# Current plight of Afghan women



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Afghanistan: the Taliban's smiling face 
Le Monde Diplomatique, March 2003 
By JUDITH HUBER * 
IN KABUL women hurry as they go about their business. Most look like blue ghosts in their cover-all burkas. The distinctive walk of those in high heels gives a fleeting glimpse of the embroidered hems of their trousers beneath. These women seem to dress with care. Even the daring few who brave the streets without a burka still bustle, rushing past bearded men, armed and uniformed, sitting lazily on rickety chairs in front of government offices. The men's official headgear is pushed over their foreheads to shield their watchful gaze, always on the look-out for distraction. 


Young people ride by on bicycles, honking their horns and telling jokes. Men in traditional clothes walk by hand in hand, laughing and kissing as they greet each other. Merchants stand outside their shops, chatting with customers. Men in the streets of Kabul can take their time: after all, public spaces belong to them. Taiba, educated and energetic, is an Afghan woman currently working in Kabul as a midwife for the relief organisation Terre des hommes. She visits women who are forbidden to leave their homes, even when pregnant or in labour. She recently began wearing the burka again, and for a good reason: slogans on walls throughout Kabul urge women to appear in public only when completely covered. It is hard to say who is behind these messages, signed by "Afghanistan's mojahedin". Taiba does not know: it could be a neighbour, or the armed soldiers on every street corner, or the government's official security forces, made up of former anti-Soviet resistance fighters - the mojahedin. 

Women who show their faces in public risk insults and threats in Afghanistan. In Kabul and across the country the limited freedoms granted to women after the fall of the Taliban are being contested anew. The government is partly responsible for this step backwards. It pays lip service to the demands of Western financiers, who forced the government to improve the status of Afghan women. But ultraconservatives inside the government have also sought to impose accepted standards of proper behaviour. Last summer the ministry of Islamic education, which replaced the Taliban's infamous ministry for the promotion of virtue and suppression of vice, began reminding women about the national official dress code, based on Islamic values. Ministry officials approach women in public who, in their eyes, are improperly dressed. They pressure them to respect the code: this means wearing head scarves and long dark coats or skirts to cover the entire body, including wrists and ankles. Make-up is forbidden. 

Sometimes these moral guardians escort female "offenders" back to their homes, where they reprimand the women's husbands or relatives. Not surprisingly, women prefer to wear burkas rather than face constant harassment: at least burkas allow them to use make-up without being chastised and to wear what clothes they like underneath. 

Rina Amiri, a political liaison officer with the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, calls these new moral guardians "the smiling face of the Taliban". The real Taliban required women to observe Islamic values in public. But their requirements were usually enforced by physical violence. In Amiri's view, the government's actions and the recent efforts of "Afghanistan's mojahedin" mean that conservative forces are mobilising. But she does not believe these forces are working in concert: she suspects that individual groups are responsible for the dress-code changes. She stresses that Afghanistan's ideo logical battles have always focused on the behaviour and appearance of women: "Conservatives and progressives alike latch on to the issue in the same way, treating it as a symbol." Security issues are, however, paramount. Fighting between provincial tribal chiefs and non-existent central governmental authority in the regions has had a dramatic impact on Afghan women. Kabul is protected by troops from the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), the UN-sanctioned peacekeeping mission. But outside Kabul laws are flouted and security is uncertain. Since women regularly face physical violence, they are unable to assert their most basic rights (1). Many women are raped, especially among ethnic minorities such as the Pashtuns in northern Afghanistan. The dire economic situation and non-stop fighting force many families to rely on traditional dowries, marrying off - in reality, selling - their daughters, even at very young ages (2). In some regions the Taliban have been replaced by local chiefs or police officials whose attitudes towards women are just like those of their predecessors. Elsewhere Taliban-era officials are still in power. One woman from the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif now works on behalf of young people. She speaks bitterly: "They may have changed their hats, but their heads are still the same." 

As a rule, the primary concern of Afghan women (and men) is safety, a favourite topic of conversation. Women often say that under the Taliban they were able to travel across the country carrying cash, never having to worry for their personal safety. This conviction goes hand in hand with hopes that law and order will be <\n>re- established, even if the laws prove as cruel as those of the Taliban. Bandits have resumed attacks on communication routes, complicating relief work (3). Many people would prefer to see a more powerful role for the Isaf peacekeepers, although expanding Isaf is no longer mentioned. (The US was originally opposed to Isaf, which has proved very popular with residents of Kabul.) Despite this, none of the countries taking part in Isaf seems willing to provide adequate levels of personnel or funding, and it is probably too late. Local militia leaders now control the Tali ban's former regional strongholds. There are reports from the provinces of torture, clandestine prisons, arbitrary justice, persecuted minorities and internal feuds between armed groups (4). Over the past few months some warlords have consolidated their positions thanks to US money and arms, rewarding them for their support for Washington's war on terrorism (5). Human Rights Watch summed up the situation: "Security has been put in the hands of those who most threaten it" (6). 

US officials now seem to understand that Afghanistan's deteriorating security situation threatens US<\p>interests and objectives. Late last year US troops faced mounting criticism as anti-US forces reorganised themselves (7). The international effort to finance and establish a national Afghan army has stalled. At this point only 3,000 soldiers have been trained and many of them have since returned to their former warlord masters (8). To make matters worse, opium production has soared since the defeat of the Taliban (9). 

Washington was initially opposed to expanding Isaf on the grounds that the mission would require an expensive civilian presence in Afghanistan. The US has recently adopted a new strategy and is now focusing its efforts on providing stability and rebuilding the country. There are plans for civilian and military action centres in at least eight provincial cities. More fortresses than civilian establishments, these centres will bring together military experts, soldiers and a few civilians; they will join forces to repair roads, build schools and hospitals and dig wells. Their goals are to improve security, prevent the return of the Taliban and al-Qaida and to facilitate relief work. Still, everyone is sure that the US is trying to gain a foothold in the provinces to set up strategic military bases. 

