Letter to the editor 3, October 29, 2015
Before me is a World War II photograph of, “women workers making munitions on the factory floor.” There they are, a valued, contributing part of the national effort, standing behind rows of empty bomb casings waiting to be filled. In other words, these women are directly engaged in and are a necessary part of a system whose aim includes mass killing of the human beings still alive down below. These women are complicit in the killing. It was war; it had to be won.
Reader, now you see that words, framing questions “in other words,” matter.
Which brings us around to the interview with MP elect Peter Schiefke—congratulations Mr. Schiefke—‘...on Vaudreuil-Soulanges environmental concerns’ (Your Local Journal, October 22, page 5).
Pipeline safety, assessment and oversight were the principal points, in reference to Energy East, processes, “…that will gain the trust of the public.” Left out of the conversation (perhaps because Vaudreuil-Soulanges doesn’t have the geographical reach) is the environmental impact assessment of what will enter the pipe and ditto of transforming the stuff at refineries at the exit end. We know it will not be ordinary crude.
More precisely, however safe Energy East will be, if its use entails expanding oil sands extraction, as it will, the pipeline project will add to Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions, not lower them. This additional climatic degradation will ensue in the context of the current life-saving need to reverse global warming.
In other words, according to the interview, we, Canada, will be increasing climate damage but we will be doing it safely, and “with the trust of the public”!