Politics 4A — An Addendum

Open Note To The Prime Minister

Sir, as you know, the Canadian biassed system of government elections gave your party a majority of representation in the House of Commons.  Nevertheless, you should never forget that the majority of Canadians did not vote for you.

Therefore, your recent pro-Zionist stance at the U.N., something that was not evident in your election manifesto, although not surprising considering your record, comes as a huge annoyance to those pro-Palestine voters among us who believe that we are in the majority.

Many of us belief that the Israeli occupation of Palestine constitutes a huge international problem that will only worsen if Israel continues to build on occupied land and ignore the U.N. General Assembly resolutions against it.  For example, would you be prepared to send the Canadian Forces to assist in the future defense of Israel, or accept their use of nuclear weapons?

Therefore, considering the global consequences of your action, I demand that you institute a Canadian Referendum on the subject for or against Israel’s unacceptable behavior ... or even an abstention.

P.S., I realize that you are unlikely to read this, but I feel much better for having written it.

Comments please.

Politics 4 - A Palestinian State

I do not think that there is one subject to be discussed that avoids politics.  Even religion cannot be discussed without involving politics.  One of my posts discussed tipping in restaurants in which I avoided the possibility of a government ban on the subject.  Could we discuss organic foods without the Ministry of Food applying some regulations?  Could I spank my child’s bottom without the police knocking on my door?  Could I walk my dog in the park without a regulatory-designed leash ... well, probably, that will be next.

Could a tiger nurse orphaned piglets?  Could a polar bear play harmlessly with tethered husky dogs?  Could a lion hug and lick a woman who had cared for it earlier?  I am sure that some of you have seen these videos, but I digress ... could humans live together in peace?

Time and time again the U.N. has asked Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and, constantly, they refuse.  Iran has signed, has permitted inspections, yet we demand that only Iran provide discrete details, because Israel says that it “knows” that Iran poses a nuclear threat.  Israel bombed a nuclear power station in Iraq where, later, international experts could find no evidence of a clandestine weapons factory in the ruins.  Later, the U.N. released the Goldstone Report, a scathing report which accused Israel of 37 specific war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza earlier this year. Israel has denounced the report as "Anti-Semitic (even though Judge Goldstone is himself Jewish).  Declassified documents from the former South African regime prove not only that Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades, but has tried to sell them to other countries!

Finally, let us diligently read UN General Assembly Resolution 3376 (one of many) that states:  "Reiterates all relevant United Nations resolutions which emphasize that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible under the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law and that Israel must withdraw unconditionally from all the occupied Palestinian and other Arab territories, including Jerusalem"

Now, today, a slight, usually quiet man, President Mahmoud Abbas, stood in front of the U.N. General Assembly to cheers and almost tumultuous applause, to say that he believed that it was time for Palestinian statehood ... and I am one person who believes that this day has been a long time coming.

I wonder if you agree with me?

Food 2 - Pretentious Pubs

New restaurants are not always purpose-built — for as long as they have existed, new ones have appeared in converted houses, especially public houses (pubs) and even the odd deconsecrated church.  Those with home-style cooking may become fine-dining establishments, and vice versa.  Thus, there was always a rotation of cuisines in a variety of restaurants — some would go out of business and be replaced by others, caused mainly, by market forces.

In recent years, many people have become more interested in the quality of food, not only nutritional values, but also organics and freshness, and this has had an affect on restaurant menus, especially in pubs.  The plough-man’s lunch accompanied by a pint of ale has been elevated to the squires-lunch accompanied by a glass of white Zinfandel.  This has created a pretentious craze amongst a certain group of people who may be heard referring to the gastropub where the ‘gastro’ prefix increased the prices, embellished the menus, while not actually raising the activity in the kitchen.

In a number of cases the pub cook whose pièce de résistance was bangers and mash continued with sausisse et purée and the customers became bored.  But it is one thing to say that gastropubs have gone from being trendy to being overdone, another to try to consign the gastropub to history, as if it had never existed, or had no more value as a concept.

