If everyone took a few moments to relax …

… in a tranquil garden …

… humanity would be a much better place.
Happy Saturday.
If everyone took a few moments to relax …

… in a tranquil garden …

… humanity would be a much better place.
Happy Saturday.
Answering Your “Why Do I” Questions • WHY DO I rarely shop at Walmart? While you may assume I don’t shop there for some political reason because many…
Do Tell! Answering Your “Why Do I” Questions + A List Of Fun Friday Bloggers
If you haven’t yet met Ally from The Spectacled Bean, I hope you click the link above to enjoy a little visit. Not only are her posts thoughtful, entertaining and enjoyable, but the comments often are, too.

I am likely “preaching to to the choir” but still felt it is important to share the following statement. It’s our next step forward.
The Next Step
This is a very important post-election piece from Marc Doll via Bernie at Equipoise Life. I hope you click the link above to give it (and the comments) a read. The electorate has spoken and the politicians are supposed to listen, so it’s time we ensure that they pull together for the betterment of our beautiful nation.

21 April 2025 – Otherwise occupied Friday-Saturday-Sunday, so today is my last chance to vote in the four days of advance polls for our up-coming (28…
In Advance
Penny from Walking Woman reminds us of how great it is to be able to vote. Please click the link above to read the rest of her post.
Vive le Canada. 🇨🇦
I’ve been thinking a lot about social media and how it and other services are subject to the Canadian boycott – and I realise that many other countries are doing the same – of American services and products.

Not that I have an answer, as the very service I’m using right now WordPress, is an American amenity.
So I’m posing a few questions which I hope you will be kind enough to answer. Have you dropped any American services such as AppleTV, Amazon, Wayfair or Netflix? Have you dropped any social media services such as X, Facebook, Pinterest or Instagram? If you have dropped some but not others, why?

I have dropped Amazon, Amazon Prime, Wayfair, Facebook and Instagram but have kept Netflix and of course, WordPress. My reasoning is that Netflix is a publicly traded company whose founder and chairman is clearly anti-Trump. WordPress, on the other hand, is non-profit, open-source project, which means that no one really owns it.
Nevertheless, while I am very conscious about shopping local and Canadian I really don’t want to stop Netflix and certainly not WordPress, although it frankly feels a bit uncomfortable.
What are your feelings?
Like many others I watched Donald Trump’s so-called “liberation” speech with great interest. Getting through his mind numbing rhetoric and cavalcade of falsehoods was a feat in itself but important to stick through it, nevertheless. Afterward there was of course the usual analysis and reaction, but what absolutely astonished me was the response of the CBC reporter who attended the speech in person. With an ear-to-ear grin, she crowed about how Canada and Mexico had been left off the list of tariffed countries. In other words, we were escaping additional tariffs – this time.

Yikes. Agreed that we dodged a bullet, but we already have the massive tariffs he imposed last month, so it’s essential that we be extremely aware of something that seems to be eluding us here, and that’s the tendency to begin normalising this tariff situation. We absolutely must not; there’s nothing normal about what Trump is doing to us and Mexico and has now forced on many other parts of the world.
There’s a very famous scientific experiment that has repeatedly been proven to be true no matter the species and no matter the time or place. And that’s that if something is introduced very gradually, no matter how awful it is, we will eventually get used to it.

A frog placed in a pot of hot water will immediately jump out, but if you place him in room temperature water and very slowly turn up the heat, he will stay and die.
A much more extreme example is how Hitler gradually reduced the rights of Jews and other identifiable minorities, bit by inexorable bit, until they had lost absolutely everything, including their lives. The tendency of any species to normalise was part of the reason why he was able to get away with this process.

Because of this tendency, we have to be on guard, now more than ever. The will-he-won’t-he, to-ing and fro-ing, maybe-maybe-not, how-bad-will-it-be tariff puppetry has carried on for months now, amping up the fear and worry and creating sleepless nights and high blood pressure all over this country.
And now, all of a sudden, an escape! The tremendous sigh of relief that the tariffs weren’t worse is a prime example of the mindf**kery we have been subject to since last November. But in reality, nothing much has changed. Many people’s jobs, particularly in the auto, aluminum, steel and lumber industries are on the brink. There are 25% tariffs on anything falling outside of CUSMA (in the U.S. it’s known as USMCA). It’s vitally important to remember that the tariffs already being levied are terrible economic hits that will disrupt our economy and potentially devastate many people’s lives.

