/Rogers and other major ISPs have an anti-competitive incentive for usage-based billing rules. The approach prevents an independent provider from becoming a genuine competitor, even if it can fully afford to offer better service than its major rival. Incumbents have their own TV services and, after Bell’s new CTV acquisition, now have their own TV channels as well. The conflict of interest can encourage them to impose artificially low bandwidth caps on themselves, and on independents,all done in efforts to make themselves appear more attractive,to the disadvantage of the independents and other competitive internet service providers.And so the decision was rejected, and sent right back to the CRTC where is was supposed to quietly die. But,strangely,the Jaberwocky still stalks the public,BELL/ROGERS have revived the dead monstrosity in CRTC committee and once again the CRTC is holidng hearins.however.what has changed.not the arguments solidly presented against, not the government resolve,consider ALL THREE PARTIES ALREADY OPPOSED UBB,Useage Based Billing.

What really then is the point of these CRTC hearings,and yet another decision.The THREE PARTIES were firmly resolved,the government itself of the incumbent Conservatives had made a decsion, taken a stand,and so too did the other parties, the opposition, the Liberals, and the New Democrat Party……..so why must the Jaberwocky of USB be slain again……….quite simply regardless of the decision of the CRTC what with their second attempt, they simply HAVE TO BE TOLD MUST BE TOLD, UBB is dead.Quite simply Bell/Rogers are attempting the journey toward an Internet oligopoly or monopoly,in sum toto.
To understand the real impact, though, it is important to view UBB in context with other issues, which together:

jeopardize the sovereignty of our nation,
have a chilling effect on freedom of expression, and
threaten the privacy and democratic freedoms traditionally enjoyed in Canada.

“There is a huge conflict of interest here being seemingly ignored by the CRTC. Bell-Rogers are limiting their competitors’ ability to compete with their cable divisions, by using their Internet divisions to discourage increased Internet usage. Why is this not discussed more often? Maybe one company should no longer be allowed to own both?”

As we’ve been covering, Canadian regulatory agency the CRTC recently had their (or should we say Bell’s) effort to impose usage-based billing (UBB) on Canadian wholesalers and consumers shot down by Canadian leaders for being anti-competitive, punitive, and generally just ridiculous. The review was demanded after immense public backlash to the concept of usage-based pricing, though the CRTC’s inquiry is expected to be rather hollow.
The Harper/Reform/”Conservative” Party ,though it did state it would not allow implimentation of UBB,as too did the will of the other parties,Liberal and NDP,did nothing except send the decision back to the CRTC with instructions to review the decision,as in change their minds.But the time is now,to reaffirm that decision NOT to impliment or allow UBB,it is the time for the Conservatives, to, and for the Liberals and NDP Party to,force the reaffirmation of the original decision not to allow such UBB implimentation,in all direct honesty and intergrity,it is the time for the government also to keep it’s WORD, it’s solem vow,to the Canadian people.Opposition to the CRTC was massive.

The NDP’s digital-issues critic said any decision by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission to allow usage-based billing threatens access to the Internet.According to Timmins-James Bay MP Charlie Angus, usage-based billing is unfair to consumers and could be used by large Internet service providers to limit competition from third-party ISPs and online media sources.“We’ve seen this all before with cell phones,” Angus said in a press release today (January 20). “Allowing the Internet Service Providers to ding you every time you download is a rip-off. Canada is already falling behind other countries in terms of choice, accessibility and pricing for the Internet.”Angus called for “clear rules that put consumers first”.

The NDP’s release was applauded by OpenMedia.ca, a nonprofit organization that’s been campaigning against usage-based billing, also known as Internet metering.OpenMedia.ca has collected more than 34,000 signatures on an online petition against usage-based billing for Internet service.

In December, Vancouver city council voted to take a stand against usage-based Internet billing and call on the CRTC to reverse its May decision opening the door to the practice.What makes these UBB approaches noteworthy when viewed from a Canadian perspective is that in other countries, there is the free market system,free enterprise,and there is sufficient competition such that consumers in other countries can typically choose between unlimited or UBB capped plans,depending on the provider, and any provider must make itself attractive to consumers, or else adopt a different market plan apporoach to attract consumers, in short, they can choose, they are not dictated to.Should a provider imagine a UBB cap plan is atractive to a consumer at say $35 a month, versus a unlimited plan at $35 a month,well so be it.The choice is there, for the people,the consumer, and for the provider as well.That is the free market system, the proper method of free enterprise.

