Unfair Trade, the Skeptics View

Why don't stores carry any any unfair trade labelled products? I mean, for someone like me, who is a little short on cash, and without any major moral dilemmas, unfair trade products represent an ease on the wallet.

Now their must be unfair trade products, because there are fair trade products. So should we assume all imports not labelled 'fair trade' are exploitive and made in sweatshops?

How much better treated does someone in fair trade get? In the third world, a job is a job. The going rate for labour is the going rate. Do fair trade companies say that's not fair, we're raising the bar? Who cares if our products are more expensive?

Or is it a big scam to make more money? Can I really trace those coffee beans, or the chocolate bars back to fair trade practices, whatever fair trade is really defined as? Was there absolutely no sexual harassment in the workplace, no unscrupulous boss getting some nookie in the back office so the new girl could keep her job? How can I be sure? Do the books show these bosses paying employees generously? How do I know they're not getting a kickback when the 'fair trade' police are looking the other way?

Are workers making minimum wage according to first world standards? I think that would be the true meaning of fair trade. Paying a guy the nine bucks an hour someone here in Ontario would get for doing the same job.

Fair trade? No thanks, I'll cheap out every time.

My Writing Journey - the abbreviated version.

Six years ago, in 2003, I'd finished my journey from South Africa to England in a Beach Buggy. I'd heard the same line over and over again from friends and family members. "Why don't you write a book?"

It's one of those things, I was either going to write a book or I wasn't, and at that point in time I hadn't made the decision yet. Yet similar to many decisions in my life, the idea was planted, mulled over, and suddenly acted upon.

In response, I bought a second-hand laptop in Holland and headed down to France. The plan was to find a flat, take French courses, and start writing the book.

I stopped in Bordeaux. It was October. It was cold and wet and miserable. I couldn't find a cheap flat, anywhere.

A friend advised me to try Morocco. It made perfect sense. It was a former French colony. It was cheaper than France. The weather was better. I could maintain my Arabic studies.

So I went. Bus, train, ferry, another train. Three days later I was in Rabat. Within a week I had a flat and had signed up for French courses.

I wrote, and wrote, and wrote. In less than three months I had an almost full length manuscript. It needed a bit of editing, though, or so I thought.

It was around this point where construction started in the apartment below me. From eight in the morning to six at night, a constant pounding, like someone is taking a sledgehammer to the wall right next to you.

It was supposed to last two weeks. After three weeks, with completely stalled progress on my book, and still the incessant pounding, I decided to move out.

I moved in with a friend, a woman with two kids who needed the money. She was neurotic, depressed from a bad marriage and confused about an on-and-off relationship with a local man. Her mood swings kept me steadily in my room working on the book.

It wasn't the best environment to write. There were many distractions. My productivity wasn't the same as it had been in the apartment.

I met a girl, Siham, at a weekend running club. My productivity diminished further.

I needed to get away. After seven months in Morocco, I flew to England. I spent six months locked away in a flat in Bolton. During this time, I sought feedback on my novel, and with that in mind, I stumbled upon a website called Critique Circle.

The feedback wasn't flattering. My characters were static, the scenes lacked description. I was telling, telling, telling, and not showing, showing, showing. My character was arrogant and didn't connect with readers. I tried to be funny, but came across as stupid and irritating. My punctuation was awful.

It was bad.

I took the feedback and rewrote the chapters. Each week I submitted a different chapter to the writing and critiquing circle. In that six months, my writing progressed immensely, and at the end of it, my writing was on the verge of being good.

During my stay in England, I talked to Siham almost every day. We had a rendezvous in Spain half way through my stay. I was scheduled to go back to Canada in December, but I wanted to see her one last time. I'd come to one of those decisions that gets mulled over, and finally acted upon.

I proposed to Siham in the Costa del Sol, southern Spain just before returning to Canada. She said yes.

I came back to Canada and continued to write fairly intensely.

My writing was interrupted by my move back to Morocco three months later. As we got married, and for the next four months, I got very little done. I gradually got back into it, but married life isn't nearly as productive as bachelor life, and I made slow progress on the book while honing the craft more and more.

It was 2005 now, approaching two years into my writing endeavor. 2006 came, and the writing was picking up again. I was getting close to having a finished project.

I had to work a lot on the ending.

I had to work a lot on the beginning.

The middle wasn't bad. It only needed a little work.

Then Siham was pregnant. My work spiralled downwards, from a rush to get it done, to being stuck on a chapter I just couldn't get right.

That chapter, Egypt, took over a year. For the last three months of the pregnancy, and the first nine months of my son Zack's life, I just couldn't concentrate on it. Every rewrite made it worse. Finally, I decided I needed to finish it, even if it was bad.

With Zack approaching the one year mark, I got back into writing. I found a groove. Not a fast groove, not an ideal one, but one where productive improvements were coming out. I was setting realistic goals and meeting them.

Then, one day, I had the complete manuscript. I printed it off and headed away for a week of solitary bliss in Spain where I could edit it without distraction. I did most of the editing on the trains and ferries, and for the first time, read over the manuscript in its entirety.

Half the chapters needed work. The beginning sucked, and so did the ending. The beginning got completely redone. The ending got tweaked.

We moved back to Canada in 2008.

I continued to edit. I joined a writing group and edited a few pages a week, which helped me to finally get the beginning right. In the meantime, on my own, I gradually worked through the entire manuscript, again and again. Each time, I picked chapters and scenes that needed work. Then, there wasn't any more work to do. I had something before me that was as good as I could get it on my own.

Now, six years into my writing journey, the manuscript is with an editor and I'm seeking publication.

The endeavor continues.

Confidence Boost

There are times when I feel nothing is going right, and recently, it has been like that. A strange mix of bad luck, poor decision making, and a frustrating inability to combine my life's pleasures with my personal responsibilities.

What I needed was a confidence boost, and I got it.

My novel is pretty much as good as I can get it. It's also at the stage where I don't want to look at it constantly, day in and day out, anymore. I just want to get it published.

It's taken me six years to get to this point. Six years of learning the craft of story telling and all the tricks of the trade. Six years of rewriting chapters, scenes, adding, deleting, tweaking, critiquing, and trying to get it all right.

Having been rejected by countless agents. In fact rejection is a good word, it means I was actually acknowledged, the majority of agents simply ignored my queries and didn't bother to respond.
The problem was, this was the query letter stage. I couldn't even get my foot in the door to have them look at my first chapter!

A few weeks ago, I sought the advice and expertise of an editor. I contacted a relevant and highly recommended website, and was put in touch with several very qualified editors.

The one I chose works from California. We started with the first couple chapters, mainly because I didn't want to pay him a huge sum for the entire book right away, especially if he thought my work was crap.

He really liked it. He described it as a joy to edit and a real page turner. He was excited to be moving on with the story and said that I had learned the craft of writing much more aptly than the majority of writers who approached him. He went on to say there was definitely a publisher somewhere who would be interested in my work. It needed tweaking here and there, and aside from a few commas and reworded sentences, there were only two minor reworking suggestions in the first 10,000 words he looked at.

So there it is. My confidence boost. I'm now researching and contacting publishers instead of agents.
According to many books I've read, this might be a mistake. It's this frustrating catch 22 situation. Agents want authors who've been published. Publishers want authors with agents. What's a guy with a good manuscript and no credentials supposed to do?

An excerpt, and NO GO ZONES

I've been in war torn countries and violent regions. I've been held at gun point, shot at, threatened with death. I've had my campsite stormed by military. I've been mugged at knife point.

I would go back to these countries. In fact, there are few countries in the world which I would not hesitate to visit. I might hesitate visiting Iraq, and would perhaps only go after researching the region, dangers, and issues involved.

There is only one country in the world where I will definitely not go, not without a significant military presence guarding me anyway. That country is Somalia. If you are a Western journalist or an aid person, basically, if you are white, don't go there for a visit or a story. It's unstable. There is no functional government. The people are xenophobic, and those who aren't, may see you as a meal ticket for kidnapping and ransom, if your lucky. If your unlucky, they'll scalp you, rape you, chop your head off and drag your broken body down the street.

Here is an excerpt from my book, leading up to a particularly dangerous section of my journey to a region bordering Somalia.

The ten-storey brick building housing the Canadian consulate seemed typical of downtown Nairobi; poorly kept and blackened from pollution. Inside and on the third floor lay the standard, uninspiring Canadian Public Service office with grey carpets, glass barriers, and a rack of relevant pamphlets. On my only previous visit, I’d asked about what party festivities were taking place for Canada Day on July 1st. Within minutes, I’d managed to get the entire Kenyan staff worked into an angered frenzy. They thought that their unappreciative bosses had forgotten to invite them. In the end, a woman from the embassy, located elsewhere in the city, shouted at me over the telephone. “There is no Canada Day Party!”
Now, more than a month later, I returned to the consulate. Based on the advice of a fellow traveller, I went to inform them of my imminent travels to the north.
A frizzy-haired Kenyan woman sitting in her cubicle looked up at me as I approached. “I remember you.” She narrowed her eyes. “Have you come back to cause more trouble?”
I took a hesitant step toward the window and greeted her with my warmest smile. “That’s a lovely blouse.”
She unfolded her arms and her face softened as she glanced down over her frilly cream-coloured blouse. “How can I help you today?”
“I’m driving to Ethiopia. Someone told me I should consult with the embassy first.”
Her expression changed into one of confusion and she began shuffling through papers on her desk. “You shouldn’t drive there. The Canadian Embassy doesn’t recommend it.” She found the correct stapled stack of papers and picked the phone up to call someone. A few moments later, a white woman came through the door. Her sour expression and pressed suit made her seem like a staunch feminist who scared male co-workers into submission. They talked in Swahili, discussing the Canada Day incident before switching over to my travel plans. The Canadian woman finished with something to the tune of, “Stupid tourist,” after which they both laughed and she turned toward me. Her pale blue eyes were cold and penetrating. “We recommend that people avoid travelling north of Mount Kenya.”
“Why is that?”
“Because it’s a UN level three zone,” she said with conviction, as though it was something so obvious any idiot would understand.
“I’m sorry, what’s a UN level three zone?” I asked.
“It means it’s dangerous.” She put her hands on her hips and pursed her lips.
There was a silence. I hadn’t expected a red carpet welcome, but didn’t think I’d get called a stupid tourist either. “Okay,” I said. “Let’s discuss my other options to get to Egypt. I hear in Somalia they chop Westerners heads off and drag them through the streets. Then there’s Sudan: where the south is run by rebels fighting a government who are trying to ethnically cleanse them. Functional roads in the war-torn Congo don’t exist, however rape and heroine-addicted child soldiers do. Which do you recommend?” I doubted she could even name the surrounding African countries.
Her eyes narrowed into angry slits. She waved her finger at me. “Northern Kenya is so dangerous,” she began, “It’s so dangerous that no insurance company will cover you there.”
“That’s okay, I don’t have insurance.”
The secretary handed her the document and the woman held it up to the window. “This is a travel advisory warning Canadians not to travel to northern Kenya. I suggest you read through it and rethink your plans.” She handed it back to the secretary who slid it through a tray under the window. “Is there anything else?” she asked bitterly.
I responded in Swahili. “No thank you. I’ll read this and then drive to Ethiopia.”
We locked eyes for several seconds before she gulped and looked away. Her mouth opened, but for the first time nothing came out. She remained that way as I winked at the gaping secretary, turned and left.