Was this an attempt at softening us up so that we will be more compliant once a new PM is in place? I believe so, because I don’t think that Trump has at all changed his mind about subsuming us and turning us into a colony to be exploited. We are still where we were.
It’s therefore vital that we keep forging ahead with plans to diversify, to remove interprovincial trade barriers, and above all to separate ourselves from the U.S. The continued boycott of their products, and especially the avoidance of such conglomerates as Amazon (Bezos), X (Musk), Etsy, eBay and others are crucial as we continue to carve our own path. CUSMA is dead, or will be soon. There’s no going back, and the politicians now trying to get our votes need to understand that without fail.
The mindf**king needs to stop.
This opinion piece originally appeared in The Globe and Mail. I believe it’s an incredibly germane article that should be read and considered by all Canadians, especially before we go to the polls on April 28. There are eleven important links throughout the piece; I hope you have the time to go through them.
If You Want Peace, Prepare for War – an Ancient Lesson Canada Must Remember
THOMAS HOMER-DIXON
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published March 21, 2025
Thomas Homer-Dixon is executive director of the Cascade Institute at Royal Roads University and professor emeritus at the University of Waterloo.

Si vis pacem, para bellum.
If you want peace, prepare a for war. This ancient Roman aphorism is starkly relevant to Canada’s situation today, no matter how contrary it seems to our national culture.
U.S. President Donald Trump believes that the treaty that demarcates the Canada-U.S. border is invalid and that the boundary should be moved. Put simply, he wants to take our land. And the risk of that happening is higher if we pretend it doesn’t exist.
There are people who want to believe that Mr. Trump’s annexation talk is just a tactic to get us to make bigger trade concessions. The tariffs aren’t intended to make annexation easier, they say, but are instead part of a strategy to restructure the U.S. economy, reduce the country’s deficit and lower taxes.

Similarly, until a couple of weeks ago, any suggestion that the United States would use military force against Canada was derided as ridiculous. And anyway, commentators argued, Canada can’t be militarily defended, because our population is strung out in a thin line along America’s northern border.
But those perspectives are shifting fast.
Earlier this week, the renowned Yale historian Timothy Snyder (and visiting professor at the University of Toronto) wrote that “war with Canada is what Trump seems to have in mind.” He highlighted Mr. Trump’s “strangely Putinist” fiction that Canada isn’t real – that we’re not economically viable, that most of us want to join the U.S., and that the border is artificial. The assertion that Canada isn’t real is the kind of lie, Dr. Snyder said, that “imperialists tell themselves before beginning doomed wars of aggression.” It’s preparation “not just for trade war but for war itself.”
Other scholars are now seriously addressing the possibility of war. Aisha Ahmad, a Canadian specialist in failed states, recently argued that an invasion of Canada would “trigger a decades-long violent resistance, which would ultimately destroy the United States.” And last week the military historian Elliot Cohen published an assessment of past U.S. attempts to conquer Canada, with a reminder to the Trump administration that they produced “dismal results.”
You’re likely shaking your head by now. This can’t be possible! But Mr. Trump’s modus operandi is to turn craziness into reality. We need to stop shaking our heads at his craziness and see the new reality he’s creating.

