Stephen Harper on side with drugs and terrorism

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Canada and organized Crime

Columbia today:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/business/inside/colombian.html

“After the destruction of both the Cali and Medellin cartels, the cocaine business began to fragment. Younger lieutenants realized that the large organizations had been more vulnerable to attack by US and Colombian authorities. They formed smaller, more controllable groups and began compartmentalizing their responsibilities. One group simply smuggles the drugs from Colombia to Mexico. Another group controls the jungle labs. Yet another deals with transportation of coca base from the fields to the labs. There are well known links between the Colombian Marxists guerilla groups and the cocaine trade. Guerillas protect the fields and the labs in remote zones of Colombia in exchange for a large tax that the traffickers pay to the organization. In turn, the Colombian right wing paramilitary groups are also thought to control both fields, labs and some of the smuggling routes. This situation has been disastrous for Colombia - both sides in an on-going civil war are able to reap huge profits from the drug industry which are then turned into guns for further fighting.
The DEA and the Colombian National police believe there are more than 300 active drug smuggling organizations in Colombia today. Cocaine is shipped to every industrialized nation in the world and profits remain incredibly high.”


Afghanistan retakes heroin crown


http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2814861.stm


“Afghanistan retook its place as the world's leading producer of heroin last year, after US-led forces overthrew the Taleban which had banned cultivation of opium poppies.
The finding was made in a key drug report, distributed in Kabul on Sunday by the US State Department, which supports almost identical findings by the United Nations last week.
Low-grade heroin is refined in Afghanistan from opium, which is manufactured from the extract of poppies.
"The size of the opium harvest in 2002 makes Afghanistan the world's leading opium producer," the report said.
The International Narcotics Control Strategy Report said the area of land used to cultivate opium poppies reached 30,750 hectares, compared with 1,685 hectares in 2001.
Afghanistan overtook Burma - whose production fell for the sixth straight year, to 630 tonnes - as the leading opium producer.
The British government is the leading sponsor of the anti-drugs campaign in Afghanistan.
Contradictory claims
The report said fighting illegal drug trafficking was key to the US war on terrorism.
"The US campaign against global terrorism in 2002 highlighted the importance of our international drug control programs," it said.
Despite its own figures showing the Taleban had cut Afghanistan's heroin production by about 95%, the report claimed that heroin had "financed the former Taleban regime".
The UN International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) report, released on 26 February, said that Afghanistan produced 3,400 tonnes last year, up from 185 tonnes in 2001.
While the US report praised US-backed Afghan president Hamid Karzai for the measures he has introduced to cut heroin production, the UN report said his two executive orders had no practical impact.
Growing problem
The Pentagon and the State Department are reportedly split over how heroin production should be tackled in the country.
While the Pentagon insists that the military operations in Afghanistan should be limited to fighting terrorists, while the State Department thinks armed forces should tackle opium production.
The US report also praised Pakistan for "excellent" co-operation with US anti-drugs efforts.
Last week the head of Pakistan's Anti-Narcotics Force, Major General Zafar Abbas, said that heroin production in Afghanistan this year is expected to reach more than 4,000 tonnes.
Russian guards patrolling Afghanistan's 1,340-kilometre border with Tajikistan, the main transport route for Afghan drugs to European markets, have seized 1.5 tonnes of heroin already this year.
Last year, Russian and Tajik border guards seized 6.7 tonnes of drugs.”

Stephen Harper suggested recently in a press scrum that Canada shouldn’t wait for Columbia to “solve all its problems” before investing in Columbian industry and sending Candian dollars into Columbia.

Canada can be proud that our government is prepared to do business with violent drug riddled terrorist regimes.

Just makes me so proud to be a Canadian….

NOT
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Says something about participants at CC when a bestee thread gets more traffic than current events...

But hey.....what could be more Canadian...?
 

