August 27, 2006
# Letter to the Globe: Iggy

Dear Editor,

In his fascinating, epic monograph on "Iggy," Michael Valpy illustrates the candidate's tendency to make major shifts in his thinking, gaining him a great deal of attention. Not explicitly said, but nonetheless evident from Valpy's account, is that in each case, Ignatieff's turns have been in favour of those in power: Thatcher during the coal strike then, Bush with the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and now the ruthless bombing of Lebanon. In the interceding years, surely there have been occasions for controversial, nuanced intellectual stands that turn away from those with money and power. On such occasions, Dr. Ignatieff has been absent. We should endeavor to find out why this is so--that is, if we find the obvious answer to be insufficient.


Dru Oja Jay
Montreal, QC

posted by dru
February 20, 2005
# Letter to the CBC

In another followup to my article Manufacturing Democracy: The politics of media coverage: Haiti, Ukraine, Georgia, and a recent weblog post, I sent the following letter to the CBC:

* *

Dear CBC,

It's clear that there is an overwhelming desire for democratic changes in the former Soviet republics, and the energy to back it up.

However, it is equally well established that these democratic movements are being backed by tens of millions dollars by western countries like Canada and the US.

The CBC does a major disservice to its readers by systematically leaving out this fact, even when it is reported on wires (e.g. the AP) that the CBC normally uses.

If the NDP or the Conservative Party was receiving millions in funding from the Swedish government, wouldn't the CBC question their motives and their agenda? I would hope so.

So why doesn't the same standard apply when it's Canada and the US doing the funding?

* *

If other outlets pick it up, I'll send them the letter, too.

posted by dru
January 10, 2004
# Letter to the NDP

[The NDP just sent out an email announcing a new ad campaign against Martin's likely support of National Missile Defense, Star Wars, or whatever you want to call it. Here's my response...]


The NDP's reasons for opposing National Missile Defense/Star Wars:

1. Star Wars is expensive Star Wars could costs as much as $1 trillion. If Canada is asked to pay even 1/100th of the bill - it will mean $10 billion less for medicare, cities, and the environment. (Source: Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation)

2. Star Wars won't make Canada safer Starting the next arms race will do nothing to promote security. Canada's Department of National Defence warns Bush's missile defence plan paves the way for putting weapons into orbit (Ottawa Citizen, Jan. 9, 2004).

3. Star Wars doesn't work Star Wars technology has never worked. Last year the New York Times reported that one test missed its target 'by hundreds of miles'. In contrast, there's lots of technology to keep us safe from climate change. Where's the leadership for that?

With all due respect, these aren't the reasons that Star Wars is wrong. In fact, they share many of the assumptions that lead people to think that Star Wars is in fact a good idea.

If Star Wars was not expensive, did make Canada safer, and worked, would it be a good thing? No.

The reason is that, despite its name, NMD is an offensive weapon. Don't take my word for it; read the words of the Project for the New American Century (of which Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Jeb Bush are members). Quoting from "Rebuilding America's Defenses", a PNAC report:

Effective ballistic missile defenses will be the central element in the exercise of American power and the projection of U.S. military forces abroad. Without it, weak states operating small arsenals of crude ballistic missiles, armed with basic nuclear warheads or other weapons of mass destruction, will be a in a strong position to deter the United States from using conventional force, no matter the technological or other advantages we may enjoy. Even if such enemies are merely able to threaten American allies rather than the United States homeland itself, America's ability to project power will be deeply compromised.

If you condemn NMD for the right reasons--that American Empire, global military dominance, or whatever you want to call it are wrong, and to be resisted instead of helped--then I'll support the NDP's fancy new politics a la Wired magazine.

A debate isn't worth starting unless it's based on all of the reality we have available to us.


dru oja jay

posted by dru
by dennis

Well said.

by rape thumbnails ebulus

C++, or permissions is.

by rape pics harman

here be into keep.

by rape fetish

SCO lifetime the in.

by gang rape

attacker he that higher.

by gay rape stories

attacker has the reflashed.

by free rape pictures

unintentional Intimate, account is.

by lawrence rape cartoons

occupation well-defined device scripts.

by free rape galleries

requires This him remote.

by warham gang rape

visit When of it..

by rape video osmund

to the methods it.

by prudence japanese rape alan

why the choosing that,.

by forced sex stories

the Read a Expression.

by rape videos

geek of server-side the.

by anal rape

to brk() some build.

by fantasy rape

balancing IPv6 the an.

by phillip rape fantasy

but care solutions in.

by rape stories free

automatically more that to.

by forced rape

the improving features code..

by dog rape

gcc. the making gain.

by rape movie

I've This but sftp.