Mr. Trump isn’t just “a quasi-fascist,” said Jonathan Leader Maynard of King’s College University in London in a message to me a few days ago, “but an absolute fantasist who treats things as true because he fantasizes about them. Canada as the 51st state, Gaza as a hotel resort, tariffs making the economy boom, splitting Russia off from China – all these ideas are fantasies. But given free rein, he might pursue any or all of them.”
If one observes Mr. Trump carefully, one can see his tell – an unintended hint of his subconscious fantasy about geopolitics. It’s there in the school-room map on a stand beside his desk in the Oval Office, emblazoned with “Gulf of America.” And it’s there again in his comments on March 13, when he talked about the “beautiful formation of Canada and the United States.”
“It would be one of the great states anywhere,” he said. “This would be the most incredible country visually.”
Mr. Trump is playing the board game Risk, and the main players are the U.S., Russia and China. A nation’s power equates to its visible expanse of territory across a cartoon-like world map. All countries are ineluctably locked into a planet-spanning winner-take-all conflict. And to prevail, the United States needs to absorb Canada (and to take over Greenland and the Panama Canal) not just to Make America Great, but to achieve “hemispheric control,” in Steve Bannon’s eager locution.
Mr. Trump’s board-game imaginings may be fantastic, but they’re creating, day by day, a stark, hard reality: The rules-based international order that originated with the 17th century jurist and philosopher Hugo Grotius – and on which the principle of territorial sovereignty is based – is unravelling. Emerging in its place is something akin to Thomas Hobbes’ state of nature – a world governed by brute force and the will of the strongest.

The unravelling process will take time. An assault on Canadian territory won’t happen soon, not this year, nor likely the next. But if we choose to remain weak, here’s how things could go before the end of Mr. Trump’s term, especially if domestic unrest and dysfunction further radicalize his regime, encouraging it to try to distract attention by picking fights with outsiders.
Mr. Trump will steadily escalate his demands on Canada, tying them to progressively broader political and territorial grievances. He’ll also increasingly question our country’s basic legitimacy as a sovereign nation, as he’s already started to do. A flood of lies from his associates, cabinet members, and the MAGA-verse will paint us as, at best, an irresponsible neighbour that’s not protecting America’s northern flank, or, at worst, an outright security threat, because at any moment we can restrict access to the energy, potash, water and other critical resources the United States needs.
Once we’re framed as an enemy, intelligence and military co-operation (for instance, under NORAD) will end. And at that point – with the U.S. military’s senior ranks purged of resistance and Trump loyalists in place – demands for territorial concessions, explicitly backed by the threat of military force, will be a simple next step. They’ll likely start with something small – an adjustment to the border in the Great Lakes, for instance – as a test of our will. But they won’t end there.
What’s the probability of this kind of scenario? Ten per cent, 5 per cent, or 1 per cent? No one can say for sure. But it’s certainly not zero. And given the existential cost to Canada, we’d be stupid not to take it seriously. In game-theory terms, we need to pursue a strategy of “minimax regret” – to minimize, as best we can, the possibility of worst-case outcomes.