BitWhys

what green dots?
Apr 5, 2006
3,157
15
38
What's a few assault rifles between friends when there's a pending labour shortage to offset?
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Bitwhys

Astoundingly Machiavellian isn't it!?

We'll send troops to Afghanistan ...where the Northern Alliance is our chosen allies and who are also responsible for the poppy trade...and Hapless now decides that Canada should get on the cocaine marketting bandwagon ...I could post articles about violence in Columbia but I suppose that terrorism is only terrorism when you don't make a buck at what you're doing.

Of course we can't forget Carlyle and the American nabobs of war when it comes to making profit at terrorism.....
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
Bitwhys

Astoundingly Machiavellian isn't it!?

We'll send troops to Afghanistan ...where the Northern Alliance is our chosen allies and who are also responsible for the poppy trade...and Hapless now decides that Canada should get on the cocaine marketting bandwagon ...I could post articles about violence in Columbia but I suppose that terrorism is only terrorism when you don't make a buck at what you're doing.

Of course we can't forget Carlyle and the American nabobs of war when it comes to making profit at terrorism.....

When you must do something that initially you have spoken out against, it is a method of porting your actions from somewhere out of sight while providing a distraction to attract the eye. In this way you get to play both ends of the field and enjoy the win/win result while building for your own personal future elsewhere while the results of those actions show their true nature.
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Unforgiven

Hey!

Isn't that the "conservative way"...

I remember when an Ontario premier....Ernie Eaves commiserated with the Ontario electricity bill payers who were feeling ripped-off....

He "froze" the cost of electricity and gave his conservative pals a cut on their electricity bills...and now what appears on my electricity bills....?

Debt Retirement Charge......

Man there's no fooling these Konservatives when it comes to managing to screw everyone for their personal and exclusive benefit....
 

Impetus

Electoral Member
May 31, 2007
447
33
18
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall the Debt Retirement Fee predates Ernie.

Muz

Unforgiven

Hey!

Isn't that the "conservative way"...

I remember when an Ontario premier....Ernie Eaves commiserated with the Ontario electricity bill payers who were feeling ripped-off....

He "froze" the cost of electricity and gave his conservative pals a cut on their electricity bills...and now what appears on my electricity bills....?

Debt Retirement Charge......

Man there's no fooling these Konservatives when it comes to managing to screw everyone for their personal and exclusive benefit....
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Impetus

Yes I could be wrong. Where did this debt retirement charge come from?

Other than the million dollar salaries of the thieves now in control of electricity in Ontario, why aren't Ontarians and everyone else for that matter paying the cost of electricity generation?

Why is there any question about the costs of producing and delivering this commodity?

You may be correct that Ernie Eaves didn't carry the ball on this issue, but please provide me with the rationale behind the electricity circus in Canada and Ontario....

Is it true that Canada's connection to the North American power grid permits Canadians to enjoy the filth of coal fired generating plants to feed the appetites of America....before the needs of Canadians are served?

I just wish there were people of integrity and vision running things instead of the has-been-wannabes that Canadians get to choose from at election time.... who then increase their salaries (25% for Ontarios MPPS) and provide million dollar salaries to people who haven't a clue about damn near anything never mind climbing a pole or a tower in an ice storm and attempting to restore power to millions....

We have con-men in office and Ernie Eaves has always been the picture of this caliber of politician in my mind....

My advice....

Get off the grid and demand that Canadian people take first place and not Americans.
 

Minority Observer84

Theism Exorcist
Sep 26, 2006
368
5
18
The Capitol
Columbia is a classic example of no peace not because a resolution is not possible but because the people who could bring about this change are getting too much profit both financially and politically from a waring Columbia .
 

elevennevele

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2006
787
11
18
Canada
Don't get me started on Harper's human rights hypocrisy on this one. I told ya all he was showboating about China after they snubbed him.


"I think Canadians want us to promote our trade relations worldwide, and we do that, but I don't think Canadians want us to sell out important Canadian values — our belief in democracy, freedom, human rights," Harper said.

or

''I don't think Canadians want us to sell out important Canadian values. They don't want us to sell out to the almighty dollar.''
Oh, but now it's the opposite lecture from Harper when it comes to Columbia. Columbia?! Yeah right.

"When we see a country like Columbia that has decided it has to address its social, political and economic problems, it wants to embrace economic freedom, it wants to embrace political democracy and human rights and social development, then we say we we're in," he said Monday in Bogota."
So what about leadership of Columbia having ties to death squads and drug trafficking and all sorts of human rights violations? Gee, had I made his quote myself about China, it sure wouldn't have changed the criticism I received by those who defended Harper for not supposedly, "selling out to the almightly dollar." For not tempering his open criticisms simply for trade.

Really, the only thing transparent about Harper is his hypocrisy.
 

elevennevele

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2006
787
11
18
Canada
For all the political garbage Harper has done, I still figured... - hey - there isn't any election, just sit back and spend time with the family. I mean, do I really need to waste my time pointing out the obvious with this guy?

Obvious as in "200 page manual on obstructing and manipulating Commons committees" obvious.

However, when you have found yourself making an argument over something and those who defend Harper slam you on issues of human rights (and I was by no means suggesting we don't be critical of China's human rights, but that we go about it in a more productive manner than showboating on a plane sitting on the tar mac because we got snubbed for doing amateur hour of playing domestic politics on the international stage), and then Harper now makes a case for Columbia beyond any accolade I would make for China and definitely not for Columbia... well, I just have to get back on here (with a long run on sentence) to again state a case on the dangers of having a guy like Stephen Harper lead this country.

Oh what such a man of broken promises, and control fetish desires would do to this country if we, for some lapse in judgment, give him a majority. The guy does enough damage to this country as is.
 

Impetus

Electoral Member
May 31, 2007
447
33
18
Hey Mikey!
I'm with ya here, believe me.
I'm pissed the old Hydro One CEO was allowed to leave with a major pension and severance which is likely part of the debt we're retiring no matter how they try to hide it.

Here's the official blurb:
How much is the debt and how long must we continue to pay the debt retirement charge (DRC)?

In the years prior to restructuring in 1999, Ontario Hydro had borrowed money to build new generation plants and expand transmission and distribution networks. The interest and principal on this debt was to be paid by the revenues earned from the sale of electricity. The total amount of the debt left by the former Ontario Hydro, including other liabilities, was $38.1 billion. Of that total, $17.2 billion was assigned to Ontario Hydro's successor companies - Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation (OPG). The remaining $20.9 billion was defined as 'stranded' debt. This amount was later reduced by $1.5 billion through the transfer of other assets.
Responsibility for managing the stranded debt was assigned to the Ontario Electricity Financial Corporation (OEFC). Part of the net income of OPG and Hydro One goes toward paying the debt, as do payments in lieu of taxes by OPG, Hydro One and local distribution companies. On April 1, 1999, the stranded debt amounted to just over $19.4 billion. According to the OEFC's report for the year ended March 31, 2004, the debt increased to almost $20.6 billion. This increase was largely a result of the almost $1 billion cost of the 4.3 cents per kilowatt hour fixed price for electricity introduced by the previous government. The new pricing structure, which better reflects the true cost of electricity, provides OPG with a regulated price for its nuclear and baseload hydro generation. This will provide customers with more stable prices and improve the financial viability of OPG.
The debt retirement charge (DRC), which produces approximately $1 billion annually in revenue, is intended to contribute to paying off the debt that was not assumed by Hydro One and OPG. This 'residual' stranded debt was estimated to be $7.8 billion. The DRC will end when the residual stranded debt is paid off, which the OEFC estimates will occur between 2012 and 2020. DRC revenue is included each year in the OEFC's annual report. If you would like to know more about the status of the debt, you may wish to visit the OEFC website at www.oefc.on.ca to read its latest annual report.


