|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
||||||
|
The burned out hull of a Beechcraft Baron, belonging to local resident Russ Orr, laid on the tarmac of the Oliver Airport following a fi re early on the morning of Monday, June 29. The investigation into the fire is ongoing. Airplane catches fire at airportRay Wangen Oliver firefighters responded to a blaze at the Oliver airport early on the morning of Monday, June 29, after a Beechcraft Baron caught fi re. The call went out at apporoximately 4:30 am. The plane, according to owner Russ Orr, caught fi re somewhere near the gas outtake/intake valve. Orr said that when the fi re crew arrived they contained the blaze but allowed the plane to burn out since there were concerns about contaminating the site. Orr’s Baron, one of the fastest in its class with a new 2009 Baron fetching in the neighbourhood of $1,000,000, was almost completely destroyed, with only the wings and the rear of the tail section remaining intact. Orr said that he suspects the fi re began after someone attempted to drain the fuel from the aircraft. The fuel intake/ outtake can be gravity operated. However, Orr said that anyone attempting to remove the fuel, which is high octane and can be used in any vehicle without a catalytic convertor, would likely be coated with fuel themselves. “There’s probably someone out there with burns all over their arms,” said Orr. The fuel used in Orr’s Beechcraft is highly combustible and the slightest spark, from either a lit cigarette or static electricity, would have been enough to set the plane on fi re. RCMP, when asked for comment, would only confi rm that a fi re did occur and that the investigation is ongoing. Huge Conservative deficit has roots in Liberal decisionsAlex Atamanenko Many Canadians were led to believe the Conservatives to be sound fi nancial managers. October’s federal election was won, in part, due to their ‘reputation’ of being good with the books and their bold prediction that Canada would not slip into recession. In the November economic update, Conservatives were stating that Canada would have a surplus federal budget. January’s federal budget projected defi cit spending in record amounts. Finance Minister Flaherty’s admission that Canada will incur a $50 billion defi cit for the fi scal year 2009 is not that surprising to anyone paying attention to the trajectory we have been on for the last decade or more. For many years, New Democrats have been criticizing the corporate agenda that has been championed by successive Liberal and Conservative governments. Cuts to the GST – a measure that really only helps people with incredibly large amounts of money to spend; cuts to corporate taxes that reward the business elite while saddling everyday Canadians with cost of running the country are among the items New Democrats have opposed. It was changes to the Employment Insurance system in the 1990s, however, that currently undermines our ability to take care of our most vulnerable and hand-off a fi scally viable country to future generations. Canadians well-remember the defi cits that ballooned through the 1980s. Built on a foundation of Liberal largesse in 1970s and early 80s, Canadians at that time turned to the Conservatives under Brian Mulroney expecting sound fi scal management. What they received were record defi - cits. The Liberals with three majority governments in the 1990s reversed the defi cit trend by stealing billions from Public Service pensions, wiping out the huge Employment Insurance surplus, downloading federal responsibilities to provincial and territorial governments - pinching health care budgets to the point that it became diffi cult for Ottawa to enforce the Canada Health Act. The budget surpluses that the Liberals railed off for years were fi nanced by Employment Insurance premiums. These premiums no longer fl owed into a pool that paid EI claims and had no effect on year to year budgets. This led people to believe we had surplus money available for corporate tax cuts and GST cuts. Short-sighted thinking that is biting us hard today. Once the huge EI pool had evaporated there was no rainyday fund for the conditions we are seeing today. The money was stolen with no consideration of future need. Now we must pay EI from general revenues and the current government is reluctant to do so. EI still takes in much more than it pays out. It has become a source of general revenues and can now be considered a tax on working and employing our citizens and not the social safety net it was designed to be. Demand spurs a corporate sea changeDavid Suzuki with Faisal Moola Protecting our planet is no longer seen as a fringe activity. Most people now consider themselves to be environmentally aware and are taking steps to help. Caring for the environment has become mainstream – it’s the “new normal”. And that’s refreshing! The environmental problems we face today are so serious that people from all sectors of society must work together to solve them. That’s why it’s so