Monday, February 23, 2009
Upcoming Articles
"Breaking up with your in-laws" - joys and consequences.
"Who is really cheating welfare"-in your own neighbourhood
"Pedophiles Among Us" - a look at pedophiles on Gabriola, and why their families accept this behavior.
"The Passive Agressive Personality
"Laytonism and the Death of NDP Values"
"Who is really cheating welfare"-in your own neighbourhood
"Pedophiles Among Us" - a look at pedophiles on Gabriola, and why their families accept this behavior.
"The Passive Agressive Personality
"Laytonism and the Death of NDP Values"
Labels: Upcoming Articles
Friday, February 06, 2009
This week's letter to the Sounder feb6/09
To the Editor:
It has been interesting since my last letter to the Sounder. 2 phone calls really liked it and want to meet. 4 phone calls that could best be termed as more than a little rude - obscene and hate filled (am now filtering my calls so leave a message). Several attack e-mails and three public confrontations last time I was out. One of the Laytonites told me there were thousands of deserters and tens of thousand more "refusniks" (draft dodgers) in Canada from the Iraq war. Refused to believe that according to Immigration Canada there were less than 50 deserters, and were no draft dodgers because the American Military has been all volunteer for more than a generation. Another didn't know who Tommy Douglas or Ed Broadbent were, but did know that there were hundreds of Canadian deserters all over the world who had deserted from Afghanistan and that the Canadian government was covering it up. Some just ascribed colorful traits and suggested physical impossibilities, while others seemed concerned for my safety and suggested I move off the Island (much like in-laws).
I should have clarified in my article that Laytonites were only a minority of the NDP - but they are the ones in control of the party. The NDP used to stand for social justice, union rights, and a moderate brand of socialism. The Laytonites are left of Marx with the tactics of opportunists. Anything to get elected, anything for power including bribing the Separatists with taxpayer money for cabinet seats they could never achieve thru elections. Pierre Trudeau approached Ed Broadbent after the defeat of Joe Clarke’s 8-month government offering him an alliance and cabinet seats to avoid going to another election. Ed refused as he believed in democracy and that government should be elected by the people, not decided thru backroom deals. What a difference between that NDP and the Laytonites version.
I was already uncomfortable being an NDP because of the shift from being a party of alternatives to a party of attack ads to cover lack of policy, and a willingness to join the Liberals and the Separatists to bring down a legally elected government. For me the last straw was the deliberate using of a deserter for party policies. They knew they couldn't keep him in Canada, yet they deliberately lied to him. Then they tried to lie to all of us by calling him a War Resistor - I wouldn't want to be him in front of a court martial board with war resistor in my record - they will throw the book at him.
I think that people, especially journalists, should be careful to know when they offer help that they have the ability to deliver the promised help, and that the help they offer won't make the person’s situation worse. Above all people, even deserters, shouldn't be used for political purposes and then tossed away - notice the lack of mention or follow up on Cliff? Especially newspapers that claim to represent the community should use common sense not party policy.
When party policy beats common sense the publication ceases to be a "news" paper and becomes a party propaganda sheet. Looking at what the party has become and realizing that the majority of the NDP would never rise and take our party back I knew I could not continue to go on supporting the party nor could I remain silent about what I saw even though I knew it meant provoking the Lunatics Laytonites. The NDP used to be a party were truth and different views were respected not silenced thru threats and lies, but that was before the Laytonites took control. More details and background can be found on ianlowden.blogspot.com.
It has been interesting since my last letter to the Sounder. 2 phone calls really liked it and want to meet. 4 phone calls that could best be termed as more than a little rude - obscene and hate filled (am now filtering my calls so leave a message). Several attack e-mails and three public confrontations last time I was out. One of the Laytonites told me there were thousands of deserters and tens of thousand more "refusniks" (draft dodgers) in Canada from the Iraq war. Refused to believe that according to Immigration Canada there were less than 50 deserters, and were no draft dodgers because the American Military has been all volunteer for more than a generation. Another didn't know who Tommy Douglas or Ed Broadbent were, but did know that there were hundreds of Canadian deserters all over the world who had deserted from Afghanistan and that the Canadian government was covering it up. Some just ascribed colorful traits and suggested physical impossibilities, while others seemed concerned for my safety and suggested I move off the Island (much like in-laws).
I should have clarified in my article that Laytonites were only a minority of the NDP - but they are the ones in control of the party. The NDP used to stand for social justice, union rights, and a moderate brand of socialism. The Laytonites are left of Marx with the tactics of opportunists. Anything to get elected, anything for power including bribing the Separatists with taxpayer money for cabinet seats they could never achieve thru elections. Pierre Trudeau approached Ed Broadbent after the defeat of Joe Clarke’s 8-month government offering him an alliance and cabinet seats to avoid going to another election. Ed refused as he believed in democracy and that government should be elected by the people, not decided thru backroom deals. What a difference between that NDP and the Laytonites version.
I was already uncomfortable being an NDP because of the shift from being a party of alternatives to a party of attack ads to cover lack of policy, and a willingness to join the Liberals and the Separatists to bring down a legally elected government. For me the last straw was the deliberate using of a deserter for party policies. They knew they couldn't keep him in Canada, yet they deliberately lied to him. Then they tried to lie to all of us by calling him a War Resistor - I wouldn't want to be him in front of a court martial board with war resistor in my record - they will throw the book at him.
I think that people, especially journalists, should be careful to know when they offer help that they have the ability to deliver the promised help, and that the help they offer won't make the person’s situation worse. Above all people, even deserters, shouldn't be used for political purposes and then tossed away - notice the lack of mention or follow up on Cliff? Especially newspapers that claim to represent the community should use common sense not party policy.
When party policy beats common sense the publication ceases to be a "news" paper and becomes a party propaganda sheet. Looking at what the party has become and realizing that the majority of the NDP would never rise and take our party back I knew I could not continue to go on supporting the party nor could I remain silent about what I saw even though I knew it meant provoking the Lunatics Laytonites. The NDP used to be a party were truth and different views were respected not silenced thru threats and lies, but that was before the Laytonites took control. More details and background can be found on ianlowden.blogspot.com.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Gossip is Violence
Gossip is Violence.By Ian Lowden B.A., M.Sc.
