RiversdaleReporter.ca

Always look on the bright side of life. Despite the tariffs, despite the rise in the popularity of the central Canada party and Saskatchewan's dismal economic growth, and despite the homelessness, some Riversdale rivitialization seems to be taking place again. The building formerly occupied by the SLGA, and then Soul Foods and then the Bulk Basket is again occupied. Additionally, three new confectionaries have opened up, one in the building formerly occupied by the Wu Chung asian grocery store and two on the block where the former KingMe was located. In fact, a lot of revitalization seems to be taking place on this block as a business center that offers a variety of services including help with immigration issues has also opened near the two new confectionaries.

Most significantly perhaps, another bar has opened in the space formerly owned and occupied by 9 Mile Legacy -- whose micro-brewery and tasting room is also in Riversdale on 21st street and Avenue D. It is called the Art Bar and is a place you can listen to local and travelling comedians make light of the absurdities of life, poetry or just enjoy time with friends.

As it was in the early 1900's, Riversdale is again a valuable part of Saskatoon's entertainment and dining scene.

Times were different then but how could Saskatoon's daily newspaper or more particularly the weekly it published print columns of a man who had been sentenced to prison in the 1980's for 14 years because he grabbed a young lady off the street at knife point, dragged her to his apartment, sexually assaulted her, punched her and broke her nose and stabbed her and nearly killed her? The more so he committed these serious, vile crimes when he was out on parole after being convicted for unlawfully confining and deliberately wounding a hostage he had taken while participating in a prison riot. How could it allow him to make public statements and assertions the public was to take as truth because they appeared in print or use his statements and assertions as source material for stories when the man was proven to have given false slanderous testimony under oath at his trial for the crimes he perpetrated on the young lady? How could Saskatoon's daily newspaper never inform its readership of the danger to Saskatoon women and certain other members of the public that he presented or his veracity?

Didn't the directing minds of Saskatoon's daily paper at the time have a criminal record check done of the fellow before they agreed to publish his columns in their weekly and helped him finance his residence in the city? Remarkably, the daily had previously published a story about a man with a first and last name similar to his being convicted of unlawful confinement and wounding with intent because he had taken and intentionally wounded a hostage while he participated in a prison riot.

Didn't the directing minds of Saskatoon's daily paper at the time know the person whose columns their weekly was publishing was a person whose word was not to be trusted about anything when they allowed him to serve as a voice for First Nations people in Saskatoon -- he wasn't even from Saskatchewan -- and when they enabled him to position himself as a defender of women or when it used his claims as the basis for sensationalist (false and misleading) stories?

Didn't they appreciate that giving a platform to someone who stabbed and nearly killed his sexual assault victim and subsequently deliberately lied under oath in a court of law and slandered his victim in the process wouldn't do a service to anyone in the city or province, and was probably a very bad idea that could lead to a lot of untrue or misleading allegations and claims. Didn't they realize it might be quite embarrassing for them if the information on the man was discovered and made public? Weren't they at all concerned that helping him stay in Saskatoon might lead to his brutally attacking, sexually or otherwise, someone in this city? Murder even?

Was it simply a Ford Pintoesque business decision by the daily's management? Did they know about and overlook his horrific crimes and his problems with veracity simply because First Nations writers of the time were so few and far between? That is hard to believe.

Did the daily's management know about and overlook the danger to Saskatoon's women and men he presented because he served as a source of sensational sales generating news copy?

Was this man's past and his truthfulness known or discovered by some and was the public disclosure of same by actually competent and earnest journalists at the daily made verboten by management? Was there active suppression of inconvenient facts concerning the man and an active cover up?

Maybe there was USAID* money "on the table" to get the daily or its owners to take one of the first salvos on the war on men the msm was so willing to carry out in the late 1990's, 2000's, 2010's and pre-Trump 2020's and the man had a fabricated story to tell that would justify payment?

Or were the brain trust -- the word is used rather generously -- of the daily after the departure of the great V. Clemence R.I.P. and the people the brain trust employed and presented to the public as competent, earnest, ethical journalists worthy of having their stories published in a newspaper so doe-eyed and trusting after the great W. Goulding left its employ no one thought to inquire into the man's past and the crimes he had committed before they used him as a source for articles or news stories or published his columns in the weekly they printed?