heartening to see an increasing number of corporations pitching in to protect nature and our planet’s ecosystems. From restaurants to grocery stores to clothing retailers, businesses are looking for ways to make their operations more sustainable and environmentally responsible. They’re taking tangible steps by offering better choices to consumers. One of the best things about the growing number of environmentally responsible initiatives is that they demonstrate how powerful individual citizens can be. Businesses respond to consumer demand, and the right demands can result in real benefi ts for the environment. Some of the changes we’ve seen as a result of consumers using their power include reusable grocery bags, hybrid cars, locally grown and organic food in stores, products and clothing made with recycled materials, green buildings, and sustainable seafood in restaurants and stores. So much can be achieved when people work together. Researchers at universities and environmental organizations often conduct studies and provide information. Citizens take that information and change their daily behaviour, sometimes by encouraging businesses to act on this new knowledge. Businesses respond by changing their practices and offering more sustainable choices. This in turn causes their suppliers to improve the way they produce their products. One quickly growing consumer trend that has been satisfying to me is the increasing demand for sustainable seafood. My grandparents came to Canada from Japan because of the abundance of fish in our oceans. My most cherished childhood memories are of camping and fishing in B.C. But over the years, I’ve seen a lot of changes. Many of the fish species that were once so abundant are now in decline, with some facing extinction. At the David Suzuki Foundation we’ve worked hard over the years with our allied organizations in the SeaChoice program to scientifi cally assess which fi sh and seafood species are still thriving and which are threatened by overfi shing and habitat loss. We’ve also looked at aquaculture practices to see which ones provide food without harming the environment and which have unacceptable impacts like spreading parasites and disease to wild fi sh. We’ve also been working with fi sheries, aquaculture producers, and governments to translate the demand for sustainable seafood to real change in the oceans. After all, the end goal is to protect species and marine ecosystems. We’ve used this information to inform people about the best and worst choices for seafood. And individuals have responded by demanding that stores and restaurants start offering sustainable choices and refraining from carrying species that are at risk or that are produced in a way that is harmful to the environment or to other species. Fortunately, the tide has started to turn across Canada. Many chefs, restaurants, and seafood distributors are working with SeaChoice and other sustainable seafood programs to offer better options. Recently, the Overwaitea Food Group, which operates 117 stores in 80 communities in Western Canada, agreed to collaborate with the David Suzuki Foundation and the SeaChoice initiative on a sustainable seafood program for its stores. The grocery chain is now working with us to develop and implement a six-point sustainability plan for buying and selling seafood. We’re at the beginning of the journey, but we commend Overwaitea for demonstrating leadership and committing to help improve the health of our oceans. It was especially gratifying to hear the grocery chain’s president, Steve van der Leest, say that he chose to work with SeaChoice because when they started looking for experts to help out, we had the “best science” they could fi nd. Mr. van der Leest knows that switching to more sustainable seafood comes with challenges, including the fact that some sustainable fi sh can be more expensive than non-sustainable options, but he noted at a news conference that “Doing the right thing always pays off.” We couldn’t agree more. People everywhere should know that they can help businesses do the right thing by asking them to offer sustainable choices and by supporting businesses that do. |
RCMP revisit accident issuePOLICE BRIEFS The RCMP is continuing its investigation into the fatal motorcycle collision which occurred on June 13, 2009, involving 41 year old Robert Charles Mitchell of Oliver. At this time, the RCMP Southeast District General Investigation Section has taken lead responsibility for the investigation. In addition to updating the status of the investigation, the RCMP has also taken quick steps to correct inaccurate information which was previously relayed to a local Oliver media agency days after the collision. Backgrounder: On June 13, 2009 at approximately 02:30 am, the Oliver RCMP attended to a motor vehicle collision involving a motorcyclist and pick-up truck which had occurred on Highway 97 and 360th Ave in downtown Oliver. The motorcyclist, 41 year old Robert Charles Mitchell was transported to the South