Muz

Impetus

Yes I could be wrong. Where did this debt retirement charge come from?

Other than the million dollar salaries of the thieves now in control of electricity in Ontario, why aren't Ontarians and everyone else for that matter paying the cost of electricity generation?

Why is there any question about the costs of producing and delivering this commodity?

You may be correct that Ernie Eaves didn't carry the ball on this issue, but please provide me with the rationale behind the electricity circus in Canada and Ontario....

Is it true that Canada's connection to the North American power grid permits Canadians to enjoy the filth of coal fired generating plants to feed the appetites of America....before the needs of Canadians are served?

I just wish there were people of integrity and vision running things instead of the has-been-wannabes that Canadians get to choose from at election time.... who then increase their salaries (25% for Ontarios MPPS) and provide million dollar salaries to people who haven't a clue about damn near anything never mind climbing a pole or a tower in an ice storm and attempting to restore power to millions....

We have con-men in office and Ernie Eaves has always been the picture of this caliber of politician in my mind....

My advice....

Get off the grid and demand that Canadian people take first place and not Americans.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Harper is merely fulfilling his role as official American lap dog, all he needs now is the uncle sam leash.
Wars on things like terrorism and drugs are nutty concepts to begin with, as it is unlikely to be successful, having a war on an ideology. For example a war on terror is of little value, as terrorism is a thing, but fighting actual terrorists is something else. The problem is instead of going where the terrorists were, in Afghanistan, America chose to invade a country that did not support terrorism and they destroyed Iraq instead.
 

TomG

Electoral Member
Oct 27, 2006
135
10
18
Wars on terrorism, drugs etc. are not so much nutty concepts as they are the stock in trade of modern nation-state leaders. It is perhaps less nutty to call them symbols rather than concepts. As symbols, they can be entirely empty of substance and content and have value as abstractions. Such things have great value for political leaders, because the symbols can mean anything that who owns them says they mean. Freedom and democracy too have become nutty concepts.

Perhaps these symbols might seem less nutty if the modern nation-state is considered to be just another corporation competing in the follower business. Our elections do seem like contests for who can assert ownership to the best set of symbols. And keeping with a business metaphor, the best set of symbols would be he most efficient ones--devices that produce followers but at minimum production costs.

What could be more efficient than gaining control of a huge source of revenue by producing followers with empty symbols that mean nothing, or anything, and can be changed at will? A competing leader can observe drugs and terror and declare war on they. The successful leader can later claim that the war on terror is really about providing freedom and democracy. The leader can eventually declare freedom and democracy and leave. I can’t remember if victory on the old war on poverty was ever declared. Lots of people are still waiting but probably forgot about that particular war. All these victories can be achieved by doing nothing at all except manipulating symbols.

Modern liberal democracies might be thought of as a business owner’s dream—huge revenue combined with low production and investment costs. Just think of the value of the asset controlled in comparison to campaign costs. The follower business must be a vision of sugar plum fairies to a business type. If nutty concepts and empty symbols didn’t exist, they’d have to be created.

And speaking, of nutty concepts, the concept of Hydro’s stranded debt (mentioned in previous posts) is another nutty concept. As I recall, the stranded debt concept was crafted because the Harris government wanted to claim something like a balanced budget. They proceeded with selling assets and accounting the sales as revenues. If there are enough assets, any books can be balanced in single years by selling assets. However, the books are balanced by accepting losses to the organization’s net value. The trouble was that the Hydro didn’t have much immediate value as an asset if its debts were included. So we had what amounted to a buy-back scheme.