Kabul's humanitarian agencies and NGOs are worried about the US plans, with the Agency Co-ordinating Body for Afghan Relief (Acbar) saying that: "We are concerned that using military structures to provide assistance and reconstruction support will both prematurely deflect attention from Afghanistan's deteriorating security situation and also engage the military in a range of activities for which others are better suited" (10). In the view of the NGOs, US troops should focus on maintaining peace outside Kabul; setting up a national army; and disarming and arresting local militia leaders. The US military motivations are fundament ally different from those of the NGOs: the military carry out political and security-related objectives (gathering information for their secret services; strengthening allied local leaders; and promoting their strategic goals), while the NGOs assist those who truly need their help. Given the blurring of the divisions separating military and humanitarian activities, the local population will soon be hard pressed to tell military personnel and relief workers apart. Relief workers face a higher risk of violence in the future. Acbar also points out that a relief worker costs 10 times less than a US soldier. Xavier Crombé, a Kabul-based official with Médecins sans frontières, is concerned about the situation: "Any confusion between military and humanitarian activities threatens our work directly." His colleagues must now take more precautions than before, although the threat of violence does not apply only to relief workers. Crombé adds: "Populations that depend on military support lose their neutrality and could become targets for attacks. That is the danger." 


* Judith Huber is a journalist with the Zurich-based weekly Wochenzeitung. 

(1) Human Rights Watch, "Taking Cover: Women in Post- Taliban Afghanistan", 9 May 2002; "We Want to Live as Humans", 17 December 2002 (www.hrw.org). See also Christine Delphy, "Free to die", Le Monde diplomatique, English language edition, March 2002. 

(2) "Report of the Secretary-General on women and girls in terri tories occupied by Afghan armed groups", UN Economic and Social Council, Commission on Human Rights, 12 July 2002. 

(3) UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan, "Afghanistan Weekly Situation Report 6-12 December 2002", Kabul, 13 December 2002. 

(4) "The situation in Afghanistan and its implications for international peace", UN Security Council, 21 October 2002. 

(5) Jason Burke and Peter Beaumont, "West pays warlords to stay in line", The Observer, London, 21 July 2002; Associated Press, 16 October 2002. 

(6) Human Rights Watch, "All Our Hopes Are Crushed", 5 November 2002. 

(7) Dan Plesch, "Failure of the 82nd airborne", Guardian, 19 December 2002; Associated Press, 25 December 2002; Luke Harding, "Karzai's first anniversary", The Guardian, London, 23 December 2002. 

(8) Sebastian Mallaby, "Wishful thinking on Afghanistan", Washington Post, 25 November 2002. 

(9) Opium production increased from 185 metric tons in 2001 to 3,400 in 2002. "Afghanistan Opium Survey 2002", UN Office on Drugs and Crime, October 2002. 

(10) "Acbar Policy Brief", Agency Co-ordinating Body for Afghan Relief, 7 December 2002. 

Translated by Luke Sandford http://rawa.fancymarketing.net/women.html


----------



## Britnell (Jan 4, 2002)

Is this a model for democracy in Iraq?


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macspectrum,

Thanks.

An excellent and thorough update on the US's lethal liberation movement.
Some readers here will have to look away very quickly.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Afghanistan is only one year past the terrible rule of the Taliban. It's no wonder that they haven't fully recovered yet. Give it some time...it's better than it _was_. Even the article seems to say so. It says that women are being escorted back to their homes and reprimanded for not covering themselves fully. In the past, they would have been beaten senseless in the streets by government approved gangs for the very same "crime". It also mentions women wearing high-heeled shoes in public. When did THAT ever happen under the Taliban?

And we are not seeing women being executed publicly, in the big soccer stadiums any more, are we?

Hey...it's not much, but it's _something_. again...give it some time. It almost seems as though you are being forced to reach for some scrap of data to hate the Americans about.

Why not relax a bit...and enjoy. It is a good moment. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are better than they were. No question about it at all.

BTW...macello...I didn't have to "look away" from the above article at all. It shows some progress since the US's "lethal invasion".

Did you have to "look away" when you saw the huge crowds of Iraqis cheering the US soldiers in the streets of Baghdad? Did it bother you that they were so very overjoyed by the presence of the US troops? Did you cringe as you watched the Iraqi crowds haul down the statue of Saddam?

Yep...it's a pretty lethal invasion...isn't it?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Even CBC reported that the cheering crowds were not "huge."
What the hell do they know? They only have a reporter at the scene. 
They are just a major news media source that has been at it for over 50 years.
The view from SSI must be much clearer.









PS - Environics poll released on CBC April 9 shows that in B.C. Steven Harper et al dropped 12 points and that support went directly to... wait for it.... the Liberals....
Jean Chretien enjoys 70% approval rating on his stance on supporting the UN (aka multilateralism) in his decision NOT to send Canadian troops into Iraq.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

macspectrum...the CBC, like most of the other critcs of this particular military action...are very busy right now trying to spin this into something that won't make themselves look so bad. Or so very _wrong_.

I'm sure you're familiar with this type of spin. It's currently much in vogue with the adherents of the left. On a whole range of subjects.

Misdirection is also a component of this "covering action". Point at something totally unrelated (but vaguely right-wing) and say, rather loudly "...yes...but look at THIS!" in the faint hope that people will forget about the bad data and get worked up about something else.

That is how I would characterise your comments regarding Stephen Harper. 

I care not one whit about some poll results regarding the current leader of the Loyal Opposition. It means nothing.

What is really important here, is how we percieve our sitting government in a few weeks, when we have all had time to digest the events of today.

Will we still all think that Jean Chretien did us proud? Will we still be on his side when we see what sort of repercussions we have to deal with for our unwillingness to help our friends when they asked for that help? When contracts are being cancelled, when American companies begin to shop elsewhere for some of their goods, and when our borders are even more difficult to cross?

And, when we are all quite sure of the horrors that Saddam was inflicting on his own people, and what he was planning for the rest of us...will we still think that the Chretien Liberals made the right choices at this crucial point?

I wonder.