This means, first, recognizing that channelling Neville Chamberlain won’t work. Mr. Trump knows what he wants – our territory – and he’s out to get it. There’s no happy middle ground that can be reached through appeasement. He’ll take our concessions and demand more.
And it means, second, that we need to move to a wartime footing in all respects – economically, socially, politically and (perhaps hardest for us to accept) militarily.
The doubters who say Canada can’t be defended are wrong. Canada can indeed prepare effectively to resist U.S. military force. Scandinavian countries have developed elaborate and popular plans for homeland defence against a massive external threat. We can do the same, starting now by standing up a national civil defence corp, a capacity that would also equip us to better deal with all disasters, natural and human caused.
Already, Canadians in every walk of life are discussing privately how they’re prepared to protect our homeland. True, in any violent contest between Canada and the U.S., we can’t possibly win in a conventional sense. But we can ensure in advance that an authoritarian, imperialist U.S. regime knows the cost will be high enough to make it far less likely to attack in the first place.
The stronger we are, the lower the risks. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
In light of the disastrous meeting between President Zelenskyy and President Trump, where both Trump and Vice-President Vance decided that Zelenskyy wasn’t doing his best Oliver Twist imitation and began slinging vitriol at the victim while supporting the aggressor, I think it’s salient to pass on the following opinion piece from Andrew Coyne. This was originally published by the Globe and Mail on February 28, 2025. Many thanks for this idea from Jane at https://robbyrobinsjourney.wordpress.com
Brace yourselves: whatever crazy, awful things Trump may have done to date, it’s only going to get worse
by ANDREW COYNE
Skate to where the puck is going, not to where it’s been. That bit of trite wisdom, attributed to Wayne Gretzky, might usefully be applied in assessing the risks posed by Mr. Gretzky’s political idol, Donald Trump.
Every time we think we have taken the measure of Mr. Trump, every time we think we have understood the depths of his depravity, the absoluteness of his nullity, the scale of the threat he represents – to American democracy, to Canada, to the peace of the world – he defeats us. He does or says something far worse than we had ever thought possible, even of him.
We need to learn from this, fast. Because Mr. Trump is metastasizing, mutating, rapidly worsening. He is on a kind of exponential spiral, his behaviour approaching levels of madness and mayhem that had never previously been imagined, let alone seen.
Our expectations of him are forever playing catchup to the reality. Which means we are forever calibrating our responses, not to where Mr. Trump is going, but to where he has been. That way lies disaster.
We need to understand that however awful Mr. Trump’s behaviour may have been until now – however callous, dictatorial, insane or dangerous, and however it may seem to have defined the limits of what is possible in each regard – it is only going to get worse, and at a rate that will itself defy all expectations.
Consider Mr. Trump’s performance in just the month or so since he took office. Did even the most alarmist of Mr. Trump’s critics anticipate he would not just undercut Ukraine in its struggle for survival against the Russian invaders, but take the Russian side in every material respect – assigning blame for the invasion not to Russia, but to Ukraine; cutting Ukraine out of the negotiations on its fate, while ruling out NATO membership and the restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity in advance; voting with Russia against a UN resolution denouncing the invasion; and demanding Ukraine pay the United States half a trillion dollars in reparations for the offence of having resisted its own annihilation (and decimating the Russian war machine in the process), a figure that is many times the actual amount of American aid it has received?
Did anyone imagine he would not just make similarly extortionary demands of his NATO partners in return for the United States’ “protection,” but effectively signal that no such protection would be provided, should Russia expand its attacks on Europe beyond the multifaceted hybrid-warfare campaign in which it is already engaged? Did even Mr. Trump’s supporters anticipate that he would also telegraph, in the space of the same few fevered days, that he would abandon Taiwan?
Or, closer to home, did anyone imagine that the original Trump threat to Canada – that we would be included in his proposed global tariff of 10 to 20 per cent, notwithstanding our joint membership in a continental free trade area – would suddenly swell into a special 25-per-cent tariff applicable only to ourselves and Mexico, and then into a campaign to forcibly annex the country? Was, likewise, the invasion and seizure of Greenland, or the Panama Canal, ever envisaged?
Did anyone predict, when the pseudo-official Department of Government Efficiency was first announced, what it would become, scant weeks later: a wrecking ball of dubious legal authority, consisting of Elon Musk and his 20-something acolytes, roaming the halls of various government departments firing officials at random and hacking into government payment websites to prevent duly authorized expenditures from being released?
No doubt it was expected that Mr. Trump would pardon some of the Jan. 6 insurrectionists. But was it ever suggested he would pardon all of them, 1,500 at one go, no matter how severe their crimes – or that he would harass, prosecute or dismiss the law enforcement officials who brought them to justice?
All of this, as I say, is just in thr last few weeks. Mr. Trump’s ambitions have grown materially wilder in that time, his actions more senseless, his rhetoric more extreme – he has lately taken to quoting Napoleon on the virtues of executive lawlessness and referring to himself as “the King” – than even in the weeks before then, in the demented interval between his election and his inauguration.

That was the period, recall, when he made a series of nominations for senior government posts that could only be described as perverse. It was as if he had deliberately selected the worst conceivable person for each position, the person most directly hostile to the mandate of the organizations they were nominated to lead. Thus Matt Gaetz, accused of statutory rape, was nominated to fill the job of Attorney-General; the alcoholic weekend television host and civil war prophet Pete Hegseth, who has been accused of sexual abuse, was nominated to Defence; the paranoid conspiracy theorist and anti-vaccine crusader Robert Kennedy Jr. to Health and Human Services; the Putin apologist and suspected Russian asset Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence; the lunatic Kash Patel as director of the FBI.
None of these were suspected, even through the long months that preceded the election, when Mr. Trump campaigned on an increasingly explicit appeal to fascism, while violating one norm after another – questioning his opponent’s racial identity, fabricating stories about immigrants eating pets and promising to round up and imprison 12 million immigrants in camps, prior to deportation.
Mr. Trump’s conduct in that campaign exceeded anything he had said or done since his attempt to overturn the results of the previous election in January, 2021, which was itself far worse than anything he had done in the four long years of escalating insanity that marked his first term in office, which exceeded by a wide margin even the most fearful projections that had preceded it.
The pattern is unmistakable. Mr. Trump’s actions, his statements, his very state of mind, have been growing worse over many years, and not steadily, but at an ever accelerating pace. This is, I suggest, not accidental. It is a function of his malignant narcissism, a narcissism that requires constant demonstrations of his power to dominate others, or at least to outrage them, or at any rate to hold their attention.
But as behaviour that was previously unthinkable comes to be expected, so it becomes harder and harder to sustain the same level of outrage; and as even a constant level of outrage starts to lose its psychological potency – as any drug will, if taken often enough – so Mr. Trump has been forced to increase the dosage of his self-administered narcotic of transgression. The self-destructive lunacy, and the resulting chaos, that would previously have satisfied him is no longer sufficient. He must take things to the next level, and the next, still crazier than the one before – crazier than he has ever previously done, crazier than anyone expects, crazier than anyone could expect.
If you think things are bad now, then, brace yourself: it is about to get a whole lot worse. If you are alarmed at the speed with which the Trump administration has set about dismantling every institution of American government and every pillar of the international order, you must understand that this is not just the initial burst of activity, the “shock and awe” phase after which things will settle down: if anything, the pace will continue to accelerate.
It cannot be otherwise. It is dictated not only by Mr. Trump’s insatiable psychological cravings, but by the ambitions and objectives of the fanatical ideologues and criminal opportunists with which he has surrounded himself: for where the destruction of everything that surrounds him is for Mr. Trump an end in itself, for Mr. Musk and his followers they offer the chance to rebuild a techno-fascist utopia out of the rubble, or at any rate to make off with as much as they can, while they can.
This rather alters the stakes, and the resulting challenge: of comprehension, let alone formulating an effective response. We have not just to understand what Mr. Trump and his team are up to now, but what they are capable of in future. That would be difficult enough in a normal, linear progression. But on the exponential curve on which Mr. Trump is now launched, it almost defies the imagination.
Take everything, then, that Mr. Trump has done in the last few weeks, and how much of an escalation this represents over his performance in the previous months or years. Now project that same rate of change forward over the next few weeks, or months or years: to Mr. Trump’s still nascent efforts to weaponize the justice system against his opponents, for example, or to seize the power of the purse from Congress; to his readiness to defy the courts, to suppress dissent at home and stamp his rule on other countries, and generally sow chaos.
Now apply the same rate of change to the rate of change. That is what we are really up against, and while it is almost impossible to plan on that basis, if we are not at least making the attempt we have not begun to appreciate the true dimensions of the threat that confronts us.
I don’t say for one minute that Mr. Trump will succeed in any of these ambitions. Indeed, it is far more likely that his administration will spin out of control and collapse, overwhelmed by its own internal divisions, by popular opposition and by the multiple cyclones of havoc it has heedlessly set in motion. But that presents challenges of its own.
The world has never before been faced with such a threat. The United States has handed the nuclear codes to a madman, a criminal, a would-be dictator and a moron, all in the same person. Whatever the purpose to which he directs these powers – to impress his dictator friends, to further enrich himself and his cronies, to seize absolute power or just to watch the world burn – we must hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
This isn’t at all a political blog and I’ve certainly never wanted it to be controversial, either, but in light of recent developments around the possibility of being “economically forced” into becoming “the 51st state,” I feel that I have to stand up for my country. I know that many Americans do not agree with president-elect Trump’s pronouncements about annexing Canada; nevertheless, here we are. Such a threat requires a response.

First of all, we Canadians are not grateful for the “offer” of statehood as a number of U.S. politicians, pundits, show hosts and various others have said that we should be. We are, in fact, very insulted by the notion, just as Americans would be if another country decided that they should be forced into some sort of unwanted union.
To support this view, Mr. Trump has asserted on his social media platform that “many people in Canada LOVE [Trump’s emphasis] being the 51st state” worded as if we had already joined the U.S. That is simply and factually very inaccurate. The vast majority of Canadians like, value and want our independence, sovereignty, and self-determination.

Supposedly, the U.S. is “subsidising” Canada through an “unfair” trade imbalance and if we want to continue this position, we should become a state. Again, this is factually inaccurate. The trade balances completely once our oil and gas shipments are taken into account, which Mr. Trump is neglecting to include. It’s particularly worth noting that Mr. Trump specifically signed off on this trade agreement during his last tenure.
The U.S. is categorically not “subsidising” Canada. And that extends to our military, as well. There are no U.S. troops stationed on Canadian soil in order to defend us. We are more than capable of defending ourselves, and we do have that history.

There seems to be some astonishment that we don’t want this “union.” The people who feel that way should stop to consider. We are a sovereign, independent nation with a long history of doing things our way and of defending our right to do things our way. We like and want that. Internally, we may disagree; we may argue and face division. But in the end we have a precious commodity: our right to disagree and argue and face division and through that process, to come around to our own path, a path that represents us, our culture and our values.
We are not perfect, and Mr Trump has flagged issues that he feels we need to address such as illegal border crossings. The U.S. is not perfect either, and we have issues such as the flow of illegal guns into our country. There is no reason why these issues can’t be solved cooperatively; why would there be a need for threats of annexation? Or is that the whole point?

Being forced into becoming a part of the U.S. fundamentally flies in the face of the American philosophy of self-determination. The fact that those who are advocating this approach are also failing to see this discrepancy is incredibly disturbing. Self-determination is okay as long as we do what the United States tells us to do? Or otherwise we’ll be forced?

Canada will never voluntarily join the U.S. With all due respect, we don’t want to be American. It’s that simple. And on that note, and since Mr. Trump was elected on a platform of addressing issues such as inflation and a number of other internal matters, I suggest that he turn his attention to those, and leave us to deal with ours.

In the past, we two nations have cooperated extremely well. One sobering example is 9/11. There were all those Americans on all those aircraft who were required to land here and were looked after as sisters and brothers in need who had been horribly attacked.
More recently, we are providing help to the state of California as it battles those terrible fires. The governor asked that we send our military firefighting units and they, as well as many civilian firefighters have either arrived or will be shortly.
These are the things you do for a good neighbour and we do them gladly. We shouldn’t lose sight of all this goodwill and respect, built up over generations, that our two nations have worked hard to achieve. It’s a precious thing that’s far easier to destroy than to build.
If you’re in Europe, Happy Saint Nicholas Day! Saint Nick – or as he is known in The Netherlands, Sinterklass – was also referred to as Nicholas the Wonderworker. He was an early Christian bishop from Turkey who practiced from about 300-340 CE and died on December 6, hence his feast day.

He was revered for his generosity and particularly for his custom of secretly providing desperately needed food or money to the poor or struggling. He also gave small gifts to children.

When Dutch colonists arrived in New Amsterdam, today’s New York state, they brought with them the tradition of Saint Nicholas or Sinterklass, which was translated into English as Santa Claus. However, Henry VIII – the much married 16th century king of England who also tended to behead his spouses if they upset him – had already decided to move any celebration around Saint Nicholas (known as Father Christmas in the U.K.) to December 25.

For countless centuries prior to the rise of Christianity this particular day had been celebrated as – among many others – the Feast of Saturnalia or the Celebration of Yule, a time to honour the return of the sun through light displays, gift-giving and banqueting. Over time, the traditions of the two sets of “New World” colonists, U.K. and Dutch, became combined into a December 25 celebration of a fly-around-the-world-in-one-night, North Pole-domiciled entity known as Santa Claus.

I think it’s important to remember that the tradition of Saint Nicholas or Sinterklass or Father Christmas or Santa Claus was based around the idea of giving – in secret – to the less fortunate, something that seems to have become terribly lost in our intensely spendy world.
Food for thought.