It it too late to stop climate change?

CO2 in the atmosphere is widely regarded to be the primary cause of climate change.

Thus far, the international focus has been on trying to reduce CO2 emissions. I've never been convinced that this is the right strategy.

I'd be curious to know how much more humanity adds to the CO2 equation vs how much it takes away from CO2 recycling through deforestation?

How much less CO2 would the normal cycle of the earth emit if humans didn't exist at all? I don't think it's very much.

Now before you get angry at me and call me a Republican, or worse, let me clarify my position. I think the more important factor in the CO2 equations is deforestation. Specifically, how much CO2 recycling ability are we taking out of the atmosphere when we cut down a billion trees a year?

The lungs of the world are being purged, like a cancer, and no matter how green we get with our mechanical, solar, wind powered, and battery technologies, the real key might just lie in replacing the earth's lungs - our forests.

What is the most efficient CO2 absorbing plant? I don't know! But, if we could figure this out and plant it on a mass scale, we might have a better chance at balancing the CO2 equation.

Furthermore, the answer might lie in finding as many viable replacements for wood as we can. Metal, concrete, hemp for paper, bricks. Do we need to use a lot of wood to frame a house? I don't think so.

Deforestation has been brought up time and time again, but it now seems overshadowed by our carbon footprints. If we take the total human carbon footprint out of the equation while keeping the deforestation problem, I think we're still on a crash course to disaster.

What do you think?

Bail out bitterness

While GM and Chrysler find themselves rewarded for years of mismanagement, overspending, and generally poor decision making, Ford are the biggest losers in the bail out bonanza.

Ford's Mazda takeover gave them what the other two never had, a strong presence in the small car market. This is a key reason behind Ford's survival. Unfortunately, they are still teetering with debt and other high costs. The difference between Ford and the two bankruptcy protected US automakers is Ford are managing their costs and surviving, or at the very least not bleeding profusely.

So what do they get for their successful business model? Nothing. While GM and Chrysler offload debt via bankruptcy and have a fifteen billion dollar infusion, Ford continues to exist under their heavy burdens because they can.

The problem is, GM and Chrysler now have a competitive advantage.

Look at it this way. Take two identical businesses, relieve the debt of one and give them money while doing nothing for the second.

Flush with cash and not paying off any debts, the first business can cut costs, lower prices, and squeeze the second business out of the market.

Instead of bailout, Canada should have attracted other car manufacturers, (VW, Subaru, Nissan, Fiat, etc) to North America with loan guarantees and fire sale of the factories GM and Chrysler left behind. They would have saved fifteen billion dollars, recovered some of the losses of GM and Chrysler rather than providing bad businesses with a competitive advantage.

Was it pride that made us do it? Pride in North America's long auto manufacturing history? Or was it keeping up with the Jones'? The US gave em cash, we should too.

Moving onto US protectionism measures, buy American, and subsidizing.

Economics 101 says protectionism bad, open market good. In fact, isn't protectionism a small step toward Communism? Government intervention, etc, etc...

Whether its Obama or the pressure he's receiving I don't know, but protectionism fails in the long run. I think in many ways he's a model president, particularly for the international healing, but his economic policies have been lukewarm at best.

Protectionism can have an upside, but only if other countries are too daft to catch on and prevent getting dumped on by subsidized goods.

For instance, the US is subsidizing the pulp and paper industry. For every $500 the industry takes in in revenue, the US government gives them about $200.

In the long run, this could ruin other countries business models while dumping cheap lumber internationally. Once we're addicted, and the US has total control over the industry, then they can change from subsidizing lumber to taxing it heavily and raking in the money.

So what could Canada, and other countries do to ease the pain?

We could offer similar subsidies. That would keep our industry going, although at a heavy cost to the taxpayer.

The better option would be to form an international agreement with all other countries to charges tarrifs that double the subsidized amount from the offending country, not only on the raw materials, but on any and all products related to the pulp and paper industry.

Such an act would kick off a trade war and everyone would lose in the short term. But, losing in the short term is better than getting your ass kicked in the long term by the US. The longer term goal being to strong arm the US back into non-subsidizing behaviour.

Some say that in the 1920s, when the recession hit and the stock market nosedived, that a protectionist response led into the great depression. Are we on the same road once again?

Teen Rugby Manslaughter Conviction

Two years ago, at a rugby game in Mississauga, a fifteen-year-old boy died after a 'behind the play' incident with an opposing player.

The incident reminds me of two moments in all of my sports where my temper was flaring and I might have hurt someone.

The first was in a hockey game. Another player was doing something to irritate me, I don't recall what. I turned around to give him a little slash, and my stick got higher than I intended. It clipped him in the head. The play looked dirty, but I'd intended to get him in the arm. It wasn't a Chris Simon type Tomahawk full on swing, and even if the player wasn't wearing a helmet the worst he would have gotten was a bruise, but it goes to show how a slight act of aggression can go wrong.

The second incident occurred in front of the net in a ball hockey game. I was jostling for position and things got rough. I picked up the opposing player by the shorts. In that moment he was at my mercy. I could have pushed only a tiny bit and sent him crashing backwards onto his head. But I realized that. My intention to rough him up didn't include seriously hurting him, and I let go. After the game, he mentioned that he was terrified in that moment, off balance and in danger, and I'd relented and even helped him stay balanced.

I look upon this unfortunate rugby incident in both lights. It's a situation that occurs daily in sports, with the result 99.9999% of the time no major damage. There are a few nuts out there. Guys who don't have the self control to stop themselves when an opposing player is at their mercy. This young man could be one of those people. Then again, he could just be a guy who got caught up in a moment and the result caused a tragic death.

Is South Africa following Zimbabwe?

Zimbabwe declined gradually. It wasn't an overnight disintegration. Initially there was hope. They were economically powerful and a country with regional and international significance.

Then came signs. Issues that made people shake their heads: The Matabele tragedy; the mistreatment of white farmers; the quelling of opposition. Yet all the while, hope still held strong that the sound fundamentals of the country would keep it afloat.

Now it's a mess. Cholera, starvation, corruption, intimidation. The gradual incremental signs have snowballed until the breadbasket became a basket case.

Now, those same signs are growing more prevalent in South Africa.

Signs have been about for some time. One of the strongest early symbols of South African political degeneration came at the highest levels of government with Mbeki's ignorant early response to the AIDS pandemic.

Years later, Zuma took it to a new level with his alleged rape of an HIV infected family friend, and how he showered afterwards to protect himself against the virus.

But the scary signs continue in other ways.

A year ago, a xenophobic outburst saw 60 foreigners killed and numerous others raped, beaten and tortured. Yet there hasn't been a single arrest.

Recently, the Sowetan newspaper quoted opposition leader Ms Zille as saying: "Zuma is a self-confessed womaniser with deeply sexist views, who put all his wives at risk by having unprotected sex with an HIV-positive woman."

In response to this "true" statement, Ms Zille has been accused of being racist. The ANC Youth League (could this be scarily familiar to the Zimbabwe war veterans) then released a statement threatening to take militant action against Ms Zille if she continued to talk "hogwash".

The league said it was "disgusted by remarks attributed to the racist girl Helen Zille, who when failing to defend her stupid and sexist decision to appoint predominantly white males into her Cabinet, attacks the president".

While the words didn't come from Zuma himself, time will tell how he handles the criticism of a robust democracy. Opposition by nature criticizes the government for their shortcomings. Will Zuma accept the criticism and govern well? Or will he be more like Mugabe, squashing the opposition and becoming increasingly tyrannical?

Many people around the world have the same misgivings over President Zuma's record of sexual conduct. Even if he was innocent of rape, his polygamist attitudes and indifference toward AIDS was startling. The only good news is that it's too early to tell which path he will follow.

Time will tell. In the meantime, we'll do what we always do, keep hoping.

Reasons behind Canada's record deficit.

Fifty billion dollars equals about $1,500 per Canadian.

That's $6000 for a family of four.

So, why exactly is Canada going into such a huge deficit?

Here are three reasons.

The primary reason is lower taxes received due to capital losses replacing capital gains. If the average Canadian loses $5000 on the markets instead of making that much, that's a $10,000 loss to potential taxable income per Canadian.

A second reason is higher unemployment. More unemployment means more money paid out in EI benefits and less taken in.

The third contributing factor is poor taxation to compensate for the lower capital gains. The GST, instead of being dropped to 5%, should have been raised to 10% in order to shield us from out of control deficits. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out income taxes will be down significantly this year. Apparently, Canada's current government didn't figure this out.

While a hike to 10% GST would have been unpopular, in fact it would have reversed a promise of the the Conservatives, it would have been their smartest economic decision.

In the best of years, Canada ran a $15 billion dollar surplus. That was during record oil prices and huge revenues from the oil sands. More typically, a good year might be around $6 billion.

In other words, it will take either ten years of constant economic prosperity and the resulting budget surpluses to pay off the 2009 budget deficit. Either that, or it will take ten years of 10% GST.

Estimates vary, but a reliable number pegs Canada's Federal debt at around half a trillion dollars. So, if a good year yields a 6 billion dollar surplus, we're looking at 90 years worth of good budget surpluses before we can pay off our current debt.

The problem with debt is that it spirals. A point is reached where, even in a good year of taxation, all of the taxes go to servicing the interest on the debt.

In the US, their national debt sits at around 12 trillion dollars. That's $30,000 per US citizen, and $120,000 for a family of four.

If, at the modestly low interest rate of 2.5%, the average tax per household would be over $3000 just to service that debt. If interest rates go up to 5%, that doubles, etc.

Political Scandal Week and Flashing Lights Syndrome

I've got something important to do. I scuttle down the street, focused only on the task at hand, and, whoa, FLASHING LIGHTS!

What do they mean? Why are they there? I gotta check them out! What was that task I was doing again? Oh, never mind, FLASHING LIGHTS!

It's sometimes surprising how easily our attention is drawn away from important issues. This week, one political scandal is topping the next, but are some concocted in order to distract the attention of the masses from more serious issues.

A former PM, and a conservative at that, is under the corruption gun. There's something very fishy about Mulroney accepting wads of cash from an international shadester only months after he left office. I'm curious to know....

Holy crap, another Conservative is under the gun. Names are named, some prominent conservatives playing influence peddling games. Whoa, the conservatives are in for a bout of bad press just when the opposition has overtaken them in popularity.

BUT WAIT! A Super Hot Liberal MP mistreats her maids! CAT FIGHT, CAT FIGHT!

It's those flashing lights again, sucking the media into a distraction, and us, the population follows.