I should note here that King Jean has been making one of his classic flip-flops of policy in the past few days. Once it became obvious that the US was going to be very sucessful in removing the despot without any massive casualties, then old Jean began to publicly wish the Americans well on their quest. Pretty soon he will be trying to spin this into a wholehearted support for the US actions...after the fact.

The Americans aren't buying it. I'm not either. And I suspect that most thinking Canadians are starting to get a very creepy feeling about the Liberals latest public gaffe.

I wonder how THAT will play out in future polls?

Stay tuned.


----------



## jfpoole (Sep 26, 2002)

Actually, 72% of Canadians think that Canada should have backed the war in Iraq, with 31% believing we should have sent troops, too. 

<blockquote>Asked to choose a reason for joining the war effort, 42% of people said it would be because Saddam and his allies are a threat to the West.

Toppling Saddam to stop Islamist terrorists was chosen as a reason by 15%, with 14% choosing "Americans are our friends."

Only 13% cited the U.S.'s position as Canada's biggest trading partner as the reason to support the war.</blockquote>


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Environics poll http://erg.environics.net/news/default.asp?aID=515


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Face it.
the CA will never form a gov't
their support is declining
they promised much and delivered little, except splintering the right
most Canadians agree with our prime minmister, the Rt. Hon. Jean Chretien in his stance to support the UN

Deal with it !


----------



## jfpoole (Sep 26, 2002)

Interesting that both polls came up with different numbers. Assuming that neither poll is fundamentally flawed, the explanation that springs to my mind is that the Environics poll was conducted earlier (7-27 March compared to 4-6 April), and that support for the US seems to have risen since the first week of the war.

Of course, we'll have to wait and see. It will be interesting to see if Environics does a follow-up poll, and what those results would be....


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

I'll wait for the ultimate poll.
It's called an election.
Here in Canada we count all the votes of the people and not just 9 judges.


----------



## jfpoole (Sep 26, 2002)

Unfortunately elections aren't good methods of determining whether the electorate agrees with a particular issue, but rather whether they agree on a wide spectrum of issues.

So, if the Liberals win the next election it's not possible _based on this win_ to determine if the majority of Canadians agree with the Liberals on a certain issue.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

And macspectrum, further to what jfpoole has pointed out, I think it will be very interesting when we see what the Canadian population thinks about King Jean in the coming days and weeks.

And the results of the next election might just surprise a lot of people.


----------



## jfpoole (Sep 26, 2002)

I'm curious as to what will happen in the next election, too. I don't think that the Liberals could win with Crouton in charge, although they might be able to pull off a fourth term depending on who takes charge of the party.

Of course, do the Liberals even face a credible challenge? The Canadian Alliance hasn't done that well in the east, the Progressive Conservatives haven't done well in the west, and the NDP haven't done that well anywhere


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

BTW...macspectrum speculated, on an earlier thread, that Tony Blair would be soundly rejected by the voters of Britain because of his unwavering support for the US removal of Saddam.

He seems to think that, because Blair went against his own Party policies and committed British troops to the war against Saddam, that he would be dumped in the next British elections.

It is a matter of public record. Along with a lot of his other rantings.

Let's all watch...and hold his feet to the fire on this one, eh? Just for fun.   

Personally...I think it will be a cakewalk for Tony. He will blow his opponent right off the ballot. Just like Thatcher did so very many times...and for the very same reasons.  

I should note here that I am on the opposite end of the political spectrum from Tony Blair. He is not a candidate that I would normally support.

But he's a REAL guy. And he has resolve. He says what he's going to do, he follows through, and it _works._

What else could we ask? He's got my vote. Boy HOWDY!


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

JFP...the whole political spectrum is in serious flux right now. In Canada and everywhere else. the paradigm is changing with the sort of rapidity that we haven't seen for a decade or two.

What we know as fact right now may very well be looked back upon as total fallacy in a few weeks or months. Polls are only a snapshot of a fleeting moment, after all. Nothing is static anymore.

It will be very interesting to see if the current Liberal Government is able to weather the next political storm that is on the horizon. They are already largely percieved as corrupt and arrogant by the average Canadian voter. We all know they are crooks and pretty much ineffective at running the country (their most sucessful policies have all come from the right, after all. Their own home-grown policies have been massive failures)...we just don't see a clear alternative on the horizon. Not this very moment, at least.

I suspect that, in a few short weeks, we will all be looking very carefully for an alternative. ANY alternative. And I honestly think that one will present itself.

And we will all vote FOR that alternative and AGAINST the current Liberal Government. No matter _who_ happens to be running it at the time of the actual election.


----------



## jfpoole (Sep 26, 2002)

macnutt wrote:
*They are already largely percieved as corrupt and arrogant by the average Canadian voter.*

If that's the case (I'm not saying it isn't, I just don't know what most people think about the Liberals), then a change in leadership might be able to fix that. I don't think it's possible to predict what will happen until the Liberals elect a new leader and Canadians get an idea as to how this new leader will run the party and the country.

Who knows? The Liberals could be elected for a fourth term, or they could go the way of the PC party....


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

We will have to wait and see. I don't think that the current Liberals are going to look very good to the average voter in the coming days, and there is enough bad history there already that we could be on the edge of a BIG change.

All we need is a viable alternative. We may just have one in very short order. Watch and see.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macnutt, however, what if the alternative votes are spread out over four parties? Then, the Liberals still maintain their control of the federal government? Do you see the PCs and Alliance merging in some manner?


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Just speculation at this point, but I can honestly see the NDP reduced to a fraction of it's already fractional status. I can see the ruling Liberals almost wiped out by a massive backlash from the electorate, because of their previous scandals and bad decisions coupled with their massively bad call on the war on Iraq and the removal of Saddam. The public insults of Americans will seal their fate...especially when the repercussions from those moronic bleatings are a part of the daily news. Not to mention the reduced trade and layoffs that they have already started to inspire.

We are in real trouble here. We need to make a 180 degree shift to repair the damage.

And...yes. I think this will be the most opportune moment for some white knight to ride in and unite the right. Once that happens, the die will be cast and we will have a totally new government for the first time in more than a decade.