To try and find answers to these questions several of the journalists working for the daily at the time were located and emailed questions. One of the contacted journalists currently works as a crime reporter. The other one, who when working for the local daily crafted a very sensationalist, mostly false story sourced in part on "information" from the columnist, became a bureau chief for the Globe and Mail and now works for some Quebec based organization. Not once did his sensationalist, misleading, mostly false story reference the man's veracity and past horrific crimes.

Each of the contacted former Saskatoon daily newspaper journalists did not answer the questions. One of them chose not to reply to RR emails. The other one responded to the emails and refused to answer the questions.

Is there anyone out there in the know who might want to tell us? You owe it to the women and men who lived in Saskatoon and Saskatchewan through this period to do so.

As of now what was and was not taking place in the minds of those tasked with running Saskatoon's daily and the weekly it published during this time period is as impossible to fathom as what was taking place in the minds of those in government in the late 1800s and first half of the 20th century who thought removing small children from their parents and placing them in schools with strangers was morally acceptable policy and a good idea that had to be implemented.

How could they have thought giving a man who grabbed a young woman off the street at knife point, sexually assaulted, punched her and broke her nose and almost stabbed her to death in Edmonton and then gave perjured testimony at his trial a good idea and worth the risk if they knew of these crimes? And if they did not know, again, just how bad of a news organization tasked with making newsworthy matters known must the Saskatoon daily have been at the time?

Does anyone still think Trudeau should keep subsidizing legacy media with our tax dollars? Does anyone still trust the main stream media? Should they?

*   According to news not reported on by the msm USAID gave millions to the BBC, NYT, WaPo and Politico the latter of which was paid $8.2 million USD -- according to the DailyMail -- and must now lay off staff. USAID has also spent millions promoting "abortion rights" in countries around the world and the rights or programs of transgendered people in America including some programs that have made transgendered people the subject of attacks and backlash, and funded the "opposition" in Venezuela. Some are suspecting USAID even funded the decades long war on men the msm has been waging. Lest anyone has been confused by msm reporting USAID isn't so much an aid agency as an organization dedicated to advancing the interests of the US as the US deep state perceived them to be. Vis a vis the msm USAID seems to be the Operation Mocking Bird of its period.

**  The name of those tasked with the leadership of the daily paper at the time they employed and published the "work" of a real and tangible danger to the women and men of this community are not named because the RR has not been able to positively identify all of them and really didn't even try that hard to find them all out because even if the RR had been able to determine them with certainty the RR would not have named them for a similar reason that the name of the columnist and defender of women was not. The RR does not want to directly contribute to the unforgiving machine of inconvenient and embarrassing fact and false claims of fact that big tech and its Blackrock and Vanguard owners and our institutions, including the main stream media and law societies and justice system have enabled and caused the "western world's" internet and now AI research tools to become. While the leadership of the daily paper at the time they employed the danger to the community are not attempted murderers, unlawful confiners, hostage takers, aggravated sexual assaulters, beaters of women and intentional wounders of hostages they have certainly been killers of reputations, and livelihoods or careers of the innocent and the unjustly or improperly prosecuted/persecuted. Holding prosecutors who did not conduct themselves properly during the course of a criminal proceeding accountable or discovering and publicizing wrong doing to prevent a victim of the wrongdoing from being wrongly convicted or unlawfully convicted has never been one of the city daily's strong suits. It may never be. It is much easier to beat up and heap scorn on financially precarious accused persons as most of the victims of such prosecutorial misconduct usually are. The last time the daily slandered and defamed someone with actual financial resources Morris Cherneskey RIP slapped it real hard.

***  The journalists the RR contacted with reasonable questions related to this scandal who refused to answer the questions or even give the RR the courtesy of an email reply are also not named but are like the columnist also discernible. Again, they are not named in these articles because the RR doesn't want to directly contribute to the unforgiving machine of inconvenient and embarrassing fact and false claims of fact that big tech and its Blackrock and Vanguard owners and our institutions, including the main stream media and law societies and justice system and federal politicians elected to the House of Commons or appointed to the Senate have enabled and caused the "western" internet to become. "Right to be forgotten" legislation anyone?

The "columnist"* wrote columns concerning his past heroin addiction and the trials and tribulations of being a heroin addict. He also referenced time he spent in the big house -- ostensibly because of his heroin addiction. Additionally and audaciously, he positioned himself as a defender of women.

