Oil & the Loonie

Something called Carbon Capture Report comes up every so often when I put “peterderemigis” into Google. Today I opened it to see why my name was embedded, and found this: my old 2010 outburst about $150-a-barrel petrol when Canada’s currency was just about par with the greenback. Now oil has sunk to just over forty dollars per barrel U.S. along with the Canadian currency now worth scarcely seventy-five percent of the U.S.dollar as media celebrates the Climate Change conference of world leaders; with the leader of Canada’s Liberals about to pledge over 2 billion dollars for a future carbon free universe.

Global Warming versus Expensive Oil

Amidst endless media concern about the dire consequences of global warming little or nothing is heard about how expensive oil has contributed to the recent world economic crisis. ‘”These are extraordinary times … the challenges we face have only just begun”‘says the governor of the Bank of Canada warning Canadians of the seriousness of the crisis. Of course as most economic commentators have said since the autumn of 2008 this recent world-wide economic catastrophe has been the effect of poorly financed mortgage loans in the United States, and not the third great oil shock caused by the price of oil rising to nearly $150 a barrel as food prices skyrocketed.

Corporations and Political Parties are a Lot like People

In the 2012 U.S. presidential election campaign someone said Republican candidate Romney thinks corporations are people. So I think that political parties like corporations are beginning to behave a lot like people especially in Canada where the actions of party leaders are too often seen as being motivated by a premier’s or prime minister’s preferences as though they had the powers of American style presidents rather than of the parties they serve, elected as members of parliament not as a prime ministers. The blurb that follows was written in 2010 and offers a glimpse of the policies and tactics of the Liberal party (just before the now defiled Prime Minister Harper’s Conservatives achieved their majority in 2011), reminiscent perhaps of the current Liberal adroitness opposing ISIS.


Canada’s 2008 motion to leave Afghanistan by 2011
On February 21, 2008 CBC News announced:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has unveiled a new motion with a hard end date of 2011 for Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan, a move aimed at bridging the gap between the Conservatives and Liberals.
It is now more than 2 years since “the gap between the Conservatives and Liberals” had been bridged and now a Toronto Star editorial encourages that “Canada Debate our role in Afghanistan”

To support its call for a parliamentary debate this editorial quotes federal Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff whose Liberals now believe
‘that there is a justification for some continued mission in Afghanistan after 2011.’
Perhaps it has been U.S Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s (representing the U.S. government and its Peace Prize winner President Obama) provocative attempt “to kick start a national debate about Canada’s future in that troubled country” that has belatedly made a debatable topic of Stephen Harper’s February 2008 parliamentary motion committing Canada to leave Afghanistan in 2011.

We know what we think we know, and what we know about politics, economics, society, science and education is what we’re allowed to know: what various authorities say on television and on increasingly opaque rumour and bias layered “social media”. So when Canada’s 2-week old Prime Minister representing Canada’s Liberal party and 39% of an electorate attended an economic conference of world leaders 2 days after a major attack in France, the conference most likely became a discussion of war. But Canada’s new leader is depicted as a “Rock Star” smiling midst a cluster of grinning and jubilant female admirers. After this initial online CBC display at the top of over 200 million files we see that the “Rock Star” Prime Minister will not continue supporting the bombings of ISIS but will send more Canadians into Iraq to train troops to maintain Canada’s opposition to ISIS. But what does this take support from there to put it here mean for Canada’s military stance in the world, in the Middle East and Africa. Will it be about the same as that developed by Canada’s former Conservative Prime Minister as Canada once advertised as peace keeper has become a peace maker; or will it appear less bellicose amidst “nuanced” utterances of a “Rock Star” seeming to give “peace a chance” .




I saw Mr. Trudeau some days before the Paris attack and the G20 conference in Turkey where media depicted him as a “Rock Star” an image that confirmed my impression of him on CP24 as a light weight speaking but saying nothing, dancing to the choreography, trying not to misstep. But here’s another impression.

Amidst much hand wringing over Europe’s and north America’s offers to import Syrian refugees, and trepidation over possible financial market losses because of the November 13 killings in Paris, investors seemed in a buoyant mood buying gold, silver, oil, bonds  and stocks on the Toronto and New York stock exchanges. Earlier videoed speeches by Mr. Obama and Mr. Hollande recommended  immediate unified actions to thwart further terrorist attacks in Europe and America.

In trying to learn online about what preparations had been made to thwart the November 13, 2015 killings before they’d happened  I discovered an article dated November 15, 2015 that suggests that French media and Paris emergency groups had anticipated the attacks and that “The head of France’s external intelligence was in Washington for consultations with CIA Chief John Brennan two weeks before the attacks” 

But the article hints that the November 13 attacks are being used as pretext for “military escalation directed against Syria and its allies[Russia?]. It is not intended to go after the Islamic State, which is protected by the US led coalition.” 

The statement about French media knowing about the attacks in advance appears in the headers of other online articles.

But the hint that France’s deployment of the ‘…aircraft carrier group Charles de Gaulle to the Middle East, with a mandate to “fight against the Islamic state”…’   

could be aimed at the “Syria and its allies and its allies” is as unusual as it is baffling.

About 6:30 pm. France announced it would send its aircraft carrier to the middle east as a result of Friday’s attacks. Online articles seem to indicate that the French had announced the sending of its Charles De Gaulle aircraft carrier before November 13, 2015. Another article dated Feb 23, 2015 linked to an November 15 Atlantic article says


“French Aircraft Carrier in Gulf for IS Fight




Unity, Change, Freedom, Obama

Mr. Hollande followed, speaking above the caption “act of war” that’s been on my screen since Saturday November 14. His Agreement with Mr. Obama’s call for stricter border control was expressed in a caption calling for stricter controls in Europe. Then another caption appeared as Mr. Hollande continued speaking asking for extra legal measures. There were  statements about the need for greater powers  and more resources(money?).

Amidst all the video statements above, one about extending a state of emergency beyond the current 3 month period seems typical in its showing a kind of after-the-fact-lack-of for thought and planning as though states of emergency should be implemented after the fact not before, as if someone’d forgotten that major attacks seem to have taken a long time to plan and do not immediately repeat  after an atrocity;  and so may not require an immediate increase in government resources (money?) and powers, but  rather thought and careful planning.

Deremigi's Blog

And today, November 15, 2015, the “unity” theme keeps appearing on my TV screen silently in printed video captions under president Obama’s speaking at the G20 conference in Turkey about stricter national boarder enforcement. And the thought occurred that at the G20 “unity” as in Mr. Obama’s early political campaigns means agreement, and it’s difficult to imagine anyone in  his audience wanting to disturb the quietude of “unity”.

December 26, 2014

I was just looking at my most recent posts: one very old one and one reminding me that “unity” is still a central political theme along with “change” both highlighted by Mr. Obama in his 2008 primary campaign bringing to mind a curious omission among political slogans – “freedom”.

View original post

Tar Sands Media Mystery

In the old article that follows are some puzzling media depicted concerns about Canada’s, Alberta’s Tar Sands; the source according to EIA of the United States of America’s most plentiful imports of foreign oil. Critics of the Tar Sands have succeeded in stopping the building of a pipeline(at least during the present administration) to carry Tar Sands oil into the U.S.A. even though that very same oil will continue being shipped by train. Recently I’ve heard that some complain that pipeline ruptures may have been the reason for resisting the Key Stone XL pipeline project; yet media stories about derailed oil tank cars at times have seemed constant. So what’s the problem? Well if the real concern is the mining of Tar Sands oil, methods of shipping that stuff distract from the real need which is to stop mining it. For according to some business journalists despite the nullifying of Canada’s pipeline project and low oil prices, Alberta’s oil industry continues doing rather well, perhaps giving rise to a former Conservative cabinet minister saying America’s cancelling the pipeline leaves some anti Tar Sands critics still unsated.

Deremigi's Blog

April 18, 2014

Since I published “Oil By Train Or Pipe”inspired by an email from the U.S. Energy Administration, some times identified by the acronym EIA, a slew of Nobel Laureates that included former president Carter was reported to have admonished Mr. Obama, the current U.S president not to exceed to Canada’s and some of his fellow Democrat’s pressure to permit the building of the Keystone pipeline that would carry Tar sands products from Canada’s western provinces into the United States. I have learned from these EIA emails that Canada which today is the U.S.’s foremost supplier of imported oil even ahead of Saudi Arabia, the land ruled by the famed royal house of Saad. From this presumed EIA presented fact one must infer that whether or not the pipeline is built should have no effect on whether or not Americans use Tar sands products which they have been consuming…

View original post 191 more words

Alberta Tar Sands

Today is November 11, 2015

Last week the United States finally confirmed that it would not allow Canada’s pipeline company to build an oil pipeline from Canada through to the southern U.S.A. to transport Alberta Tar Sands oil , and even I felt that this might limit Canadian exports of oil, its largest commodity. Well yesterday’s email from EIA reminded me that Canada with the world’s fourth largest oil reserves will continue to be a major supplier of Tar Sands oil to the U.S.A. despite the loss to the pipeline business.

Canada is one of the world’s five largest energy producers and is the principal source of U.S. energy imports.

Canada is a net exporter of most energy commodities and a significant producer of crude oil and other liquids from oil sands,..
April 18, 2014