I am used to getting varying reactions from people about the things I write. Sometimes the reaction is in the form of letters to the editor but more often it is in the form of discussion when I meet a friend or acquaintance at the grocery store, or when people drop by, or when they E-mail or phone. Usually only the people who are angry about something I’ve said or they think I’ve said, write into the paper. I’m not sure why this is but hopefully it will change. I think part of it is because it’s easy to deal with someone one on one when you agree with them. When they don’t agree people find it safer to put barriers or distance between themselves and whom they disagree with. Which brings me too the ultimate way of striking out without risk to yourself –Gossip.Some people may get angry at my choice to include gossip among violent reactions. Gossips in particular, don’t like to think of themselves as violent. Most gossips would be shocked at being called violent. Gossips usually see themselves as non-violent and also usually as morally superior. They are deeply insulted at being included with the physical and emotional abusers.My working definition of violence is “intentional acts that damage another person”. There has to be an action, that action has to be intentionally damaging, and damage has to occur, for abuse to occur. This definition allows the inclusion of all intentional acts of damage- physical, emotional, threats, self-abuse and of course verbal abuse whether directly applied or indirectly applied (like gossip).Some of the longest lasting abuse is that which scars the person deep inside. Often the things people say can last longer and be more damaging than a physical act. To me the most damaging abuse occurs when someone attacks another who is totally unable to defend themselves.Emotional abuse is not always performed face to face; often it is performed from a distance. This distance is designed to keep the attacker safe from being recognized while at the same time doing as much damage as possible. The ultimate perpetrator of this kind of abuse is the gossip. The gossip is usually one of those people who will never confront you face to face. They usually have a veneer of civilization to camouflage themselves, but under this veneer beats the heart of a true abuser. Not only is this abuser a coward like every other abuser, but also they cover their vicious and cowardly nature with the persona of a non-violent person. Gossips are one of the clearest examples of the passive aggressive personality pattern..A gossip uses words and innuendo to try and destroy anyone who irks them. If you intentionally try to destroy another persons reputation or credibility are you not trying to do them harm? If you try to hide where these attacks are coming from are you not acting out of cowardice? If your intent is to do another harm, to damage and hurt another, are you not an abuser?We all have seen (and sometimes been a part of) this type of character assassination so we are all aware how devastating and how long lasting this brutal this kind of violence can be. Most of us outgrow the anger that generates this kind of violence by the end of adolescence, but some particularly damaged individuals can carry this anger and violence throughout their lives, constantly feeling the need to destroy others to fill an unmet need within them. Like all others who routinely use violence these abusers are making choices. No matter what your pain you have a duty to get the help you need to become a non-violent person. A truly non-violent person is one who strives to not use any of the forms of violence. None of us is perfect but in the striving towards it lies the real measure of a humanNext time you hear someone gossiping, look at their intent. Are they trying to damage that person? Why? Then, ask yourself, after I leave will I be this person’s next item of gossip?Conclusion: To paraphrase Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump. Abusive is as abusive does.
I am used to getting varying reactions from people about the things I write. Sometimes the reaction is in the form of letters to the editor but more often it is in the form of discussion when I meet a friend or acquaintance at the grocery store, or when people drop by, or when they E-mail or phone. Usually only the people who are angry about something I’ve said or they think I’ve said, write into the paper. I’m not sure why this is but hopefully it will change. I think part of it is because it’s easy to deal with someone one on one when you agree with them. When they don’t agree people find it safer to put barriers or distance between themselves and whom they disagree with. Which brings me too the ultimate way of striking out without risk to yourself –Gossip.Some people may get angry at my choice to include gossip among violent reactions. Gossips in particular, don’t like to think of themselves as violent. Most gossips would be shocked at being called violent. Gossips usually see themselves as non-violent and also usually as morally superior. They are deeply insulted at being included with the physical and emotional abusers.My working definition of violence is “intentional acts that damage another person”. There has to be an action, that action has to be intentionally damaging, and damage has to occur, for abuse to occur. This definition allows the inclusion of all intentional acts of damage- physical, emotional, threats, self-abuse and of course verbal abuse whether directly applied or indirectly applied (like gossip).Some of the longest lasting abuse is that which scars the person deep inside. Often the things people say can last longer and be more damaging than a physical act. To me the most damaging abuse occurs when someone attacks another who is totally unable to defend themselves.Emotional abuse is not always performed face to face; often it is performed from a distance. This distance is designed to keep the attacker safe from being recognized while at the same time doing as much damage as possible. The ultimate perpetrator of this kind of abuse is the gossip. The gossip is usually one of those people who will never confront you face to face. They usually have a veneer of civilization to camouflage themselves, but under this veneer beats the heart of a true abuser. Not only is this abuser a coward like every other abuser, but also they cover their vicious and cowardly nature with the persona of a non-violent person. Gossips are one of the clearest examples of the passive aggressive personality pattern..A gossip uses words and innuendo to try and destroy anyone who irks them. If you intentionally try to destroy another persons reputation or credibility are you not trying to do them harm? If you try to hide where these attacks are coming from are you not acting out of cowardice? If your intent is to do another harm, to damage and hurt another, are you not an abuser?We all have seen (and sometimes been a part of) this type of character assassination so we are all aware how devastating and how long lasting this brutal this kind of violence can be. Most of us outgrow the anger that generates this kind of violence by the end of adolescence, but some particularly damaged individuals can carry this anger and violence throughout their lives, constantly feeling the need to destroy others to fill an unmet need within them. Like all others who routinely use violence these abusers are making choices. No matter what your pain you have a duty to get the help you need to become a non-violent person. A truly non-violent person is one who strives to not use any of the forms of violence. None of us is perfect but in the striving towards it lies the real measure of a humanNext time you hear someone gossiping, look at their intent. Are they trying to damage that person? Why? Then, ask yourself, after I leave will I be this person’s next item of gossip?Conclusion: To paraphrase Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump. Abusive is as abusive does.
Letter to the Sounder - Feb 3/09
To the Editor:
It has been interesting since my last letter to the Sounder. 2 phone calls really liked it and want to meet. 4 phone calls that could best be termed as more than a little rude - obscene and hate filled (am now filtering my calls so leave a message). Several attack e-mails and three public confrontations last time I was out. One of the Laytonites told me there were thousands of deserters and tens of thousand more "refusniks" (draft dodgers) in Canada from the Iraq war. Refused to believe that according to Immigration Canada there were less than 50 deserters, and were no draft dodgers because the American Military has been all volunteer for more than a generation. Another didn't know who Tommy Douglas or Ed Broadbent were, but did know that there were hundreds of Canadian deserters all over the world who had deserted from Afghanistan and that the Canadian government was covering it up. Some just ascribed colorful traits and suggested physical impossibilities, while others seemed concerned for my safety and suggested I move off the Island (much like in-laws).
I should have clarified in my article that Laytonites were only a minority of the NDP - but they are the ones in control of the party. The NDP used to stand for social justice, union rights, and a moderate brand of socialism. The Laytonites are left of Marx with the tactics of opportunists. Anything to get elected, anything for power including bribing the Separatists with taxpayer money for cabinet seats they could never achieve thru elections. Pierre Trudeau approached Ed Broadbent after the defeat of Joe Clarke’s 8-month government offering him an alliance and cabinet seats to avoid going to another election. Ed refused as he believed in democracy and that government should be elected by the people, not decided thru backroom deals. What a difference between that NDP and the Laytonites version.
I was already uncomfortable being an NDP because of the shift from being a party of alternatives to a party of attack ads to cover lack of policy, and a willingness to join the Liberals and the Separatists to bring down a legally elected government. For me the last straw was the deliberate using of a deserter for party policies. They knew they couldn't keep him in Canada, yet they deliberately lied to him. Then they tried to lie to all of us by calling him a War Resistor - I wouldn't want to be him in front of a court martial board with war resistor in my record - they will throw the book at him.
I think that people, especially journalists, should be careful to know when they offer help that they have the ability to deliver the promised help, and that the help they offer won't make the person’s situation worse. Above all people, even deserters, shouldn't be used for political purposes and then tossed away - notice the lack of mention or follow up on Cliff? Especially newspapers that claim to represent the community should use common sense not party policy.
When party policy beats common sense the publication ceases to be a "news" paper and becomes a party propaganda sheet. Looking at what the party has become and realizing that the majority of the NDP would never rise and take our party back I knew I could not continue to go on supporting the party nor could I remain silent about what I saw even though I knew it meant provoking the Lunatics Laytonites. The NDP used to be a party were truth and different views were respected not silenced thru threats and lies, but that was before the Laytonites took control. More details and background can be found on ianlowden.blogspot.com.
It has been interesting since my last letter to the Sounder. 2 phone calls really liked it and want to meet. 4 phone calls that could best be termed as more than a little rude - obscene and hate filled (am now filtering my calls so leave a message). Several attack e-mails and three public confrontations last time I was out. One of the Laytonites told me there were thousands of deserters and tens of thousand more "refusniks" (draft dodgers) in Canada from the Iraq war. Refused to believe that according to Immigration Canada there were less than 50 deserters, and were no draft dodgers because the American Military has been all volunteer for more than a generation. Another didn't know who Tommy Douglas or Ed Broadbent were, but did know that there were hundreds of Canadian deserters all over the world who had deserted from Afghanistan and that the Canadian government was covering it up. Some just ascribed colorful traits and suggested physical impossibilities, while others seemed concerned for my safety and suggested I move off the Island (much like in-laws).
I should have clarified in my article that Laytonites were only a minority of the NDP - but they are the ones in control of the party. The NDP used to stand for social justice, union rights, and a moderate brand of socialism. The Laytonites are left of Marx with the tactics of opportunists. Anything to get elected, anything for power including bribing the Separatists with taxpayer money for cabinet seats they could never achieve thru elections. Pierre Trudeau approached Ed Broadbent after the defeat of Joe Clarke’s 8-month government offering him an alliance and cabinet seats to avoid going to another election. Ed refused as he believed in democracy and that government should be elected by the people, not decided thru backroom deals. What a difference between that NDP and the Laytonites version.
I was already uncomfortable being an NDP because of the shift from being a party of alternatives to a party of attack ads to cover lack of policy, and a willingness to join the Liberals and the Separatists to bring down a legally elected government. For me the last straw was the deliberate using of a deserter for party policies. They knew they couldn't keep him in Canada, yet they deliberately lied to him. Then they tried to lie to all of us by calling him a War Resistor - I wouldn't want to be him in front of a court martial board with war resistor in my record - they will throw the book at him.
I think that people, especially journalists, should be careful to know when they offer help that they have the ability to deliver the promised help, and that the help they offer won't make the person’s situation worse. Above all people, even deserters, shouldn't be used for political purposes and then tossed away - notice the lack of mention or follow up on Cliff? Especially newspapers that claim to represent the community should use common sense not party policy.
When party policy beats common sense the publication ceases to be a "news" paper and becomes a party propaganda sheet. Looking at what the party has become and realizing that the majority of the NDP would never rise and take our party back I knew I could not continue to go on supporting the party nor could I remain silent about what I saw even though I knew it meant provoking the Lunatics Laytonites. The NDP used to be a party were truth and different views were respected not silenced thru threats and lies, but that was before the Laytonites took control. More details and background can be found on ianlowden.blogspot.com.
Concerning the IT budget by Ken White
COMMENTS ON THE 2009 ISLANDS TRUST BUDGET
Islands Trust has asked for public comment on its proposed budget which includes a tax increase and pay increases for Trustees.
We currently live in a world with job layoffs, massive stock market losses, companies cutting dividends, large drops in defined contribution pensions, potential reductions in defined benefit pensions, hiring freezes, weak Canadian dollar, salary reductions, property value reductions, and difficulty in selling properties. Islanders, many who live on fixed or reduced incomes, are coping with the crisis by cutting back on their budgets in many ways.
But Islands Trust still wants to raise taxes and vote themselves a pay increase.
Islands Trust weak attempt at facing the financial crisis is to say we are not going to have the outrageous tax increases of the last three years and instead just increase taxes at an amount closer to the rate of inflation (which is what they should have been doing in the good times).
It would be much better for Islands Trust to admit that the tax increases in the last three years, which were far above those of other local governments, were excessive and should be rolled back. Islands Trust needs to recognize that this is a time for cuts, not of increases of any amount.
This is a challenge to the new Islands Trust Council. To ignore the economic reality and pass any tax increase at all to islanders would be shocking, shameful, and irresponsible. If Trustees also vote to increase their own pay, they are simply adding another insult to the current pain islanders are facing.
Ken White
Passage Island
Ken has sent copies of this to the Sounder, the Driftwood, and Island Tides - ian
Islands Trust has asked for public comment on its proposed budget which includes a tax increase and pay increases for Trustees.
We currently live in a world with job layoffs, massive stock market losses, companies cutting dividends, large drops in defined contribution pensions, potential reductions in defined benefit pensions, hiring freezes, weak Canadian dollar, salary reductions, property value reductions, and difficulty in selling properties. Islanders, many who live on fixed or reduced incomes, are coping with the crisis by cutting back on their budgets in many ways.