In reality, it's little more than a labour dispute between a prominent figure and her family's caregivers. But we better have a full parliamentary inquiry. Something has to distract the masses from the alleged corruption running through the party in power. What better to do that than throw in some sex appeal and blow it out of proportion?

Would we be as enthralled if the lower profile John Cannis was under the nanny gun? I think not.

WHO says brace for pandemic. Ontario had no ICU beds available.

We are on the verge of a possible catastrophe. The WHO warns the world to brace for the swine flu pandemic. Millions could die.

And Ontario has zero availability in their Intensive Care Units?

Can this be right?

Last week, a family attempted to have a woman flown home from Cancun after she suffered a debilitating asthma attack. Her return was blocked by Health Canada at first, (apparently fearing spread of the Swine flue,) and when they relented, she was not allowed to return because of a lack of availability in intensive care.

Read the Globe and Mail article here.

Had she been returned quickly, would she have lived?

Only a doctor familiar with her case could provide probabilities on that question. But you can't deny that Cancun has their own hospitalization issues to worry about, and that might have compromised her quality of care while down there.

As saddened as I am about the tragedy for this family, the real issue is there are no ICU beds available in Ontario. On the verge of a pandemic, that's a scary proposition.

Stop it, just stop it.

Think back to the most frustrating moment of your life, a time when something very unfair happened to you.

Perhaps it was a business deal that went sour and someone walked off with a bunch of your money.

Perhaps it was not getting paid for a job.

Maybe it was seeing an incompetent co-worker getting a raise while you put up with harassment. Maybe you got fired for his mistake.

You might have been accused of something you were innocent of. It could have been a wrongful court judgement.

Maybe a professor marked your unfairly, or somehow your test score was impossibly low when you were sure you’d aced it.

You were by far the best qualified for the job, but it went to someone else.

It sucks, but a few days or weeks pass and you move on with your life, the bitter memories fade into insignificance.
Take your most frustrating moment, add torture, imprisonment, having your family ripped apart, and have the moment drag on for over five years, and you might get a sense of what Abousfian Abdelrazik has been going through.
It wasn’t bad enough that they accused him of being a terrorist without any legitimate proof.

It wasn’t enough that the Sudanese government tortured him, imprisoned him, and then said they were mistaken and that he was in fact innocent.

It wasn’t enough that the RCMP cleared him of ANY criminal activity.

It wasn’t enough that CSIS cleared him of any criminal activity.

The Canadian government refuses to let Abousfian Abdelrazik return home to Canada for no good reason!

If you were to ask him which torture was worse, the Sudanese interrogators or Canadian bureaucracy, I think I know what his answer would be?

That is what the Canadian government is doing, torturing him psychologically.

It’s the torture of never being able to meet the criteria to see your family, to return home, to go back to your life and normality.

It’s the torture of not being able to see your child grow from a little girl into a young woman.

It’s the torture of having your wife divorce you, perhaps because she thinks you’re a criminal.

It’s the torture of having her die and not being able to hold her hand one last time.

The Canadian government is the torturer.

Stop it, just stop it. Let him come home.

Buying a used car in Eastern Ontario?

If you thought coming here would lead you to a car auction website, I'm sorry but it won't. I'm likely having the same troubles as you are.

A Google search reveals a frustrating series of interconnected links that never get you any closer to finding where a car auction actually takes place. It's the worst of the worst of search frustration. I did manage to find an auction somewhere, but it was restricted to dealers only.

If you're looking for a car auction, a better option is to scour the local newspapers, or even their online counterparts.

When dealers attend car auctions, reputable dealers will only bid on cars with no major accident histories and will have a mechanic check to make sure that the vehicles are sound. Often, these are lease returns.

Used car dealers are notorious for being shady characters. The worst of the worst prey on unsuspecting customers. They'll pay peanuts for a damaged car at an auction, (a car that a reputable used car dealer won't touch), and find a car report agency that shows the car as having an accident-free history. If you think you are getting a "great deal," then there's a chance the car was damaged.

BNN just ran a story about the company Car Fax, the car history reporting agency. Their histories are often incomplete. If you are on the verge of buying a car, either take it to a mechanic right away, or, if you don't know of a reliable mechanic near the dealer, make sure they have a two week return policy so you can get it checked out properly. Make sure you tell the dealer you are doing that, and that you expect to have your money back if the car doesn't pass inspection. Some dealers will try and force an exchange for another vehicle, but be vigilant and work a money-back-guarantee into the fine print.

When I went to look at a used Toyota Corolla at a dealership, they were asking $12,500 on the sticker price. I'd found a similar used vehicle for under ten, and wanted to try and bargain the dealers down. It didn't work, but the most demoralizing part was, as I walked out, somehow the final price had increased to over $14,000, with dealer fees and other hidden costs worked on. Some bargaining skills eh?

I walked away with no desire to return to that dealership.

Some dealers will bargain, others won't. Research beforehand whether you can wheel and deal, or whether the price is the price. My rule is to try and negotiate the final price to between 3% and 10% below the actual sticker price. Make it clear right away that you don't want to hear about "extra" costs. You don't care about them, you are sitting down and negotiating the final price and the dealer can put his list of extra costs away.

Walk away if you have to. If they know the deal is good for them, they'll bring you back.

If you are buying privately, the same 'mechanic' caveats apply. The two websites I use for used vehicles are kijiji.ca and autotrader.ca.

Kijiji has far superior search capability and is easier to navigate.

Autotrader includes dealer cars and may have a bigger inventory, while it's big downfall is that you can't do a search of your own city. Instead, you're looking at an entire region and, if you live in Kingston like me, you might have to drive for three hours to find your car.

Both are prone to hijacking, dealers in other cities putting cars up in the wrong category. I report them as spam on Kijiji, and get frustrated when reading them on autotrader.

Talk to friends and others about reputable dealers and their experiences. Google the dealers name and look for good and bad stories about them, although be wary, if a dealer sells enough cars, one is bound to be a lemon and get a bad review. But if they're trying to pass off damaged goods as having immaculate histories, that's another story and are the kind of dealership you definitely want to stay away from.

If you want to know about a brand's reliability history and general problems a vehicle is known to have, a good place to look is consumerreports.com. For a few dollars, you can get a one month membership.


Happy hunting.

The UN Summit on Racism

I'm currently reading a book called The State of Africa.

I'm in the middle of the second chapter on Rwanda. If things truly unfolded in Rwanda the way this book says they did, then it's shocking how the UN was a counterproductive entity in that conflict.

The UN had the not-so-brilliant idea of holding a second UN summit on racism. As though it might somehow be resolved by bringing racist people together and promoting dialogue.

Few were surprised when the president of Iran's anti-Israel speech caused an uproar. Leaders walked out of the summit. He ruined the little party of people trying to do the right thing, but never quite getting it right.

Every time I hear the words anti-Semitic, I have to read the words for myself. I wonder whether it's a knee-jerk reaction to the slightest criticism of Israel, or genuine lies and hatred spreading anti-Semetic rhetoric. As often as not, it's an overreaction to justified criticism.

So when I heard that diplomats walked out of a UN conference on racism during a speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I sought to read it for myself. Here are some key quotes from his address, followed by my thoughts:

The victorious powers [of the world wars] call themselves the conquerors of the world, while ignoring or down-treading the rights of other nations by the imposition of oppressive laws and international arrangements.

So far, controversial, but not untrue.

Following World War Two, they resorted to making an entire nation homeless on the pretext of Jewish suffering. They sent migrants from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in the occupied Palestine. In compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive, racist regime in Palestine.

If you changed 'totally racist' to 'racist,' and 'most cruel' to 'cruel,' then this wouldn't be too far of a spin off the truth. Still controversial though. And yes, at this point, if not anti-semetic, then definitely anti-Israeli.

It is all the more regrettable that a number of Western governments and the United States have committed themselves to defending those racist perpetrators of genocide, whilst the awakened consciences and free-minded people of the world condemn aggression, brutality and the bombardment of civilians of Gaza.

Again, a terrible choice of words. "Genocide," should be, "War crimes." Rwanda was a genocide. Hitler vs the Jews was a genocide. A few hundred dead Palestinians a year is not a genocide. You could argue 'war crimes' and be okay. When you grossly exaggerate or outright lie, your entire speech becomes an irrelevant rant.

[Conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan were] a clear example of egocentrism, racism, discrimination or infringement upon the dignity and independence of nations.

Afghanistan was attacked because they supported a terrorist organization who attacked a powerful foreign country. Their leaders were asking to get ousted. That said, the words racism and discrimination can relate to issues within the conflicts, while egocentrism is more in line with the poor execution and lingering challenges in both. A valid argument would be how oppressive regimes were replaced by corrupt and incompetent ones, and how security has deteriorated. Again, poor words. While criticism is fine, to simplify a complicated issue into one of racism, as though it explains every mistake committed, is a poor way to get a message across.

Today, the human community is facing a kind of racism which has tarnished the image of humanity. In the beginning of the third millennium, the word Zionism personifies racism, that falsely resorts to religion and abuses religious sentiments to hide hatred.

All racism tarnishes the image of humanity. Israel, Israel, Israel. I reread this passage numerous times and it doesn't really make a lot of sense.
I struggle to find accurate estimates of numbers of Palestinians killed, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to five years in Darfur. Where is the Arab indignation? Muslims are dying after all.

Efforts must be made to put an end to the abuse by Zionists and their supporters of political and international means... Governments must be encouraged and supported in the fight aimed at eradicating this barbaric racism and moving towards reforming the current international mechanisms.

If Ahmadinejad's speech wasn't so overbearing up to this point, then this part might have some merit.

You are all aware of the conspiracy of some powers and Zionist circles against the goals and objectives of this conference... It should be recognised that boycotting such a session is a true indication of supporting the blatant example of racism.

Or they could be boycotting based on the fact that people like Ahmadinejad are there. You just proved it was a waste of time.

In conclusion, Ahmadinejad's comments, as translated and posted by the BBC, were definitely anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist, which by definition are one and the same. Saying that being anti-Zionist is the same as anti-Semetic is different argument. By definition, anti-semitic is discriminating against Jews. While being anti-Israeli can carry such undertones, I think a distinction should be made between the two.

Spreading mistruths and blatant exaggeration of circumstances is racist, and for that the international reaction to this nut is warranted.

But I would hesitate to use the definition anti-Semetic. I consider it no more anti-Semitic than spreading lies about American transgressions is anti-Christian.

So, is a UN summit on racism a good thing?

Definition: racism or racialism
Noun
1. hostile or oppressive behaviour towards people because they belong to a different race
2. the belief that some races are innately superior to others because of hereditary characteristics

I find it interesting that an international organization controlled by the will of five Nations, each of which vetoes taking action against 'racist' acts based on their own self interest, is hosting a racism summit.