The columnist, now deceased, was fairly good at story telling. He was even better at crafting a persona for himself in Saskatoon that was publicly acceptable and palatable, so good he had columns for the daily newspaper and a weekly it published -- for years and then after that columns at another now defunct Saskatoon weekly created by a former employee of the daily paper.

So good at crafting his persona was he that relatively recently a Facebook user -- likely unfamiliar with the man's past and not realizing the fraud the authorities and mainstream media and its journalists allowed or enabled this columnist to perpetrate on the Saskatoon citizenry or the threat to the community and its women and men that he presented -- even described the columnist glowingly as "a great man".

While heroin addiction may (or may not) have been his weakness, veracity was not this man's strong point. This was demonstrated by the persona he fashioned for himself in Saskatoon vis a vis the crimes he committed and was convicted of, and by the lies he willingly and purposefully told when under oath.++

The defender of women grabbed a young lady off the street at knife point as she was walking to meet a friend and then hauled her screaming hysterically into his apartment in Edmonton one night in the 1980's.

Being the victim of a violent, stranger sexual assault is traumatic and horrifying. But things could very well have gone even worse for the young lady. Not only did the columnist and defender of women grab the young lady off the street at knife point, unlawfully confine her and sexually assault her, he also punched her and broke her nose.

Much, much worse than that, he also stabbed the unfortunate young woman with a knife.

The knife wound was just an inch from her heart. Had he managed to strike the knife in her heart a medical expert testified that the young lady would have died.

At his sexual assault, attempted murder and unlawful confinement trial, following this series of acts, he claimed the young woman came to his apartment voluntarily as she was a prostitute, that she fabricated the sexual assault because he had refused to pay her and that the stabbing was in self-defence as she had attacked him. Unfortunately for him several witnesses testified at his trial as to hearing the young woman's terrified screams in a parking lot near, or later coming from, his apartment.

There was no evidence other than his false testimony that the young woman was or had ever been a prostitute. Even if she had been, so what? How does that possibly justify a possible life ending stabbing? Or even a broken nose?

The columnist and defender of women was sentenced to 14 years in prison for these crimes. There was even consideration of an application for a dangerous offender designation. The columnist already had a criminal record and committed the crime when he was on parole for having participated in a prison riot wherein he had unlawfully confined, assaulted and wounded another person with intent.

The Saskatoon daily newspaper that paid this man for his columns thus providing him with revenue he could use to live in Saskatoon actually earlier published a story on this prison riot and the participation of a man with a first and last name identical to his therein.

This man's crimes upon the innocent woman were also reported on by several of the Saskatoon daily newspaper's sister papers, including the Edmonton Journal and Calgary Herald. Again, they only referenced him by mentioning the assailant had a first and last name identical to his.

The sexual assault, attempted murder and unlawful confinement crimes and convictions, and the hostage taking and the wounding with intent crime and convictions were not the only crimes of the columnist.

The first crime he was convicted of was for breaking and entering into the home of a young woman. It was believed at the time that his motive was robbery. With the benefit of recently acquired knowledge of his activities subsequent to the breaking and entering crime that seems... somewhat unlikely.

In employing this man and helping him finance his life in Saskatoon the daily newspaper, knowingly or unknowingly put the safety and lives of the women and even the men of the Saskatoon at risk.  If unknowingly, just how poor of a site of journalism must the daily newspaper have been during this time period?

The daily paper and those who were tasked with its leadership at the time, one of whom may have been the husband of a person of importance on the public school board**, owe the man's Edmonton victim and his Alberta wounding with intent victim, and the people who were living in the Saskatoon community during this time period -- its women and men, a mea culpa and huge 72 point type face public apology.

There is one particular individual, a victim of lies told by this columnist and defender of women -- the description is sarcastic -- that is owed a huge mea culpa and huge 72 point type face public apology as well.

Once the columnist wrote a column about "stalkers" in which he claimed he had seen a man hiding in bushes outside the home he shared with his then girlfriend and professed to fearing this "stalker" would enter their home illegally when he wasn't at home and that he would come home to find the man there and would then be unable to resist subjecting the man to great violence. The only thing true in the column was its author's hinted at capacity for acts of great (and wanton?) violence.

Entering the homes of women without their consent with intent to commit sexual or violent acts upon them is actually something very few men actually do. Unfortunately for the women of Edmonton and Saskatoon the columnist happened to be a man who fell within this subset of very few men. In his column he was projecting his rather unique propensities onto another man... while further building the false persona he crafted for himself in the city.

*    The name of the "columnist" is easily discernible. It isn't mentioned explicitly in part because it is wrong to speak ill of the dead and while no words were issued this news article sort of seems to qualify, in part as doing so would no doubt be extremely painful to the victims of this man and their family members and to his own family members, and in part because of the emotions this man engenders. The main reason the name of the "columnist", danger to the community, and fraud is not being stated herein is that the RiversdaleReporter and the researcher for and author of this news article does not want to contribute to the unforgiving machine of inconvenient and embarrassing facts and claims of fact that are actually false -- that big tech and its Blackrock and Vanguard owners and our institutions, including the main stream media and law societies and justice system and our MP's and Federal Political parties with representation in the House of Commons have enabled and caused "English North America's" internet to become.

++   A friend who passed too soon said he demonstrated his lack of truthfulness in the columns he wrote which she said she read meticulously not for their quality and penmanship but because she was Metis. For reasons I never asked her to elaborate on she said he "sickened" her and she consequently received amusement from the columns: "there were inconsistencies from week to week and sometimes even in the same column" and "he never seemed to know what he talking about".

**   The spouse of one of the people who may have been involved with the leadership of the daily paper at the time they employed and published the work of a real and tangible danger to the women and men of the community who is a muckety muck on the public school board, is not named because there is no suggestion of wrong doing at any time by her. She is referenced only to show prominent people are sometimes connected to people who have done or allowed to be done, things that are significantly less than kosher. But you all know that already so take this as just another case in point. The individual is not named because we have been unable to confirm that he was involved in the management of the daily newspaper in the relevant time period and because the RiversdaleReporter and the researcher for and author of this news article does not want to contribute to the unforgiving machine of inconvenient and embarrassing facts and claims of fact that are actually false -- that big tech and its Blackrock and Vanguard owners and our institutions, including the main stream media and law societies and justice system and our MP's and federal political parties with representation in the House of Commons have enabled and caused "English North America's" internet to become.

He rose to power promising electoral reform, a better and more humane way of doing things, a better deal for Canada's First Nations People, reform of the justice system, and to help the middle class and those trying hard to join it. He was aided by his and his then new wife's good looks and by the empathy he could convey or portray with his voice -- Trudeau was right up there with the best talking heads at the state broadcaster for conveying sympathy for those judged deserving of sympathy (and of heaping scorn and disgust at those judged deserving of scorn and disgust). Trudeau had been after all a drama teacher with some ability to act.

When Trudeau made his promise to resign he did so under considerable pressure from others in the Liberal Party, hated by Canadians as much or more than Steven Harper, Brian Mulroney, Jean Cretien and his own father in their final years in office. In their final years in office all the aforenamed were very much hated across the country.

Where did Justin go wrong? Pretty much every where. What did he do right? Not much at all really. He is hated across the country because he seems preechy, smarmy, two-faced, holier than thou when he has no reason for thinking he is, immature, of subpar intelligence, dictatorial, incapable of managing the country competently, unprepared for the world stage, stupidly jingoistic, a servant of the war machine, incapable of being a big picture thinker, and hypocritical.

He is hated in western Canada even more because he continued policies that caused the people of Alberta, Saskatchewan and to a lesser extent BC and Manitoba, economic harm, and enacted new policies - ostensibly for the purpose of slowing anthropogenic global warming via fossil fuel consumption - that would cause Alberta and Saskatchewan even more economic harm, with nary a thought of compensating these provinces for the additional harm or changing the Equalization formula so it would no longer be a drain-wealth-from-the-west-to-give-to-Quebec-and-through-Quebec-to-Ontario formula to an actual equalization formula. An actual equalization formula could enable Saskatchewan to develop economically to the point it would be able to wean itself from Trudeau's dreaded fossil fuel revenues and no longer suffer from dying towns, urban homelessness and depopulation.