What became OPG agreed to pay what might be thought of an excessive price for Hydro’s generating if the government agreed to buy back some of Hydro’s liabilities. And, the buy-back became known as the debt retirement surcharge. Great idea, the followers who bought the balanced-budget symbol will probably be paying the debt-retirement surcharge for the rest of their lives, and the leaders who owned the follower business never even had to explain what a stranded debt was. Everybody sure thought a balanced budget was great though. Balanced budget is another nutty concept. Nothing new here, the Peterson government borrowed billions from the CPP for non-profit housing and achieved a balanced budget by accounting the debt as a single year asset (but where would the liability be accounted)? When do the followers stop paying?
 

Toro

Senate Member
And speaking, of nutty concepts, the concept of Hydro’s stranded debt (mentioned in previous posts) is another nutty concept. As I recall, the stranded debt concept was crafted because the Harris government wanted to claim something like a balanced budget. They proceeded with selling assets and accounting the sales as revenues. If there are enough assets, any books can be balanced in single years by selling assets. However, the books are balanced by accepting losses to the organization’s net value. The trouble was that the Hydro didn’t have much immediate value as an asset if its debts were included. So we had what amounted to a buy-back scheme.

The concept of "stranded debt" is quite common with public utilities, though usually it is referred to as "stranded assets" with the debt financing the assets.

Utilities make investments in assets that are meant to generate cash flow for several decades. However, usually when there is a change in the regulatory environment, the projections turn out to be wrong, and the value of the asset is less than expected. Because the investment is approved by a regulatory body during a different regulatory regime, once the asset becomes impaired, it is deemed "stranded," and the regulatory body approves a charge to be levied on all consumers for a certain amount of time to cover the costs - the debt, capital expenditures and operating costs - of the stranded asset.

However, how the proceeds from the disposition of such assets effected the Ontario budgeting process, I don't know. But the concept is not unusual.
 

TomG

Electoral Member
Oct 27, 2006
135
10
18
Thanks for the clarification. Stranded debt financed asset seems like a concept I can grasp. Never the less, a library of Parliament document http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb0534-e.html used the definition below.
(7) Stranded debt is debt that cannot reasonably be serviced and retired by commercial companies (in this case the Ontario Hydro successor companies, notably Ontario Power Generation and Hydro One) in a competitive electricity market. See the 2003 Annual Report of the Office of the Provincial Auditor of Ontario.
The definition, unlike the ‘stranded asset’ concept, still seems a bit nutty. What wasn’t nutty is that Hydro did have a bunch of assets impaired from some seriously wrong assumptions about useful lives, maintenance costs and disposal costs of its nuclear power rather than impaired by changing regulatory policy. Hydro also had a large amount of foreign held debt in an era of falling exchange rates. Ontario Hydro had some serious problems (many of which were of its own making). A decent summary is below.

http://www.piac.ca/energy/ontario_electricity_restructuring/

Suffice it to say that Hydro would have been a problem for any government of any ideology. For example, there were threats from bond rating companies to lower the Province’s debt rating. The Harris government’s attempt at market determined hydro rates led to a storm of protest from seniors whose bills doubled, and also from the comedy of negative spot market prices that persisted for hours when major suppliers had to dump excess capacity onto the grid. Politics being what it is, neither the market rates nor a thoroughly privatized Hydro survived, although the stranded debt surcharge did survive.

My non-professional economist perspective is that the stranded debt concept as applied to Ontario Hydro successor companies is still a bit nutty. The environment was that the Harris government was selling public assets from an ideological perspective (privatization). The government wanted deals. I’m not sure I can see how the concept of ‘stranded assets’ can be cleanly applied when something is up for sale. One way to ‘un-strand debt’ is to sell what is indebted for what the market will bear and retire the debt from the proceeds.

Granted this ‘just sell it’ idea may be too simplistic to apply to utilities. But still, when I think of negotiating a sales deal where the idea of stranded debt is included in the deal, house seller 2nd-mortgage take-backs and zero percent financing auto deals keep coming to mind. I just can’t see how the stranded debt concept can be applied cleanly when the economic terms seem to be among the variable components of a sales negotiation. Nutty, or maybe it’s just me.