To conclude, Ahmadinejad had a chance to make real arguments about an increasing mistrust of Muslims throughout the world (which in his particular case is not entirely unwarranted.) He could have shown examples, (Abdelrazik, Guantanimo), of the West putting aside its morals and values when it comes to Muslims who often turn out to be innocent.
He could have eliminated the controversy over Israel's existence from his rant and tied in Muslim frustration into a real concern over the international lack of condemnation when Israel crosses the line between defending itself and committing atrocities.

He could have used the platform to be a model voice for Muslim outrage. Instead, he was an embarrassment not only to his country and his religion, but to the United Nations.

Toddler Toys, advice from a Dad

So you're at the toy section, wandering amid all the colours, pressing different buttons to hear silly sounds, looking at different features, sizes, prices.

There are good toys, and there are bad toys. And there are bad toys which seem like good toys at the time, but really really aren't.

Bad toys, IMO, are ones that need a lot of time cleaning up. The pools of plastic balls, the lego sets, the blocks. While one of these is alright, try not to overdo it. In fact, don't buy them at all. There's a good chance some uncle or aunt or cousin who doesn't have children will see these toys and think, "Hey, let's get little nephew these."

In my opinion, the worst toddler toy out there is - Puzzle books. A toddler, once he figures out how to take the puzzle pieces out of the book, does just that. Page after page. And you get one huge mess of puzzle pieces that parents have trouble sorting through, let alone a two year old. Not that parents do sort through them. Once they're out, they're out. If you do take the half hour needed to sort through the puzzle pieces and put them back in (like anyone actually would), then they are all over the place again the next time the kid gets the book.

Before I mention the best toy, I want to say this. I went to Toys'R'Us, and they didn't have them. Walmart didn't have them either, or Zellers, or all the usual suspects you would think have a big toy selection.

I'm talking about a toy that a parent and a child can enjoy together. Something interactive, where a parent gets as much joy out of it as the child. A toy that a baby enjoys, a toddler, and right up to a teenager enjoys. Something you can grow into a collection. Some adults even make a living with variations of these toys.

What is it you ask?

The puppet.

In Kingston, ON, I buy them at a local specialty toy and education store called Play and Learn. It's on the corner of Princess and Gardners across from the shopping centre.

Think about it this way.

Dolls and stuffed animals are boring!

Kids play with them for a minute, go grrr, or make sounds, etc, then lose interest. But puppets! You can make them into real characters. There are pirate puppets, policemen, firemen, dinosaurs, crocodiles, pigs, you name it, they have it. There are puppet theatres, (which you can make your own out of cardboard and some cloth, or with wood if you want a bigger project.) And unlike all the countless useless toys lined up on the shelf and in the toy box, a parent can actually play together with the kids and have fun with a puppet.


Other toys I recommend.

Fridge sound and magnet toys - Keeps them occupied while you cook and clean.

Jack in the box - The classic pop gets them every time. They'll play for hours and not get tired. Best of all, it doesn't cost as much as the branded and highly advertised dolls etc.

Kite - Great for windy days. At less than $2 at the dollar store, you can't go wrong, even if it flies away after the first use. Some extra advice, attach a dog leash to the handle so if the child lets go, you have a backup. Oh, and stay away from trees.

Why I feel so strongly about Abdelrazik's injustice.

Watching this whole ordeal unfold brings back a lot of painful memories, some related, and others not so much.

They remind me of some of the most unpleasant memories of my life. I assume most people, if they dig deep enough, can recall an unfair decision they were powerless to change.

Just thinking about it gets your blood boiling.


If one thing is apparant from Mr. Abdelrazik's plight and the George Galloway affair, it's that too much power rests in the hands of certain people. In these cases, certain incompetent people. Hopefully these tragedies will help get this situation changed.

As for my bad experiences with immigration. I'm still bitter. I'm still mad as hell. And there's still sweet nothing I can do about it.

Except this. Make as much noise as possible when I see it happen to someone else. Do my bit to help draw more attention to it, get it fixed, and then move on with my life.

People might think if I am so angry about Abdelrazik, then I must also sympathize with Khadr in Guantanimo. In truth, I really don't. He made a mistake and the only question is, how much longer is he going to have to pay for it.

My answer, I honestly don't care.

At worst, Mr Abdelrazik has, to my knowledge, made no such mistake. At best, if he has and our government can prove it, then he deserves to face his accusers and have his day in court.

Their is a hot debate going on right now about whether a Muslim woman can wear her veil while testifying at a rape case in Toronto. The court ruled that she had to remove the veil when testifying because the accused rapist has the right to face his accuser.

I imagine Mr Abdelrazik dreams of such a right. One of many rights denied by the Canadian government for over five years now.

What Can You Do to Help Abousfian Abdelrazik?

My wife and I have run into frustrating and humiliating visa problems at the Canadian Embassy before. I've also had trouble, while overseas, getting a Canadian Passport replaced. You can read about my personal passport problems in Cairo here.

You can read about my wife's visa troubles here, and here, and here

Not to mention other related stories if you were to scour through my blog.

While my wife and I have jumped through a few hoops and felt indignation, Mr Abdelrazik has gone through absolute hell.

So what can you do to support Mr. Abdelrazik?

Firstly, contacting the Canadian Embassy in Sudan is useless, unless you want to try and talk to Mr. Abdelrazik directly and blog about his answers.

Secondly, spread the word. Join facebook groups such as this one. Invite friends to join the facebook group. Create more facebook groups, other groups, and just get the word out there that a Canadian citizen is having his rights violated by our own government.

Another facebook group is here.

Third: Complain to your local member of Parliament. You can find your local member of parliament and their contact info via this website.

Financially supporting Mr. Abdelrazik is a slippery slope. The danger being, you could be deemed to be funding a suspected terrorist and have some vindictive element in the Canadian government put you on their naughty list. While I will blog and shout and cry indignation, I've not yet committed myself to taking actions beyond using the mighty pen, err, keyboard. Whether or not you do is up to you.

Hrmm...

I got this message in my email.

Hi ,



I came across your blog at Blogger.com. It is very well written and interesting. I like how you have explored the topic. If you are interested, I would like to extend an invitation to join http://www.allvoices.com/journalism. It’s a citizen journalist site. We discuss, debate and write about everything under the sun here.The site has a lot of people who are passionate about writing and use this as a tool to make a difference.



Allvoices also has an incentive programme for writers who can earn up to $10,000 cash. You can visit http://www.allvoices.com/journalism for more details and do register if you are interested.



Thanks,

Tara

As someone wary of vanity publishers etc, it would be nice to know which blog you thought highly of, otherwise this just seems like a random email sent to bloggers you happened to come across. While $10,000 interests me, I'm wondering if my chances aren't better if I go the the local Tim Hortons and roll up the rim. At least I know they'll pay out if I win.

I'm going back editing my book now.

Death by bureaucracy. Stuck at the Sudanese Canadian Embassy

In case you believed my post the other day, please read the first letter of each line.

Now for my blog...

And I thought Sudan was an annoyingly bureaucratic country. Here's an excerpt from my chapter after a week in the country.

"In government offices, sweaty lethargic men in cheap-cut suits shuffled papers behind their desks. The only decorations in the offices were glass-framed pictures of their bald, heavy-set president Omar al-Bashir. His thin moustache highlighted the grimace on his face. He had a hooked beak of a nose and ferret-like eyes.

His stern expression seemed to convey a sense of urgency, and since I always saw him when dealing with paperwork, for me, he illustrated the urgency of Sudanese bureaucracy. A permit to travel, a permit to stay in Khartoum, a permit for the car, photographs, photocopies… "

Abousfian Abdelrazik, a Sudanese-Canadian citizen, has been in Sudan since 2003. He's unable to return home to Montreal where he has his children because his name's been put on a US security threat blacklist.

He travelled to Sudan in 2003 to visit his ailing mother. He was subsequently arrested, tortured, released, interrogated by US and Canadian security agencies, and after all that, has sought refuge in the Canadian embassy for the past 11 months. He's afraid to go out onto the streets of Khartoum because he fears arrest and further torture, imprisonment, or even death.

One thing confuses me though Mr Harper. He's on a no fly list, but flew out of Canada. How does that work exactly?

If he is guilty of something, pursue a criminal investigation and CHARGE him. Don't just tread all over his rights.

The RCMP and CSIS both exonerated him of any criminal activity. The Harper government hasn't.

It's a disgrace on par with the internment of Japanese citizens during World War II and it shows a scary anti-Muslim sentiment on part of Canada's top leadership.

That might bode well with some voters. But let's seriously think of the repurcussions of this. It brews resentment and stokes the fires of people who might actually be violent extremists living inside Canada. Is that a good thing?

If we are violating the rights of someone who has not had due process, it jeopardises the legitimacy of the Canadian justice system. It casts a shadow upon all terrorist investigations because of the cruel, unfair, and seemingly arbitrary decisions made at the top level.

Bring him back, investigate him, charge him, do what you want when he gets back to Canada. Just don't leave him in indeterminate limbo, not to mention promising one thing and doing another.

It's disgusting.

I've Been Arrested

After getting up this morning, I was in the shower and washing off
Parts of my body. Suddenly, there was a loud knock at the door.
Raging police officers burst into the house.
Instead of getting becoming a cop, I was getting arrested.
LET GO OF ME," I shouted.

For goodness sake, I'd done nothing wrong.
Over six hours later, my parents bailed me out.
One of the charges was related to drug trafficking while I was in
Liberia. Only problem is, I've never been to Liberia.
Seriously, I don't know what to do. Anyone have advice?

Are the Borders going Bananas!

A lot of political border decisions have been made recently that defy logic.

George Bush entered Canada a couple weeks ago to give his first post-presidency speech. Protests and indignation about his war criminal past abounded. His questionable record and presidency aside, if he was denied entry, the only pleasure I would derive from it would be the humiliation factor. I'd probably disagree with the decision, solely based on the fact that I'd want to hear what he has to say about all of his mistakes and the mess he left behind. I'd also disagree with a refusal of Bush based on principals of free speech, not rocking the boat, and keeping our ties sane with the USA.

It seems the Canadian border officials have a double standard however. It has no problems slapping another ally in the face by rejecting one of their ministers. British Minister George Galloway has been denied entry into Canada because he helped deliver humanitarian aid to dying, suffering and starving Palestinians during the Israeli invasion.

I don't know where this decision is coming from. It's easy enough to blame Stephen Harper. The free speech stifling is in line with his Bush-style rule and Israel-can-do-no-wrong political stance, but I'm painfully aware of the rigidity and questionable decision making processes of Canada's Immigration officials, as well as the Canadian government's inability to get involved. In immigration matters, the Canadian government has a hands-off approach like one would expect in high-profile police investigations or criminal court proceedings.

I do however think this should be a rallying cry for Liberals and New Democrats. If they can't organize a true coalition, then at least unite in some of your criticisms. This is one of a dozen potential overthrow issues, get down to it and start criticizing.

Surprisingly, the madness is not just restricted to Canada. The British minister may be getting denied for sympathizing with a suffering group of people, but it's not the worst immigration decision made in the past weeks.

South Africa, Africa's shining beacon of fairness, equality and human rights, denied entrance to the Dalai Lama last week! I'm shaking my head right now. It defies logic! I might at least understand denying entrance to, say, Winnie Mandela. Or even the Pope into an African country hard hit by the HIV epidemic. But the Dalai Lama? The man whose country was invaded by China, and has for years preached a peaceful resolution. A man who more than any other, and perhaps only seconded by Nelson Mandela himself, symbolizes peace and forgiveness and everything that's good about the world.

Who made that decision?

Qatar, meanwhile, is hosting none other than the man recently indicted for War Crimes by the ICC, Omar Al Bashir.

Are the borders going bananas?

The search for the perfect car...

My wife and I are looking at new cars, or perhaps even slightly used ones.

Our range is as small as the Honda Civic and as big as the Suburu Forrester SUV.

Considerations.

Price: While lower is better, our price maximum hovers around $25,000.

Reliability: Toyota and Honda lead the pack in reliability. Based solely on the reliability factor, I've discounted buying any US car company vehicles.

Economy: Fuel efficient is better. While my wife wants an automatic, I'm all for the more efficient manual transmission. Manual cars usually rate higher on reliability too.

Size: Bigger is better, we are a family.

Perks: It's nice to have base models with AC, cruise, a storage area for an ipod, heated seats, etc.

Comfort/Ride: Not a big deal for me, but something my wife is adamant about, thus her desire for an automatic.

Incentives: There are murmurs of various government incentives to boost the car industry. While I've got negative opinions on whether the government should actually do this, I wouldn't complain of having a few thousand bucks knocked off a car I was buying.

Other smaller factors are: Asthetic appeal, accident avoidance, acceleration, owner costs, possible built in Canada/America incentives; and financing options.

With these considerations, I bought a one month membership on the site consumerreports.org It cost six or seven dollars. I think I have to cancel it because it automatically renews. For another fifty dollars, you can ask for the exact dealer costs on four models. The following four are what we currently are considering asking about:

Honda Civic: The first car I ever owned, and later, the first car my wife and I bought together were Civics. Fuel efficient, affordable, top marks in reliability and familiarity are what the Civic has going for it. While the downsides are size and perks. Civic's base models are just that, very basic, and we'll have to get some upgrades which will push the price upwards. Civics are a good prospect for government incentives, with SI models built in Canada, and other models built in the US.

Honda Accord: The Accord scores high marks in reliability and the size is definitely better than the Civic. The price is pushing our maximum, although we can always bargain. Fuel efficiency, while not the super Civic, is good. One worry I have with the Accord is a big drop off in ratings between the Manual and Automatic transmissions. Manual is definitely the way to go for this car. While not built in Canada, they are built in Ohio, and most probably with some Canadian parts.

Nissan Altima: The Altima's upsides are that it has a good basic options plan and they offer zero percent financing for three years. A price question mark is that I don't know how low they'll go with the financing option vs cash outright. They are the sleekest looking car of the ones we are looking at and score top marks in comfort. Reliability, while historically good, is a little less certain than Hondas. The price is pushing our limits too, with the quoted total price from the dealer being around 29K, although we'd ideally bargain down below our maximum. Altima's are built in Japan, so potential government incentives may not apply.

Subaru Forrester: When I think of Subaru's, I think of sturdy vehicles that can go offroad - basically, a base model rally vehicle.The Forrester is the highest overall rated SUV in its class (small SUV) according to Consumer Reports, and though it says small, it feels bigger than the CRV or Rav4. They tend to have the best base options plan of the bunch, with cruise, heated seats, AC, and a cool hidden area to connect an ipod. It's the biggest vehicle we're looking at. For all those great perks, the downsides are, a big vehicle means less fuel efficiency. Another factor is potential resale value, which could be seriously downgraded if we have another oil price surge. Reliability is said to be good, although again, it's not a Honda or a Toyota. While I dream of a Land Cruiser, my pocketbook says Forrester. I believe it's built in Japan, thus might be exempt from potential gov't incentives.


Cars still on the radar, but not quite on the list...

Toyota Camry and Corolla: The Camry ratings are a little lower than expected. Reliability doesn't get top marks, like one would expect, and for everything it has, the Accord is just a little better. The Corolla stacks up similarly as not quite the Honda Civic. Still, they're worth watching for potential Canadian-made government incentives, particularly the Canadian made Corollas.

Honda CRV: While rated very higly and getting top marks in reliability, my wife finds them uncomfortable. My problem with the CRV is it doesn't hit me as a real SUV ala something I can take offroad and have fun with. While I wouldn't necessarily go rallying if we bought a Forrester, it's nice to have some offroad faith in a vehicle.

Volkswagen Jetta: The Turbo diesel really appeals to me, and the Jetta price is in our range. The downsides are reliability is tough to determine on the updated model, and I'm under the impression that replacement parts are costly for VWs. This could be a stereotype, but it's a factor in my decision, just like the stereotype of American cars being junkers has made me discount them. The big draw for a VW is that my journey was done in an old VW Beetle, the Beach Buggy, and it therefore has a lot of nostalgic value. Though the sporty Golf would maximize this feeling, however the car we will eventually buy is more for my wife than for me. Instead of buying a dub right now, a dream I'll hold onto is to one day fly down to Mexico, buy an old VW Beetle, and drive it back to Canada.

Other factors at play here are: I'm expecting to hear an overdue job offer any day now; The potential government incentives may never materialize; Is the recent stock market rally a blip in the downward trend or the start of a bullish recovery?; Whether an unbelievable deal on a lightly used car drops onto my lap (and I still swear that I won't buy from the big three). And finally, who will give me the closest price point to the actual dealer cost of a vehicle.

Then there's always the possibility of an about turn by my wife to buy a cheaper, smaller, used vehicle in the 10k range to tie us over until we are more settled...

The Bashir Arrest Warrant.

I think it's about time, but I also wonder what's the point.

The timing is as right as any to sign an arrest warrant for one of the worst tyrants currently in power, if not the worst.

Six months ago, the timing was wrong.

This is not because he was less guilty, but because his ability to rouse anti-US sentiment is substantially weakened today due to the American political shift. The world is still awestruck by Barack Obama, whereas George Bush was extremely unpopular.

The result, the arrest warrant now appears less like some American-led conspiracy to break apart the Muslim world and steal oil, and more like a decision based on Omar Al-Bashir's genocidal record.

While Bashir attempts to conjure up the victimized image, fewer people are likely to buy it.

Then again, aside from limiting his travel options, does the arrest warrant for war crimes and crimes against humanity really serve any purpose other than riling him up? Worst case scenario, he boots out all foreign presence in Darfur and goes for that elusive title of genocidal maniac.

The Bell Button

Sometimes phone lines get wet and start to crackle, or not work at all. To correct this, Bell used to tell their consumers to unplug all the phones. They would send an electric shock through the phone lines to zap all the water out of the system. If the phones were plugged in, they got fried.

I wish I had access to that magic button that sends electric shocks through the phone lines. I'd use it to zap those con-artist phone numbers where a machine tells me I've won a cruise, or my car insurance is about to expire, or my credit card is overdue, or whatever BS they're pushing.

Zap... BANG!

That's for costing me another fifty cents on my pay as you go plan, wankers!

Is failure in Afghanistan Inevitable?

It was shortly after the big Y2K scare that I was in Zimbabwe. I went to visit the ruins just south of Masivingo. A Zimbabwean guide walked with me through the low-cut grass, up the nearby escarpment where the long-forgotten king had resided, and to the great Zimbabwe wall. He explained the former kingdom, and concepts such as how the rocks were broken with fire and water in order to build the impressive towering wall.

During a break in the tour, as we sat on a jutting rock that overlooked the valley below, I asked him what he though of Robert Mugabe.
"We are at peace," he said, " and I am happy for that, so I support Mugabe."

After having read the BBC and other foreign newspapers calling Mugabe a crazed tyrant, the young man's answer surprised me. While this was in Zimbabwe, he could just as easily have been an Afghanistan guide in the very same year, supporting the Taliban.

I blogged some time ago about Harper's mistakes in Afghanistan.

Some time before that, it was Jack Layton who said success in Afghanistan meant bringing the Taliban on board. Layton was immediately lambasted by Stephen Harper, called Taliban Jack, an extremist sympathizer, and every other name in the book.

So I find it serendipitous that now, Stephen Harper admits the Taliban can't be beaten. The Taliban can't be beaten, under fair international rules anyhow, for many reasons: They're hard to find and have safe havens just across the border in Pakistan; they can create converts faster than we can destroy them; and perhaps most importantly, they provide an alternative that no matter how many downfalls it has, has upsides too.

The first upside is that, under the Taliban, Afghanistan saw it's first 'relatively' peaceful times in memory. The Taliban's extreme religious beliefs and archaic interpretations of Islam also brought extreme justice. While women were downtrodden, justice was archaic, and social freedoms abysmal, the archaic justice kept people in line, and that meant peace.

The allied alternative presents social freedoms, women's rights, democracy, generous rebuilding programs and a theoretically fairer justice system. On the downside, as long as the Taliban lurk in the shadows blowing things up, targeting civilians, and causing havoc, we can't provide the one thing they could, peace.

But the allied alternative fails in other ways. Leniency led to corruption, which has replaced fear of reprisal that existed under the Taliban. Essentially, people are a lot less willing to steal when the last guy who got caught had his right hand chopped off.

I've always believed that in order to defeat the Taliban, the allied forces had to present a better alternative and win over Afghanistan ideologically. Having starting off with a war, they were on the back foot to begin with. Meanwhile, the Taliban saw it in their best interests to cause chaos at every opportunity because that meant, at the very least, the allied forces couldn't provide peace, which was the one thing the Taliban had provided.

So do the allies need to bring the Taliban on board?

It is an unpleasant prospect. It was Taliban support of Osama Bin Laden that got them invaded in the first place, and deservedly so. Their ideology is the opposite of what many Western ideals preach. Among their many unconscionable crimes against humanity, they target girls seeking education, and civilians in crowded places.

My biggest fear, if forced to deal with the Taliban, is their unwavering ideology. The progresses we have made could be turned back. Worst of all, we'd be giving into people who actively supported attacking us.

I fear the Taliban are no longer a political force, but an ideologically driven force bent on purging Western influences and the Western invasion. I fear negotiation isn't in their interest, purging Muslim lands of Western influence and setting up a Bin-Laden inspired Islamic Republic complete with violent ideologies is. They hate us and everything we stand for, and vice versa. At worst, this means that the trust isn't their to even open negotiations. At best, it means we're in for some tough concessions.

Book Reports - The Hiram Key

I recently read a book that I'd found on the used books shelf at the local charity shop. It was called the Hiram Key.

It was a book about Freemasons, an organisation that in some ways seems silly, and others fascinating. The author traces the roots of Freemasonry back through time, suggesting they have links to ancient Egyptian rituals, which directly influenced the rise of Judaism and Christianity. He goes onto suggest Freemasons spawned from the Knight's Templar of France, who were themselves the guardians and seekers of historical truth, the knowledge thereof leading to claims of Heresy and their downfall.