But Islands Trust still wants to raise taxes and vote themselves a pay increase.
Islands Trust weak attempt at facing the financial crisis is to say we are not going to have the outrageous tax increases of the last three years and instead just increase taxes at an amount closer to the rate of inflation (which is what they should have been doing in the good times).
It would be much better for Islands Trust to admit that the tax increases in the last three years, which were far above those of other local governments, were excessive and should be rolled back. Islands Trust needs to recognize that this is a time for cuts, not of increases of any amount.
This is a challenge to the new Islands Trust Council. To ignore the economic reality and pass any tax increase at all to islanders would be shocking, shameful, and irresponsible. If Trustees also vote to increase their own pay, they are simply adding another insult to the current pain islanders are facing.
Ken White
Passage Island
Ken has sent copies of this to the Sounder, the Driftwood, and Island Tides - ian
Series of Exchanges About Article the Shingle refused to Publish
-----Original Message-----From: Ian Lowden [mailto:ian.lowden@shaw.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 12:29 AMTo: flyingshingle@shaw.caSubject:
Dear editor: I am enclosing the last article (or letter to the editor whichever you wish - I am reasonably sure you will find some reason not to print it) that I will be sending you as I find I can no longer stomach your insistence of propaganda over truth. I had my doubts about you from the first when you said your goal was to produce an objective, un-biased community newspaper as you where proudly a "NEW NDP" and I haven't met one of those yet that is capable of distinguishing between truth and the party line; but to be fair, I decided to wait and see-who knows you could have been the exception that proves the rule. However, you have evidently decided that being a "Laytonite" is the only truth acceptable (somewhat like a southern Baptist -you don't need facts you have faith). I may be the first to abandon ship but I know I won't be the last as even some of your loyal staff (and you don't seem to understand that loyalty only works if it goes both ways) are feeling very uncomfortable with the way you have decided to go with what used to actually be a newspaper. Some of them are feeling more than a little deceived, and frankly, I think you have lost your credibility with most of this community. As for helping Cliff I think the turnout at your rally speaks for itself - when 99% refuse their support you can pretty well assume you have destroyed his chances. It is truly a shame that you are so locked into an unquestioning follower mental structure that you don't even think about whether you are helping or hurting someone like Cliff or the community itself. However, I think you will find that Zealots are pretty quickly dismissed by people, especially islanders, who by and large do think for themselves. However, all that aside, you really should check out the articles you print as I found one of them had been plagiarized almost word for word from a source on line, except for one paragraph. This should have been self-evident to you if you had bothered to stop and think. Regretfully, working with you has not been possible, as you don't really work with anyone; you think they work for you. I won't be phony and wish you luck, as I don't. So even though I very much doubt you will print my article as either my last column or as a letter to the editor, I will just say good-bye and hope you have an epiphany someday before you screw up even more people. - Ian Lowden (ianlowden.blogspot.com)
Hi Ian and Derek,
Ian, I understand from Derek that you also sent this letter – and I presume your article – to the Sounder, so I am including Derek in my response.
As you know articles for the Shingle have an 800 word limit, and the Shingle does not allow personal attacks of community members. The article you sent me is 967 words long not counting the headline, and will also require a bit of editing regarding personal attacks. If you choose to make those alterations I will publish your article.
I will of course publish your letter to the editor, but require that you tell me which article you are alleging has been plagiarized, and provide proof if you want that allegation to be published.
I am sorry that you feel so angry, but I do understand your decision to stop writing for the Shingle.
Regards,
Chris Bowers
Editor/Publisher
The Flying Shingle News Ltd.
381 Spruce Ave.
Gabriola Island, BC
V0R 1X1
P/F: 250-247-7987
editor@flyingshingle.com
www.flyingshingle.com
Cut the bullshit Chris - you have no intention of publishing my article as either a letter to the editor or as my last article. As for 800 words - that is a very convenient new rule as you have published articles and even editorials longer than that. As for personal attacks I don't believe my article contains any, just a criticism of your propaganda over truth policy - so what is it you identify as "personal attacks”? You print plenty of those! So if you aren't going to publish it because you are afraid that many of the community will agree so be it - it along with your refusal to publish it will get out there by relaying it through many people's contacts via e-mail and flyers so it is still your own credibility that suffers most as within a couple of weeks everyone on the island will know about your flimsy excuses. As for printing my letter - the article was my letter, the other part was just an explanation to you. As for providing you proof of plagiarism I believe you should be quite capable of figuring that out yourself - you do after all claim to be computer literate and should know how to do a search and quite frankly I have no intention of doing your job for you - it took me 8 minutes to find the source of the article you presented as new. I don't know whether you think you can control the Sounder or not but even if somehow the sounders new owners where to give you that right my article will still get out there. Your choice not to publish it will just strike everyone as cowardice.
I think Derek will have to make up his own mind whether he wants to cover for you or not, especially as it will get out anyway. You keep deluding yourself with your own importance. Why would Derek cover for someone and refuse to represent views other than yours when you are doing your absolute best to steal his advertisers and drive him out of business? If Derek had issues about thinking my words are personal attacks I would listen to him - from you it is just a predictable response. Some of your staff have already told me that you would not publish it under any circumstances - so after this you will have to say - The Shingle will present any community members opinion that the editor endorses". Do you really think that Derek is dumb enough to join that kind of censorship and for what? Do you think so well of yourself that you think he is trying to make the Sounder a clone of the Shingle, and that he shares your every opinion. Several islanders - including some of your advertisers have already seen some of my article and without exception are pleased that someone is willing to stand up to your manipulations. So I will also include Derek in my response to you. If he sees a problem then I will listen but all your objections appear to be specious and self-serving. You really should take a look outside your narrow circle and see how people are viewing you and what you write and what you choose not to include. Or is it you think attacking Layton's little soldiers is personal - if so re-read your Dear Gord columnist which most people think sucks as much as your dear gabby.
