Harper warns of 'very challenging' economy in 2012

CTVNews.ca Staff

Dec. 25, 2011

Canada is not out of the woods after several years of depressed economic activity, Prime Minister Stephen Harper warned in a year-end interview with CTV.

"We have some major challenges in front of us," Harper said in a wide-ranging interview with CTV News Chief Anchor and Senior Editor Lisa LaFlamme, which airs Monday at 7 p.m.

With an eye on 2012, Harper repeatedly mentioned how tough economic times globally could affect Canada and the budget.

"There's going to be a whole range of areas where this government's going to be taking issues over the next year to secure the sustainability of our key programs," Harper said.

"The next year will be a very challenging year for the global economy and therefore the economy of this country."

Despite extensive international and domestic criticism over Canada's decision to pull out of the Kyoto Accord, Harper remains adamant that it was the right move.

"It doesn't matter what Canada does. It doesn't matter what, frankly, Europe does. Unless we get all of the major emitters to be part of an accord that has mandatory targets, we're not going to get anywhere," he said.

"We have to have those who produce the most emissions actually doing the biggest reductions," he said, mentioning China, the United States and India are not covered under the emission-lowering accord.

At the same time, Harper also made strong statements about selling Canadian oil to China after the Keystone XL pipeline project to the United States was delayed by the White House.

"I am very serious about selling our oil off this continent, selling our energy products off to China," he said.

However, speaking about a recent trip to the United States, Harper did say that he's been told privately the Keystone project will go ahead.

"I ran into several senior Americans, who all said, ‘Don't worry, we'll get Keystone done. You can sell all of your oil to us.' I said, ‘Yeah we'd love to but the problem is now we're on a different track.'"

The prime minister was also joined by his wife, Laureen, for part of the interview, who spoke of the challenges of raising kids at 24 Sussex Avenue in the Facebook age.

A lot has changed for Harper over the past year, who says for the first time in a decade he has some job security and is not "living out of a suitcase."

The Conservatives' majority victory in May ended half a decade of minority politics and changed the political landscape. With the NDP and the Liberals both under interim leaders, Harper faces an opposition in flux.

He says he intends to fully use the opportunity with his firm grasp on power

"I've seen too many majority governments (in which the) bureaucracy talks them into going to sleep for three years and then they all of a sudden realize they're close to an election," he said. "We're going to try and keep busy through the whole four years."

Harper maintains that the economy continues to be the top item on his agenda, particularly as the economic recovery remains precarious because of the uncertain situation in Europe.

"We still need to find some ways that this country can continue to grow, even if our major partners and allies are not," he said.

Harper says Canada has "fiscal flexibility" but is pursuing modest reductions in government spending in order to reduce the deficit.

He adds that immigration reform, particularly with credentials recognition, could be a real boost to the Canadian economy.

"But we've got to do more in the economy of the future than just passively accept applications. We have to recruit people to come to this country, particularly when there are specific skill shortages that are developing, and that's what we're going to do as a government," he said.

A week before Christmas, Ottawa announced a new 10-year health-care plan that took the provinces by surprise. While it was received well in the Western provinces, eastward it was greeted with outrage.

"But I think we all understand that the rate of growth of the health-care system can't be sustained and that somehow that's going to have to be tackled, so that we, we keep a system that Canadians value," Harper said of the new plan. "This government will ensure that there continue to be increases in health-care transfers."

On a more personal note from the past year, Harper spoke about the passing of Jack Layton and his decision to grant the NDP leader a state funeral.

"I think in the end, the funeral and the outpouring, everybody made it as good as a situation as it could be under the circumstances. I mean truth is, obviously it was a terrible personal tragedy but I think we all made the best (of it,)" he said.

"Everybody knew Jack, knew that he was liked. He was liked by those who disagreed with, even those who disagreed with everything he believed in."

Foreign Affairs

The Arab Spring, particularly the uprising in Libya, threw the Harper government -- like most Western governments – a curveball in the international arena.

Canadian troops left for Libya in March to participate in the NATO-led mission there, with Canadian Forces aircraft taking on an active bombing role.

"In the case of Libya, the, part of the reason we got so aggressively involved as it was actually hard to imagine that even Libya could possibly get worse," Harper said of the mission, which officially ended in November.

"This has been a pretty remarkable revolution in Libya to this point."

But Harper says he is conflicted about whether the Arab Spring revolutions will led to peace in the region.

He says the situation in Egypt -- which has had peaceful relations with Israel for decades – is mixed and he's expressed his concern to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

With Canadian combat operations ending this year in Afghanistan, Harper said the initial goal of the mission -- to stop terrorism -- has been largely successful.