I don't have any interest in reading stories of religious epiphany or someone's road to finding Jesus, or Moses, or Mohammad. I am however fascinated by the history of it all. I want to know more about the times of these impressive figures, how they lived and changed the world. More than anything, I want snippets of the truth, especially if it's controversial.
I'm like someone hanging on every word of the tabloids and their latest dirt on Brittany, Branjolina, or you name it. Except my fascination is about different religions and how they got it wrong.

The Hiram Key is most controversial toward the Catholic Church, saying it was a creation of the dying Roman Empire in a bid for it to retain power. It claims the Catholic Church relied almost solely on the misguided religious interpretations of Paul, whom among other upstart Christian groups in the holy land, was considered a complete charlaton who filled in the holes of his sketchy understanding of Jesus with his own ideas.

It's controversial and I like it...

As a child, saying the Lords Prayer every day at school, I used to think it finished with, "All men." It makes sense to a child, as though that final blessing is reserved for everyone, though a staunch feminist might disagree. So where did Amen come from anyway?

It's a word that all three religions, Judaism, Christiantiy, and Islam, finish their prayers with. According to the Hiram key, it was a link between ancient Egypt's most powerful god and ceremonies, and modern religion. It was a reference to Amen Ra, the Egyptian sun god.

The Hiram Key, Pharoh's, Freemasonry and the Secret Scrolls of Jesus: A worthwhile read if you are like me and enjoy some different perspectives on history. If you can get past it's main weakness, that it often passed off conjecture as truth in order to further other points of conjecture, then you're in for an entertaining tale, and a peek into a secretive sect of society that dates back through the centuries and continues to capture people's imaginations.

A Billion Earths?

A decade ago, it was widely touted that the earth was unique. We were a cosmic fluke, the perfect location, the perfect sun, the perfect protection from other planets.

Newsflash, most solar systems form planets. According to recent publications, there could be a billion earth like planets in our galaxy. Our galaxy is one of billions of galaxies in the observable universe.

According to Wikipedia, "Our galaxy is estimated to contain at least 200 billion stars^[8] and possibly up to 400 billion stars,^[9] the exact figure depending on the number of very low-mass stars, which is highly uncertain."

I would guess that the nearest earth-like planet is within 20 light years. Furthermore, I would guess that the nearest earth-like planet and star worthy of serious life-giving contemplation is within 50 light years.

Jihad - Installment III

Jihad:

1: a holy war waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty ;

also : a personal struggle in devotion to Islam especially involving spiritual discipline

2: a crusade for a principle or belief

My experience with Majid and his friend wasn't my first experience with Arab hospitality, nor would it be my last. Throughout my time in the Middle East, I'd been invited for tea on several occasions. Taxis were paid for by locals whom I'd asked for directions. Sodas and teas were bought for me. In fact, anytime I asked for help, I found this bend-over-backwards hospitality to be second nature. If you asked for directions, people didn't just point and explain, but they detoured their course and walked with you to get there. If you asked where you could buy a soda, they'd sit you down and rush to the store to buy one for you.

After my experience in Saudi Arabia, I asked a Jordanian why two complete strangers would be so kind. The answer I received was this: "Muslims believe that a traveller might actually be an angel from heaven. It is their duty to be generous to all strangers, thus it reflect positively on their chances of entering heaven."

In a sense, that fits with the non-violent definition of Jihad. Through generosity, kindness and hospitality, a good Muslim hopes to show behaviour that reflects well on their internal struggle, that being to appear worthy of the ultimate goal, which is going to heaven. Therefore the deeper meaning behind Jihad can be defined as the struggle to appear worthy in the eyes of Allah.

In this sense, such an act, falls under one of the five pillars of Islam, Zakat.

Definition zakat (zə-kät`)

Islamic religious tax, one of the five basic requirements (arkan or "pillars") of Islam. All adult Muslims of sound mind and body with a set level of income and assets are expected to pay zakat. Zakat is due yearly on certain types of property and is distributed to eight categories of individuals specified by the Qur'an. These categories are usually defined to include orphans, the poor, travelers, beggars, debtors, slaves, and the efforts to propagate Islam. Zakat is payable, at different rates, on crops, harvests, herds, gold and silver, and merchandise. For gold and silver, which is understood to include all liquid assets, the rate is 2.5%. Being religiously prescribed, zakat is distinct from charity (sadaqa) which is voluntary. Zakat is essentially a personal exercise with no intermediary control, and could be given directly to its recipients, although a central treasury often collects it. In recent times, Pakistan, Sudan, and Saudi Arabia have enacted legislation to enforce the zakat.

This helps explain why the hospitality or assistance often results in a gift or monetary help, paying for a taxi, a soda, etc. Particularly in the Zakat categories of travellers and the efforts to propagate Islam.

So when I asked the Jordanian about why someone would be so kind to a traveller, perhaps hidden in his answer about angels was also the effort to propoage Islam.

So where does violence fit into Jihad?

A more apt definition of Jihadist might be hero, in the sense that it is someone that stands up to an aggressor for principles they believe in. I like to think they are willing to fight and die for a just cause. In ancient times, a band of ragtag desert tribesmen wielding swords and facing down an army was a more realistic interpretation. In modern times, a bomb is dropped on the Jihadi, or a shot fired from an impregnable tank, etc.

Every religion has its heroes. Often the most revered are those who refused to renounce their faith in the face of death or disfigurement. That is perhaps the true Jihadist. Not someone who perceives an injustice and mass murders indiscriminately. In their anger and blame, such a reaction means they are losing the inner struggle for goodness. IMHO, it is retroactive to the deeper Zakat meaning of propagating their faith.

My Run-in with Jihad - Part I

Jihad:

1: a holy war waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty ;

also : a personal struggle in devotion to Islam especially involving spiritual discipline

2: a crusade for a principle or belief

This is a blog about an amazing coincidence.

It starts here, in the chapter I wrote about my time in Saudi Arabia.

My Saudi Arabian memories had been mostly bad up to this point. I’d been delayed at the point of entry to near starvation, and I was later kicked out of a city for not being a Muslim. Outside those unfortunate blips however, I’d been mostly treated with respect, been approached with a kindly curiosity, and was even invited to sip tea on plush red carpets on several occasions.

Then, turning my conceptions of Saudi Arabians completely upside down, I came across Majid and his friend.

If you haven't already, click on the above link and read my chapter about Saudi Arabia. Otherwise, the remainder will confuse you.

It was two years later, and I was in Morocco now. I’ve read the

New York Times a handful of times in my life. This was one of those rare occasions it came across my lap and I found this article.

If you can't read it, I found another posting of it online, here.

The second paragraph caught my attention.

“He went to Iraq seeking Martyrdom because of the recent events there,” Abdullah Al-Enezi said of his younger brother Majid, who had been training to be a computer technician.”

Could it be the same person I'd met two years previously?

I scoured through the rest of the article, then immediately went to my old diary from 2002.

This is what I found.

Here’s a translation of my atrocious handwriting. I've edited out other addresses for privacy reasons.

Tuesday October 29^th

Stopped in Tabuk with a broken muffler pipe. Two local teenagers helped find a garage, then drove us to Pizza Hut. (They) Paid for our lunch without telling us. (Then they) Drove us back and paid for the welding on the Beach Buggy. Then (they) gave me a gift, traditional Saudi Headdress and beads. (The) Nicest thing a stranger has ever done for me. We then drove off to Jordan and spent the night in the desert. (majid.r.enazi(at)hotmail.com)

I later tried the email address, it didn’t work.

I’ll do a future blog on how Jihad relates to Majid in both instances, the generosity and the holy war.

I've crunched the numbers on the liklihood of Majid Enazi being Majid El-Enezi on another blogpost here.

Crunching the Jihad numbers.

For my blog on Majid, You’ll notice the two names are spelled differently, however in Arabic they would be spelled the same. Arabic uses only strong vowels, A, E, and W. Softer vowels can be shown with accents, which are usually left out. Furthermore, many Arabic names, when translated into English, can have the (El) taken out. El is a linking word, like (the), and many Arab names have it.

Both Majid Enazi and Majid el-Enezi, would likely be MJD, El-ENZI when written in Arabic. Furthermore, newspapers might alter names for various reasons, foremost because they are being translated from Arabic, but also because that’s how they hear them and therefore spell them differently.

The next question was, how many Majid el-Enezi’s or el-Enazi’s are there in Saudi Arabia? Is it a name like John Smith? Was it just a coincidence that I came upon two people who happened to have the same name?

So I did some research.

The article describes Majid as a younger brother who had been training to be a computer technician. Therefore, the age seemed right. The boy I met was a teenager between the ages of 17 and 19 in 2002. In 2004, it would make sense that he was studying for a degree.

An easy way to check how common a name is would be to use Google or Facebook. I did, and here are the results.

The only concrete reference to Majid El-Enezi is a link to the same New York Times article. I found no solid links to the name Majid Enazi.

Same goes for Facebook, I found no Majid Enezi’s or Enazi’s.

There are however 283 Enezis and 171 Enazis on facebook, most of which are preceded by ‘al’

Of the Enazi’s on Facebook, just over half show they are from Saudi Arabia (of the people who use the network location option).

For the Enezi’s, it’s about 20%.

Extrapolating, that narrows it down to about 100 Enazi’s from Saudi Arabia, and 50 Enezi’s. I’ll take a guess and say that the majority of Saudi Arabian males between the ages of 20 and 30 are using Facebook. For the sake of argument, say it’s 50%.

So, that means there are 300 Enezi's and Enazi’s of interest. Approximately 25% are women, so the number narrows further to 225 potential ENZ’s.

The majority of Facebook users in Saudi Arabia are young males, of which Majid would fall into the category of. Say 80% are males under 35. So we’re down to 170 people.


But out of the 170 young male Enezi’s in Saudi Arabia, how many would be in the three-year age range that fits with Majid in the article?

If the approximate 170 young Enazi males are evenly distributed from 15-35, then there are about 25 young Enezi’s who fit the age profile.

In conclusion, there is a very good chance that the Majid Enazi I met, is the Majid al-Enezi from the New York Times article.

Here’s a photo of Majid giving me the gifts.




If you enjoy this, or happen to know Majid, please leave a comment.

The Haunting Ghosts of Bushenomics

Apparantly, the Bush administration overpaid for the Bank bailout to the tune of 78 billion dollars.

Broken down, that's $260 per American citizen handed over to the banks, just because, well, they screwed up.

For a family of four, they're on the hook for about a grand to pay for Bush's latest screwup.

Not that it's a big deal. With a ten trillion and soaring National debt, a thousand bucks is a drop in the bucket compared to the $130,000 each American family owes toward the national debt, assuming it could be paid off right now.

If Americans were to merely keep the debt at bay with interest payments, and assuming interest was stable at 5%, that family would pay

$6,500 per year.