Okanagan General Hospital then transferred to Kelowna General Hospital by Emergency Health Services after rear-ending a pick-up truck being driven by a 37 year old Oliver man. Mitchell passed away while receiving emergency care for his injuries at KGH. The driver of the truck was unhurt in the collision. Mitchell was not wearing a helmet at the time of the collision. “It was reported earlier, by the Oliver RCMP, that police had not “confi scated” a helmet from Mitchell’s motorcycle. This oral comment and error was made with only a partial review of the fi le being completed, prior to the detachment representative being interviewed by the media in Oliver”, stated Cpl Dan Moskaluk, RCMP Southeast District Media Relations Offi cer. “Upon reviewing the dissemination of information to the media to date on this matter, on June 23, I became aware that the error in comments regarding our member removing and holding the helmet, had occurred, and took steps to correct this issue. The comment was confi rmed as being made and reported on as such. This is being publicly corrected today with the following statement”: “Although police did not have any direct contact with Mr Mitchell on June 13 prior to the collision, an on-duty Oliver RCMP offi cer had earlier removed and held two helmets from the unattended motorcycles while they were parked in Oliver, some time prior to the collision. The Oliver RCMP member had also observed earlier, what was believed to be the same motorcycles as seen parked, being driven erratically and thus had an investigative interest in the two motorcycles. When found parked, the offi cer recognized the machines as being owned by persons that he knew. The offi cer waited by the motorcycles for the owners to return and departed after leaving a note on the motorcycle advising the registered owner to call the offi cer in order to retrieve the helmets. The offi cer did not receive any phone inquiries regarding the helmets”. The offi cer’s primary intention of removing and holding the helmets were in order to prevent the possible theft of the helmets, in addition to preventing the continuation of any offences involving the motorcycles. It was the same offi cer who later attended to the collision less then a block away from where the motorcycles had been parked. The offi cer was accompanied at the time by a volunteer Auxiliary Constable who is employed by the BCAS and fi rst aid was administered to Mr Mitchell. The initial collision investigation is being conducted by the RCMP South Okanagan Traffi c Services and the South East District Collision re-construction analyst, who attended the scene for forensic evidence gathering and examination. The addition of the Southeast District General Investigation Section is in the purview of thoroughly investigating the entire evenings’ events that took place on June 12 and 13 inclusively leading up to and including the collision. The RCMP is continuing it’s investigation into this fatal collision along with that of the BC Coroners Service. “Aside from the clarifi cations of previously released information by the Oliver RCMP on or about June 17, it would be premature at this time to further comment on any detailed fi ndings in regards to this matter. The RCMP conveys its condolences to the Mitchell family for their loss”, stated Cpl Dan Moskaluk. Neda Soltan: Anger and fear grab TehranGwynne Dyer The grisly video of 26-year-old Neda Agha-Soltan dying in a Tehran street, shot down by a government thug, has already been seen by millions of Iranians. If the protesters against the alleged rigging of the recent election needed a dramatic image of martyrdom -- and such images have a special resonance in Iran -- they now have one. But things are not quite so simple. Her death, all the more affecting because she was not actually a protester but just trapped in the midst of the demo, has enraged many people, but it has also frightened them. She was only one of ten people killed on Saturday, 21 June, in Tehran by the police and the Basiji (the volunteer militia that normally serves as the regime’s “morality police”) but hers is the death that you can actually watch. It was very fast, very ugly, and clearly quite arbitrary. If this is what happens to innocent bystanders, are you sure you want to go out and demonstrate again tomorrow? The conventional wisdom says that in Iran such deaths only fuel popular anger and make the demos grow bigger, and that is certainly what happened during the struggle to overthrow the Shah of Iran thirty years ago. But there were only hundreds of demonstrators, not hundreds of thousands, on the streets of Tehran in the days after Neda’s death. The regime has now nailed its colours to the mast: Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said that he will back President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad’s disputed election victory come what may. There will not be a compromise in which the elections are re-run, maybe with a different outcome that makes Mir Hossein Mousavi, the