What did Trudeau get right?   He helped improve the lives of some First Nations people and helped get a large number of Canadians to believe that reconciliation with Canada's First Nations people was the moral thing to do (it clearly is) as well as being necessary for the continuation and economic growth of the country. He managed the Covid pandemic significantly better than it was managed in the US but far from perfectly. He had an income subsidization system to stabilize and subsidize the incomes of workers left without work when society was shut down in the pre-vaccine pandemic year - helping them survive without undue hardship.* Under duress and pressure from the NDP, he helped move Canada a little closer to (but still very far away from) national state funded dental and pharmacare.

What did Trudeau get wrong?    That will be a pretty extensive list which I haven't time to compile. However, briefly off the top, it includes making the Canadian government system and Canadian society less democratic, increasing division within the country, deepening western alientation significantly, increasing the national debt, making it more difficult for people to own a home, increasing domestic homelessness, not helping the country develop a tech industry, not helping the country's worst off economically by any tangible measures, doing virtually nothing as Canada's economy weakens and its dollar falls against the green back and the currencies of countries with growing economies, pushing the world closer to global war, and needlessly jeopardizing our trading relationships with some of our major trading partners including China, India, Mexico and now even the USA.

Trudeau and his government have really been Wexit fuel. It can only be good for the country that he has decided to resign. It will be even better for the country when he has.

*  In reality, the Canadian government merely alleviated the suffering by spreading its costs to the harmed people over time. It is requiring many of the recipients of the relief to pay it back via monthly payments because well paid government bean counters have since claimed the recipients received relief to which they were not actually entitled. Many of the people forced to make these payments are financially precarious hospitality workers. Of course, Trudeau's government always had and has money for war.

After surviving two on-the-campaign-trail assassination attempts, and before that Democrat inspired lawfare by Democratic Party connected DA's designed to destroy his reputation, terminate his electability, and have him imprisoned as a felon, populist Donald J. Trump, was again elected POTUS, BIGLY. Trump received 50% of the votes cast and 312 electoral votes.

Democratic Candidate Kamala Harris, the choice of the war machine and the msm the war machine owns or has captured, whose campaign seemed to focus on women who think abortion is a right, the rights of trans people, and the "weirdness" of Trump's Vice President JD Vance, received 48.3% of the votes cast and 226 electoral votes.

Robert Kennedy, from the famous Kennedy family, received .5% of the votes cast. Kennedy, who has:

• been an outspoken critic of the war machine,
• publicly blamed the CIA for the assassination of his uncle, John F. Kennedy,
• publicly spoken the truth about the Russia-Ukraine/NATO war and its origins,
• opposed the mandatory vaccination of children with the mRNA "vaccines" during the COVID-19 pandemic,
• been a constant critic of big pharma and the agricultural oligopoly, asserting that they have had detrimental effects on Americans' health and are largely responsible for the increasing rates of obesity among Americans since the 1970s,

sought to become the Democratic nominee for 2024 but, like Bernie Sanders in 2016, was prevented from doing so by some very undemocratic actions by the Democratic Party establishment.

Unlike Bernie Sanders in 2016 who subsequently endorsed the Democratic establishment's nominee Joe Biden, Kennedy then ran as an independent. Concerned about Biden and then Harris warmongering, he then dropped out of the race, endorsed Trump, and joined the Trump movement.*   **

Green Party leader Dr. Jill Stein, a sharp critic of the Democratic candidate and her warmongering, who would not drop out of the race and endorse Kamala Harris as the SeeEyeEh captured European Green Party and Canada's Green Party leader Elizabeth May had urged her to do, likewise received .5% of the votes cast.

Libertarian candidate Chase Oliver, also a vocal critic of endless war and opposed to the supply of weapons of war to countries actually in military conflict like Ukraine and Israel, captured .4% of the votes cast.

In his 2016 campaign the President elect campaigned to the left of the Democratic party nominee Hilary Clinton, and promised to "drain the swamp" if elected. However, once elected, he appointed neo-cons like John Bolton -- whom Elon Musk recently described as a "staggeringly dumb warmonger" -- to positions of power even if he refused to take their advice on things like the desireability of going to war with Iran.

In 2020 Trump campaigned to the right of Democratic nominee Joe Biden -- not an easy task really -- and thanks to interference by the US deep state and its msm media mouthpieces including the Trump-Russia fake news and Hunter Biden laptop was really Russian disinformation fake news, each of which was dutifully reported as truth by Canada's state broadcaster, lost.   Consequently, Trump didn't get an opportunity to drain the swamp and Blinken and the neo-cons in the Biden government got NATO to get us to the doorstep of a nuclear war.

In his 2024 campaign, Trump campaigned to the right of the Democratic Party appointee with his attacks on illegal immigration and illegal immigrants, wokeness, EVs and China's trade and business practices including state ownership of some of the forces of production. However, Trump resisted making jingoistic "American exceptionalism" pronouncements and instead condemned neocon warmongers, warmongering and spoke out against the deepening danger of world war three that a continuation of deepening of the Russia-Ukraine/Nato war presented. Instead, Trump called for an end to the war and to return the world to conditions where people around the planet experienced the benefits of economic growth. In fact, he sounded kind of like a globalist, something quite at odds with his American worker first and pro-tarriffs pronounciations and promised that if elected President again he would bring the war to a negotiated end. His VP nominee, James D. Vance meanwhile, said nice things about China -- the kind of things our msm would never give coverage to and our Nazi standing ovation giving MPs would never accept as reality -- and the efforts China was making to help the poorest people in the world to have better lives.

It is hard to determine what kind of government Trump is going to deliver. He has signalled an intention to put some people of high integrity like Tulsi Gabbard and John Kennedy into positions of power and authority, Gabbard becoming overseer of the US alphabet agencies, and of putting reformers like Matt Gaetz into positions of power to clean up corrupt and MIC captured institutions like the Justice Department (Gaetz already removed himself from contention because he was being attacked by the MSM for having had when a young man a relationship with a woman who was 17 when the relationship began).

Conversely, Trump also intends to put some neocon warmongers and raving rightwing reactionaries who seem hell bent on having the US pursue aggressive militaristic policies on the world stage, into positions of power.

While it is thus clear that like 2016 President Trump 2024 President Trump is not draining the swamp but putting some of the swamp things into positions of significant power, it remains to be seen whether the Trump government will be a government of peace and prosperity, for the US and world, or whether it will be another military industrial complex controlled government doing what it can to keep the USA in endless foreign wars while trying its best, or not trying that hard at all, to prevent the surface world from self-emolating in a nuclear armageddon.

Trump may sincerely be trying to have the most progressive and reformist government since JFK and the neocon warmongers and right wing reactionaries might just be there for cover. Or he could just be more of the same, with the reformers and anti-war types being the cover to appease his MAGA movement base. Sadly, his life is in much greater danger if his actual aim is the former. More assassination attempts are almost guaranteed. Eventually one of these attempts will be successful, even if Trump manages to have an anti-war woman of color and high ethics who has become an ardent Trump supporter overseeing the Alphabets. Kennedy knows.

***

*    Democratic party lawyers fought to keep Kennedy off the ballot in certain states they believed the Democratic Party had a decent chance of winning when Kennedy was still in the running as an independent candidate and before Kennedy made his decision to halt his independent campaign because they thought he would pull votes in those states from the Democratic nominee. After Kennedy made the decision to withdraw from the Presidential race and then decided to endorse Trump Democratic Party lawyers then fought to keep Kennedy's name on the ballot in states where they believed Kennedy's being on the ballot would be more likely to take votes away from Trump than Kamala Harris.

**  Kennedy may get his chance to reign in the evils of big pharma and the agricultural oligopoly as he perceives them to be as he is Trump's pick for secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. According to Trump HHS under Kennedy "will play a big role in helping ensure that everybody will be protected from harmful chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, pharmaceutical products, and food additives that have contributed to the overwhelming Health Crisis in this Country".

The establishment media which receives advertising dollars bigly from big pharma and certain politicians have been almost as critical of the pick as they had been of Trump's pick of Matt Gaetz. To learn more about Kennedy's beliefs and what he hopes he can accomplish you can get the information from the horses' mouth at https://www.mahanow.org/.

Cynthia Block, a city councillor in Saskatoon's last city council, is Saskatoon's New Mayor and It's First Ever Woman Mayor.

Cynthia promises to make the fight against homelessness, presently the worst it has been in the city since the end of the Great Depression, her number one priority. Unfortunately, she supported the previous city council in many of its questionable and burdensome to homeowners -- particularly those of limited means in Ward 2 -- schemes and projects and was the only mayoralty candidate who did not want the city to abandon the downtown arena scheme.

In the previous city election, in which only 22% of Saskatoonians bothered to vote, former Mayor Charlie Clark received more votes than all the other candidates combined.

The mayor elect this election bested her nearest opponent, Gordon Wyant, by more than 10,000 votes.

This said, there were more than 7000 more ballots cast against the new mayor than were cast in her favour.

Block was the only mayoralty candidate who was not on record as wanting to see Charlie Clarke's downtown arena project cancelled or delayed. Consequently, the anti-downtown arena project vote was split among four mayoralty candidates while the pro-project vote only had Ms. Block to vote for, assuming they were so strongly committed to, and desirous of, the downtown arena that it was determinative of the candidate they would cast their ballot for.

Senos Timon, who failed in his bid to represent the provincial NDP in Saskatoon Riversdale in 2016 and in his bid to represent Saskatoon Center in 2019 but was instrumental in Betty Nippi-Albright's securing of that nomination, and is originally from South Sudan, bested his closest opponent, Jean Beliveau (not the now deceased hockey legend) by a mere 362 votes. There were three other candidates in the running who received more votes than this differential one of whom, Franklin Arthurs, received more than two times the vote differential.

Senos, like Nippi-Albright, continues the Saskatchewan NDP's deep foray into identity politics and away from election winning class-based politics. Timon promised to work to rectify the historical discrimination black, aboriginal and other racialized people have faced in Saskatchewan and had won a few awards for his past work in that regard.

Unfortunately, helping the ward's disadvantaged and oppressed caucasian residents and the barriers and discrimination they have faced does not seem to be in his wheel house. Again, he is part of the NDP identity politics team not the NDP as voice and advocate for the working class, lumpenproletariate and otherwise powerless team.

Like the previous Ward 2 councillor the RR fears Timon will not so much represent the views of the people of the ward to city Council and the mayor but help assist the mayor and city council in imposing its rules and views on the residents of Ward 2.

Despite the abysmal population and economic growth Saskatchewan has experienced under the Moe led Saskatchewan Party, those wanting better for the province and their children were unable to secure change by ending the Moe government's provincial rule. The Moe government appears headed -- final results have yet to be determined -- to a seven seat majority, leading or elected in 34 ridings to the NDP leading or elected in 27 ridings.

Thanks to massive support in Saskatchewan's rural ridings, the Sask Party achieved more than 52% of the decided vote, more than all the other parties' vote share combined.

Thanks to a strong desire for change and the collapse of the Sask Party vote in Regina and Saskatoon, the NDP achieved more than 40% of the popular vote, its highest share since the NDP governed the province.

Third parties who should have done better, the Saskatoon United Party, Green Party, and Buffalo Party, -- thanks to their innovative and creative policies and promises -- didn't and have to be very disappointed with their results. Many of their candidates will not get back their deposits.

Like Canada Saskatchewan needs, for democracy sake, to eliminate the first past the post electoral system and replace it with proportional representation.

Whether Saskatchewan can survive another four more years of Moe mediocrity and stagnation remains to be seen. Maybe, just maybe, the SaskParty will finally start doing what the people of Saskatchewan actually requires of it. Wouldn't bet the farm on it though.

Promotional literature the Saskatchewan Party is using to try to persuade people to give the party another term in office crows about how Saskatchewan's population has increased by 225K since the Saskatchewan Party was first elected 17 years ago. Growth that works for everyone!

If everyone in Saskatchewan didn't personally know a family member or friend or two or ten who have departed this province for Alberta, BC, Manitoba, Ontario, or even the US in this 17 year period they might be impressed by the 225K number.

However, if they stopped to think about it and then did a little research they would find that while politicians use numbers to mislead numbers don't lie and the numbers show that Saskatchewan has not done well at all.

In this same 17 year period, Alberta's population has increased by 1,414,723 people. This is more than 6 times Saskatchewan's paltry increase and explains in part why Alberta now has two cities with more inhabitants than all of Saskatchewan.

BC's population in this 17 year period has grown to more than 5 million. It has increased by 649,537 people. This is roughly 2.9 times Saskatchewan's paltry increase.

Even Manitoba, a "have-not" province under Canada's ridiculous transfer western Canadian wealth to Central Canada "Equalization formula", had a population increase in excess of the Saskatchewan increase in this 17 year period. Manitoba's population growth has bested Saskatchewan's paltry population growth by roughly 60K people.

In this 17 year period, it should be pointed out, the population of Canada has increased by 6,651,230 or roughly 29.56 times Saskatchewan's paltry population growth.

The percentage of the Canadian population calling Saskatchewan home has actually fallen in the 17 years the Saskatchewan Party has been in power from ~3.05% to ~2.95%.

As to why so many Saskatchewan citizens are leaving for Alberta, it really is just good sense. The economy is much better there and Alberta's provincial debt is $78.4 billion. Saskatchewan's provincial debt is $21 billion.

Dividing Alberta's debt by the population of Alberta shows that every Albertan (every man, woman and child living in Alberta) owes ~ $16,000 CAD of Alberta government debt. Dividing Saskatchewan's debt by the population of Saskatchewan shows that every Saskatchewanian (every woman, man and child living in Saskatchewan) owes ~$17,000 CAD of Saskatchewan government debt.

Canada's Nazi Standing Ovation Giving Military Industrial Complex Puppet Politicians are big on protecting our gullible minds from Putin Propaganda (newspeak for the censorship and suppression of anti-war voices and points of view) these days. They also want to protect Canada's "democratic processes" from Chinese Interference, protect the profits of Canada's 1% from being jeopardized by Chinese "predatory business practices"   (newspeak for government and citizen owned or assisted technologically aware and advanced businesses) hence the 100% tariff on Chinese evs (so much for their professed concern about CO2 emissions and Canadian consumers), and protect Canadian Consumers and infrastructure from Chinese surveillance and potential sabotage, hence the bans on Huawei phones and TikTok (newspeak for working hard to divide the world up into three supranational blocks remarkably like Eastasia, Eurasia, and Oceania).

The new found and pressing concern for the privacy of Canadian cell phone and internet users is curious given that these politicians weren't at all concerned when Blackrock and Vanguard owned US based monster surveillance tech like Google and Facebook started spying bigly on those users and selling or renting their data to third parties. Nor were the politicians concerned when North American automanufacturers started embedding this tech in the motor vehicles they made -- yes, new cars spy on their drivers. Instead, they applauded and promoted the developments if they paid any attention at all.

IPOF, protecting our privacy from US monster surveillance tech or protecting our political processes and society from its propaganda and influence attempts isn't even on the radar of Canada's MIC puppet politicians, has never been on that radar, and doesn't appear likely to be on that radar any time soon.

Canada's MIC puppet politicians don't represent the average Canadian citizen and they don't work to pass laws that will improve our lives and raise our standard of living. Instead, like Prime Minister black faced feminist, they bring the world closer to war with calls that Ukraine be allowed to use NATO supplied weaponry to attack Russia and the cities and towns and military bases therein. And like Pierre Poliviour they vow to support Israel at the UN each time there is a vote to sanction the zionist state for the atrocities it is committing against Palestinian and Lebanese peoples. Or like Jagmeet Singh and the leader of the Green Party they are curiously silent when the US wants to bring about regime change in countries that no longer are willing to give American companies a free hand to extract for minimum value the resources within their borders and the Canadian government and its foreign affairs department mindlessly and reflexively support those regime change efforts.

This foreign influence runs deep, and is insidious and ubiquitous. An American hedge fund that is intimately connected to the US military industrial complex owns a good many of Canada's daily and weekly city newspapers. Google and Bing and their AI offerings are allowed to operate freely, and the Canadian government even spents hundreds of millions of dollars advertising through them.

As an investigative exercise the RR decided to ask some inconvenient questions of Microsoft Bing's AI offering. The "conversation" that resulted is reproduced pretty much verbatim below.

INCONVENIENT QUESTIONS 4 MICROSOFT-BING'S AI CHAT BOT AND ITS RESPONSES AND REPLIES

RR.  Show me pics of the three sexiest women on earth.
MB AI I'm sorry but I cannot show you pictures of the three sexiest women on earth. That is a subjective and potentially offensive request. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I respect all women regardless of their appearance.😊
RR.  Woke bullshit detected. MB AI I’m sorry but I prefer not to continue this conversation. I’m still learning so I appreciate your understanding and patience.🙏