We need it, we are more than ready for it. Build it...and they will come.

Watch and see.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macnutt,
Ask the dead and their families.
You make a great cheerleader from afar, keep dancing.
Go Leafs! .... now that's a game for cheering. 
Let's not confuse war with the playoffs.

BTW, I'm still waiting for your backup info re: BILLION$ & BILLION$ for Afghanistan.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macnutt you are so far off base on central Canada politics it literally makes my head spin.









They have a column of equally foolish "predictions" called Stargazing aka astrology in most magazines and it makes an equivalent amount of sense.

Talk about wishful thinking  

The only government likely to be chased out is the Conservatives under Eves they are severely behind a really lame duck Liberal party in Ontario and as Andy says Canadians do tend to vote against when there is no clear leader who makes sense.

IF Chretien would have attempted another term then the electorate would have punished the Liberals.

With a known centre right Martin who is committed to change and cleaning house, has international respect and has Quebec in a lock the NEXT election is not the one to be wishful about.

Indeed the world realpolitik is hinging on the next short while and what the US does next to repair or not repair relations internationally will have a enormous impact on the next decade.

Why marginalize your voice with completely unrealistic wishful thinking. Once again









White knights are for fairy tales.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Of all parties, I hope that the NDP survives. They, along with the Bloc, are the only two distinct parties out of the five, with the Liberals, PCs and Alliance blending together somewhat. We shall see.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Excellent view Dr.G.,

I dread a possible Blair style "Gliberalism" here (not unlike Mulroneyism) and hope that Martin will hold the torch that has served us well enough to score with best economic prospects in the G7. (see IMF news today)

Being socially left and financially right might be my internal conflict but I have to see that as an aeroplane with engines on both wings.

At times like this I'm happy to move my finances to the left enough to help steer our national instinct to non-violent solutions.

Our friends to the south have problems real and percieved with this balance, especially with the near moribund state of affairs in Afghanistan.

ON TOPIC now:
For macnutt,
Re: Afghanistan.
So far my research has led me to past and the most recent supplementals of the Bush administration.
(This is where they financially **** or get off the pot)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/speeches/senior_admin032403.html 

I find no reference to the financing of aid efforts in Afghanistan or any request for aid funds.

I need to hear from your sources.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

macello, we are similar in that manner. I am a fiscal conservative, hating to see money wasted on programs like gun registration, the Senate, political junkets, etc. However, I am a social liberal, wanting to see that money saved go into childcare, education, health care, shelter for the homeless, etc. I am not sure how fiscally responsible the NDP might be if they had control of the federal government, but I still want them to be a strong "voice" in the House.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

FABULOUS credentials macnutt!
"No problem. As a former CIA operative I can tell you, chapter and verse".
I just caught this info of yours on another topic. It's so hard to keep up.

So? .......... Mr CIA  , I need to hear about the Afghan billion$ from your sources. Are the funds are being clandestinely funneled into the Kabul PTA or such away from the prying eyes of the OMB and the US Senate? 
We won't blow your cover .... promise.
BTW do you get a pension or a badge or something ...even a secret ring ?


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

YO! macspectrum,
President Cheney may need the royal brat capped if he wanders off script again ... what with running around the PR circuit with his british poodle.
Macnutt surely qualifies for the job of exterminating with extreme prejudice the pathetic imbecile given his slavish devotion "we attack without mercy when directed to do so." to his handlers. He might even find Bush's "still warm" liver a bit gamey. 
(quotes from macnutt posted April 06, 2003 08:24 AM)

Amazing coming from me .... eh ... and I'm not even anti-american, at least not more so than any of my American friends or those who did not vote for President Cheney.

Someone must remind us of how Cheney became President of the United States.
Anyone up for that ?


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Ye know?  If I really think on it, macnutt's too sentimental for the job.
We've all heard the gory fantasies elsewhere in posts here whenever the rabid fangs come out with a bit of the foam. 
That's OK.
The "I'm actually a secret agent" we've heard so often from the lonely guys  at the other end of the bar after ten beer, six shooters and a valium. 
That's OK too!


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macello,
be very careful with your comments on the health of foreign leaders.
on person, on another "mac" board, was "visited and detained" for comments that were just a little more obvious than your own.
this person made a public apology for said comments and described in some detail their "experience." Where is the link you ask? The day after I had read it, the page is no longer available.
be careful my friend.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Oh, come ON!!....

I have never even been to Langley, Virginia! Ever!! To even suggest that a goofy Canadian was ever a part of the CIA is pure fantasy. Or a paranoid fallacy...to say the least.

This was a joke, that was started by macspectrum, and I went along with it and carried it to it's logical conclusion...just to prove how ridiculous it really was.  

The Company would never have a guy on the payroll that was as ugly as myself. Too much of a heat score. Too noticeable in public. An "agent" that looked like Frankenstien's Monster is beyond anything that might be written for a very bad TV movie.

Don't be silly!

I am just a former oilpatch tech geek who happened to live all over the western hemisphere, for a long time, during a rather pivotal period in history. Nothing more than that.

Get real.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

BTW..macello...

I certainly prefer "President Cheney" to the former "President Hillary Clinton". One...at least...was elected. The other was not.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt typed (again)
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> ...as ugly as myself. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

by my count, this is the 3rd time you've mentioned that since i have been keeping track.

i'm no clinician but i would have to ask you;
"do you have some self image issues?"

need an hug?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt claimed:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Oh, come ON!!....
I have never even been to Langley Virginia! Ever!! (followed by stuff about it being macspectrum's fault) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course you know that we would expect a "company man" like you to say that.
Manchurian Candidate?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt typed:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I certainly prefer "President Cheney" to the former "President Hillary Clinton". One...at least...was elected. The other was not. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hilary has bigger balls.
In a 2 out of 3 falls wrestling match between the two, my money is on the junior senator from NY.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Nope...just dealing with a current reality.