opposition leader, the new president, but leaves Ali Khamenei and the basic principles of the “Islamic revolution” in place. The regime’s heavy artillery, a parallel army called the Revolutionary Guards, has now been deployed on the streets, and its website makes it clear that it is willing to kill demonstrators: “The Guards will fi rmly confront in a revolutionary way rioters and those who violate the law.” In Iran, the phrase “in a revolutionary way” instantly recalls the tens of thousands of alleged enemies of the new regime who were killed in mass hangings in 1989. It is the regime that has deliberately raised the stakes, from a mere dispute about the outcome of an election to an existential struggle for the regime’s survival. It is a gamble, of course, for there are many young Iranians who would be willing to fi ght it out on that ground -- but their leaders are not. All three presidential candidates who believe they were cheated in the election are stalwart supporters of the Islamic regime. How could they be otherwise, when all presidential candidates are vetted by the Guardian Council for their revolutionary and Islamic dedication? Mousavi was prime minister during the war with Iraq in 1980-88. Mohsen Rezaie is a former commander of the Revolutionary Guards. Even Mehdi Karroubi, the most liberal of the candidates, is a cleric who has served the revolution faithfully, if critically. If it comes down to the survival of the Islamic revolutionary dispensation that they have devoted their lives to building, Mousavi, Rezaie and Karroubi are all ultimately on the same side of the barricades as Khamenei and Ahmadinejad. That is precisely what it’s coming down to, by the bold or desperate decision (take your pick) of Ali Khamenei. As he intends, it leaves the young people in the streets (60 percent of Iranians are under 30) without leaders. It now seems likely that Khamenei and Ahmadinejad knew in advance that the latter’s re-election bid was doomed, and rigged the election to “save the Islamic regime,” or at least their version of it. Nothing could have been clumsier or more drastic than the intervention that they made, but it may have served its purpose, at least in the short run. The protesters know they have been cheated, but without leaders or organisation they may not be able to continue. We will know if it’s really over on 31 July, forty days after the killing of Neda Agha-Soltan. In the Shia tradition, that’s when the forty days of mourning end. During the revolt against the Shah, that was when the masses came out into the streets again to remember their martyrs. The game is still afoot, but the young, predictably, have been betrayed yet again by their elders. Health is dependent on the communityHealth Matters “The part can never be well unless the whole is well” (Plato) If people are the “part” and the community is the “whole”, then the health of the people is directly dependent on the health of the community. Winston Churchill said “We shape our buildings and thereafter they shape us” and nowhere is that more important than for those that have a mental illness or addiction. About one in fi ve British Columbians lives with some form of mental illness or addiction, yet two-thirds will not seek help. In the 1970’s people with mental illness were moved from large in-patient hospitals back into their communities. They were moved away from environments that were built specifi cally to meet their needs and returned to communities with few supports, programs, or facilities to help them. Housing is a basic need and signifi cantly affects health. Decent, safe, and affordable housing contributes to our physical and mental well being. Imagine you are struggling with mental illness and you lose your job due to high absenteeism, lack of energy and/or repeated visits to the hospital. With no income it makes it diffi cult to keep up with rent or mortgage payments. You may lose your home, furniture and household contents. Where would you go? Many people with a mental illness or addiction decide they are better off, or their circumstances force them, to live on the street. Without a fi xed address you are not eligible for a range of social services including health care. Essentials like medication, transportation, and healthy food are not available and your symptoms may worsen and force you back into hospital. It is a vicious circle and a harsh reality for many people living with mental illness. The stigma that is associated with mental illness and addiction makes it diffi cult to remain in a rental property once the illness is discovered. Many landlords are reluctant to rent housing to people with mental health issues, and some assume these tenants will be diffi cult. Sometimes the health service system provides outreach support services where the clients are - in the downtown core. The result is a concentration of people with mental illness all located in an area that was not built to address their needs. What can we do? Realize that mental health issues exist. In fact, one in four of us will experience a mental illness at some point in our lifetime. Creating environments that support people with a mental illness or addiction contributes to a healthy community. Providing affordable housing in all areas of the community and appropriate support services available will help people to cope during challenging periods in their lives. |