Here's a graph to show the history of the US debt, since 1938.




Broken down, here are the numbers of who has been responsible for what.

For the sake of argument, I've mostly put the first year in office per president on the previous administration's bill.

Presdient	term	debt	Approx.	Interest owed	Interest adjusted
		increase	Bond Yield	for term	(deficit)/surplus
Nixon/Ford	69-77	700 billion	6.50%	130 billion	(570 billion)
Carter	78-82	350 billion	12%	516 billion	166 billion
Reagan	82-90	2.8 trillion	7.50%	940 billion	(1.86 trillion)
Bush I	90-94	1.8 trillion	5.50%	670 billion	(1.13 trillion)
Clinton	94-02	1.2 trillion	5.50%	2.67 trillion	1.47 trillion
Bush II	02-10	5 trillion	4.50%	2.7 trillion	(2.3 trillion)

I could crunch the numbers for days, coming up with historical interest rates, how much each president added to the debt vs how much they had to pay in interest.

To make this easy, I've estimated the average interest rates during various presidents since Nixon, which is really when the US Federal debt started increasing at a dramatic rate.


Here's the graph I used for my interest rate estimates. The purpose of this estimation is to break down how much each president was on the hook for, based on the 10 year US T-note yield. The chart above breaks each leader's debt down into interest from previous debt, vs debt they accrued by overspending.





Based on these interest corrected figures, lets add up the total budget management by Republicans vs Democrats.


Republicans - 5.86 trillion deficit

Democrats - 1.63 trillion surplus

Interest on previous debt - 7.596 trillion

Other statistics: over 90% of the debt came from three leaders whose reign lasted 20 years, Reagan, Bush, and Bush jr.

Writing Group, Week Two

I've attended my second week of writing group now. There are eight of us, with between four and six people submitting work each week.

There isn't a lot of socializing beforehand, which is appreciated. I made a few comments on other peoples work. I do feel a little lost as I'm jumping into some of the stories part way through.

It's nice to have experienced writers tell you what they think. The other authors seemed interested in my work and their feedback was positive and thoughtful changes and tweaks.

To get into the writing group, I first met Nancy Brown, author of a book about her battle with substance abuse called Facing Life. Nancy introduced me to Maureen Garvie, another Kingston author, professor, and respected editor.

In being introduced to Maureen I had two hopes. The first was to get into the writing group. The second was partly hoping that she might take on editing my story. She hasn't said "no," but she seems busy with her work schedule. I think she's also feeling out my writing style.

Having been critiquing writers for five years, it's hard to tell someone outright that they need A LOT of work to ever get published. It really is a waste of time line editing their work. The most valuable thing they can be told is they need A LOT of practice to be publishable. I don't think I'm at that stage, then again, most writers don't. I'll admit, I have a scene here and there that I reread and cringe at why I didn't change it.

It hurts to hear harsh criticism. I've heard it early in my writing days, but over the years, those same harsh critiquers were praising my progress and suggesting I enter certain pieces into competitions. Now, I feel I'm hovering at the publishable level, and with a decent editor I can get pushed over it.

Unfortunately, getting an editor can be a tricky business. For one, there are a lot of frauds out there. The website Preditors and Editors is a good place to look into the dangers of frauds, from agents and publishers to bad editors.

Through Critique Circle, I've had my work edited by other writers, which helps bring it up to a higher standard and weed out 95% of the little errors. Through the writing group, I'm proceeding at a snails pace of about five pages a week. At the current pace, it would take two years to scour through my entire manuscript with them.

It's an enjoyable experience and one where I'm learning quite a bit. Week three is tonight.

Is finding an agent like finding a job?

My wife and I are both well educated. Job searching is frustrating. I'm at the point where I feel you need to know someone to get anywhere.

A friend of mine in Quebec was recently put through a hiring process. He knew someone in the company and got the pre-screening test questions in advance. There were several situational questions. He had thirty minutes to answer all of them, and he raced through his prepared answers, barely finishing on time.

It was a job he was overqualified for, but needed something in hopes it would lead to something better.

"There was almost no way someone could have finished the test in the allotted time unless they'd read and prepared the questions well in advance," he told me.

One of the dozen applicants scored higher than him on the test. The only plausible answer could be that he wasn't the only person who got the test in advance.

The same thing happened in the interview. He finished second again and just missed getting the job. His friend that provided him with the test and interview questions wasn't on the selection committee unfortunately.

He was sure that the person who got hired had a friend on the selection committee or had some sway with it.

But you can't complain that someone else cheated when you cheated too. It's like going to the cops when someone ripped off your stolen merchandise.

It got me wondering though. How many jobs have I wasted my time pursuing because someone else had an in? How often was I just another chump sitting in front of a group of insincere interviewers to make the process look legit?

Now, as I search for an agent, I'm wondering if my efforts aren't the same on some level. It's much better if you know someone. Many agents say that outright, others publish scary statistics.

Let me say that a good agent won't represent crap just as a respectable publisher won't publish it. That's a given. Even if JK Rowling herself recommended a friend as a writer, an agent could quickly pick up if the writer was good or terrible.

But having someone, an editor, an established writer, a publisher, someone whose opinion means something, introduce you and push your work, is probably worth a hundred query letters and partial submissions.

It puts the agent or publisher in a positive mood, someone they respect is giving a good word. In essence, they are reading something they assume will be good, which may be the opposite to their expectation with a random submission.

I don't have the wit of Bill Bryson, nor the descriptive and literary flair of Paul Theroux. Like every writer, I have my own voice, honed and practiced and edited for years. I have a story I believe in, and writing that I feel finally makes the grade after years of the critiquing and editing learning curve.

I've sent off nine queries. I've been rejected by three agents. That's just the query stage, so it says a few things.

Sometimes, no matter how well a letter is written, if an agent isn't taking clients, or representing your genre, they'll fire off a letter saying they're not interested.

It also says tweak the query letter. So I have. I've run it past other writers, and come up with something that I feel is quite good now.

I'm sending two or three queries a week. I'm also working on my second book, which I'll announce in the next two weeks whether I'll pursue the story or not. Several third book ideas are in the works as well. All are non-fiction at this point.

If I do ever come out with a fiction, it will be something that builds and builds over years, with scenes drawn from different inspirations and gelled together over time. Which reminds me, I should get a notebook just for scene ideas and character building that I might one day use.

An International Collective Sigh of Relief.

Bush is gone, and while the despair he caused to hundreds of millions of people lingers on, a new era has dawned upon not only America, but the world.


The following snippets of Obama's inaugural speech have done more to derail terrorism than the trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives wasted by the Bush Administration.

"We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and nonbelievers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace."

...followed by...

"To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West — know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it."

Agents? Publishers? Which road to take...

Many agents want previously published authors. Publishers want agented authors. How's a guy supposed to break into the industry?

I have a thick 1200 page book in front of me called Writer's Market. It lists agents, publishers, magazines, and everything you need to know about where and how to sell what you write. I borrowed it from the library because I'm too poor to buy my own.

The above isn't entirely true. Some publishers accept unagented material. Here's an example of one:

Boyes Mills Press. Receives 10,000 queries and 7,500 manuscripts per year. Publishes 50 titles per year.

They publish one in every 150 submissions they receive. I'm wondering, should I even waste the twenty dollar postage and twenty dollar printing fee to sent them my manuscript?

Assuming some agents do approach them, while other writers are recommended through colleagues, the chances grow even bleaker.

The scenario is equally confusing when going the agent route. Some agents despise multiple submissions. They demand exclusivity. Yet they take up to two months to respond to a three chapter submission and demand that you snail mail them every step of the way.

Come on!

I can understand agents don't want to waste their time reading something that will be sold to someone else. But requesting more than two weeks of exclusivity at the query stage, or more than a month at the first three chapters stage? As a writer, that's a painfully long time, especially if the answer is no.

As a writer subbing queries, long response times scream, STAY AWAY. While exclusivity coupled with long response times is a definite way off my short list. Two months to respond to a query? I don't understand.

Here's one example of an Agency: How to Contact: Query with sample chapter, outline/proposal, SASE. Accepts fax queries. No email queries. Considers simultaneous queries. Responds in two months to queries. Obtains most new clients through recommendations from existing clients and editors.


It takes a minute to read a query letter and five seconds to decide, 1) This is/isn't a type of story I'd represent. 2)The query letter is/isn't written well enough for me to want to see more from this guy.

Same with the first couple pages of a novel. Either they're into it and ploughing forward, or it doesn't appeal to them and the names and titles are put into a rejection template and printed off at the end of the day.

The ideal agent:

They accept email queries and one chapter submissions and respond quickly as to whether they are interested or not. They then either ask to be mailed or emailed partials and whatever else they want; a synopsis, an autobiographical note; a proposal.

I think it's safe to assume agents open to unpublished authors without referrals reject the majority of unsolicited material after the first page. They probably reject the all but about 5% after the first chapter.

How much paper, money, and time could agents would save writers if they accepted the first chapter by email?

I'm going to tweak my synopsis, outline and bio now.

I've made a list of forty agents who might be interested in a travel novel. I've graded them, from A+ to C-, depending on their submission criteria.

To get an A grade, three criteria are necessary.

1) accept email queries
2) seem open to travel memoirs
3) don't sound intimidating, (we prefer referrals, we take two months to respond to queries, etc.)

Eight of the forty on my short list made the A grade.

One last note:

I'm meeting with a new writing group tonight. I've been in online writing groups with Critiquecircle.com for four years now. This will be my first live writing group.
I'm also looking into a professional editor to go over the book with me while I query agents. She has my first chapter. I hope she sees enough promise in it to take me on.

Who says spend?

The Globe and Mail wrote that Canadians are telling the government to spend. Who are these Canadians and why are they telling the government to spend?

Now is a time for fiscal competence. If the government wants to spend their way out of trouble economic times, they should do so very carefully. I'll even suggest they look into where they can eek out a little more money in taxes to cover the bill. Why not increase the price of gasoline a tad, or increase the GST back to competent levels.

In a typical year, Canadian citizens pay billions in capital gains taxes. In a typical year, the stock market increases 5-10%.

In 2008, the stock market fell about 35%.

Instead of capital gains boosting incomes, which translates to higher income taxes, you'll probably see limited gains in 2008, while 2009 could see some huge losses dragging Canadian's income tax payments down.

Which is why we need higher GST, and why we need higher gas taxes. They are two areas where a few cents can be taken without too much pain.

The government should act competently and not try to spend our way out of trouble like the Americans are doing. If Canada wants to spend, do it on things we need and that provide longer term assets such as infrastructure and development.

Spend?

As a person searching for a job and in financial trouble, the greedy self-seeking side of me hopes the government spends and gives me some stability. However the logical side of me says be frugal. We are already paying 25 billion a year in interest, predominately from our last incompetent Conservative government spending spree. I don't want that to jump to fifty billion a year as a burden for the next generation of Canadians to bear.