It is also pointed out the basic Bell/Rogers monopoly,the very root of this present evil,with access of internet by use of their phone line,they also have internet over their cable line,which is fair, in that their cable is a monopoly,do you suppose,or else it is somewhat skewd,and, then is it not.BUT there is internet by satellite, that bypasses both their phone monopoly, AND their cable monopoly.would crtc see to it that a satellite provider was blocked BY GOVERNMENT from either beaming said service to Canada, AND/OR not following USB but rather a free usage internet through THEIR system…………….and so………not….It is sadly pointed out that Satellite providers must have permission to beam their signals in to Canada, and the CRTC would subject THEM ALSO to being forced to use UBB also,AND that any such UBB would also be subject to the definition of the CRTC/BELL/ROGERS in what a “deal” they could submit to the Canadian consumer, the Canadian Public.so this all most assuredly,as it did before,and so too as it does now,points to a direct cash grab made available to the massive monopoly, the Bell/Rogers……….Let freedom ring!Let there be free enterprise, let there be a
competitive system,let there be laissez faire,let there be a democratic economic system, Or not.

Here’s my suggestion. Everyone everywhere needs to back off and let the internet progress as it needs to. Right now all these new laws and regulations are only meant to one thing,Put money into some monopolistic providers( BELL/ROGERS) pockets, and really that has no place in the supposedly free market,free enterprise,democratic Canadian financial and economic systems.LET FREEDOM RING!!In Poland,the internet is…….free.

Secret Squirrel On Canada Boycotting United Nations Conferences.

Secret Squirrel has decided to comment on Canada, a nation employing a strange political technique of the boycott,boycotting as in not attending, not attending social global interaction sporting events, and yet even United Nations conferences because the policies,politics, ideas,thoughts of other nations don’t agree with their own. Canada employs the childish and ignorant technique of the boycott.Let us ponder Canada in its ridiculous boycotts,some of which are exampled here.

In 1980 Canada boycotted Moscow Olympics,(along with America) allowing other nations to garner the few medals Canada usually wins,and the large numbers America usually wins(not really wise for the Americans as there are a great many nations it doesn’t like, and a greater number of nations which don’t like it), shooting themselves in the foot there.The Canadians even yet boycotted an anti-racism conference in Durban,South Africa(along with America)…….curious,anti racism,a conference to discuss anti-racism, and Canada chooses not to attend.

They,the Canadians,have also boycotted speeches by other world leaders,in and at The United Nations, unwilling to listen to them and their ideas, thoughts, perspectives and theories,in the free and open forum that is the gathered United Nations.Tch tch tch…..what if children boycotted schools, you know what that would lead to,what it has in Canada’s government, idiocy.Canada’s boycott of the Olympic Games 1980 was to protest the Russian invasion of Afghanistan.Perhaps Canada will now boycott(along with America), the Russia’s 2014 Olympic Games at Sochi,will Canada boycott protesting it’s(their) own invasion of Afghanistan? I think not.

So now Canada boycotts a UN arms meeting,because it disagrees that North Korea, whose turn it is to chair it,will chair it.Well, these disarmament conferences are mutual meetings geared to disarmament,trying to achieve it. Seems Canada is inclined to not to listen,heed the council of, nor respect the other nations of the world.In terms of peace and neutrality,Canada is not any of that,it has invaded militarily Afghanistan,presently also Libya,in short, it is on a belligerent course of action militarily,it is an aggressor nation,though it does nothing by itself,it does exhibit militarily pack behaviour.Canada cannot possibly say it has have every right, indeed the duty, to boycott a disarmament conference if the country chairing the meeting is North Korea,or any other for that matter.   How is it possible to trust a country which claims it wants disarmament but won’t discuss the issue?