Derek, my offer remains open, if you think my article goes over the line between criticism of a paper's policies and content and into personal attacks let me know which parts and where and I will endeavor to work it out with you. As far as I (and others who have reviewed this) see it is an appropriate response to the Shingle and to my ex-brother-in-laws hate mail, which was, a very personal attack but Chris chose to publish it anyway. You can't have it both ways Chris, just because you want it to go away. Many more people will question your credibility for not publishing it. Either way you lose. You just got to figure out which way is going to damage your credibility more. You control the Shingle but that doesn't mean you can control what Islanders think, no matter how much you wish you could. As I have said before, my article is the only thing I want published and you know it is not the little explanation to you, once again you just try and obfuscate between a personal note and the article, and before you tell me that you can't publish the article as a letter to the editor because it exceeds 250 words let me remind you of how many times you have broken that rule when it was something you wanted to publish. And don't insult anyone's intelligence by suggesting I break it down to 250 words. You really are such a phony, you try and hide behind rules that you break all the time, it seems the rules are only there to help you justify not printing what you don't like - and that kind of thinking is exactly what separates a community newspaper from a manipulative propaganda sheet. One last thing, don't pretend to be sorry that I am angry, it is your anger you have to deal with and don't pretend you understand why I will no longer write for you, you don't really understand that either. So go ahead and publish it - you can always spend the rest of the paper trying to tear it apart, which I am sure you would enjoy as you like tearing at people who don't have access to defend themselves, it seems to be your thing, no wonder you couldn't cut it as a counselor-for the same reasons you won't make it as a publisher, you can't see past your own little walls let alone be able to empathize with any view other than your own.
Dear editor: I am enclosing the last article (or letter to the editor whichever you wish - I am reasonably sure you will find some reason not to print it) that I will be sending you as I find I can no longer stomach your insistence of propaganda over truth. I had my doubts about you from the first when you said your goal was to produce an objective, un-biased community newspaper as you where proudly a "NEW NDP" and I haven't met one of those yet that is capable of distinguishing between truth and the party line; but to be fair, I decided to wait and see-who knows you could have been the exception that proves the rule. However, you have evidently decided that being a "Laytonite" is the only truth acceptable (somewhat like a southern Baptist -you don't need facts you have faith). I may be the first to abandon ship but I know I won't be the last as even some of your loyal staff (and you don't seem to understand that loyalty only works if it goes both ways) are feeling very uncomfortable with the way you have decided to go with what used to actually be a newspaper. Some of them are feeling more than a little deceived, and frankly, I think you have lost your credibility with most of this community. As for helping Cliff I think the turnout at your rally speaks for itself - when 99% refuse their support you can pretty well assume you have destroyed his chances. It is truly a shame that you are so locked into an unquestioning follower mental structure that you don't even think about whether you are helping or hurting someone like Cliff or the community itself. However, I think you will find that Zealots are pretty quickly dismissed by people, especially islanders, who by and large do think for themselves. However, all that aside, you really should check out the articles you print as I found one of them had been plagiarized almost word for word from a source on line, except for one paragraph. This should have been self-evident to you if you had bothered to stop and think. Regretfully, working with you has not been possible, as you don't really work with anyone; you think they work for you. I won't be phony and wish you luck, as I don't. So even though I very much doubt you will print my article as either my last column or as a letter to the editor, I will just say good-bye and hope you have an epiphany someday before you screw up even more people. - Ian Lowden (ianlowden.blogspot.com)
Hi Ian and Derek,
Ian, I understand from Derek that you also sent this letter – and I presume your article – to the Sounder, so I am including Derek in my response.
As you know articles for the Shingle have an 800 word limit, and the Shingle does not allow personal attacks of community members. The article you sent me is 967 words long not counting the headline, and will also require a bit of editing regarding personal attacks. If you choose to make those alterations I will publish your article.
I will of course publish your letter to the editor, but require that you tell me which article you are alleging has been plagiarized, and provide proof if you want that allegation to be published.
I am sorry that you feel so angry, but I do understand your decision to stop writing for the Shingle.
Regards,
Chris Bowers
Editor/Publisher
The Flying Shingle News Ltd.
381 Spruce Ave.
Gabriola Island, BC
V0R 1X1
P/F: 250-247-7987
editor@flyingshingle.com
www.flyingshingle.com
Cut the bullshit Chris - you have no intention of publishing my article as either a letter to the editor or as my last article. As for 800 words - that is a very convenient new rule as you have published articles and even editorials longer than that. As for personal attacks I don't believe my article contains any, just a criticism of your propaganda over truth policy - so what is it you identify as "personal attacks”? You print plenty of those! So if you aren't going to publish it because you are afraid that many of the community will agree so be it - it along with your refusal to publish it will get out there by relaying it through many people's contacts via e-mail and flyers so it is still your own credibility that suffers most as within a couple of weeks everyone on the island will know about your flimsy excuses. As for printing my letter - the article was my letter, the other part was just an explanation to you. As for providing you proof of plagiarism I believe you should be quite capable of figuring that out yourself - you do after all claim to be computer literate and should know how to do a search and quite frankly I have no intention of doing your job for you - it took me 8 minutes to find the source of the article you presented as new. I don't know whether you think you can control the Sounder or not but even if somehow the sounders new owners where to give you that right my article will still get out there. Your choice not to publish it will just strike everyone as cowardice.
I think Derek will have to make up his own mind whether he wants to cover for you or not, especially as it will get out anyway. You keep deluding yourself with your own importance. Why would Derek cover for someone and refuse to represent views other than yours when you are doing your absolute best to steal his advertisers and drive him out of business? If Derek had issues about thinking my words are personal attacks I would listen to him - from you it is just a predictable response. Some of your staff have already told me that you would not publish it under any circumstances - so after this you will have to say - The Shingle will present any community members opinion that the editor endorses". Do you really think that Derek is dumb enough to join that kind of censorship and for what? Do you think so well of yourself that you think he is trying to make the Sounder a clone of the Shingle, and that he shares your every opinion. Several islanders - including some of your advertisers have already seen some of my article and without exception are pleased that someone is willing to stand up to your manipulations. So I will also include Derek in my response to you. If he sees a problem then I will listen but all your objections appear to be specious and self-serving. You really should take a look outside your narrow circle and see how people are viewing you and what you write and what you choose not to include. Or is it you think attacking Layton's little soldiers is personal - if so re-read your Dear Gord columnist which most people think sucks as much as your dear gabby.
Derek, my offer remains open, if you think my article goes over the line between criticism of a paper's policies and content and into personal attacks let me know which parts and where and I will endeavor to work it out with you. As far as I (and others who have reviewed this) see it is an appropriate response to the Shingle and to my ex-brother-in-laws hate mail, which was, a very personal attack but Chris chose to publish it anyway. You can't have it both ways Chris, just because you want it to go away. Many more people will question your credibility for not publishing it. Either way you lose. You just got to figure out which way is going to damage your credibility more. You control the Shingle but that doesn't mean you can control what Islanders think, no matter how much you wish you could. As I have said before, my article is the only thing I want published and you know it is not the little explanation to you, once again you just try and obfuscate between a personal note and the article, and before you tell me that you can't publish the article as a letter to the editor because it exceeds 250 words let me remind you of how many times you have broken that rule when it was something you wanted to publish. And don't insult anyone's intelligence by suggesting I break it down to 250 words. You really are such a phony, you try and hide behind rules that you break all the time, it seems the rules are only there to help you justify not printing what you don't like - and that kind of thinking is exactly what separates a community newspaper from a manipulative propaganda sheet. One last thing, don't pretend to be sorry that I am angry, it is your anger you have to deal with and don't pretend you understand why I will no longer write for you, you don't really understand that either. So go ahead and publish it - you can always spend the rest of the paper trying to tear it apart, which I am sure you would enjoy as you like tearing at people who don't have access to defend themselves, it seems to be your thing, no wonder you couldn't cut it as a counselor-for the same reasons you won't make it as a publisher, you can't see past your own little walls let alone be able to empathize with any view other than your own.
Article shingle refused to Publish
A Number of Truths About Heroes, Deserters, Duty, Betrayal, Honor, Family and Choosing Propaganda Over Truth. by ianlowden.blogspot.com
Not everyone shares the view of the the "New" Ndp about bringing our troops home. Most Canadians are proud of our troops, and our troops don’t want to come home – they know that helping the Afghan people to be free of their TALIBAN TYRANTS is a noble thing to do, and we haven’t had a single deserter, in fact our troops scheme to get into the units that are being sent, so unlike what the NDP would have us believe, they are all volunteers and proud of it.
I like Cliff and I hope he gets to stay in Canada but calling him a "WAR RESISTOR" insults the memory of those many who struggled, were beaten, imprisoned and killed in legitimate War Resistance. War Resistors do not join a military already at war and they don't wait two years taking Uncle Sam's money until they are being sent over before they desert.
I think Cliff made a very stupid choice by VOLUNTARILY joining up and compounded the error by desertion. However, we have all made stupid mistakes in our life and will probably do so again. Refusing to fight in Iraq, which ranks right up there with the stupidity of Vietnam and their Civil War, does not mean he should be deported and put in jail. He has already given up his family and his country and that is not easy to do. Being afraid to die or be maimed is natural. Not being willing to die in a war that has made Iraq worse off than it was, is just plain common sense.
I would feel different if Cliff had deserted because he was being sent to Afghanistan, which is a just war, as was WWII. He would also have a lot more support if the "NEW" NDP were not using him to spread their propaganda and show Jack Layton what good little followers they are. Being used by the NDP's little blind soldiers is the last thing he needed, and calling him a WAR RESISTOR shows an astonishing amount of miss-trained intellect and a total lack in their grasp of history.
Cliff should be allowed to stay in Canada until Obama pulls the troops out of Iraq and puts them into Afghanistan, which is where they always should have been. I expect that with Obama, Canadian troops as well as a greatly expanded international fighting force will be in Afghanistan until the people there are safe from tyranny. I also suspect that Obama will issue amnesty and call off the hunt for people like Cliff who put survival ahead of stupidity. So wake up Cliff, admit you made a mistake and stop going on with the left-wing whackos that are insulting every one’s intelligence by trying to make you out as some kind of hero. You are just a guy who made a mistake and didn't want to die because of it. I wouldn't allow them to send me to Iraq either, nor would most of the people on this Island be willing to go.
I haven't submitted anything to the Shingle since the election and for two months before the election was not allowed to even submit my regular column because their was the fear that I might point out some of the many things about the Island Trust that need fixing, The Shingle ignored the issues and chose to print nothing except propaganda for the Triumphurate. So while I was banned from publishing anything my IT opponents were given plenty of coverage of their own choosing. I was left with five pieces of ant-ian articles and no chance to even defend myself from the misquotes, quotes taken out of context and outright untruths, including a hate letter full of the insane-like ramblings of my ex-brother-in-law. My wife’s family is angry because I could no longer tolerate their crazy-making and unacceptable behavior. Since then my wife was given a choice to divorce me or lose her family, she chose me and has therefore been cut off from any and all contact by her mother, brother and sister, because she supported her husband and not "THE FAMILY". (I added this because so many people have asked why my wife and her family are now dead to each other - (brother's’s choice, mother’s loss).
I had hoped that this refusal to do any balanced reporting might have been a temporary mental burp but it appears now that propaganda rather than truth is the way the Shingle has decided to go. Therefore, as I refuse to have my name associated with propaganda instead of truth I very much doubt you will ever see my name on anything in the Shingle again. It is un-fortunate that June decided to sell her paper to someone who abuses and ultimately will destroy her life's work. June had strong opinions but June would at least try to print all sides and I never saw her ever risk someone's whole future just to echo a political leaders personal viewpoints. I think June, (like I) was an Ed Broadbent/Tommy Douglass kind of NDP and there is no longer any room in the NDP for anyone with the ethics, commitment, or passion for truth of Ed and Tommy.
I have offered my column and skills to the Sounder, which at least seems to strive for neutrality and balanced reporting, as a community newspaper should. So if you want to continue reading my views you can contact the Sounder and tell them so or you can go to my blog - ianlowden.blogspot.com where you will find many postings including a power-point collection of pictures called the Highway of Heroes-which shows how many other Canadians feel about our military in Afghanistan - Pride and Gratitude - not a War Resistor to be seen
.
Ian Lowden
Not everyone shares the view of the the "New" Ndp about bringing our troops home. Most Canadians are proud of our troops, and our troops don’t want to come home – they know that helping the Afghan people to be free of their TALIBAN TYRANTS is a noble thing to do, and we haven’t had a single deserter, in fact our troops scheme to get into the units that are being sent, so unlike what the NDP would have us believe, they are all volunteers and proud of it.
I like Cliff and I hope he gets to stay in Canada but calling him a "WAR RESISTOR" insults the memory of those many who struggled, were beaten, imprisoned and killed in legitimate War Resistance. War Resistors do not join a military already at war and they don't wait two years taking Uncle Sam's money until they are being sent over before they desert.