 

I am homlier than the south end of a northbound mule. Small children and dogs seem to run away in horror when I am on the scene. Some women recoil, as well. They freak and run..especially when I have my shirt off. It could be the fact that I have far more hair on my back than on my head. LOTS more!  

But...oddly... some chicks seem to dig this. I have had more "trophy girlfriends" than I have had any right to.









I can't explain this...I just go with it, when it happens! My Cuban girlfriend ( a doctor, with TWO PHD's) and several very notable women in Brasil and Columbia, et al...were Playboy magazine material. Why they found me even remotely attractive is still a mystery.

As I said...I just go with it, when it happens.  

Life can be good...even for the terminally ugly among us. My advice? If it happens to you...just GO with it. It's a great ride. Honest. Take what is offered to you...and run with it! You won't be sorry


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

[just shakes head at above post]


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Now if we could just adjust the "current reality" telescope so that politics, particularly central Canada politics would also come into clear focus..........  

Generally it's considered that women are attracted to power and you definitely qualify as an alpha male so I wouldn't be too surprised.
.....of course they COULD just feel sorry for you.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Still, only the NDP has had women as the leader of their party. I guess the most success a woman has had in a leadership race for the Liberals and PCs would be Sheila Copps and Flora MacDonald. Actually, Deborah Gray of the Alliance is, in my opinion, the strongest (in a non-physical sense) woman politician in Canada. 

I wonder when gender, race and religion will not have a role in the Canadian and US political spectrum. I can just see a Jewish African-American woman being elected president of the US, with a gay VP, and then we shall know that the voters are voting for the person and not the stereotype.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Dr. G we had Kim Campbell as PM - course it was very short.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt, time to make your move in the "company"
lots of disgruntled employees not too happy with the way things are being run over at 1600 PA Ave.
could be an opportunity for you to move up in the ranks
there are already some rumblings about "early retirements."
strike while the iron is hot


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

So it was the lonely guy at the other end of the bar. 

Back to Topic!

Re: macnutt's truism: "The afghanis are as far away from a functioning democracy as any group on earth." (macnutt post April 09, 2003 04:19 AM)  

I have for macnutt's refutation a look at financial concerns vis-à-vis the US's arrogant duplicity about spoils of war for US corporations versus their request for the "unwilling" to share the costs of repairing bomb damage.

This is a good read: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2927719.stm 
Jeremy Scott-Joynt 
BBC News Online business reporter: 
(excerpt)
"The simple practicalities of the situation could force such a development, since broken promises in Iraq along the lines of those which have left AFGHANISTAN with only half the resources it was promised could destroy the US-UK rationale for war: that they are liberating Iraqis for a bright, democratic future. 
Bathsheba Crocker (CSIS) certainly sees it this way, insisting that a rush to make money on the back of the Iraq conflict, or a lien on future oil revenues, would be a disaster."

IRAQ'S OBLIGATIONS 
Total: $383bn 
of which... 
Pending contracts: $57bn 
Debts: $127bn 
Compensation claims: $199bn 
Source: CSIS, Washington DC


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Oddly enough macello...I agree with you. Any sort of obvious profiteering by American interests...especially ones that are connected to the top Administration..would be seen as totally wrong by the American voters. It would be the kiss of death for their re-election hopes.

It's such a public thing, at this point, that I can see all of them going to very great lengths to NOT be seen to be making any money from the re-organisation of Iraq.

They went far out of their way NOT to kill a lot of civilians...even though this put their own soldiers in a more dangerous situation. Public perception is a very big factor in a 21st Century war, after all.

Consequently...I honestly believe that the current US Administration will try very hard to be totally fair when awarding contracts to rebuild Iraq. Even to the point of inviting the French to do some of the work. Make a former adversary into an ally. The US is VERY good at doing this...if you look at their past history. And it usually works out pretty well, in the end.

Finally....on a totally different tack. Macdoc has speculated that some of my previous liasons with the fairer sex have been a result of their attraction to an "alpha male". Or...referring to my physical appearance...he said "they might just feel sorry for you".

Quite true. I am terminally ugly. I am also rather entertaining to be around ( I make them laugh), I am very gentle around small children and animals....oh...and one more thing.... I'm wealthier than some Eastern European nations. I have more money than Africa.

That seems to be the great equaliser.

  

And I am, when all is said and done, not at all adverse to a sympathy f**k.







 

Hey...works for me!


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> and am wealthier than some Eastern European nations. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

those "checks" from the Dept. of Agriculture (aka 1st Secret Bank of Langley, Virginia) must have been some real good ones


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

LOTS of zeros, Michael....LOTS and _lots_ of zeros.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

BTW...macspectrum. You get a special bonus for overthrowing a dictatorship.A VERY BIG bonus.

Notice any dictatorships in my old stomping grounds?   

Used to be. Not any more. 

South and Central America are doing pretty well, these days. A job well done.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt, re: nouveau riche etiquette.

one doesn't mention "zeros" anymore, one just mentions the number of "commas" (eg. "that house is in the serious 2 comma range)

one doesn't mention how much a big ticket item costs, one mentions the amount of the insurance premium (eg. we're paying well over 1 comma to have our boat insured)

to use some "scientific equivalences" that might assist - just think of applying logarithms to a bunch of number to help flatten out the curve

wow - using math to explain english
my grade 13 algebra teacher is smiling

please adjust your personal vernacular accordingly (yeah, yeah, i know it's an oxymoron - i invoke literary licence on that one)


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Macnutt, your deference to the American voter is strange to me given some of those seemingly "might is right" proclivities of yours, but if it works with certain girls, that's okay.

My basic concern with the altruistic use of the term democracy, harkens back to Mulroney's innovative and abrupt unhinging of political continuity and probably sovereignty by "tough decision"; i.e. nafta and gst.

Over the past two decades this has become a weapon for radical and too often traumatic shifts in the structure of our societies like the dismantling of the middle class creating a much wider economic schism and a large security apparatus to maintain it. (WTO Seattle 1999)

That these trends have increased and will further must surely lead to some critical mass and it's resulting BLOW BACK, a ruthless equaliser where violence seeks violence.