Does Canada belong there in either case? No not really,   they still haven’t figured out how to successfully create an atom bomb for example,but if they actually ever do then they will pose a worse threat than the DPRK ever will, on the basis of their constant and continuing invasions of nations foreign to themsleves,whether or not they consider themselves liberators as that is the usual horn blown by all who belligerently invade.Should Canada ever chair such a meeting it would be “absurd” that one of the world’s worst offenders on foreign invasions should do so.The North Koreans invaded South Korea once,Canada has invaded foreign lands twice and counting. Canada claims that “North Korea’s chairmanship undermines the integrity of disarmament framework and of the United Nations, and Canada will simply not support that,” Canada will no longer “go along to get along” and will instead take principled stands on foreign policy, Canada will also press for reforms of the rotating presidency structure so countries like North Korea and Iran don’t have a chance at the seven-week helm,would it also push,perhaps, that Canada shouldn’t as well.Imagine Canada what with it’s invasions of the Arab lands(for the oil supply of course),pushing some form a agenda at peace conferences!Could Canada be believed?Not really,no indeed.Canada is not a neutral,not a peace keeper, but really a belligerentnation(albeit not ever by itself).Canada is a member of NATO, a supposed defense alliance, but with recent invasions and activities in Arab lands, we see that this is really not so, NATO is, and has become, a repressive, suppressive attack alliance, garnered not to defense, but rather attacking lands, gaining political control of them, and then inexpensively sucking out the minerals and resources for their selective uses and applications,well under the guise of a fee charged for “liberating” the victim nation,Canada is part of such nations,a member of a group of such nations,and Canada is such a nation, yet they, the Canadians, condemn the North Koreans,the humungous kettle has called the tiny pot………..black.

Canada’s presence actually  undermines the integrity of any particular discussion on nuclear disarmament, and on any other military type of discussion due to its belligerent invasions of,presently, Arab lands.It is not for Canada to decide who
should host or who should not host any discussion forum in the United Nations in the first and any place, indeed all nations should in all equity,equality, and global fraternity be chairs at specific terms, whilst Canada should learn that chairs will
not be nations it specifically approves of and are within it’s political and economic policy dictates.Canada has presently a pattern of driving a poorly defined agenda within international bodies such as the UN,when it should have a policy of toleration, respect and equality for all.You have to ask yourself what they’re trying to achieve here.After losing a bid for a UN security council seat Canada risks being further sidelined and more irrelevant by pursuing boycotts instead of showing
leadership on issues of any particular variety.Canada doesn’t seem to be definitive on issues that are going to get results and move things along – it seem rather to be blocking things that they don’t like or things they don’t appear to be in line
with,they’re not providing what the alternatives are.The Canadian attitude seem to be, with the swelled head that the present government of Canada demonstrates,is a dictatorial attitude of it controlling the game, and not liking the direction the game takes, the sad snotty little nation takes it’s ball and goes home.And,need we add,Canada ranks(really now), fourteenth (14th), in international arms sales…….

1. USA
2. Russia
3. Germany
4. France
5. United Kingdom
6. Netherlands
7. China
8. Spain
9. Italy
10. Sweden
11. Israel
12. Ukraine
13. Switzerland
14. Canada
15. South Africa
16. South Korea
17. Poland
18. Belgium
19. Norway
20. Brazil

Oh dear,North Korea didn’t make the top 20.My,my…so should Canada be allowed to chair arms conferences?Why no, it would have to boycott itself.One simply must look at Canada now, the Canadian government, and its political position, as being
abusive,schizophrenic, and…racist, quite obviously.