The intro conundrum - on writing

In previous blogs, I've talked about an editor I once called. At the time, I was green to writing. Essentially, I sucked. I had no direction, no concept of powerful writing for an audience, I just spewed out my story and thought it would get eaten up.

The editor left me stuttering. "Why would anyone want to read your book?"

It was a simple enough question. But I didn't have the answer. I wasn't someone famous, like Michael Palin. I wasn't extraordinary in any way, except that I'd done something extraordinary that nobody knew about... or cared about?

What the editor wanted was something I could write on a matchbox that would make her salivate over the book.

I have it now.
A spiritual, against-the-odds African journey, in a broken old Beetle.

I can tweak that here and there. But that's my story.

Spiritual is an aspect I didn't have before. I didn't see myself as a spiritual person. It reflects religion and faith and hope and all the things a practical person like me tries to keep in a box of personal feelings.

But it's what readers want. They want to get in touch with my feelings as I went through this amazing journey. The trick is, keeping it simple. Showing them tidbits of my inner self while not ranting about them. Sharing a deep, honest emotion can often say so much more than a rant can.

One of my many challenges in this book has been writing a catchy intro. I tried a hundred different angles:

My going nowhere bank job before the journey;
A breakup pushing me to travel;
Searching for my inner self; (It sounded cheesy.)
Starting with one of the most intense parts of the book; (but it ruined the later buildup to that part)
A Paul Theroux type overview of the negative of Africa;
A positive outlook on Africa;
A description of Cape Town;
A taxi ride;
My first AFrican journey; (It was confusing)

They were all just okay.

Finally, I was back in Canada just this past summer. I spent a week at the family's old log cabin. While there, I recalled that this was the place I'd first learned to dream. It was a place of inspiration, where I'd read my first African Adventure novel and watched my first movie on Africa.
My inspiring grandmother had gone against the odds and bought the cabin in 1939. It was built during World War One. She too had travelled in her youth, and her stories put the travel bug in me. Put two and two together. And bang, I had my spiritual intro, a dedication to the memory of my wonderful, inspirational grandmother.

It was the deepest. It was the most personal. It was the most honest.

It's done, and I feel good about it.

Time to find an Agent for my book

My writing journey has taken me five years to get to this point. I originally thought it would take me six months to get this book out, and that it would be bought up like wildfire.

I was wrong on so many levels.

First of all, it took a year before I even had a manuscript length novel to submit, and 80% of that time was spent doing revisions.

I worked on proposals and cover letters and synopses and outlines. I submitted it to half a dozen agents, and got half a dozen rejections.

It was then that I found two things.

The first was that 99% of writers who produce manuscript-length work won't ever get published. This is because either they aren't good enough, or there's not a big enough market for their work.

The second was about the critiquing world. I joined the wonderful website www.critiquecircle.com

Critique circle was an eye opener. My writing was awful. It was all tell and no show. There were grammar mistakes everywhere. It was boring. I came across as arrogant and selfish and traipsing from one place to the next like a spoiled shit.

I worked and worked and worked on edits, submitting my stuff for critiques, and critiquing hundreds of other stories in the process.

After the second year, with all the critiquing, and having read how to write books, my writing got to the level where it was publishable. Each chapter took from a week to a month of hard editing to get to that level though.

Marriage caused a major slow down in my work. I was just getting into a groove as a writer and found that I wasw no longer able to lock myself away and focus entirely on progress with the book.

A year later, a baby arrived on the scene. The demands on my creative time went from slim to almost none, and for over a year my work all but stalled. The little progress I made was often undone by scatterbrained edits, where I'd work on a section only to make it worse, or repetitive of a previous chapter.

Then, one day, I worked my way to the end of the book. A complete first draft of the entire manuscript lay in front of me. I decided to leave home for a week and just edit everything.

I took trains and boats and buses up to Spain. I returned after a week with 400 marked up pages.

I made the corrections over the next month. Then, I gave the manuscript to an editor/friend who scoured over the story.

I revised her edits and rewrote the first two chapters.

The first two chapters still make me grit my teeth. They were a nightmare. I wanted the writing to be perfect and enticing and engaging. The problem was, I didn't enjoy writing them. It was a monotonous start to my journey. It was a backpack journey across a first world country, where the meat of the book was in the third world ahead.

So I pared it down. I focused on buying the car, forshadowing on the excitement ahead, and creating a little tension by playing up any problems I had. One of the challenges of the first chapters is they differ so much from the rest of the book. The events aren't as impacting on me as other parts.

I edited and edited and edited. I took parts out, I put parts back, I tweaked and overwrote and underwrote. Finally, I had something not brilliant, but passable. The best I felt I could do for the lacklustre circumstances surrounding the beginning.

I learned a lot about writing on my journey to the finish line. For example, a cliche error the majority of new writers make is starting their book with a character waking up. This was the case so often in the critiques and edits I made on other people's work that I saw it more often than not. This doesn't necessarily mean the writing is bad, it is often quite good. The beginning simply shows lack of imagination, and if a writing cliche, it can be a warning sign for agents and publishers.

So, with the help of countless other writers, ups and downs, and persistence, I have a finished manuscript again. It's been five years since I began writing. Two years of learning the craft, and another three years of constantly interrupted progress to the finish line.

Using the Preditors and Editors website to scour through agents, I sent my first query Sunday, and received a response saying they were too busy to take me on. I take this two ways.

One: They are busy, and my query letter didn't quite turn them on enough to really want to see my book.

Two: Improve the query letter and try another agent.


Yesterday I went to the local library and checked out the book "2008 Writers Market." I made a shortlist of fifty agents to target, and from them I pared it down to a shortlist of around five to start with.

I was going through my shortlist, and clicked on one of the websites. It said for non fiction submission procedures, "Follow the guidelines in the agent's book, (How to Write a Book Proposal). By Michael Larsen.

It was coincidentally on my lap. It was a book I bought during the 'So I think I can write' stage.

Three or four years ago now, I went through the book page by page and wrote a proposal. The proposal is actually quite good, although parts of it need to be updated.

So I'm working on the book proposal now and will send a query letter to Mr. Larsen's agency today.

The proposal includes a theme for my next book. A gamble, considering I'm waiting for circumstances to pull together in order to even write it.

Old beginning

Here's an old beginning to my book which I've discarded. I've used the scenario in a later chapter as a flashback.

Prologue

Hunched over his wooden cane, a prune-faced old man ambled up to the open spot at my counter. “So you’re going to be a banker,” he said.
It was my first week on the job, and his words felt like some invisible force slamming into me. “Err…” I swallowed, hard, and reached to loosen my tie. “I uh… I suppose so.”
With his head barely above the counter, the old man gave me an indifferent look, as though I was now a useful cog in society. He handed me his bankbook and I tapped numbers into the computer. Memories flooded back of the African travel life I’d recently left behind.
#
On my first visit to Africa, at twenty-three years of age, I was collected from Cape Town airport by family friends.
“Africa is dangerous,” they told me. “Perhaps you should just stay in Cape Town and keep in touch with us.”
A week later, I said my polite goodbyes, slung my heavy backpack on, and went out with the spirit and enthusiasm of a first-time traveller. I bussed up the coast, and later around the country. I climbed mountains, rode horses, and bunji jumped. I fished and surfed and kayaked. I joined tour groups and stuck my camera out of high truck windows trying to photograph Africa’s wildlife.
Three months of backpacking and group adventure was enough, and I moved from backpacker to intrepid traveller. A pair of Afrikaans-speaking brothers sold me a bright-yellow beach buggy, which I drove north into Zimbabwe and Zambia. There, I was greeted by smiling and waving Africans. The buggy needed constant repairs and I often camped in the wilderness tinkering at it with my toolkit.
#
The old man cleared his throat to grab my attention. His hand shook as he placed his cheque on the counter. “Being a banker is a respectable position in society,” he said.
Yeah respectable, I thought. But a respectable bank is no place for a dream-filled rogue.

Is Islamic banking coming?

More than a year ago, I blogged about Sharia Banking.

That blog was in response to a Globe and Mail poll which asked readers the question.

Do you think Ottawa should approve applications it has received from Muslim groups looking to set up so-called Sharia banks that would operate within the structures of Islamic law?


The response was a resounding 82% no.

It bothered me how negative the reaction was.

Today the United States took a huge step toward Sharia banking principles. In the article, Fed chops rate to record low, the article says.

"The U.S. Federal Reserve Board on Tuesday aggressively cut its target for overnight interest rates to a record low zero to 0.25 per cent, and said it would employ “all available tools” to dispel a year-long recession."


That, my 82% Globe Reader majority, is Sharia banking at its finest. But if anyone wishes to pay higher interest rates in the spirit of being anti-Islamic, then feel free to shop for banks charging the highest interest.

On a related note:

In watching the movie, "Merchant of Venice," Al Pacino plays a Jewish money-lender. According to the Shakespearian tale, it was illegal for Christians to charge each other interest at that time. One might surmise that at some point in Christian history, charging interest was not allowed. This tidbit led me to further research, and I came up with this website.

A quote of a quote.

Throughout church history, Christian teachers have taken a strong position against exacting usury on a loan in order to make personal profit. Whereas usury is thought of today as charging excess interest, the word actually meant charging any interest. Ambrose said, "If anyone commits usury, he commits robbery and no longer has life." Calvin declared that the professional money lender should be banned from the church. Luther commented, "After the devil there is no greater human enemy on earth than a miser and usurer, for he desires to be above everyone." 1


The website also mentions Jews were not supposed to charge other Jews interest.

Interesting!

I'd like to admit that there are economic principles at work here that I struggle to understand. It is said that lowering interest rates stokes inflation. I'm not 100% sure why.

Such an environment would encourage people to borrow US dollars, invest the money in another currency, then repay the loan in the future when the dollar has fallen in value. This is the reason it didn't immediately make sense to me. It's a recipe for disaster and an easy money making scheme.

So I thought about it.

The only reason I can surmise inflation would run up is that it is related to debt.

The United States National debt sits at over ten trillion dollars. At the rate of return of 0%, who is going to want to keep their investments in US bonds? Therefore the sell off begins, right?

The US government has to buy back their low-interest-yielding bonds. They have two ways to do this. Print money or raise taxes. Raising taxes hurts the economy. Printing money stokes inflation.

The government is likely to do a bit of both. But I see a storm brewing that could send the US dollar crashing.

Therefore borrow dollars, change them to Euros, get some interest, and pay off your low interest loan gradually as the dollar crashes.

To test my theory, I'm borrowing an imaginary $100,000 US dollars right now and converting it to imaginary Canadian dollars. At todays rate, that gives me $120,000 Canadian dollars. Investing that in a Canadian Savings Bond for 5 years, with yields around 2%. At end, I'll have around $135,000 Canadian.

Assuming I won't be able to get a great interest rate as low as 0%, I'll pay 2%. So in five years, I'll owe US$110,500

We'll see how much my gamble is worth in dollars in five years.


Footnote:
1. Christian History Magazine (Worcester, PA: Christian History Institute, 1987), 7(2):18.