May 10th -- Come out for the launch of the St. John's Social Justice Co-operative @ The Lantern 7-9 PM

Why we need a Social Justice Co-op in Newfoundland and Labrador right now.

You are invited to participate in the launch of the newly incorporated St. John's Social Justice Co-operative -- Friday May 10, 7 to 9pm at The Lantern, 35 Barnes Rd.

Social justice is under attack as never before, in our province, our nation and around the world. At all levels – locally, provincially, nationally and internationally – corporate values and neoliberal ideology prevail. Our governments make terrible decisions and people are suffering. Inequality and injustice are becoming more extreme. So we have decided that we need a Social Justice Co-operative as a slightly different formation to other efforts to take on these issues.

Existing groups are struggling for lack of money, staff and resources. They are muzzled by government control. If ever we needed to come together to advance and protect the cause of social and economic justice here and throughout the world it is NOW. The idea originally arose out of the need to have an organisation 'with similar aims to those of Oxfam' to take over the Duckworth St building. But it has become clear that whether we have the building or not, our community badly needs a Social Justice Co-op to help facilitate and coordinate all the frustrated energies in our community as more and more cuts come down the line and more and more NGOs find themselves without resources and muzzled.

We need to get together and build our energy, and above all, develop a free and unfettered voice that can speak out against increasing inequality and injustice both in our own community and around the world.

Download the membership form HERE.

Cinema Politica next film screening May 21 at 7 PM, MUN Arts Building room 1046

Come out to the second screening of the newly formed Cinema Politica St. John's on May 21! Every third Tuesday of the month throughout the summer our local Cinema Politica will be screening a hard-hitting documentary not promoted by mainstream culture.

To keep up to date, be sure to like their Facebook Page. 
 

Watch the trailer, and read more about The Pipe on their website: http://www.thepipethefilm.com/

MAY 1ST -- Public Information Meeting on Fracking to be Held in St. John's

The goal of this meeting is to inform people about the plans for fracking in this province, with the intent of forming a Fracking Awareness Group for the East Coast.  A Fracking Awareness Group has been established on the West Coast and have been very effective in getting the word out and mobilizing people.

Learn more about what has already been done from allies reporting at the 4 O'Clock Whistle and other posts on fracking published on this blog.

Questions for Black Spruce on the possibility of Hydraulic Fracturing on the West Coast of Newfoundland

Based on the article “Municipal leaders express concerns about fracking” by Christopher Vaughan, The Western Star April 20, 2013

Since there have been no public consultations thus far by Black Spruce Exploration Corp. on their (and Shoal Point Energy’s) plans to conduct hydraulic fracturing on the West Coast of Newfoundland, there has thus been little opportunity to question the company on the health and environmental impacts which may result from such an undertaking. However some information from the company has been presented to municipal leaders at a consultation they were invited to, and thankfully reporter Christopher Vaughan was on site to record what had been said by Black Spruce representative David Murray. Vaughan’s article (subsequently published in The Western Star) has thus brought to West Coast some snippets of Murray’s presentation - a presentation which it appears raises far more questions than it answers. The following is a list of quotes from the before mentioned article, paired with responses that highlight a need for greater information.

Welcome Mr. Murray:

“The president of Black Spruce Exploration [David Murray] was in Stephenville Crossing on Saturday to tell two-dozen municipal leaders about his company’s search for oil and the potential for hydraulic fracturing on the province’s west coast.” - “Municipal leaders express concerns about fracking” by Christopher Vaughan The Western Star April 20, 2013

Firstly, while it’s great that you’re talking to municipal leaders (and to companies who are likely to profit somewhat from fracking), now maybe you could offer a public presentation, so we, the public, can express our concerns over hydraulic fracturing? This might seem a trivial thing, but is highly important to us, and we’d like to know first-hand what you’re planning.