People began to realize that good food was available at a good price in an informal atmosphere.  No more smoke, questionable curry, or the need to wear a jacket and tie.  Innovation spread like wildfire, and happiness was evident at the dining tables.

The old pubs were challenged to improve their kitchen staff, and regular restaurants were required to pull their socks up.  After all, why go to a fine-dining establishment when you could eat equally well at the ‘Dog and Fiddle’ for a third of the price?


There is a famous culinary publication that contains menu descriptions such as, “... a cohesive natural empathy” or is “... as acutely calibrated as a Rolex watch”. Salads are “... vibrant” and “... worth exploration”. Desserts “... mobilise a lot of chocolate”. A roasted pigeon breast with beetroot is part of “... a cornucopian assemblage”.  Yes, I know, you’d prefer to go to the ‘Dog and Fiddle’.

Obviously, there are good and bad pubs just as there are good and bad fine-dining restaurants ... people aren’t idiots.  The ‘Dog and Fiddle’ may advertise itself as a gastropub while the nearby ‘Lion Inn’ doesn’t.  The ‘Lion Inn’ may make a delicious pheasant cooked in wine, while the ‘Dog and Fiddle’ may be run by posers called Cedric in black T-shirts ... who knows?

One thing is for sure, the quality of food in many pubs is here to stay, and if you intend to visit London, Ontario, let me know if you would like an introduction to a good example.

Aerospace 2 - Opposing Two Giants

Last week, Boeing revealed its decision regarding the question of a new generation aircraft, the B-737 MAX, that will be competitive with the proposed Airbus A-320 NEO.  There is, naturally, some controversy regarding this decision that questions the introduction of either aircraft.

In my opinion, there is a connection between these compromise plans and Bombardier's development of a narrow body aircraft, the CSeries.  Neither of the two giants could compete with the CSeries in its class for a number of reasons.  One reason that appeals to travellers is the four or five abreast seating in the CSeries that compares with the normal six abreast seating provided by the competition.  Airbus and Boeing argue that they are not competing in the 100-seat category but, if so, why have they rushed Band-Aid solutions to improving their A-320 and B-737 designs.  Probably, because should the CSeries be successful, and it will, Bombardier will introduce an extended version that, it could be suggested, will close the gap.

Originally, Boeing developed the B-737 with different fuselage-length variants and this natural progression was also seen in the A-320 series.  Over time, each manufacturer improved their design in small increments, for example, the introduction of composite materials and fly-by-wire systems.

Meanwhile, in fact, for more than two decades, Bombardier had entered the market with a range of small business jets, created completely from original designs and, most importantly, conducting advanced research in fuselage construction, composite materials, and closely coordinating with gas turbine manufacturers for fuel efficient engines, such that the introduction of their CSeries aircraft will be a leader in its class (Brazil's Embraer and China's Comac aircraft companies may compete in this market segment but, at the moment, can not compete, totally, with the advanced technologies employed in the CSeries).

Both Airbus and Boeing are showing good order books, especially Airbus, but we should note that they are not all firm orders.  The B-737 MAX is very much a compromise redesign, especially when we look at the new engines.  The main comparison with the A-320 NEO is the smaller fan blade diameter.  Although the new engine is larger than previous models, it is smaller than fitted to the A-320 NEO (168 cm compared to 205 cm fan blade diameter respectively).  The reason for this is that the height of the wing is less and the B-737 MAX requires a 42.9 cm (16.9 in) ground clearance.  It has been said, unconvincingly, that a larger engine would create greater drag but, equally, would be less efficient than that of the A-320 NEO.

In my opinion, the argument that the two giants are using tested designs is quite poor as there is little to compare, for example, the B-737 of 1964 with that of today.  Equally, the CSeries is using technologies that have been well proven for many years on their Global Express series of aircraft.

Therefore, the introduction of Bombardier's CSeries will be a leap forward in advanced design with superior qualities superior in its class, such that, I am sure, if the fly on the boardroom wall of Airbus and Boeing could talk, there would be some smiling faces in Montreal.

Quotation - "Another World ..."

Arundhati Roy

"Another world is not only possible, she is on her way.

On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing."