Tuesday, March 25, 2003 C. L. Hanes

The inherent volatility resulting from a formula of "Free Access To Information" PLUS "Free Speech" AND a socially conditioned common understanding that journalists and/or the "media" deliver factual information. Most people form their intellectual perspective from what they see on their televisions, hear on their radio, read in their newspapers, and/or find on the Internet.

I have long been suspect of "journalists" who I continually see selling the virtues of their work and necessity for society finding the truth through "their skilled delivery of the facts" (their words - not mine). The obvious pre-occupation with their own credibility could very well have been an issue with me but I really did not have the time or interest to address it. I’m not a "stand around the water cooler philosopher type" and actually interact very little with society other than working with my buyer-clients.

I do not belong to a political party and in spite of having very well defined political positions on a number of significant issues, I consciously avoid the pursuit of causing a commotion over them as I simply do not believe in waste, especially in the pursuit of what I see as the "unchangeable".

It appears to me that Canada has a unique form of democracy that I really do not understand. Certainly, our democracy more closely resembles the British style of democracy as opposed to American democracy. It’s funny, but much like religion, democracy is another one of those vague but very personal matters that is usually best left untouched.

I think that it is safe to say that Canadians have long held a somewhat hidden hostility toward Americans. I know that ever since my childhood I can recall hearing a distinguishable but subtle antagonistic social dynamic leveled toward Americans by Canadians.

Since the outbreak of the conflict in Iraq I have been shocked by the conduct of our Government and disappointed with our media. I have to confess, I’m a news "junkie", so much so that I rid myself of cable television to help me control my addiction. Last evening I received a solicitation from Rogers Cablevision and my "fix" will be here at 5:00 today.

During my time off of my "habit" I confess that I frequented local programming that is available on the airwaves (CTV, Global, City TV, and CBC if I want to play around with the antenna long enough). The Internet had always promised that the "Information Superhighway" would be paved with Broadband and the "New World Order" would have all of it’s media delivered on a PC.

Well, we know that that was all a "pipe dream" and even the best sites still today carry minimal true multimedia capability and that any that do, such as CNN who offer "streaming-video" clips for additional monthly fees of $9.95 (I tried it to cover the war but it is decidedly disappointing). I tried canceling my CNN "real-one" service subscription today but ran into a disappointing and unethical cancellation procedure with that good old "your call is very important to us . . ." repeat message while I am required to invest my time and resources to sitting on hold for a CNN operator to come on the line and confirm that no more charges will be encountered. I didn’t have to talk with anyone to agree to pay them $10 a month for their service but, if you want to cancel, it’s delay time. This is the type of conduct that leads to my "credibility" questions to follow.

I guess that the thing that is bothering me most around this war is "credibility", and/or the lack of it. I am ashamed of the Canadian Government and that it has purportedly spoken for me. I am upset that the Government Officials who have made such egregious public statements are still being paid by my tax dollars. I am disgusted with CBC (Government Broadcasting Network) for it’s expletive and socially offensive marketing of its programming.

The issue of credibility underlying this war is certainly first and foremost on the minds of the global community. I don’t know that there is a definitive answer out there that anyone could give on this issue. We see a lot of individuals lashing out, obviously "high" on some basis of confidence in themselves for having some unique inside perspective that has given them a more enlightened view.

For some bazaar reason, the masses seem to think, or is it just the celebrities themselves that think, that "movie star" or "rock star" celebrity lends merit and weight to personal perspectives. Hollywood directors and actors/actresses have no more better informed views than bus drivers and construction workers.

We all do, however live in a democracy and one can only hope that therein lies our salvation. The complexity of the issues of today evolve out of issues directly related to unique aspects of freedom (such as freedom of speech, rights to demonstrate, etc.) enjoyed within a democracy.

Credibility of the Governments

In this conflict we have on the one side, the United States of America under the stuartship of Mr. Bush. I am confident that ANY objective analysis or scrutiny of the issues leading up to this war would show that the American Administration did considerable "due diligence" utilizing the most advanced technology and proven methods known to man and from the accumulations of massive intelligence the Administration concluded that a military conflict was justified.

On the other side we have a dictatorship that has in the recent past invaded two of it’s neighbours (Iran & Kuwait) militarily and who killed over a million Kurds and used chemical warfare on its own people. Twelve years ago the entire world community joined together to stop it’s hostile invasion of Kuwait. The coalition imposed resolutions to disarm Iraq. After 12 years of stalling and deceit and deception by this regime the UN imposed resolution 1441 unanimously requiring Saddam Hussein to disarm. He would not come clean. It seems to be becoming lost that all of this would have simply gone away had Saddam Hussein met the unanimous vote of the UN regarding disarming and proving that he has no chemical and biological weapons.

Canada, as a country, has a serious issue of credibility to deal with, starting with a Prime Minister who reportedly has given away billions of taxpayer dollars to friends by funding frivolous (and/or false) advertising campaigns and various promotions, who waffles back and forth on significant national matters, who has allowed a fixation with his own "legacy" to get in the way of the country’s best interests, who has allowed his staff and cabinet to make outrageous and unacceptable comments regarding our major trading partner (and national security insurance) and who has failed to stand by our "brothers" in their time of need.

Credibility of the Troops

You have got to admire the young men and women of the American armed forces who are in harms way and yet, amidst the most horrific experience imaginable, carry integrity and honour with them. Embedding reporters right with the troops (unique to this conflict) ensure the world that America has nothing to hide in it’s efforts to bring stability to the world.

What seems to be becoming clear is that Saddam’s army holds a totally different standard of integrity and honour. We have already seen serious breeches of the Geneva Convention with respect to the treatment of prisoners and now, the use of civilians as human shields.

Having your soldiers wear civilian cloths as the Iraqis are doing and hiding amongst civilians is not Guerilla warfare . . . it’s criminal! Hiding behind innocent women and children while attacking an enemy is not war . . . it’s sinful!

It is becoming increasingly more obvious to me that the main difference in the two armed forces is that the Americans are honour bent, fighting for what is true and just. The Iraqi, specifically the Republican Guard, we are told, are highly paid professional soldiers who are given a great life for their commitment to Saddam. American troops include reservists who take time away from high paying jobs to serve their country many times taking huge drops in pay leaving their wives and families to fend for themselves while he/she are away fighting. This, I feel, speaks to integrity.

I am mostly perplexed by Saddam and his representatives obvious self esteem in being able to lie and misrepresent in the face of obvious and absolute truth. Their fixation on "brinkmanship" is obvious yet it appears to me that their level of intellect leaves a great deal to be admired. Let’s not forget that a few months back the UN unanimously agreed that Saddam was a threat and required that he fully disclose his arsenal of weapons of mass murder which he has simply refused to do.

It was reported this morning that President Bush personally contacted Prime Minister Putin of Russia "demanding an explanation" regarding reports that the Iraqis are using sophisticated scrambling equipment purchased from Russian companies. The issue of credibility again surfaces.

In an ideal world there is no war. In the real one there is. It is not for me to assume to have the knowledge or ability to know who is right and who is wrong in this. I believe in democracy yet I see democratic "rights" of individuals being applied to situations that affect them that are resulting in implications into the "collective rights" of the nation.

Surely if we believe in democracy we must believe in our democratically appointed officials. Canada at this point in history has proven itself non-democratic as our socialist system has allowed the perspective of our leader to speak louder * than the words of our people. I personally am quite distressed about this and comments made by other public officials.

I respect and believe in the United States of America. I have studied it’s politics closely for a long time. I was not convinced that George W. Bush was the man for the job while running for President as I closely studied the run for the Presidency.

September 11, 2001 was an earth shattering revelation. I have watched in horror as Canada has sabotaged it’s own relationship with America since that day. It would be lying to say that there is not an undercurrent of resentment in Canada for Americans. I’ve seen it since my childhood. Certainly this subtle distaste is apparent in our media reporting. I have never understood why, after all eighty seven percent of our exports are bought by Americans.

As a nation we could not defend ourselves. I understand that I am not a military strategist or war historian but can rest somewhat comfortable in this conclusion by simple logic and observation. Our submarines have never been sea worthy since we purchased them from Britain, our helicopters are ancient and most recently have fallen from the sky, our troops had no bullets when they got to Afghanistan . . . and the list goes on and in, making it abundantly clear to me that as a nation we would be ill-equipped to defend ourselves.

We have long enjoyed an invisible insurance policy rendered through the long border that separates us from the United States of America. We know that as a nation, as long as the United States of America is o.k., Canada are safe and this knowledge, I feel, may have given us a sense of false awareness of ourselves as a people and as a nation. All of this of course, refers back to my problems with the existing Federal Government in Canada and more specifically Prime Minister Jean Chretien.

I don’t believe that we should have a military as we know it.