 “If we do find the oil, we’ll need to know how to refine this properly here,” he said. “We want to keep as many jobs as we can local and build and develop the industry just like it’s been in Alberta. We don’t want to be shipping the oil to Alberta. We want to be keeping it here, creating jobs.” (Ibid)

That’s an interesting statement since evidence to date indicates most of the jobs created would actually be filled by specialists from elsewhere, and would be short term. It’s also an interesting statement considering the dissatisfaction of many Albertans with the Fracking industry. A poll conducted last year by “Alberta Oil Magazine” (a pro-industry publication) found: 42.1% of Albertans think fracking puts drinking water sources at risk, as few as 22.4 % of Albertans trust oil and gas companies when they say fracking is safe, and 50.9 % of Albertans are concerned about environmental impacts of Fracking while only 17.1% are not concerned. But you say you want to build and develop the industry just like it’s been in Alberta? Why should we trust you if three quarters of Alberta doesn’t?

“Mr. Murray said his company is environmentally responsible, being compliant with regulations set out by the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board, Department of Natural Resources, and Department of Environment and Conservation.” (Vaughan)

Considering that those regulations have not been updated since 1996, and contain no specific regulations relating to hydraulic fracturing, you’ll understand if that doesn’t come across as reassuring. 

“Mr. Murray said a hydrology study would be conducted prior to any fracking to ensure there is no connection between fracking zones and groundwater aquifers.
“In Canada, we’ve had 200,000 hydraulically fractured wells, and we’ve not had any cases of drinking water contamination from the stimulation fluid,” he said.” (Ibid)

Actually those studies are currently underway, and this is one of the reasons many are advocating for a moratorium on Hydraulic Fracturing until more is known. What we do however know is that 6.2% of all well casings fail initially (60% fail over two decades) and that they all fail over time. 

“Even so, he said the company will case the double-case the oil well with steel and cement to a level 150 metres below the lowest drinking-water well registered with the provincial government.
“We are not required to that by industry or by regulations. We do that as a company so that there’s never ever an issue with drinking water.”” (Ibid)

Again there is a problem here; fracking in this case will be conducted horizontally (not vertically), so even if you do insure that the initial vertical well is encased properly you cannot insure there will ‘never be an issue with drinking water.’ Indeed one of the main concerns about fracking is the possibility of fluid leaching to the surface once it is in the ground (and even Mr. Murray admits that 50% of the fluids pumped in will stay in the ground). 

“Mr. Murray said fluids involved in fracking are comprised of 99.51 per cent water, sand and salt. The other 0.49 per cent is comprised of 15 chemical compounds, many of which Mr. Murray said could be found in domestic cleansers, cosmetics and foods. (See chart below for more details.)
“When people say we’re not trying to tell them what’s in there, that’s hogwash,” he said.” (Ibid)

Great so give us an EXACT list of the chemicals you will be using (not a “typical solution”), and then you won’t be hiding anything. As much as I am sure we are all fine with the possibility of drinking lip gloss and drain cleaner (wait a second that doesn’t sound safe actually?), and for that matter burning it off into our atmosphere (hang on that doesn’t sound good at all either?), we would like to assure ourselves that you aren’t planning to use chemicals (including some neurotoxins) that have been recorded as used on other fracking sites. It’s just a little point we’d like to settle.

“Mr. Murray noted not all of the hydraulic fracturing fluid comes up once oil is flowing.
“Fifty per cent stays in the rocks 1,500 to 3,000 metres below, so the stuff that comes up, you will have a separator process that will clean that and that will be put in separating pond,” he said.” (Ibid)

Oh good, so we are clear then on the process, Mr. Marshall (Minister of Natural Resources), must have been confused when he suggested at a recent public talk that the used fluid would be placed in containment tanks and not in open air ponds which, given evidence from other fracking sites, are lined about as well as most garden fountains.

 Also Mr. Murray, I am afraid to say you have not yet addressed the problem of these chemicals in terms of atmospheric contamination. Even though you plan to separate the fluid from the oil being extracted as it comes out of the well, as most fracking sites do, you have not mentioned that small (but notable) portions of the fluid is in fact burnt off into the atmosphere, nor have you mentioned the ever increasing list of respiratory complaints from people living near fracking sites that are now coming to light. All the more reason to perhaps wait a little while until we know more? Where is all this waste going anyway?  

“The waste will then be put in tanks and trucked to a port and sent by boat to a disposal company in Nova Scotia.” (Ibid)

Which disposal company? Because, as I am sure Mr. Murray is aware, there was a recent application by AIS, for Colchester County in Nova Scotia, to dump millions of litres of contaminated fracking water through sewers directly into the Bay of Fundy. And what if something goes wrong?

“Mr. Murray said his company is willing to bring in experts in the field to help train local firefighters.” (Ibid)

And how much, Mr. Murray, precisely are you willing to contribute (in dollars), to an environmental clean-up? Because if you are really going to come here and tell us all (well actually you haven’t held a public talk so it’s more like “tell some of us”) that things are rosy and that nothing could possibly go wrong you’d better be ready to clean up after yourself. We, after all, are not asking for the unreasonable – merely that a moratorium be put in place until we know more. By contrast you are asking for a rushed ahead process (continuingly making leaps towards fracking here without yet receiving approval to do so via the environmental regulations you claim to cherish), and if things do not work out as planned you are not the one who will be affected.  

It seems fitting then to end with a quote from a concerned citizen – as Mr. Cashin is recorded as saying in Mr. Vaughan’s article:

“If they’re right, good. But if they’re wrong, they walk away and it’s catastrophic for us,” (Ibid)

Other Sources:

“Alberta Oil Survey: Fracking.” By Alberta Oil Staff: http://www.albertaoilmagazine.com/2012/05/survey-results-hydraulic-fracturing/  

“Description of the Job Issue surrounding Hydraulic Fracturing” - http://hydrocarburesgim.ca/wp-content/uploads/EdwinJobs13.pdf  

“Fracking Concerns Summery” - Port au Port/Bay St. George Fracking Awareness Group

Also of possible environmental interest (consultations to be held April 29th and 30th): Investcan Consultations West Coast Newfoundland

COMPANY FAILS TO EASE FRACKING CONCERNS: Important questions remain unanswered, say concerned citizens

The Port au Port /Bay St George Fracking Awareness Group April 23, 2013 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

COMPANY FAILS TO EASE FRACKING CONCERNS

Important questions remain unanswered, say concerned citizens

Port au Port East, NL: Black Spruce Exploration’s David Murray is failing to address local concerns about fracking even as he makes the media rounds, says the Port au Port/Bay St. George Fracking Awareness Group.

Mr. Murray is the head of the newly-formed company which plans to use horizontal slickwater hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to drill for oil/gas at Shoal Point on Port au Port Bay as soon as September or October of this year.

Mr. Murray has been in damage control for the last couple of weeks after hundreds of concerned citizens turned out for an information session in Port au Port on April 7 to ask hard questions about the effects of fracking on their communities, their health, the environment, as well as on other industries in the area such as fishing and tourism.

So far Mr. Murray’s statements to the media and to the local municipalities have been evasive, unclear, and at times, even by his own admission, exaggerated. More answers are needed, says Bill O’Gorman of West Bay, before our government decides if this is something we will allow in our province.

Here are the top questions that remain unanswered:

·   Will there be a mandatory disclosure of the exact chemicals used at each specific drilling site? The most striking finding of a 2012 Cornell University study, according to its authors, was that any links between health and hydrofracking cannot be studied at all until companies start disclosing the exact chemical compounds they are using to frack. Mr. Murray has provided both The Georgian and The Western Star with a list of ‘typical’ fracking fluids from the US Dept. of Energy’s 2009 shale gas primer, but this list is misleading even by its own account. The small print on p. 63 has this to say: “the specific compounds used in a given fracturing operation will vary depending on company preference, source water quality and site-specific characteristics of the target formation.  The compounds shown above are representative of the major compounds used in hydraulic fracturing of gas shales.”

·   Where will the fracking wastewater go? Nova Scotia? Mr. Murray has stated several times over the last weeks that the wastewater from western Newfoundland drilling sites will go to Nova Scotia. However, as CBC News and other sources have recently reported, Nova Scotia is still figuring out how best to dispose of its own radioactive waste water after Triangle Petroleum fracked two wells in Hants County between 2007 and 2009. Nova Scotia has halted all fracking permits until at least 2014 as they await more information. Cape Breton County recently endorsed a complete ban on fracking.

·   200,000 wells fracked in Canada without contamination? Mr. Murray recently recanted a statement he made before the Corner Brook Board of Trade that 200,000 wells had been hydraulically fracked in Canada without “groundwater contamination.” Mr. Murray, quoting literature from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, was forgetting the case of Jessica Ernst, of Rosebud, Alberta, who is suing Encana for contaminating her water with so much methane she could set it on fire. Mr. Murray, a Calgary native, also appeared unaware that the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties recently voted to ask their government for tougher fracking regulations. Also, what about the issue of non-disclosure agreements and gag orders?

·   Where will the water come from? Freshwater or salt? Although the company has stated publicly that it will use saltwater to frack, there have been reports that Black Spruce will still need to use freshwater to get below the aquifer. Is so, where will the freshwater come from? Salmon rivers? Ponds?

·   How many jobs? Mr. Murray speculates that 50 jobs will be created in the first year and there could be 500 more if the project goes forward. Even if these numbers are correct, will these jobs go to outside teams as in prior fracking projects? Will there be enough jobs to risk killing off other more sustainable industries such as tourism and the fisheries? Black Spruce’s partner, Shoal Point Energy, has admitted that in the exploratory phase most of the jobs would be filled by “external contractors.”

·   Who is Black Spruce Exploration? Black Spruce is a brand new outfit that has yet to drill a well. Its partner, the Toronto-based Shoal Point Energy, is also small, with less than a dozen employees. Shoal Point’s president George Langdon has admitted that the Green Point shale is “a bit of a wild frontier still” with shale that, unlike other deposits in North America, is broken up and difficult to drill. Should the health of Newfoundlanders and their local communities be put at risk while inexperienced junior oil companies experiment with new slickwater hydraulic fracturing techniques that have not been proven safe?  

References:

1) US Dept of Energy, Shale Gas Primer, p. 63

2) “Nova Scotia Fracking Water Disposal” CBC News http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2013/03/28/ns-fracking-water-disposal.html

3) Alberta Association of Municipalities Resolution: http://app.aamdc.com/resolutions/2-13s.aspx

4) Amendment to the Environmental Assessment of the Port au Port Bay Exploration Drilling Program, 12

5) “Small Company Exploring Potential Huge Shale Oil Find in Western Newfoundland,” Canadian Press http://www.shoalpointenergy.com/sep-9-2012.php

For more information, contact Robin Durnford at durnford@ualberta.ca or 709-641-0004.

Yet another conversation that Darin King would prefer we forget.

The following story was communicated to me by a mother who would prefer to remain anonymous. Given King's history of retaliation against critics, I don't blame her.

Concerning King: I really like the list through the Occupy link. It's all on the public record. What about the things that are not on the public record?
I shall start with one incident going back to 2001. Long before King enter politics he was a education director at the former Burin School District. In the meeting that I had with him, on the simple request of an assessment for my child to check learning disabilities - King personally attacked me and tried to stop me from pushing for an assessment for my child.

1. Your child is developmentally slow, based on his expertise dripping in condescending droplets encased with haughty and snooty tones.

2. King proceeded, that he has the PHD and compared to what do you have in levels of education and then he looks at the file - to accounting and its not even an accounting degree.

3. King proceeds to question by education background and then moves on to my abilities in both parenting and my intelligence.

4, Then he proceeds to questioned my inability to accept decisions from authority. 

Of course, I objected at all that he said, and he proceeded to attacked me personally to get me to shut-up.

A douchebag? For some perhaps. King has had problems a lot longer and before he entered politics. King represents a weak link in the Dunderdale cabinet - he can't handle criticism nor can he handle intelligent kickback thrown at him. Especially the kind that questions his ability and motives. Dig into his past, and I am sure I am not the only parent that met his wrath, when a parent dared to asked a question. 

By the way, truth should be known: King does really think that kids with learning problems including those who have learning disabilities are developmentally slow. The reason being that the NL education ministry doesn't want to provide what the children need: effective and research based reading, writing and numeracy instruction. Its why I like Dale Kirby of the NDP. He wants to do something about that, including having all children not just some to have average to high levels of reading, writing and numeracy. 

At the moment, and for the last 20 years, NL stands number one for having the highest levels in the adult population of low literacy and numeracy levels. But King believes that children with learning issues are developmentally slow and therefore should receive no education services, because it's a waste of time. I was some glad he left for politics, because he continued on to prevent my child from accessing special education services in his capacity at the board level. I had a few years of clear sailing, until he became the ministry of education, and I was once again fighting for things for my child. I can't prove it, but when he sees me coming, he avoids me. Of course I was raised up proper by my mother, I would never dream of causing a fuss in a public way, but he wouldn't think twice of doing it to others in public or in the privacy of an office to attacked their reputation, their personal self-worth, and even call another MHA a liar.

In follow up remarks she explained that the student that King was prepared to give up on is now graduating from high school with an 80 average and will attend Memorial University.

Just protest now - call to action

No one needs permission to organize a protest. If you think it's a good idea to have a rally in your community or neighborhood, then you should. If you wanted to picket your MHA's office, then you should. If you want to write an editorial for the news or call into open line, you should. Make a sign or a banner, write the script for a protest play. There are many ways to take action, and a culture of protest emerges when people take it on themselves to just go ahead and act, feeling compelled to do so right now.

This is not to say protest actions should be impulsive -- on the contrary they need to be thought out -- but just to say that it's really up to you to take the lead and get the ball rolling if you want to effect change. Even seemingly small actions can have a big impact (putting up posters around your town, for example). There have been many protests in the last couple years we have written about on this page. If you browse through our content and the link list, you'll see lots of other ideas for protests as well. These range from occupation of public space, marches and rallies, to grassroots food-sharing kitchens, to culture jamming, and beyond. Protesting is about getting creative and thinking about what sort of action works to best convey your message.

After you hold your protest, someone will inevitably say it was a flop. Someone will nit-pick about details of how many people showed up or say your poster used language that was aggressive or over the top. Someone will say you don't have a clear demand and that you offer no alternatives. There is a whole kitchen sink full of things people say to diminish the significance of protest. Do not pay any attention to this BS. Those who do nothing are the first to denigrate those who act. For this reason it is important to show support for other activists as well, just as they will show support to you. We don't have to agree on all the issues or even on how to go about protesting, but the activist recognizes that everyone has a legitimate right to protest -- the bedrock of solidarity. Never let the naysayers dictate what you consider success. If your protest can activate even one person, if your protest does nothing more than show solidarity to another group, that is success.

These are trying times for the people of the province. Evidence of the failure of the current government and our political system becomes clearer every day. The question is certainly not whether people are angry about the reckless mismanagement of the province, but if they are able to do anything about it. To do nothing is to embolden this sort of behavior. To do nothing is to dishonor those who have come before us and condemn those who will inherit this place. Protest at such times is a responsibility, a civic duty, something no one needs permission to do. If you are waiting for someone else to lead the way it will never happen...

...the time is now...



...the activist is you...

New graffiti

Seeing some new graffiti around St. John's. Tag looks like "crisis". Something of the graffs brings to mind the subtle politics of the Listen Bird.

Updated: Who is trolling the "Dunderdale must GO!" facebook group?

This amusing exchange exposed an impostor who was sabotaging the "Dunderdale Must GO" facebook group at the centre of recent controversy.

Is "Sam Rossiter" the alias of a PC operative?  Is this yet another example the PCs using subterfuge to sabotage the free expression of public opinion?  Should we regard with greater skepticism embarassing and hateful comments in open discussion forums? 

I think you know my answer.

********** Update *********

In my haste to post this last night, I failed to offer evidence that Sam Rossitter was a fake account.  These are the reasons is why I am certain that the account was fake.

• The account was only opened on a couple of days ago, subsequent to the debacle in the House of Assembly.
• The only photograph on the account was a picture of what looked like a bomb schematic to my untrained eyes.
• The only status update was to claim that he had just received a pink slip, an obvious attempt to impersonate a laid-off government employee with a motive to hate Dunderdale.  I believe he also used foul language in that single post.
• The account had no Facebook friends and almost no information.
• The account was closed shortly after it was banned from the group.
• The commenter seemed to be deliberately disrupting the group by repeatedly commenting on posts that put the group in a bad light. This pushed those posts to the top of feed so they were the first ones seen by people visiting the page and drove many people away from the group.

The administrators of the group have modified the rules to allow admins greater freedom to ban suspected impostors and delete content contributed by suspected saboteurs. This change in policy is broadly supported by the legitimate users of the group.  I hope that people will recognize that this is being done for valid reasons and I hope that this will not detract from the interesting and genuine discussions and debates taking place in the group. (TB)

Gordon Little updated the description.

We are the common citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador who feel that the present PC government has mismanaged our fine province.

All members are free to post without needing Administrator approval but you should post items relevant to defeating the PC's in 2015. We reserve the right to remove posts that do not further the discussion of our main goal.

Administrators will remove anything hateful or threatening. Personal attacks and lack of respect will not be tolerated. Anyone engaging in that kind of behavior will be removed from the group.

Please report anything you see that violates these rules to an Administrator.

Provincial Tories talking BS on taxes...again.

Well this is pretty rich.  On Wednesday, April 17th Tory backbencher Glen Littlejohn introduced a private members resolution lauding his party for the regressive tax cuts that helped created our fiscal crisis:

"BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House commends the government for returning half a billion dollars a year to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians by reducing personal income taxes and supports the government in its decision not to increase personal income tax rates to address the Province's fiscal challenge. "

As we explained some time ago, the benefits of these tax cuts were heavily concentrated on the rich, but Littlejohn tries to spin it like all the money went to senior citizens and the poor. You can read it all in Hansard, but the tax relief he describes (using his numbers) is:

• $30 million increase for Low Income Seniors Benefit,

• $7 million for Seniors tax credit (my calculation based his information),

• $42 million home heating rebate,

• $17 million on a low-income tax deduction (rough calculation based on his numbers).

Add these numbers up and you get less then $100 million dollars. What about the other $400 million that Littlejohn is bragging about? Where did that go? Maybe Jerome Kennedy can enlighten us.

"In 2013, a single individual with taxable income of $50,000 will save over $1,600, or 30 per cent, compared to the amount of taxes they would have paid in 2006 ... So, what we are doing, Mr. Speaker, the tax reductions are benefiting the lower income earners. It is not benefiting the rich – again, whoever the rich may be."

Wow I guess he's right. All the money must go to low income earners, because rich people don't exist.  Next thing those craaazy lefties will have us taxing leprecauns and unicorns.

But hang on, don't provincial cabinet ministers make something like $150,000 a year? Someone earning that much will save about $7,000 a year from the tax cuts.  Sounds like a better deal than $1,600 to me, but what do I know? I'm not a finance minister.

Kennedy goes on:

"The suggestion here has been by the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour in their report, and the NDP, is that we should look at adding a fourth tax bracket and tax the rich. Well, let me just give you an example of how much money we would make if we brought in a fourth bracket and we raised taxes 1 per cent on people making more than $100,000, those same people who are paying 30 per cent of total taxes to date. We would make $12.1 million."

Funny how those rich people that don't exist are paying 30 percent of all income taxes, eh?  Anyway the CCPA report Kennedy references estimates more like $18 million, but lets take Kennedy's figure. It is true that $12 million seems like a drop in the bucket compared to the staggering $1000 million structural deficit produced by the colossal incompetence of this Tory government, but $12 million is not exactly pocket change. And lets remember that the marginal tax rate on income over $70,000 has been cut 6%, so restoring the rate above $100,000 to what it was in 2006 would raise $70 million (or $110 million with CCPA estimates), while still retaining about $4000 of tax relief for everyone earning a six figure salarie. That money could pay for, say, the salaries of around 1500 public sector workers, to use a completely hypothetical example.

Kennedy concludes,

"Everyone has achieved savings, but because of the profile of the tax filer in this Province, the savings have been incorporated more, I would suggest, toward the middle-income earners and the lower-income earners. That is just the way it breaks down."

No Mr. Kennedy, that is how your credibility breaks down, along with your public support and your career in politics. But I'm sure you have a comfortable sinecure waiting for you in 2015 as reward for the 8 billion dollar Muskrat Falls corporate welfare project you helped launch on the backs of those middle and lower-income earners whose interests you pretend to care about.

 Let me end by quoting Dale Kirby of the NDP's response to Kennedy's condescension.

"One of the things we wanted to [...] was raise the basic personal exemption for individuals paying taxes, raise the basic personal exemption from the $7,989 now to $9,000. It would make us more competitive in the country and put more money back into the pockets of people who need it..."

Raising the basic personal exemption is the simplest and most equitable way to share our oil wealth. In a just world, this is the form the tax cuts would have taken. But as Occupiers know, the world is only as just as we choose to make it.