BUT the game’s afoot, and there is more than one ball in play in the game of international politics, and so, the game continues, without the sore looser.Canada seems stuck on North Korea having nuclear abilities, but rather curiously Canada
seems happy with the Pakistanis having it, the Israelis having it. Canada can never now have the ability to have a positive influence on these negotiations,it has a revealed agenda,nuclear bombs for nations it likes, not for those it doesn’t like.By
withdrawing from the conference, Canada is abdicating its responsibility to act and to be heard on important issues such as nuclear non-proliferation and giving more radical countries like Pakistan,Israel,North Korea and Iran an even greater
influence on the outcome of the negotiations.Canada does not regard North Korea as a credible chair, but then the pot has called the kettle black, and Canada is by it’s actions,also not a credible chair, just as it was not a credible chair for the
Security Council.Canada even yet argues that the UN has accused North Korea of selling weapons to Iran, Syria and Burma,other nations,not liking those nations, but does not complain about nations such as Israel,France,Britain,America and whatever and whoever also selling weapons round and about the world,to whomever they do, nor itself really, ranking,again, fourteenth in world arm sales.And need one add, it,The Canada, likes the nations it sells arms to.

It ,the UN,also said the country,North Korea,in it’s arms sales, mislabeled shipping container contents, falsified information about the destinations of goods and used “multiple layers of intermediaries, shell companies, and financial institutions,which just goes to show you they have learned much from nations such as Britain,France,the United States,Israel.It is a global domination issue,a control issue, a subjugation issue,and Canada is itself a part of that very process,a very belligerent part of that process.Canada will resume its role on the 65-member body on 19 August, when North Korea’s turn as president ends.And so the tardy child will have returned from truancy,to find that it has missed the the discussions, the educational enlightenment,the exchange of ideas and thoughts between nations, which took place while it was gone, and so,when the time comes for it to face its test, it will fail out of its own ignorance and stupidity,the ignorance and the stupidity of its own government which holds only its views and opinions in high regard and disclaims the views and opinions of other nations of the world in the global fraternal order of the United Nations, nation members in equality, equity, fraternity.Canada is a disgrace, it disgraces the United Nations, and it disgraces itself,by it’s mere presence there.

Secret Squirrel Comments On NHL Disciplinary Inequities

Secret Squirrel has turned his attention to events that have taken place in the Canadian sport of Ice Hockey,in the NHL,and Squirrel has happened to see certain events transpire,between players,of a rather dubious nature, invovling penalties of a rather strange nature for interference coupled with a match penalty(player ejected from the game for same),on two occasions,both resulting in serious injury to one of the other, and yet has seen a different outcome, not in there refereeing, but in the after punishments meated out by the NHL itself.This perplexes Squirrel,and, needless to say, displeases Squirrel.Now,let us consider that violence,of various sorts, has been a part of ice hockey since at least the early 1900s.More modern examples of violence include brawls, fan involvement, physical abuse of officials, and deliberately injuring opponents,even yet biting opponents(do they taste like chicken?). Violent actions, such as kicking, hitting from behind, and prohibited stickwork(they have hit each other over the head with their ice hockey sticks), are penalized with suspensions or fines,and in some cases local policing actions. Fighting, or fisticuffs, is also penalized but is considered by many hockey enthusiasts, particularly in North America, to be quite distinct from stick-swinging or other violent acts,but again, not to the local constabularies which have been noted to press aussault charges.The referees are there to meat out the punishments, and they do,and in some cases, the courts have too(particularly those in the Canadian City Of Toronto).

But afterwards,after the referees award their penalities for the said misconduct, for the more violent acts, the league,the NHL, must meet in the boardroom to discuss the incidents,investigate, and meat out more punishment as necessary, in all equity and fairness,consisting of fines,suspensions, and sometimes fines and suspensions. However, one sees flaws in league function with regards to punishments in certain incidents,one sees inequity,inequality in the decisions meated out.Hardly fairness,equality, justice for all, no indeed. Perhaps it is time for the lawyers to enter in to the fray,and take the NHL to court for certain incidents,to secure compensation for their then clients, and punishment for the most severe miscreants in the NHL,since the NHL seems to have a perplexing inequality with respect to said after the fact punishments it meats out.The
NHL has staretd to exhibit an inability to fairly judge events which occur on the frozen ice surface,within it’s boardroom and perhaps it is time to make the NHL legally accountable.

The league has acted grandly  in some cases, such as Dale Hunter given one of the NHL’s longest suspension records: 21 games for delivering a late hit to Pierre Turgeon from behind.Late in the deciding Game 6 of the 1993 Patrick Division Semifinals between the Capitals and New York Islanders, Turgeon stole the puck from Hunter and scored, putting the game out of reach. Hunter, who was trailing Turgeon on the play, checked Turgeon well after the goal as he started to celebrate. Turgeon sustained a separated shoulder from the hit, causing him to miss all but Game 7 against the Pittsburgh Penguins in the second round, as well as most of the series against the Montreal Canadiens in the conference finals. New NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, who had earlier promised to crack down on violence, suspended Hunter for the first 21 games of the 1993–94 season—at the time, the longest suspension in league history for an on-ice incident (in terms of games missed).However,Bettman’s still
present,but the league has fallen considerably off the wagon in terms of league punishments for violent incidents.

Let’s have a serious look at Boston Bruins defenceman,Zdeno Chara, and an atrocity committed on Montreal Canadiens player Max Pacioretty………….

Here we see Zdeno  Chara’s late hit on Max Pacioretty in Boston’s 4-1 loss on 08/03/2011.
Pacioretty suffered a severe concussion and a broken vertebra in his neck on the hit.Like many of you, I saw the video. Then I saw the other pictures, images clearly showing that Chara not only knew what he was doing and where he was on the ice, but also that he intentionally pushed Pacioretty on the turnbuckle, driving his head towards it with his left arm.Chara received a penalty for interference and a match penalty as well.

The NHL rendered the decision,the league’s decision, to not suspend Zdeno Chara for his hit on Max Pacioretty , not even yet a fine, reasoned that there was no malicious intent,but on seeing the video for yourself you have to question things grandly,also take a look at this image of the hit,

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/NHL-No-suspension-no-fine-for-Zdeno-Chara-on-P?urn=nhl-331961

and at

One has to question the league on their “no malicious intent” reasoning,the image is quite plain, the truth,the plain truth, speaks for itself, speaks of all things to do with the term malicious,pre meditated,planned, a conscious act and yet there is

the strange ruling of the league,and there is the picture,the image of the act, the intent,…

Now we see a hit on a Boston player, late, rendering him semi-consious, concussion,and we find the league,  et all, rendering a 4 game suspension on the Vancouver player,unhesitatingly.So we have a conflict, Montreal-Boston, Boston-Vancouver,and an outcome in one, yet not in the other.

There seemed to be no malicious intent on the hit Vancouver’s Aaron Rome levelled on rendered on the Boston player Nathan Horton,it was at center ice, no post to run the lad’s head in to, and quite clean as a matter of fact, just a touch late,the hit by the Boston Player Chara on Pacioretty was also a tuch late, but with the added flare of running Pacioretty’s head in to a post….”Two factors were considered in reaching this decision,” the NHL’s representative said in a news release  “The hit by Rome was clearly beyond what is acceptable in terms of how late it was delivered after Horton had released the puck and it caused a significant injury.” Well the hit on Pacioretty was late, rendered an interference penalty, and quite clearly he ran the lad’s head in to a post yet the NHL’s decision there was……….to do nothing at all, no suspension, no fine.

Curious.

Lets look at the Rome Horton video,for which Rome also got a interference major and a match penalty………..

http://guyism.com/sports/video-aaron-rome-knocks-out-nathan-horton.html

We see a late hit,and the lads head runs in to a solid, shoulder, not a post, but hey what’s the difference between a
shoulder and a post.The NHL seems to think so, but not many others do.The Boston player had a severe concussion, the Montreal player ,on his hit by a Boston player, had a severe concussion and fractured vertabrae……..more.Fascinating are the league’s differing decisions.No the league must be taken to task over its operations, operations which are not in the least satisfactory,nor can one say fair and equitable, but as to a punishment for such misconduct, yes, that’s grand,with respect to the Boston Vancouver incident(the Horton incident)  but when one looks at the lack of league action with respect to the Pichorretty incident(Montreal Boston), one must soundly and roundly condemn the league, and wonder if it is wise that it is to be left to it’s own devices in policing the league.The policies and politics of hockey in the NHL leave one seeing inequity, iniquity,inequality, not with respect to the refereeing but with respect to league diciplines hidden in the board
room.Secret Squirrel is displeased.