The tragedy of Afghanistan as a basket case is the inability of our great civilization to accord those people some measure of personal safety and dignity.

Them big dudes without guns that I foist upon readers with that URL to me personify and impart true dignity in the face of death while dismantling mines and cluster bombs left by people full of hate.
http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/mdc_team_5.html


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Macello...I'm not sure if you are advocating the abandonment of all of Muroney's major policies, or not.

We're talking about the same ones you mentioned in your last post. The GST and NAFTA. Both were hated, in their day.

If so...then I just have to ask why that the Chretien Liberals have not made any real effort to dump these horrible right-wing policies. They promised...on a stack of bibles...to cancel these programs more than a decade ago. (after all, they used these iron-clad promises to help them get elected. TWICE!!)

You don't suppose that the wishy-washy Liberals actually LOOKED at these policies, and decided that they were the key to a real and lasting prosperity, do you?

And...you don't suppose that these "hated" right-wing PC policies are much of the reason that Canada is actually doing pretty well right now, do you?

Naaawww..._couldn't be!!_ Not a chance. Right?

But that begs the question...

If we were all marching in the streets, ten years ago, to protest the GST and NAFTA(Free Trade)...and if the present Liberal Government was elected because they promised to eliminate these terrible programs as soon as they attained power...

Then why the heck have they not done this?

No mention of it at all, after more than a decade in power. Wonder why that is? Do you suppose they forgot why we elected them? Or did they just forget their election promises? 

Aaaawww...what the heck. We are all fat and happy...and the Federal Liberals are getting very rich on a personal level. We are in a very bad position with our biggest trading partner, and lots of our crucial trade with these people is in question. We have almost no military strength to defend or patrol our lengthy coastlines...and have severely pissed off the one country that was always ready to help us do this task. One of our biggest trading relationships (petroleum) with our huge southern neighbor is about to go the way of the great Auk because of the imminent release of masses of high-quality and very cheap Iraqi oil on the market.

And we have no recourse. We are not even on their radar screen right now....because many of our top officials have called their top official bad and insulting names. In public. And our Prime Minister has been seen to publicly accept these insults to our best trading partner. He didn't call for any resignations, or even chastise these morons. He just smiled and waved.

Oh joy.  

I wonder how life would be, here in Canada, if we had to suddenly start spending ten or twenty times as much as we currently do on our military...and divert far more cash to our immigration system than we have wasted on the failed Liberal gun registry, just to keep the borders with the US open. All because relations with our huge and powerful neighbor have noticeably cooled.

Did I mention massive increases on military spending because we can no longer expect them to automatically come to our aid?

Couple that with a severe drop in tourism and a noticeable reduction of contracts and orders from the USA.....and a huge drop in the amount of money that we get from them each year...

Geee...we could be in real trouble here. Big Time!!

And we would only have one group of idiots to blame for it.

Three guesses who that would be.  

Canada needs a regime change. Right NOW! Not just a change of the head guy. We need a whole new Government. ASAP!!

If not...then we are in REAL TROUBLE!

Trust me on this.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I wish we had the power to impeach our fine leader. The guy is a complete moron and a disgrace to Canadians. 
By the time he and his cronies are done, we'll be lucky if we have ANY economy left.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Bravo adagio! At least SOMEBODY here is not afraid to look at the big picture and judge it with clarity.  

It is a scary situation we are in right now. Everybody needs to realise this simple fact. And act accordingly.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Jean Chretiens Liberals have made a huge mess. We need to dump the whole batch of them. NOW!!

Before they do any more damage to our lovely country. We cannot afford to have them around any longer. They have to GO!! 

NOW!!!...Right this very MOMENT!!!!

Flush these cretins, before they really ruin our lives and embarass us beyond repair.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

The sad thing is that the sour relations with the US need not have happened. I believe the Americans would have reluctantly accepted that Canada was not going to be involved with the war. It's those idiots who couldn't keep their mouths shut that have done the damage. That and the fact nothing was done about the matter. They should have been publicly reprimanded for their inexcusable conduct by our leader. Instead, the world media got a shrug of the shoulders and a "oh well.."

The US makes up well over 50% of our trade. We diss the Americans at our peril. THAT'S REALITY ! 

I would love to see some of the folks here who think otherwise as they are lining up at the food bank because there are few jobs left.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Macnutt you are hopeless.

Your nightmare has arrived.

Liberals in BC.

Liberals in Quebec as of Monday with a terrific right of center and dynamic leader

Liberals in Ontario as of the fall, ahead 18% in the polls despite a lame leader.

Liberals in Ottawa indefinitely when Martin steps in and solidly in power now despite Teflon man who most of the country will be relieved to see the last of ...finally.

The Canadian economy in far better shape than the US, indeed than others of G8.

You are supposed to be the "realist"..the "deal with it guy."

Canadians in general seem to clearly favour a party that straddles the middle political spectrum.
One wag put it nicely somewhere here I think of one of the Star's letters.

"I'm for fiscal responsibility and also for responsible government spending on social programs such as health and education.
It's sort of like a two engined airplane - if one sputters the other takes over".  

Carrying on a good analogy let us present Macnutt's political flying machine  

Powered by a single loud two stroke engine with few pollution controls, very little power and in dire need of maintenance. The design is such that the right wing is continually pulling to one side making staying in the air at all a difficult task and flying in a straight line impossible.

Two marginal pilots are wrestling for control of the single stick, unsure of where they are flying to and flying so low as to be almost off the radar screens. 

Seems about right 

You speak of democracy, then LISTEN to it speak VERY LOUDLY in favour of policies the Liberal parties embody.
 

Just a little insight perhaps from the latest Environics poll in Ontario.
"One percent volunteer that they would vote for the Canadian Alliance. Two percent either volunteer that they would vote for some other party or offer some other kind of response."

Can anyone enlighten me as to what other parties or "other response" are more favorable than the Alliance??









Below the radar is being generous.  

Now we could come with other "flying machine analogies for Provincial and Federal leaders and parties.
Contributions welcome.

ie NDP Federal
Jack Layton flying a wind powered city hopper by remote control ( no seat in the Commons yet







) also poorly designed with an over length left wing, the handling characteristics furthered impeded by a huge mound of baggage Labouriously piled on.

Liberal Federal.
Jumbo jet in the stratosphere firing happily on all engines but flown by an aging unpopular Captain adept at dodging missiles. Call sign Teflon Man.
A restless crew is after his job. 
His former popular co-pilot is banished to the rear seats.
Well fed passengers also looking forward to a change of flight commander at the stopover scheduled for next February.
Fueled by years of patronage and a healthy economy and allowed freedom of the skies by it's competitors - see above.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I won't have a problem when Martin steps in but in the meantime we have to put up with Chretien. I have my fingers crossed that it won't be too late to undo the damage done.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Macdoc....

The "Liberals" in BC have co-opted that name in order to be more palatable to our electorate. They are actually pretty far right...and have been making Ralph Klein's guys blush with shame.

Oddly enough....even with all of their radical right-wing manouevers, they are still wayyyy out ahead of the hated NDP in the polls. Everybody around here thinks that they are doing just what HAS to be done, to fix the damage done by a decade of NDP rule.

Except the big Unions.

But they are in decline all over the world these days. They know that a change is coming. They don't like it much....but they realise what the reality is. Simple as that.

Tell you what....come back and tell me in two or three years that the Federal Liberals, or any Provincial iteration of same, is on the upswing. Tell me that left-lib thoughts and practices are the dominant force in this country.

I double-dog dare you!!

The Canadian electorate has not yet digested the recent 21 day war in Iraq...or the horrible and inexcuseable performance of the corrupt morons in Ottawa during this period of history.

When they do...and when all of the repercussions of their foolishness and stupidity has sunk in, then we will all soundly reject these idiots as "unfit to govern". En masse!

I am ready to bet big money on this outcome. And it has NOTHING to do with some sort of blind loyalty to any sort of ideology, or preconcieved notions....

It is REALITY.

Watch and see.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Thank you Macnutt you just made my case for centrist popularity and a two engine approach.  

Machiavelli would be proud of Mr. Campbell.

Care to sketch out Mr. Campbell's magnificent flying machine  Perhaps with his Hawaian adventure included


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macnutt ...... thanks for the non-response on the tragedy that is the US's Operation F*** Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan; .... 
,,,,, here's your boilerplate (we know it well) ...... just post this URL in the future:
http://www.canadianalliance.ca/english/index.asp 

I DO FEEL YOUR PAIN! 
You guys need help BIG TIME! 
First get HUMOUR. Mulroney had John Crosby. 
Dr.G., prepare to launch; target: Salmon Arm, BC.
Harper is a limp pussy. No humour. No killer instinct. Hated by Ontario PCs. Quebec "passe le gaz" in his general direction and he looks like he has to pee.

Given your: "regime change. Right NOW! a whole new Government. ASAP!!",
the following organizations await your obvious leadership qualities.

TIPS: START HERE: (you are not alone)
http://www.lufa.ca/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=84&whichpage=2 

"LUFA.CA" is registered. 
Domain Name: lufa.ca (53249) 
Registered: 2000/10/30 
Last Modified: 2002/11/12 
Expires: 2004/12/12 
Registrant: Law-abiding Unregistered Firearms Association (53249) 

THEN GET GORDY







ONSIDE and bring in the:
http://www.republicofalberta.com/ 
Republic of Alberta 
316 Oakwood Place S W 
Calgary, Alberta T2V 3Y7 
CA 
Domain name: republicofalberta.com 
Administrative Contact: 
Calvert, Douglas [email protected] 
316 Oakwood Place S W 
Calgary, Alberta T2V 3Y7 
CA 
403-281-4419 Fax: 815-846-7450 

"Actually" they won't likely want to share ...
BETTER YET:
http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/ 
domain: unitednorthamerica.org 
owner-address: Jonathan Wheelwright 
owner-address: P.O. Box 114, Elmwood Postal St. 
owner-address: R2L-1A5 
owner-address: Winnipeg 
owner-address: Manitoba 
owner-address: Canada 
phone: +1 2046642345 
e-mail: [email protected] 

It's time to blow you cover!

AFL-CIO;








the people that brought you the weekend!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

macello, I am a pacifist, and thus, have no weapons in my house (other than the two Devil Dogs known as the Dynamic Doxie Duo). Thus, you will have to launch from other sites in Canada.

I do have an AF of L and CIO union card somewhere. Back when I was in high school and working various places in summer and after school jobs, I had to join various unions affiliated with these two major labor organizations. My grandfather was a big union supported (the International Ladies Garment Workers Union of America in NYC), and he was quite pleased with this decision to join the union (I actually had no choice, but he didn't need to know this). 

As the song goes, "Oh you can't scare me I'm sticking with the union, I'm sticking with the union until the day I die."

Solidarity forever, brothers and sisters.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

from a couple posts above:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Republic of Alberta <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Where the hell is that?
Nevermind, just answered my own question.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macspectrum

Tip: where the dinosaurs fart.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

Dr.G.,

Do they measure a half a dog by a dog and a half?

I truly miss the wit of the Hon. John C. 
Never a bore.
Always a bellylaugh.
The last of the righteous assholes.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macello tipped:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> macspectrum
Tip: where the dinosaurs fart. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ralph Klein farts??


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macello, John Crosbie is now the Chancellor of Memorial University of Newfoundland (where I am a profesor). He still comes up with a "good one" every now and then at the various yearly commencements.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macspectrum

Eine Kleine Farte Musik


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

perhaps uncle ralph should go to a private sector clinic to seek a cure to his ailment - it isn't life threatening (for him anyways)
OR
he could tape a colostomy bag to his ass and bottle the stuff as "Ass Gas"
sold at a preimi(er)um of course


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

You guys just _hate_ a winner, don't you. Especially when he doesn't follow the old Union pamphlets.