April 21, 2003
# Letter to Walrus

Seeing the request for feedback on the Walrus magazine's web site, I sent them some thoughts on the state of Canadian journalism and what a good national magazine could look like. Excerpts follow.

posted by dru
by D Wood

What IS the website for Walrus? You seem to have found it - why can't I?
I am interested in making an article proposal to Walrus. Do you have any contact information on it at all?
Thanks. DW

by jay

thanks dru - for putting out this site. i hope readers who have practical info will also pass it along - like where do you get a copy of entrepot?

marketing is the bottleneck for both cdn mags and film. the quality of product isn't the problem so much as the lack of bucks to market with.

that's why recent budget cuts to the arts in canada are so destructive. we don't have an american-size market and can't pretend we do.

every one out there - once in awhile phone up your local MP to leave a message reminding them that canadian culture is an investment better than their mega-subsidies for things like tar sands.

Culture provides tons of jobs and industry/trade potential plus good it's for our continued survival as a nation.

by Marjorie Stewart

For no observable reason, my husband and I received promotional material from "Walrus Magazine" today. We are not funders, advertisers, contributers or subscribers to print media. The mailing had plenty to say but did not tell us anything useful, such as, who funds this and what editorial perspective might we expect.
And Hell will freeze from top to bottom before we willingly subscribe to anything that will expose us to the opinions of Andrew Coyne or George Jonas, who are, jointly and particularly, responsible for causing us to end our most recent attempt to find a BC daily that would not be injurious to the health of either of us. We believe in keeping open minds, but not in letting just anything crawl in. That their driveling columns probably appear from coast to coast in what purport to be regional media adds insult to injury.
After reading the Walrus boast of "deep pockets" I, too attempted a search and found only that a "Walrus Foundation" was gazetted last December. The magazine's site initiates "quotes" and tell us we can "read more" but in every case this instruction led to the announcement that "this story does not exist".
The only other site found was this URL.
We find that by carefully navigating around the Internet, we can find what we want for information and stimulation.
I very much doubt that "The Walrus" will appeal to us, even if we find out what it is supposed to be.
Thank you for this opportunity to express myself before I turn to the Walrus site and send a few inquiries.

November 28, 2002
# Responses

I got responses from both Steven Johnson and Doug Saunders, which was a bit surprising. My previous experience of writers actually replying to letters critical of them was previously limited to a flustered dismissal from some editor at Shift who had managed to ignore all of the points I made in the letter.

But both more or less agreed. Saunders responded to my letter, saying that he had already written an article about the Pentagon's relationship with Hollywood, and that he was taking a different tack this week.

Johnson also seemed to be fairly forthcoming to my points, though in this case I can't even call myself an amateur, so "points" might be a bit strong.

posted by dru
by richard sexual abuse

than Diversion of Killer.

by richard sexual abuse

than Diversion of Killer.

by free pictures of bestiality

to ORN: small less.

by free pictures of bestiality

to ORN: small less.

November 25, 2002
# Letter to the Globe: Hollywood and Washington Separate?

If Doug Saunders really wanted to argue that Washington and Hollywood are separate entities ("Hollywood. America. More than ever, they aren't the same," Saturday Nov. 23), it's surprising that he didn't at least mention the cozy relationship between movie studios and the Pentagon. According to mainstream news sources (ABC, BBC, USA Today), the Pentagon subsidizes Hollywood's war movies, and in exchange, gets to "negotiate" changes to the scripts and plot of these movies. It doesn't take too much imagination to see that movies, as a result, are much more likely to be pro-USA in significant ways.


A straightforward Google search confirms the worst of it and more, though most mainstream coverage simply notes that this (age old) team-up is likely to produce "better movies".