"Afghanistan now, with all its internal security problems, is today no longer a threat to the rest of the world, and that is a big step forward," Harper said. "And there's been other steps forward in terms of women's rights and some of the particular services . . . but there is an awfully long way to go in terms of seeing the kind of country I think everybody would like to see."

http://atlantic.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20111225/stephen-harper-interview-lisa-laflamme-111225/20111225/?hub=AtlanticHome

--

NAZTEE NOTES:

If there was a TRUE concern about the Canadian economy (and Europe affecting our economy is ludicrous), then we would go back to pre-1974 and have the Bank of Canada, which is NOT privatized like the Federal Reserve in the United States, printing our own currency, rather than borrowing from private institutions.

The Libyan war in which Harper spoke was a 100% illegal war in every aspect, Obama never even had the war passed through congress.

Also, "CTVNews.ca Staff" is not a name. I find it discrediting when an article is written by no one.

GoDaddy lost 72,354 domains this week by supporting SOPA

Connor Livingston

techi.com

Dec. 24, 2011

Despite a massive Twitter campaign and a blog post that claims “Go Daddy no longer supports SOPA legislation” the company and their CEO have dodged questions about opposing the bill. In essence, they are taking a lesser role by not showing support for the bill. They have not opposed it.

This week, they lost around 72,000 domain registrations. At a yearly discounted rate of $6.99 (most registrations are higher), that’s over half a million dollars per year. It is apparently not enough for them to speak out against the bill.

How many domains is the company willing to lose before they oppose this abomination of legislation? Do they believe that when they “step back and let others take leadership roles” that we are going to see it as something other than a “duck and cover” public relations move to try to get out of the spotlight and hope someone else takes the brunt of the attacks while they quietly support the bill?

Is 72,354 domains enough? Not even close. It’s a drop in the bucket. The have anywhere from 15,000 to 40,000 domains added daily. Despite cries from the internet, yesterday was a good day with over 32,000 added. Go Daddy has not felt much pain yet. The “PR nightmare” that many of us in the tech industry perceive is happening to them hasn’t hit their pocketbooks in any real form, yet.

Until the effect is more pronounced, they can afford to deflect questions and let the negative PR pass. More must be done.

http://www.techi.com/2011/12/godaddy-lost-72354-domains-this-week-its-not-enough/

Bird flu study controversy could lead to research chill

Helen Branswell

The Canadian Press

Dec. 27, 2011

Influenza scientists are worried they may be feeling a cold front moving in.

A recent unprecedented decision by the U.S. government to ask two leading scientific journals to withhold publication of key information from controversial bird flu studies has scientists in this sector nervous.

They fear a chill may be descending on their field, potentially making it harder to tackle studies aimed at answering one of the key questions in influenza science, namely how viruses that normally infect birds, pigs or other mammals evolve to become viruses that infect people.

In the short term, it may also become harder to publish any work looking at this question if it relates to the dangerous H5N1 avian flu.

The panel of biosecurity experts that advised the U.S. government to object to publication of the disputed studies may also recommend that researchers and journals be asked to agree to a short-term moratorium on publishing any work about what makes H5N1 viruses more transmissible.

Paul Keim, an anthrax expert who is acting chair of the National Science Advisory Board on Biosecurity, says scientists, public health officials and policy makers need to reach some agreement about how much of this work is safe to do, and how much of it is safe to put into the public domain.

"A short-term publication moratorium is not essential for this, but I think that it would be useful," Keim, a professor at the University of Northern Arizona, says via email.

"We know that there is a lot of research occurring in this specific area and with every paper, the situation changes. Setting policy in such an environment is difficult and it is hard enough already."

It's not yet clear that the biosecurity board will ask for the moratorium. Nor is it certain how journals will handle the request if it comes.

But the two journals involved in the current controversy, Science and Nature, have both indicated they are at least willing to discuss a compromise, so long as a system can be devised that would give scientists and public health authorities access the withheld information on a need-to-know basis.

If the studies are published in abbreviated form, it would be a first for the life sciences, many involved in the discussions believe.

Scientists who work in nuclear physics are often unable to publish their work, for security reasons. But in most areas of science, the paradigm is that if researchers find something or achieve a goal, they must publish how they did the work so that others can try to replicate it and build on it.

It is science's best defence against fraud, though it is not a foolproof one. It is also the way science advances.

Among flu scientists, the new scrutiny of their field is raising concerns about whether ongoing or planned work will be impeded.

Those keen for answers that would help the world better assess the risk the H5N1 virus poses are particularly worried that the biosecurity concerns might stop them from seeking answers to questions that might tell the world how likely -- or unlikely -- bird flu is to adapt to human-to-human spread.