- Opinion -
142 candles for Canada Confederation Street Rules in Iran: Did regime really rig electionGwynne Dyer The rules for street demos are different in Iran. Even in the most oppressive states the rulers know that outbursts of popular anger should be contained with as little violence as possible, but elsewhere the authorities always see deadly force as the final resort. Whereas in Iran, killing demonstrators practically guarantees that the authorities will lose in the end. The demonstrations in Tehran have grown bigger every day since the presidential election results were announced on Saturday. By Monday there were hundreds of thousands of protesters on the street. The police and the various paramilitary forces had arrested and/or beaten hundreds of them, but the first shots were not heard until Monday night. That was not just good luck. Most Iranians are Shia Muslims, and Shias have a great reverence for martyrdom. Kill a demonstrator, and you create a martyr. Kill a hundred, and you create a revolution. That was how the Shah was driven from power thirty years ago, and everybody on both sides in Iran should remember that very well. The crowds demonstrating against the Shah’s tyranny, his brutal secret police and his stridently secular policies in 1978-79 were almost entirely non-violent. Nevertheless, they were shot down in their hundreds and thousands by the forces of “law and order,” who could not find any other way of dispersing them. But the protesters kept coming back, with their dead in their arms, until they were exhausted -- and then forty days later, when the mourning period was over, they were back on the streets again, offer- Street Rules in Iran: Did regime really rig election ing themselves up once more to be killed. No regime can go on for very long once that starts happening. Its own henchmen become sickened by what they are being compelled to do, and start to desert it. That is the secret music that drives the dance in Tehran’s streets today. The regime of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and recently re-elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (if you believe that he really won the election) knows that it must quell the protests without killing demonstrators and triggering a cycle of martyrdom. And the demonstrators know (though they will not admit it openly) that they need martyrs. Did the regime really rig the election? There were no impartial foreign observers with free access to the polling stations to offer an unbiased opinion, but the circumstantial evidence gives cause for suspicion.. The outcome was announced much faster than usual: the normal three-day verification and declaration was skipped, and Ahmadinejad’s victory was proclaimed only two hours after the polls closed. There was a curious uniformity in the results from very different parts of the country. For example, even in Tabriz, the home city of the leading opposition candidate, Mir Hossein Moussavi, it was alleged that Ahmadinejad had won 57 percent of the vote. Yet the overwhelming majority of people in Tabriz are Azeris, who normally show a strong bias for ethnic Azeri candidates like Moussavi. Above all, the margin by which Ahmadinejad is said to have won -- 63 percent versus 34 percent for Moussavi -- seems incredible to most urban, middle-class Iranians. They would have accepted a close result, with both the leading candidates coming in under 50 percent and the other candidates dropping out for the second round. They would even have accepted a narrow victory for Ahmadinejad in the second round, but this just does not ring true for them. If this is only a few days of protests about a stolen election, in a country which is only half-democratic anyway, then it doesn’t matter very much. If it turns out to be the straw that broke the camel’s back, then it is a very big deal indeed. It could be, because thirty-year-old revolutions tend to have a big problem with a younger generation who benefited from some aspects of the revolution (the vast majority of young Iranians are literate, for example), but who chafe at its restrictions. In fact, generational turn-over is the biggest killer of ageing revolutions. We will know if that is going to be the case in Iran in a few days’ time. History does not run on rails. It’s more like raindrops running down a windowpane, their course determined by tiny imperfections in the glass or fly-spots on the surface. If more than a dozen or so protesters are killed in the streets of Tehran, then the regime will be in truly serious danger. Even if Ahmadinejad really did win. |
||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