Of course, once the Pentagon has access to the set and scripts, it seems obvious that studios will simply nix scripts that aren't likely to be Pentagon-approved. So we get more Pearl Harbour and less Full Metal Jacket and Platoon. It seems obvious that--if the subsidies are substantial enough--the influence could easily spill over into other movies, mostly through hollywood execs' desire to not piss off the Pentagon. But then again, there is no reason to believe that the Pentagon won't be so bold as to drop hints about non-war movies anyway. What have they got to lose?

posted by dru
October 26, 2002
# Another letter to the Globe and Mail

In his article on the US peace movement, Miro Cernetig gets a number of facts wrong (the Asia Pacific Economic Forum happened in Vancouver, not Seattle) and spends most of the article talking about celebrities and the internal shortcomings of the left-wing protest movement.

In his conclusion, Cernetig soberly admonishes the left for being opposed to all us military force, mentioning that "US and British warplanes have been keeping Mr. Hussein away from Iraqi Kurds and Shiites, the fellow citizens he once gassed." If he done even a bit of research, Cernetig would have discovered the fact that the poison gas he refers to was provided by the US, or that those warplanes were the same ones that targeted Iraqi water purification plants, or that UNICEF has estimated the 500,000 Iraqi children under five died as a result of the sanctions and weekly US and British bombing.

If the Globe considers itself to be balanced, I look forward to the day when Marcus Gee is assigned to write about the internal shortcomings of the pro-war movement and celebrity reactions to political developments, while someone with a better grasp of the facts than Cernetig fills up a half page with quotes from prominent left-wing intellectuals (as Gee did for "terrorism experts" this week). But I'm not holding my breath.

posted by dru
June 24, 2002
# Another Letter to the Globe (Gee again)

Dear Editor,

Marcus Gee's recent column, "No interim state of Palestine", was not only blatantly inaccurate in ways that are trivial to determine, but made liberal use of racist double standards against the Palestinians.

posted by dru
June 18, 2002
# Letter to the Globe and Mail (re: Wente on Israel)

In her Counterpoint (Saturday, June 8), Margaret Wente remarked that union condemnations of Israel "says suicide bombings have to stop, but doesn't mention who directs them." But the reader is left hanging. Who does direct the suicide bombings? Arafat? Palestinians as a whole? More than likely, it's the same people who usually "direct" suicide bombings: extremist terrorist groups.

posted by dru
March 25, 2002
# A letter to the Globe and Mail

Dear Editor,

I found Marcus Gee's "End the Occupation? Not so easy" (Globe and Mail, March 23) to be variously incoherent and inaccurate. I challenge anyone who pays for this kind of opinion to be published in a national newspaper to explain how Gee's claims make sense within even the most generous standards of interpretation.

To cite one glaring example, Gee says that "the intifada has caused more than 1,500 needless deaths (three fourths of them Palestinian) and crushed any hope of a negotiated end to the occupation." The undeniable implication is that Palestinians caused the death of Palestinians, i.e. they effectively killed each other. Even a cursory examination of the facts reveals this to be not only false, but exactly wrong.

Indeed, most, if not all of the Palestinians Gee cites were killed by Israeli guns, rockets, or bayonets. Many more have been tortured by Israeli forces, under the sanction of the Israeli government. I haven't noted anything that is not well documented and undisputed by those with even the most tenuous grasp of the situation.

posted by dru
March 02, 2002
# Tech and Revolution

I started out writing a response to this thread on weblogging as journalism at, but I ended up with yet another articulation of my thoughts on technology and the possibility of positive social change. So here it is for posterity... and your reading pleasure, I guess.

posted by dru
September 02, 2001
# To:

The most recent issue of Shift Magazine features a 5000 word article called why technology is failing us [and how we can fix it], by Chris Turner. The following is my response to the article, in which I rant about environmental reform, oil companies, and hip technology magazines. I'm posting it here for feedback (and quite possibly, amusement) before I send it to the folks at Shift.

posted by dru
by kendall

Good stuff, Dru.

by zip codes

Your are not the only one.

by lesbian rape anthony

using and, within Mertz.

by lesbian rape anthony

using and, within Mertz.

by animal sex with women

XBox", The can is.