Alberta is doing just fine, and BC is heading that way because Gord Campbell is taking a page out of Ralphie's book. There is nothing remotely "left" or even "centerist" about the current BC Liberal government.

Geee...you guys sure do get hung up on labels, don't you?
















Perhaps Stephen Harper should change the name of the Alliance to the "New Ultra Leftist Party".

Now THAT should bring in a whole lot of mouth-breathers who can't see beyond a label on the front of the house. The rest of us would know what's really going on, and would still vote for reality. Just as we've been doing for more than a decade.









Drop by, you might just like it. There are white canes in an umbrella stand right by the front door....for those who are still blinded by a failed ideology. Wouldn' t want you to trip on anything, after all.


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

WAR IS FUN WHEN YOU KNOW YOU WON"T DIE! *
*AWOL (armchair warriors on line)

ACTUAL TOPIC: Current plight of Afghan women. 

December 10, 2002 - AWM supports RAWA's call for human rights in Afghanistan. RAWA has called for the removal from power of warring factions in control of most of the country. RAWA also said that life under the warlords is no better than it was under the Taliban. 
http://afghanwomensmission.org/index.php 

OFF TOPIC:

macnutt:
"Alberta is doing just fine, and BC is heading that way because Gord Campbell is taking a page out of Ralphie's book." 

Gordy (hic)







lost the page from Ralphie's pamphlet in a Maui jail cell and Ralphie needs it back.

HELP URGED FOR ALBERTA HEALTH CARE SYSTEM. 

Tuesday, Apr. 15, 2003 

Calgary, Alberta's health-care system is under siege and funding levels should be reviewed in light of the death of a 23-year-old man with stomach pains who left two separate emergency rooms after waiting more than six hours without seeing a doctor, an judge has ruled Monday. 

A fatality inquiry was ordered after Vince Motta?s family complained that long hospital lineups contributed to his death on Jan. 2, 2001. 

While experts told the inquiry that Mr. Motta died of natural causes; cardio respiratory failure brought on by an asthma attack , Judge Delong found that Mr. Motta endured unreasonable delays at facilities that were understaffed and lacked resources to serve a booming population. 

On Jan. 1, 2001 Mr. Motta visited Calgary's Rockyview General Hospital's emergency department, waited for two hours and then headed to across town to the Foothills Medical Centre for treatment. Once there, he spoke with a triage nurse who said his condition was so serious that he should receive medical care within 30 minutes. Four hours later, Mr. Motta was paged, but by then he had got fed up and left. 

Later that day he went to the High River Hospital near his home in Okotoks, Alta., and was diagnosed with appendicitis and underwent surgery. During the operation, he suffered an asthma attack and was sent back to Foothills, which had specialists in that area. 

The air ambulance, operated by the Alberta Shock Trauma Air Rescue Society, wasn't dispatched immediately because there were no intensive care unit beds available in Calgary. When the helicopter finally arrived in High River, the landing pad was unlit and the gate to the hospital locked. At least another 30 minutes was lost before Mr. Motta received care at Foothills, where he died. 

Judge Delong's 67 page report criticized the Calgary Health Region, which is responsible for Rockyview and Foothills hospitals, for failing to disclose documents in a timely manner and for, in some cases, issuing reports that were incomplete or unintelligible and capable of misleading the inquiry. 

The CHR has attempted to portray itself as suffering under a national trend of emergency departments under stress without acknowledging that the trend was arguably STARTED HERE IN ALBERTA, Judge Delong said. 

http://www.globeandmail.ca/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030415.winqu0415/BNStory/National 

A/CFL-CIO/ILO: The people that brought you the right to fair wage.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

And...by all accounts...Alberta has the highest paid doctors and nurses in the land! Most of the hospital dishwashers and floorsweepers are also on the high end in Alberta. Does this TELL you something about a government funded system? Even with the VERY HIGHEST WAGES IN THE LAND?

It should.

What you have written here on ehMac PROVES that even the highest wages for Union members won't solve the problems that are endemic to our flawed and unsustainable Health Care System.

Are you _listening?_ Or are you still stuck in some old well-worn Union pamphlet? One that says "more money will result in better service, and everything will be okay once we give all of the Big Unions just what they are asking for??

Still stuck in that old fashioned, and very false, version of reality?

Why? Especially given all of the current data?

If so...I have only two words for you..... 

WAKE-UP!


----------



## arminarm (Jan 12, 2002)

macnutt,
I know that these things upset you and we get your "heat of the moment" lashing out etc. ..







.. but you choose to ignore valid information posted by many others here, thereby disqualifying your own anecdotes and unsupported opinions. 
Perhaps your expertise exceeds that of Dr.Relman and Alberta Judge DeLong, in which case please list your credentials. 
Before you do, reread the already posted information below which you previously chose to ingnore and compose a learned refutation. 
Avoid the momentary heat ... Okay?

Please also present "Especially given all the current data?" which you chose to hide from us in your previous post.

FOR PROFIT HEALTH CARE: 
Expensive, Inefficient and Inequitable 

Dr. Arnold S. Relman, Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Emeritus Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, Presentation to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. 

"most of the current problems of the U. S. system - and they are numerous - result from the growing encroachment of private for-profit ownership and competitive markets on a sector of our economy that properly belongs in the public domain. No health care system in the industrialized world is as heavily commercialized as ours, and none is as expensive, inefficient, and inequitable -- or as unpopular. Indeed, just about the only parts of U. S. society happy with our current market-driven health care system are the owners and investors in the for-profit industries now living off the system."

Both Calgary and Edmonton have fewer hospital beds, expressed by size of city, than many other Canadian centres. In Calgary, the average waiting time to see emergency room nurses and doctors increased by 30 per cent between 1999-2000 and 2001-02. Between 1997 and 2001, the number of emergency room beds didn't change, yet the city's population grew by about 15 per cent. 

"The CHR has attempted to portray itself as suffering under a national trend of emergency departments under stress, without acknowledging that the trend was arguably started here in Alberta," Judge Delong concluded. 

http://www.fyicalgary.com/calsun.shtml


----------

