*I would point out here that if you took this brief sidestep to the link to this Thomas Jefferson quote, you will understand that CNN also found some enduring worth in the centuries-old wisdom of the author of America's Declaration of Independence.
I like CNN (and Canada's equivalent, CBC Newsworld) for breaking news.
Last year i was up at around 2 a.m. PST to watch the live CNN broadcast of the announcement of the year's Nobel Peace Prize winner. CNN was putting the award in "context" by explaining the reasoning for the award to the Roman Catholic priest: his work involved helping the victims of economic oppression by the Indonesian regime. And at that point the broadcast put on the screen a photograph of Canada's own "trade, aid no longer linked to rights" Prime Minister, Jean Chretien.
...If you haven't already, may i suggest you take the trip through the "What They Did" links (again) to see what this person has contributed to the "new world order" in reference to this "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children?
People who have checked out this website since i opened it and then again more recently will have noticed that i recently decided to amend the subject of it listed on the index.html page from simply:
"What Canadian and American authorities haven't told you about 'Irangate'"
to:
"What Canadian and American authorities haven't told you about 'Irangate' and the 1987 and 1997 world stock market crashes"
I might have done this earlier.
Numerous pundits and economic experts have suggested since this recent "event" on the world stock markets precipitated by the downturn in the Hong Kong market that no one foresaw it.
Not quite.
I opened this website in part because i anticipated it and have this "values"-based internal opposition to "collaborating" with any persons or parties who may be seeking to see the late-1997 volatility develop into a more enduring instability.
There is only one reason the website subject listing wasn't changed before the "crash" (i am willing to use the word; several pundits i saw on television recently decided to tell "all of us' they didn't feel obliged to use the word in the "context" of the largest single day point drop in the history of the New York Stock Exchange.
Huh?
If the word can't be used in this "context"--when should it be used?
*-I met with Mr. Cadman on May 2, 1991. I had heard a broadcast of a lecture he'd given about the circumstances leading up to the Gulf War in which he explained this matter of the necessity of "unanimous concurrence" by the Security Council permanent members before the use of force can be properly authorized, so i arranged to meet with him to discuss it.
He reiterated this position from his lecture and added a very interesting point about Canada's role in the events leading up to the war.
I will not outline it here now, though, because i promised him i would let him proofread what i said about our discussion before sending out statements to Washington, the United Nations, the Vatican, and "Arab League".
I stand by my decision to say what i did to the "Irangate" INDEPENDENT COUNSEL about our discussion.
In future, of course, as "The whole art of government consists of being honest," i feel certain that details of this matter of a certain Canadian omission of action will be more widely explained.
**-I met Dr. Jay C. Davis, Director of 'The Center For Mass Spectrometry' at the University of California, a volunteer member of the United Nations Iraqi Inspection Team, in Vancouver on October 23, 1991. He brought along a slide show to supplement his lecture on the team's findings. Of course he indicated his categorical disapproval of the Iraqi military actions in the Gulf culminating in the Gulf War--as i'd point out here i have also on ========
But as a scientist he admitted his admiration for the quality of the devices they found which, he stated flatly, indicated Iraq was engaged in a program that could lead to the production of nuclear weapons.
Along with several others attending the lecture/presentation, i spoke with the Texan inspection
team member after the event to discuss issues not covered with specificity by him earlier that evening. I showed him a copy of (then former) Canadian International Trade Minister Pat Carney's letter to me addressed to the SPECIAL DIPLOMATIC ADVISER TO THE U.S. PRESIDENT and SENIOR ADVISER TO THE YEAR OF THE CHILD authorities and asked him for his views on nuclear non-proliferation. .He rhymed off a half dozen countries he could cite off the top of his head as potential nuclear weapons powers in the coming years.
Curiously, he didn't mention South Africa, so i did--which provoked one of the other persons
in this small gathering clustered around him to tell me to be quiet; they wanted to hear what Dr. Davis had to say, not what i had to say.
I just walked away after that.
All i wanted to know was if they had discovered evidence that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons, and he confirmed that they had.
If you appreciate from the contents of this website that there is substantial evidence readily available to "all of us" that certain American authorities associated in past with this "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children have been anything but honest about it...and honesty was promised for the continuation and completion of it from the outset in 1978--you should appreciate why i opened this website.
And why, if that U.S. President who promised honesty as the U.S. President was also given a copy of that December, 1986 statement to President Reagan, at which time i, at least, had decided that the omission of the promised honesty could very easily lead to undesired "consequences" for innocent people--i have no intention of collaborating with anykind of obfuscation of the truth.
Does anyone in his or her right mind think that Saddam Hussein, faced with this problem indicated if you take a brief sidestep here and the Clinton Administration reaction to it (so far as i have personally seen to date) of simply stating they disagree with the estimate of child deaths, is going to ignore this opportunity he has to provide the parents of the dead children with an explanation for why they died?
Not only is the truth notout there about this "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children--except here on this award-winning website--i'd suggest to you again that there looms no end of problems in this "United Nations Decade of Cultural Development" because of the policy/policies by Ottawa and Washington in responding to the unemployment insurance disentitlement levied against me because of the "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis."
May i urge you to refresh yourself on the basis for my "concerns" by referring back to this excerpt from my December, 1986 statement to President Reagan and the terms of reference linked to it?
...So a recurring theme of the November, 1997 state visit to the United States by China's leader
Jiang Zemin was the sophism: "Seeing something once is better than hearing it a hundred times."
I saw two different occasions during which he cited it.
And there are these statement of policy by China last year: Take these brief sidesteps here.
Of course, i'm watching the developing "situation" in Iraq as i open these pages of my website.
A number of years ago, in the space of about 4 days on CNN, i listened to three different experts explain to interviewers in response to their questions of why "we" didn't proceed during the Gulf War all the way to Baghdad and get rid of Saddam then, that it was not possible then. I believe it was former C.I.A. Director Gates, one of those three (though possibly it was General Norman Schwarzkopf, the second of the three interviewees i recall from that time), who simply explained that the circumstances then were that they did not have a U.N.
authorization to proceed: the mandate was to oust the Iraqis from Kuwait only. Had they attempted to proceed to militarily oust him, undoubtedly he would have put his Republican Guard between the allied forces and himself...and if it came down to it, proven by his past actions, equally likely he would have let all Iraqis die before he would be captured or killed--conditions that, given the frequently enunciated allied assertions of their disinclination to harm innocent
Iraqis, as the attempt proceeded, would have led to deterioration of support for the action against the Iraqi dictator, possibly dooming the action's objective before it could be achieved.
This, and the ridiculous financial restrictions put upon me by "(my) present situation" because it's possible that according to the original contract/legal agreement (given how many sleazy lawyers cum politicians are involved, i anticipate more idiotic and pointless arguing about this than would serve the best interests of keeping "all of us" safe and living free from terrorism) both the SPECIAL DIPLOMATIC ADVISER TO THE U.S. PRESIDENT and SENIOR ADVISER TO THE YEAR OF THE CHILD authorities in my name in effect to this present time.
As this "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" included
documenting a promised U.S. Government program to expand U.S. Government developmental
aid to Latin America with specific amounts documented PICK UP FROM THIS POINT
are why i did not send Bush anything
This page hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page