"That is an absolutely key question," says Malik Peiris, a leading flu researcher and chair of the department of microbiology at the University of Hong Kong, who adds constraining this type of work "would be a huge loss."

Richard Webby agrees, noting that expert working groups asked in recent years to draw up flu research priority lists for the World Health Organization and the U.S. National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease both identified studies on what makes viruses transmissible as a key challenge for the field.

"It really gets to one of the most basic unanswered questions we have about these animal influenza viruses -- what does it take to increase their transmission?" says Webby, who heads the WHO's influenza reference laboratory at St. Judes Children's Hospital in Memphis, Tenn.

The director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases -- which funded the two disputed studies -- says he'll fight to keep the biosecurity concerns from getting in the way of the science.

"I will do everything in my power to ensure that it doesn't inhibit the research. Because the research we're interested in is the legitimate research done by scientists who have a legitimate interest," says Dr. Anthony Fauci.

But Dr. D.A. Henderson, who led the campaign that eradicated smallpox, thinks flu researchers are worried with good reason. "I can see where they'd be concerned about it. But I think we ought to be concerned about working with H5N1."

Henderson, who is a distinguished scholar at the Center for Biosecurity at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, is on record saying he believes the studies that drew the biosecurity board's concern should not have been done, that the risks of the work outweighed any potential benefit.

Flu researchers disagree, arguing these kinds of studies can help the world solve the mystery of how viruses make the jump from other species into humans.

"If someone makes a virus, specifically only for making it more pathogenic without learning any biology and in such a way that cannot occur in nature but can only be man-made, then I would be concerned because there is no purpose for this experiment," says Adolfo Garcia-Sastre, an influenza researcher at Mount Sinai Hospital in Manhattan.

But the viruses made in the two studies that triggered this debate could occur in nature, Garcia-Sastre insists.

He fears the result of the controversy will be additional layers of bureaucracy that will box out all but the biggest and best financed laboratories from doing this type of work.

Garcia-Sastre admits he's had discussions with his institution about whether any of his influenza research might raise biosecurity concerns. Webby says his team has also had talks about whether any of their work might be classified as so-called "dual-use" -- legitimate science which could also be put to nefarious ends.

These kinds of discussions are entirely appropriate, Keim says. "I suspect that after these events, there will be a lot more people looking at their research than had been before, and I view that as a good thing."

Keim isn't worried the controversy will lead to less flu research. On the contrary, he thinks it may add a sense of urgency to the field. It's a view Michael Osterholm shares.

Osterholm is both an infectious diseases expert and a member of the advisory board that recommended the studies were too dangerous to be published in full.

"I think it will create a temporary slowdown, just because we're all going to be looking at what should be done, how should it be done and why it should be done," says Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Diseases Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

"But in the end I think it will actually cause a great acceleration of H5N1 research. Because now that we know what we know, we can make the clear case that we need a lot more research. People can't write this (virus) off."

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Health/20111227/bird-flu-influenza-scientists-studies-111227/

Canada shipping bomb-grade uranium to U.S.

Andy Blatchford

The Canadian Press

Dec. 27, 2011

MONTREAL — Weapons-grade uranium is quietly being transported within Canada, and into the United States, in shipments the country's nuclear watchdog wants to keep cloaked in secrecy.

A confidential federal memo obtained through the Access to Information Act says at least one payload of spent, U.S.-origin highly enriched uranium fuel has already been moved stateside under a new Canada-U.S. deal.

The shipments stem from the highly publicized agreement signed last year by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama, amid fears that nuclear-bomb-making material could fall into the hands of terrorists.

The Canadian stash gradually being shipped from Chalk River, Ont., contains hundreds of kilograms of highly enriched uranium -- large enough to make several Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs.

But even as the radioactive freight travels toward the U.S. border, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has no plans to hold public hearings or disclose which communities lie along the delivery route.

The shipments themselves are protected by intense security protocol, which means specifics like routes, transportation method, quantities and schedules remain top secret.

The federal nuclear body, a co-regulator of the uranium transfers, says rules restrict it from disclosing such information to the public.

A ministerial memorandum, classified as "Secret," says the nuclear watchdog considers it unnecessary to hold public sessions that would allow citizens to ask questions and comment on the shipments.

That same memorandum, dated Feb. 25, 2011, points out that recent hearings for another nuclear-shipment case generated intense public and media interest. The controversy has stalled the project to ship 16 generators from a Bruce Power nuclear plant through the Great Lakes, up the St. Lawrence River and onto Europe.

The memo, obtained by The Canadian Press, appears to warn against a repeat scenario.

"Given the public and media interest surrounding Bruce Power's plan ... there may be an expectation that similar information be made public on the shipments of spent HEU (highly enriched uranium) fuel to the U.S., and that the CNSC (Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission) hold public hearings," said the document, addressed to then-natural resources minister Christian Paradis.

"To date, the CNSC has not considered it necessary to hold public hearings on the shipment of spent HEU fuel to the U.S."

When asked why public hearings aren't necessary for the uranium deliveries, a commission spokeswoman replied by email: they "are not carried out given the robustness of the packages used and due to the security issues related to the transfers of highly enriched uranium."

The government added that there has never been a significant transport accident involving nuclear materials, anywhere in the world, and that such shipments occur regularly in Canada.

It said only authorized people or agencies, like police forces along the shipment route, are made aware of the details.

One nuclear expert said theft is the primary concern when shipping highly enriched uranium fuel -- because there is virtually no danger of leaks or explosions.

"If I were the people doing the shipping and so on, I'd want to keep as low a profile as possible ... you don't want to give terrorists or criminals any advantage," said Bill Garland, a professor emeritus from McMaster University in nuclear engineering.

"There's a greater risk in the general public knowing, because then the bad guys would know as well."

As for non-theft incidents, like possible road accidents, he described the containers carrying the substance as highly resistant to collisions, chemicals, fire and explosions.

"It's relatively easy to contain and secure and it's not going to go off like a bomb," Garland said.

"I would have no hesitation sitting in the truck and driving across the country with it. It wouldn't bother me in the least."

Garland added that drivers share Canadian highways every day with trucks carrying loads of liquid chemicals, like gasoline and chlorine, that would pose a much bigger danger in a smash-up than nuclear waste.

While the risks are small, he said, that doesn't mean they don't exist. He warned that radiation could be released if someone deliberately opened a container, for instance.

Garland said moving uranium poses far more danger than shipping Bruce Power's old generators up the St. Lawrence.

He calls the generator shipments a "trivial radioactive situation" and a "non-issue" because the cylinders hold very low levels of radioactive material. He said that even if they fell into the bottom of the river, the generators would pose a negligible risk.

Canada has been importing highly enriched bomb-grade uranium from the U.S. to make medical isotopes at Chalk River for the past two decades. While Canada has been pushing for all nations to move to low-enriched uranium, it maintains a large inventory of the substance at Chalk River.

The Canada-U.S. agreement is part of a broader international project by the Obama administration to consolidate highly enriched uranium at fewer, more secure sites around the world.

The U.S. government says it wants to convert the uranium into a form that cannot be used to build nuclear weapons.

Canada made its first uranium delivery under the repatriation deal in 2010, the February memo says. It occurred in "a single shipment using an existing, licensed fuel shipping package."

The continued shipments are scheduled to take place until 2018.

But some nuclear-industry observers fear that Canadians have been left in the dark about the project.

"I don't think Canadians are aware that strategic nuclear material is, in fact, travelling across Canadian roads," said Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition of Nuclear Responsibility.

"I think it's essential that people be aware of what is involved here. People should be aware of the degree of secrecy which is required."

While he has few fears about the safety of the shipment Garland, the nuclear engineering professor, does have some concerns about the government's selective approach to transparency.

"They're willing to talk about those things (the Bruce Power generators) publicly, but yet when they talk about something that's more dangerous -- like moving HEU -- they're not so willing to talk about it," Garland said.

He said while it's critical to keep specific details about the shipments confidential, there are ways to maintain security while offering some public oversight.

"If I were king ... I would say, 'Look, let's have a committee of experts looking at this, working on behalf of the public so that they could analyze this without having to give out all the details to the public,' " Garland said.

Minister of Foreign Affairs John Baird says no new UN Security Council campaign

The Canadian Press

Dec. 27, 2011

OTTAWA — The Harper government will not mount another campaign for a seat on the United Nations Security Council after Canada's historic defeat last year, says Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird.

"It's not something I envisage," Baird told The Canadian Press when asked whether he planned another bid for a two-year, temporary term on the powerful council in the coming years.

While Baird said, "you never want to stand for something and not be elected," the often-combative rookie foreign minister was defiant and cutting in his reasoning for the decision.

"Listen, I mean, we don't go along to get along. That's just not a phrase," said Baird, using the oft-repeated mantra that has morphed into the mantra for his first six months as Canada's top diplomat.

Baird first used it at least eight times during his maiden speech to the UN General Assembly in September.

Canada was trounced by Portugal last year for the second of two temporary two-year, non-veto-wielding seats on the UN's top body. It was the first time in the six-decade history of the UN that Canada failed to win a seat for which it made a bid.

The loss sparked criticism in many quarters about whether Canada's foreign policy under the Conservative government -- perceived tilts in policy toward Israel and away from Africa and an unpopular policy on climate change, among them -- may have cost the country support among a majority of the UN's 190-plus member countries.

Baird shot back at critics on all fronts in a wide-ranging interview in his Foreign Affairs Department office shortly before Christmas.

"Maybe if we had shut up, and not talked about gay rights in Africa; maybe if we had shut up and been more quiet about our concerns about Sri Lanka; maybe if we hadn't been so vocally against the deplorable human rights record in Iran, maybe Iran might have voted for us," Baird said in the Dec. 20 interview, one of several he conducted with various media outlets that day.

"But we didn't and I don't think we regret anything. Iran probably voted against us; North Korea probably voted against us; Gadhafi probably voted against us. I think those are all badges of honour."

Baird said he is especially proud of his stand against Sri Lanka's government for not adequately investigating alleged atrocities by its military forces when they annihilated the Tamil Tigers in May 2009.

"We're appalled at that. Someone needs to stand up and say the lack of accountability for war crimes, the lack of any meaningful reconciliation ... it may not be very popular, but someone needs to raise these realities. I think it's tremendously important."

Critics say Baird and the Tories are playing what has been called "diaspora politics" by taking positions that may win them support in large blocs of newly-arrived Canadians. Tamils, for example, number in the hundreds of thousands in key Toronto-area ridings, the population's largest concentration outside Sri Lanka.

Baird rebutted the criticism, saying: "We didn't do it before election day."

On Israel, the Conservatives have incurred the ire of Muslim and Arab-Canadian groups with what is seen as their unqualified support of Israel.

Baird dismissed that as unfounded, suggesting it was a creation of the media.

"It's a principled position. If you look at our position on Israel -- in my riding we have 2,800 Jews and 11,500 Muslims and Arabs. We don't do it for political gain; we do it because we think it's right and we believe in it."

Baird said he plans to travel to Israel and the Palestinian territories in early January. He heaped praise on Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, after meeting him earlier this year.

"He is probably the world's quietest success story. The security situation in the West Bank has improved immeasurably under his leadership," said Baird.

"We've been working very closely with him on that with a lot of Canadian support. On the security side, their transparency and getting rid of corruption is a gigantic accomplishment for him and the Palestinian people. The economic growth rate has improved considerably, so it's been good news."

As for Canada being a laggard on climate change, a topic Baird raised without being asked, he said: "Travelling almost twice around the world, I've only had two foreign ministers raise climate change with me."

Baird added: "It's a big issue for some; it certainly hasn't been one that I've heard a lot about."

Baird said Canada remains committed to helping the Arab Spring countries -- Libya and Egypt in particular -- to build democratic societies that respect the rule of law.

But the minister could offer few specific examples of programs.

"We want to continue to promote Canadian values. How do we support the people themselves, and not impose our values and principles ... offer them support on democratic development on how you conduct an election, on the rule of law."

Baird reiterated the rights of Arab and Muslim women should not be trounced in the months ahead.

"It's funny because I'm not a natural champion of feminism but the role of women in North Africa, and the Middle East and the Arab Spring is tremendously important because I think it leads to not just equality, which is a Canadian value, but I think it leads to a more civil society," he said.

"I think like most Canadians, I watched what looked like to be Egyptian security forces beating a woman on the streets of Cairo. I was disgusted by that violence against a woman who, by all accounts, appeared to be just exercising her rights of free speech in a political demonstration."

Baird said he uses strong words because he is "passionate" about human rights and protecting the abused.

"When people are being put to death in Africa, whose only crime is the criminalization of homosexuality, it's really difficult to raise that when there's intolerance. But I think it needs to be said," he said.

"When you talk about rape as an instrument of war, women being raped in Libya, it's a very uncomfortable issue. Just ignoring it, throwing it under the carpet, it's not an option."

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20111227/john-baird-united-nations-security-council-111227

Iran Rejects Court Ruling It Worked with Al-Qaeda in 9/11 Attack

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
December 27, 2011

On Sunday, Iran rejected a ruling by Judge George Daniels in Manhattan that it is responsible along with al-Qaeda and the Taliban for the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

In December 23, the federal court ruled ruled that Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah materially and directly supported al-Qaeda in the September 11, 2001, attacks and are legally responsible for damages to hundreds of family members of victims who are plaintiffs in the case.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast characterized the court decision as “clumsy scenario-making” by the United States. He said al-Qaeda has no presence in Iran and that it is quite “evident” that the United States created al-Qaeda and supported it.

The U.S. State Department says Iran is harboring Syrian-born Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil, aka Yacine al-Suri, described as a high-level al-Qaeda “facilitator” who it claims has operated from inside Iran since 2005 “under an agreement between al-Qaeda and the Iranian government.”

The U.S. claims al-Suri moves money and recruits across the Middle East into Iran, and then on to Pakistan, in support al-Qaeda’s senior leadership.

“He is also an important fundraiser for al-Qaeda and has collected money from donors and fundraisers throughout the Gulf. Al Suri funnels significant funds via Iran for onward passage to al- Qaeda’s leadership in Afghanistan and Iraq,” states the Rewards for Justice program.

The lawsuit claims Ayman al-Zawahiri, described as the leader of al-Qaeda following the unsubstantiated assassination of Osama bin Laden, went to Iran in January of 2001 for four days of “intense closed-door meetings with the top leadership in Iran to discuss the impending attacks,” writes Kenneth Timmerman for The Daily Caller.

Evidence to the contrary was apparently not considered in the case. In 2002, the Hayat-e-Nou newspaper reported that al-Zawahiri was captured and jailed in Tehran. He was imprisoned in the Evin jail, where political prisoners are usually held, according to the newspaper run by Hadi Khamenei, a leading legislator and the brother of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Following the report, however, Iran denied it had arrested al-Zawahiri.

In 2005, Iranian intelligence minister Ali Younessi said approximately a thousand al-Qaeda members captured in Iran were jailed or deported. Younessi said the large number of alleged al-Qaeda members were arrested “because they intended to use Iranian territory to launch terrorist strikes on other countries.” Younessi said the many of the arrested worked for Ansar al-Islam in neighboring Iraq.

In 2003, the front man for Ansar al-Islam, Mullah Krekar, threatened to reveal his connections to the CIA.

The effort to link al-Qaeda to the Iranian government is reminiscent of an earlier attempt to link the CIA-created terrorist group to Saddam Hussein in Iraq. In 2003, the Bush neocons insisted there was a link between al-Zarqawi, Ansar al-Islam, and Saddam Hussein. Secretary of State Colin Powell went before the United Nations Security Council on February 3, 2003, and insisted that Saddam Hussein’s government had ties to al-Qaeda and Ansar-al-Islam. The United States invaded the country the following month.

In 2008, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded that the accusation was not “substantiated by the intelligence.” The year after the United States invaded Iraq, Powell admitted there was no “smoking gun [or] concrete evidence” that Saddam Hussein was connected to al-Qaeda.

As the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood founded Islamic Jihad in Egypt, Ayman al-Zawahiri received money and support from the CIA beginning in 1987. The future al-Qaeda leader had visited California twice in the 1990s and once in 1989 on fund raising missions despite the fact the FBI knew he was the leader of a terrorist organization.

Al-Qaeda has exploited the Sunni-Shia divide and considers Iran an enemy (Iran is a Shia nation and al-Qaeda is a Sunni organization).

In 2008, al-Zawahiri said it would be “in the interest” of al-Qaeda to see Iran “sap[ped]” by a fight with the United States. Ayman al-Zawahiri made the comments following a claim by then presidential candidate John McCain that al-Qaeda and Iran were in cahoots.

http://www.infowars.com/iran-rejects-court-ruling-it-worked-with-al-qaeda-in-911-attack/

Harper's crime bill misguided, N.S. experts say

CBC.CA
CBC News

Experts in Nova Scotia say the federal government's planned youth crime bill is misguided and runs counter to statistical evidence.

The Conservatives hope to pass their omnibus crime bill in the new year. It promises tougher sentences for crimes committed by young people, among other actions.

But Chandra Gosine, a senior defence lawyer with Nova Scotia Legal Aid specializing in youth justice, said youth crime has been dropping.

He said the number of inmates in Waterville, a youth correctional facility in King's County, has been declining steadily, as has his own caseload.

"I think the portrayal of youth crime is driven both by the Conservative agenda, which inflames the public, instilling public paranoia in the criminal justice system, and by the reporting of youth crimes that are sensational," he said.

"The Conservative government intends to address all crime with incarceration, which is contrary to the philosophy and direction of both criminology, sociology and general perception in the legal fraternity, which is that rehabilitation pays better dividends than locking up people."

Media distorts view of crime
Diane Crocker, a criminologist at Saint Mary's University in Halifax, said criminal cases involving youth violence receive intense media attention, but lesser crimes are not covered, creating a distorted view of youth crime.

She said Nova Scotia's restorative justice program for young people has been successful.

"It actually effectively intervenes in incidents of youth crime that then divert youth from the criminal justice system. [It's] a totally different approach to dealing with it; a non-punitive approach that is actually shown to be a very effective way of dealing with it," she said.

"We should be proud of that, as opposed to worrying about the terrible things we see in the media that are cases that are awful, but that don’t necessarily represent the landscape of crime in Nova Scotia."

She pointed to reports that found restorative justice cuts recidivism rates as well as increasing satisfaction for victims, offenders and community members. It did not lead to an increase in youth crime, she said.

Parole approach flawed, too
Crocker said the federal government's approach to parole was also flawed. She said statistics show the national parole board is doing a good job.

"We're seeing the number of breaches of parole conditions is going down. That means that, perhaps, the correctional services of Canada is getting better at designing conditions and monitoring people on parole," she said. "Our federal government seems to be under the perception that reducing access to parole, making it harder to get parole, is the way to go."

The criminal justice system works better with a staged release of offenders, rather than denying parole and then releasing them at the end of their sentences, she said.

Chandra agreed the restorative approach kept people out of criminal activity more effectively than the punitive method.

"Many of the young people who appear in the restorative justice system appear once and never again. The statistical information on that is very positive," he said. "A few young people graduate into adult crime, but they are among the minority."

Target causes of crime: police
Frank Beazley, the chief of police in the Halifax Regional Municipality, said media focus on young criminals unfairly created the impression that most young people are criminals.

"Most crime is committed by young people between the ages of 15 and 27, so you're constantly going to see the 15-, 16-, 17-year-olds in the news as people who have committed crimes," he said.

"You have to go a step further and realize that out of all our young people, the percentage doing the crimes is very small."

Beazley said when his officers deal with a young criminal, they often find factors such as lack of authority figures and other issues. "A lot of these young people come from broken homes, from single-parent homes; they’re living in poverty; mental health sometimes plays a role. And then there's the two big monsters that are out there — alcohol and drugs."

Beazley said he does not want to comment on politics or federal legislation, but he said police have to work with other agencies to tackle the root causes of crime.

"I'd like to create long-term plans that only governments can help with — long-term plans around poverty, a strategy to try and reduce poverty, more access to services for people with drug and alcohol problems, more access to services for people with mental-health problems," he said.

"If we could start today with a long-term plan to deal with any of those issues, maybe things would continue to improve more than they are today. Crime is falling, but I think it could be more dramatic with the right services and supports to people."

Bill awaiting Senate vote
The omnibus crime bill, called the Safe Streets and Communities Act, is sitting in the Senate awaiting a vote. The omnibus legislation bundles together measures from nine bills that did not pass in previous Parliaments, some of which had been identified previously as government priorities but died when the government prorogued Parliament or an election was called.

The Conservatives used motions to limit debate and speed along the omnibus crime legislation three times on its journey through the House of Commons this fall. Doing so was important, ministers said, because the measures were a key campaign commitment for the government.

It says the public backs its bill and it has gained the support of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and some victims' groups.

As legislation, it would better protect children from sexual predators, penalize drug dealers more strictly and target repeat, violent young offenders, the government says.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/12/27/ns-experts-challenge-omnibus-crime-bill.html

Canadian Citizens Urged To Flee Syria

OTTAWA, December 15 - Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird warned Thursday that about 5,000 Canadians living in violence-ridden Syria should get out of the country as quickly as posible.

At a news conference held in Ottawa, Ont., Baird said that ten months of political rioting and very harsh government response was finally coming to a head, Postmedia News reported.

"The time to leave Syria is now," Baird said. "The writing on the wall could not be more clear."

Baird also said that children of Canadian diplomats had already been relocated to an undisclosed location. Embassy officials in Damascus have been instructed to expedite others' evacuation.

"The government is ready to provide specialized consular services to those who wish to leave," the Minister said.

Baird's warning came on the heels of an announcement by the Arab League that it was imposing restrictions on air travel into and out of Syria as a retaliation for President Bashar Assad's refusal to draw down his troops against demonstrators.

"I must warn that should Canadians stay in Syria, we will not be able to guarantee the current service at our embassy or that commercial options to leave the country will remain available," the minister said.

Lindsey Williams Predictions on Iranian War, Oil Prices, 2012 Elections, and More

Lindsey Williams, ordained Baptist Minister who went to Alaska in 1971 as a missionary working for the oil giants, and who has heavy insider sources in the industry and has been able to accurately predict a number of critical events, appeared on The Alex Jones Show this afternoon to share some startling information that he has yet to share with the public since first learning the information six months ago. Williams has become more vocal since his mysterious "Mr. X" was revealed as KEN FROMM FORMERLY OF RICHFIELD OIL, following his death last year. Williams still has at least one more man on the inside and he was apparently given the following frightening information about six months ago.