I think Cliff made a very stupid choice by VOLUNTARILY joining up and compounded the error by desertion. However, we have all made stupid mistakes in our life and will probably do so again. Refusing to fight in Iraq, which ranks right up there with the stupidity of Vietnam and their Civil War, does not mean he should be deported and put in jail. He has already given up his family and his country and that is not easy to do. Being afraid to die or be maimed is natural. Not being willing to die in a war that has made Iraq worse off than it was, is just plain common sense.
I would feel different if Cliff had deserted because he was being sent to Afghanistan, which is a just war, as was WWII. He would also have a lot more support if the "NEW" NDP were not using him to spread their propaganda and show Jack Layton what good little followers they are. Being used by the NDP's little blind soldiers is the last thing he needed, and calling him a WAR RESISTOR shows an astonishing amount of miss-trained intellect and a total lack in their grasp of history.
Cliff should be allowed to stay in Canada until Obama pulls the troops out of Iraq and puts them into Afghanistan, which is where they always should have been. I expect that with Obama, Canadian troops as well as a greatly expanded international fighting force will be in Afghanistan until the people there are safe from tyranny. I also suspect that Obama will issue amnesty and call off the hunt for people like Cliff who put survival ahead of stupidity. So wake up Cliff, admit you made a mistake and stop going on with the left-wing whackos that are insulting every one’s intelligence by trying to make you out as some kind of hero. You are just a guy who made a mistake and didn't want to die because of it. I wouldn't allow them to send me to Iraq either, nor would most of the people on this Island be willing to go.
I haven't submitted anything to the Shingle since the election and for two months before the election was not allowed to even submit my regular column because their was the fear that I might point out some of the many things about the Island Trust that need fixing, The Shingle ignored the issues and chose to print nothing except propaganda for the Triumphurate. So while I was banned from publishing anything my IT opponents were given plenty of coverage of their own choosing. I was left with five pieces of ant-ian articles and no chance to even defend myself from the misquotes, quotes taken out of context and outright untruths, including a hate letter full of the insane-like ramblings of my ex-brother-in-law. My wife’s family is angry because I could no longer tolerate their crazy-making and unacceptable behavior. Since then my wife was given a choice to divorce me or lose her family, she chose me and has therefore been cut off from any and all contact by her mother, brother and sister, because she supported her husband and not "THE FAMILY". (I added this because so many people have asked why my wife and her family are now dead to each other - (brother's’s choice, mother’s loss).
I had hoped that this refusal to do any balanced reporting might have been a temporary mental burp but it appears now that propaganda rather than truth is the way the Shingle has decided to go. Therefore, as I refuse to have my name associated with propaganda instead of truth I very much doubt you will ever see my name on anything in the Shingle again. It is un-fortunate that June decided to sell her paper to someone who abuses and ultimately will destroy her life's work. June had strong opinions but June would at least try to print all sides and I never saw her ever risk someone's whole future just to echo a political leaders personal viewpoints. I think June, (like I) was an Ed Broadbent/Tommy Douglass kind of NDP and there is no longer any room in the NDP for anyone with the ethics, commitment, or passion for truth of Ed and Tommy.
I have offered my column and skills to the Sounder, which at least seems to strive for neutrality and balanced reporting, as a community newspaper should. So if you want to continue reading my views you can contact the Sounder and tell them so or you can go to my blog - ianlowden.blogspot.com where you will find many postings including a power-point collection of pictures called the Highway of Heroes-which shows how many other Canadians feel about our military in Afghanistan - Pride and Gratitude - not a War Resistor to be seen
.
Ian Lowden
Letter to Sounder Jan 25/09
Not everyone shares the view of the “NEW" NDP about bringing our troops home. Most Canadians are proud of our troops, and our troops don’t want to come home – they know that helping the Afghan people to be free of their TALIBAN TYRANTS is a noble thing to do, and we haven’t had a single deserter, in fact our troops scheme to get into the units that are being sent, so unlike what the NDP would have us believe, they are all volunteers and proud of it.
I like Cliff and I hope he gets to stay in Canada but calling him a "WAR RESISTOR" insults the memory of those many who struggled, were beaten, imprisoned and killed in legitimate War Resistance. War Resistors do not join a military already at war and they don't wait two years taking Uncle Sam's money until they are being sent over before they desert.
I think Cliff made a very stupid choice by VOLUNTARILY joining up and compounded the error by desertion. However, we have all made stupid mistakes in our life and will probably do so again. Refusing to fight in Iraq, which ranks right up there with the stupidity of Vietnam and their Civil War, does not mean he should be deported and put in jail. He has already given up his family and his country and that is not easy to do. Being afraid to die or be maimed is natural. Not being willing to die in a war that has made Iraq worse off than it was, is just plain common sense.
I would feel different if Cliff had deserted because he was being sent to Afghanistan, which is a “just” war as was WWII. He would also have a lot more support if the "NEW" NDP were not using him to spread their propaganda and show Jack Layton what good little followers they are. Being used by the NDP's little blind soldiers is the last thing he needed, and calling him a WAR RESISTOR shows an astonishing amount of miss-trained intellect and a total lack in their grasp of history.
Cliff should be allowed to stay in Canada until Obama pulls the troops out of Iraq and puts them into Afghanistan, which is where they always should have been. I expect that with Obama, Canadian troops as well as a greatly expanded international fighting force will be in Afghanistan until the people there are safe from tyranny. I also suspect that Obama will issue amnesty and call off the hunt for people like Cliff who put survival ahead of stupidity. So wake up Cliff, admit you made a mistake and stop going on with the left-wing whackos that are insulting every one’s intelligence by trying to make you out as some kind of hero. You are just a guy who made a mistake and didn't want to die because of it.
I wouldn't allow them to send me to Iraq either, nor would most of the people on this Island be willing to go.
Ian Lowden
I like Cliff and I hope he gets to stay in Canada but calling him a "WAR RESISTOR" insults the memory of those many who struggled, were beaten, imprisoned and killed in legitimate War Resistance. War Resistors do not join a military already at war and they don't wait two years taking Uncle Sam's money until they are being sent over before they desert.
I think Cliff made a very stupid choice by VOLUNTARILY joining up and compounded the error by desertion. However, we have all made stupid mistakes in our life and will probably do so again. Refusing to fight in Iraq, which ranks right up there with the stupidity of Vietnam and their Civil War, does not mean he should be deported and put in jail. He has already given up his family and his country and that is not easy to do. Being afraid to die or be maimed is natural. Not being willing to die in a war that has made Iraq worse off than it was, is just plain common sense.
I would feel different if Cliff had deserted because he was being sent to Afghanistan, which is a “just” war as was WWII. He would also have a lot more support if the "NEW" NDP were not using him to spread their propaganda and show Jack Layton what good little followers they are. Being used by the NDP's little blind soldiers is the last thing he needed, and calling him a WAR RESISTOR shows an astonishing amount of miss-trained intellect and a total lack in their grasp of history.
Cliff should be allowed to stay in Canada until Obama pulls the troops out of Iraq and puts them into Afghanistan, which is where they always should have been. I expect that with Obama, Canadian troops as well as a greatly expanded international fighting force will be in Afghanistan until the people there are safe from tyranny. I also suspect that Obama will issue amnesty and call off the hunt for people like Cliff who put survival ahead of stupidity. So wake up Cliff, admit you made a mistake and stop going on with the left-wing whackos that are insulting every one’s intelligence by trying to make you out as some kind of hero. You are just a guy who made a mistake and didn't want to die because of it.
I wouldn't allow them to send me to Iraq either, nor would most of the people on this Island be willing to go.
Ian Lowden
Letter to Sounder Feb3
To the Editor:
It has been interesting since my last letter to the Sounder. 2 phone calls really liked it and want to meet. 4 phone calls that could best be termed as more than a little rude - obscene and hate filled (am now filtering my calls so leave a message). Several attack e-mails and three public confrontations last time I was out. One of the Laytonites told me there were thousands of deserters and tens of thousand more "refusniks" (draft dodgers) in Canada from the Iraq war. Refused to believe that according to Immigration Canada there were less than 50 deserters, and were no draft dodgers because the American Military has been all volunteer for more than a generation. Another didn't know who Tommy Douglas or Ed Broadbent were, but did know that there were hundreds of Canadian deserters all over the world who had deserted from Afghanistan and that the Canadian government was covering it up. Some just ascribed colorful traits and suggested physical impossibilities, while others seemed concerned for my safety and suggested I move off the Island (much like in-laws).
I should have clarified in my article that Laytonites were only a minority of the NDP - but they are the ones in control of the party. The NDP used to stand for social justice, union rights, and a moderate brand of socialism. The Laytonites are left of Marx with the tactics of opportunists. Anything to get elected, anything for power including bribing the Separatists with taxpayer money for cabinet seats they could never achieve thru elections. Pierre Trudeau approached Ed Broadbent after the defeat of Joe Clarke’s 8-month government offering him an alliance and cabinet seats to avoid going to another election. Ed refused as he believed in democracy and that government should be elected by the people, not decided thru backroom deals. What a difference between that NDP and the Laytonites version.
I was already uncomfortable being an NDP because of the shift from being a party of alternatives to a party of attack ads to cover lack of policy, and a willingness to join the Liberals and the Separatists to bring down a legally elected government. For me the last straw was the deliberate using of a deserter for party policies. They knew they couldn't keep him in Canada, yet they deliberately lied to him. Then they tried to lie to all of us by calling him a War Resistor - I wouldn't want to be him in front of a court martial board with war resistor in my record - they will throw the book at him.
I think that people, especially journalists, should be careful to know when they offer help that they have the ability to deliver the promised help, and that the help they offer won't make the person’s situation worse. Above all people, even deserters, shouldn't be used for political purposes and then tossed away - notice the lack of mention or follow up on Cliff? Especially newspapers that claim to represent the community should use common sense not party policy.
When party policy beats common sense the publication ceases to be a "news" paper and becomes a party propaganda sheet. Looking at what the party has become and realizing that the majority of the NDP would never rise and take our party back I knew I could not continue to go on supporting the party nor could I remain silent about what I saw even though I knew it meant provoking the Lunatics Laytonites. The NDP used to be a party were truth and different views were respected not silenced thru threats and lies, but that was before the Laytonites took control. More details and background can be found on ianlowden.blogspot.com.
It has been interesting since my last letter to the Sounder. 2 phone calls really liked it and want to meet. 4 phone calls that could best be termed as more than a little rude - obscene and hate filled (am now filtering my calls so leave a message). Several attack e-mails and three public confrontations last time I was out. One of the Laytonites told me there were thousands of deserters and tens of thousand more "refusniks" (draft dodgers) in Canada from the Iraq war. Refused to believe that according to Immigration Canada there were less than 50 deserters, and were no draft dodgers because the American Military has been all volunteer for more than a generation. Another didn't know who Tommy Douglas or Ed Broadbent were, but did know that there were hundreds of Canadian deserters all over the world who had deserted from Afghanistan and that the Canadian government was covering it up. Some just ascribed colorful traits and suggested physical impossibilities, while others seemed concerned for my safety and suggested I move off the Island (much like in-laws).
I should have clarified in my article that Laytonites were only a minority of the NDP - but they are the ones in control of the party. The NDP used to stand for social justice, union rights, and a moderate brand of socialism. The Laytonites are left of Marx with the tactics of opportunists. Anything to get elected, anything for power including bribing the Separatists with taxpayer money for cabinet seats they could never achieve thru elections. Pierre Trudeau approached Ed Broadbent after the defeat of Joe Clarke’s 8-month government offering him an alliance and cabinet seats to avoid going to another election. Ed refused as he believed in democracy and that government should be elected by the people, not decided thru backroom deals. What a difference between that NDP and the Laytonites version.
I was already uncomfortable being an NDP because of the shift from being a party of alternatives to a party of attack ads to cover lack of policy, and a willingness to join the Liberals and the Separatists to bring down a legally elected government. For me the last straw was the deliberate using of a deserter for party policies. They knew they couldn't keep him in Canada, yet they deliberately lied to him. Then they tried to lie to all of us by calling him a War Resistor - I wouldn't want to be him in front of a court martial board with war resistor in my record - they will throw the book at him.
I think that people, especially journalists, should be careful to know when they offer help that they have the ability to deliver the promised help, and that the help they offer won't make the person’s situation worse. Above all people, even deserters, shouldn't be used for political purposes and then tossed away - notice the lack of mention or follow up on Cliff? Especially newspapers that claim to represent the community should use common sense not party policy.
When party policy beats common sense the publication ceases to be a "news" paper and becomes a party propaganda sheet. Looking at what the party has become and realizing that the majority of the NDP would never rise and take our party back I knew I could not continue to go on supporting the party nor could I remain silent about what I saw even though I knew it meant provoking the Lunatics Laytonites. The NDP used to be a party were truth and different views were respected not silenced thru threats and lies, but that was before the Laytonites took control. More details and background can be found on ianlowden.blogspot.com.