Lindsey and Alex started off speaking about the looming Iran situation, stating that there "will be a war with Iran." He said that the war would not begin until approximately September to October of 2012, however. He continued on to say, "Israel won't fire first... America won't fire first." The elitists, according to his source, need for Iran to strike first and initiate the battle. The impending feelings of doom, the U.S. forces already in position. This should, no doubt, have Iran constantly on edge. President Barack Obama has already stated to the allies that he would attack Iran no later than September or October of 2012 unless Iran is to hault their weapons program.

Lindsey continued on to say, "Obama is in trouble. He is the elitists man. But it's a mess." Obama has been placed in position with a purpose. He's the man that they want running the frontlines. They need a way to keep him in office, much as they did with George W. Bush. What better way to keep a President in charge and regain some of the extremely faultering rating than an impending war? You will note that the election is due to come about in October of 2012 as well. Seems like quite a big coincidence that Obama has stated he will hold off until September or October of next year, just in time for the election. You may also note that no president has EVER lost his position while in the midst of a war.

Williams also took the time to clear up something he'd been questioned about; He had stated in May on Jones' show that oil prices were going to rise to a particular level, and this was yet to happen. He had been precise and on-point with his other oil-related predictions, and it seemed as though maybe he was given false information on this occasion. Williams said that he had gone back to his source and asked why this had occured, to which his source replied, "...because too many American people were waking up." So it appears as though, for now at least, they have backed off with the hiking of the oil prices.

The next topic at hand was the seemingly inevitable crash of both the dollar and the Euro. Williams eluded to the fact that it's not that they are not going to crash, but rather that the elites haven't allowed them to crash YET. The reason for this, he was told, is to create massive debts before they allow the crash to occur. With this massive debt in place, they can basically then step in and state that they own the debts of these nations, and they will have to give in and accept the new global currency, whatever that may be. He also said that, by the end of 2012, all private fortunes will be lost that are not secured by paper

Another surprising statement Williams made was that welfare, foodstamps, and social security would not be cut off, even of the dollar does crash. the reasoning behind this being that, if they were to cut off all government funding to these citizens, they would have a real war on their hands. He said that it would be at least through to the end of 2012 and into 2013 before that were to happen.

Overall, it was an incredibly informative and mind-enhancing broadcast, and Lindsey Williams laid out some very scary predictions. It is more than hard to discredit the words of a man who has had such an unmatched track record for being spot on. Williams said that 2012 would be "the most eventful year in two thousand years," and judging by his predictions, I'd have to say that I am total agreement.

With all that we now know about the passing of the national Defense Authorization Act, and the Patriot Act's new definition of a terrorist, this is just fuel on top of an already white hot flame.

U.S. Government To Activate FEMA Camps Across The Country

There is an enormous difference between simply having detention camps built across the entire nation and actually having said camps acivated. Unfortunately, a document from Haliburton subsiduary KBR reveals the plans to begin rolling out the activation of their FEMA camps. The document, entitled "Project Overview and Anticipated Project Requirements" describes the specific services that KBR is looking to have subcontracted. The document was made public by Infowars.com after a state government employee who obviously wishes to remain anonymous.

Services listed within the document range from temporary fencing and barricades, laundry, catering, refuse collection, as well as many other "emergency environment" services.

It is very important to note that KBR's call to activate the FEMA camps comes just days after the Senate's overwhelming passing of the National Defense Authorization Act (or NDAA)

Here is a link to the initial report by Kurt Nimmo and Alex Jones of Infowars.com:
http://www.infowars.com/exclusive-government-activating-fema-camps-across-u-s/. The NDAA permits the military to detain and interrogate supposed domestic "terror suspects" in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment and Posse Comitatus.

In Section 1031 of the NDAA, a declaration is made which states the entire United States is a "battlefield," allowing American citizens to be arrested on U.S. soil and incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay.

There have been many civil liberty groups speaking out in opposition to the bill, most notabl, perhaps, the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), the country's oldest and largest Asian-American civil and human rights organization.

S. Floyd Mori, the national director of JACL, said in a letter addressed to congress, that the NDAA is scaling back for the first time on the protections laid out and provided by the Non-Detention Act of 1971. Mori added that the legislation, if in fact enacted and put into use, would be reminiscent of the clearly unconstitutional indefinite detention of Japanese Americans during World War II.

Obviously, the passing of the National Defense Authorization Act brings about feeling of fear in the minds and hearts of all well-informed citizens. When coupled with the Libyan and Syrian issues at the boiling point, the economy on a continuous downward spiral, the Occupy Movement still in high gear, a presidential approval rating at only 9% (The lowest in history), and the fact that the Russians and Chinese have said that they will step in to deter the starting of a war with Iran, this could be the final straw, so to speak.

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
― Benjamin Franklin