A vote to remember J UNE 5, 1964 was Canada’s “Black Friday.” On that day the Parliament of Canada under the direction of a Liberal minority government (the latter by the grace of Yankee dollars), voted away the great Columbia River hydro and water resources to U.S. monopoly. The vote was 108 for the Columbia River giveaway, 14 against. The latter consisted of 13 NDP Members of Parliament and one lone Tory, C. O. Cooper MP, (Rose- ‘town-Biggar). Those voicing their approval of this mon- strous sellout consisted of Liberals, Tories, Credistes and Socreds. Obviously Washington’s fast-buck brokers in the Can- adian parliament were so sure they could smother the NDP opposition that some 143 MP’s absented themselves from the House when the vote was taken. These will probably try to tell their constituents they “didn’t vote” for this be- trayal of Canada’s interests when the full enormity of that “Black Friday” crime becomes better known. This sellout of the Columbia River to U.S. monopoly by the combined forces of Tories, Liberals and Socreds has covered a period of nearly a decade. Spearheaded by Premier Bennett and his Socred gov- ernment in B.C., these political monopoly brokers, together with their Tory and Liberal prototypes in Ottawa, have re- sorted to every ruse and trick and double-talk to satisfy - Washington’s insistence for Columbia River development, ownership and control. For them a great natural resource vital to the economy and progress of B.C. and Canada, has been reduced to the horse-trader level of the quick buck, “how much?” The fast buck now and “‘to hell with poster- ity, what has posterity ever done for us?” Under years of rising public sentiment to “save the Columbia” for Canada, these political sellout artists were compelled to pretend to listen to opposing viewpoint against the sellout by many of Canada’s top engineers, experts, leading citizens, organized labor and wide sections of the public. But even while pretending to “listen,” the plans for coercing and bringing Parliament “into line” never slack- ened. Thus the Parliament of Canada itself has been trans- formed into little more than a rubber stamp for Washing- ton, U.S.A. : Premier Bennett of B.C., one of the noisiest and out- spoken advocates of sellout has expressed his “jubilation” at this surrender of the Columbia River. Future genera- tions of Canadians will live to spit upon this “jubilation,” and look upon its originator and his Tory, Liberal and Socred co-conspirators as the Quislings of U.S. monopoly in the heyday of its resources hijacking in Canada. Future generations will also remember the 14 Mem- bers of Parliament with pride, as a little band of stalwart patriots who stood with Canada—against the great Colum- bia River Treaty robb McEWEN uring recent months many U.S, newspapers and other” public information media have been giving wide coverage to the government’s declared “War on Poverty,” first initiated by the late president John F, Kennedy, and now loudly echoed by Presi- dent Lyndon Johnson, In pursuance of this worthy cause, much statistics have been compiled, a lot of it a bit startl- ‘ing, and highly damaging to some deep-rooted myths, Particularly the myth that every citizen in the American - way -of- life is “well off.” . Now it is generally admitted that well over one-third of all Americans live on. a sub-stand- ard existence, while a large per- centage of that one-third barely attain: a subsistence level. So this “war-on-poverty” does sound real good—and would be good, if it were only real. Ever ready to ape or kow-tow to Washington, we hear echoes of this “war on poverty” from down Ottawa way. But as in the USA, it is largely echoes, Poverty, like unemployment, and they are closely related, is a social evil; the end product of a social system motivated by a lust for profits rather than fine sentiments, One can readily imagine any one of the big U,S, industrial or financial tycoons or their proto- types in Canada sitting down to their normal $50.00 dinner in the Waldorf Astoria or the Royal York, and finding time between courses for a sympathetic burp in support of “war on poverty,” But just let the workers who produce monopoly’s wealth “hit the bricks” for a modest wage increase with which to strike at “poverty” direct, and the “sym- pathy” disappears faster than a politician’s pre-election “prom- ‘ise,” The big boys are ready and, willing to “war on poverty” pro- viding it doesn’t affect their annual profit rake-in, If it does, then to hell with “war on pover- Goldwater rides again —THE DISPATCHER Barry rides again THOSE movie goers who saw the picture “Dr. Strange- love”’ with its closing scene of a wild-eyed Texan GI whooping it up with maniacal glee as he rode an H-bomb from his plane down to its “Russian target’, were unani- mous on one opinion—‘“‘it’s crazy.” It was, but not more so than U.S. presidential aspirant Senator Barry Goldwater demanding that atom bombs be dropped on South Vietnam to obliterate its green terrain and its people. “We have the striking power to do its thunders Goldwater, ‘so why don’t we do it?” The senator also let it be known that with him as presi- dent, Cuba wouldn’t last long, the UN would have to toe the Pentagon line, the American Negro would be put “back in his place,” and these countries which didn’t kow-tow to the “voice” of America would have to reckon with the H- bomb. A madman, yes, but a madman on the loose, with a public following that is shockingly real. That’s what makes Goldwater a menace to world peace—and a major security risk to Canada. ty” and up with court injunctions against those who take “war on poverty” seriously, Not so many years ago adazzl- ing French Madame, curious to know what the workers of Paris were demonstrating for, was told “the people have no bread,” To this the Madame petulantly re- torted, “Well, let them eat cake,” That’s not so far fetched when applied to today’s picture as it would seem, A columnist writing under the pseudonym of “Obser- ver” in a U,S, paper under a: Washington dateline, recently re- ported that presidential aspirant Barry Goldwater wants to have America’s poor “investigated,” Barry is convinced that if the poor are “put under oath and re- minded of the perjury statutes, they will confess that their wretched condition is due to their own low intelligence or ambi- tion,” “Observer” adds, somewhat cynically, that Goldwater is merely saying out loud “what has been quietly recognized as truth for years in most of the nation’s better clubs, For gener- ations men have sat in leather armchairs digesting lamb chops and sirloin and discovering the causes of poverty, andinvariably arriving at the conclusion that poverty is the fault of the poverty- stricken themselves,” Obviously those vested inter- ests who have, and still pocket the lion’s share of the nation’s wealth (without any loss of sweat themselves), operate on the as- sumption that they alone have ‘the “intelligence” to do so, and consequently can’t affort to have their special interests endanger- ed by any governmental “go-soft- on-poverty” nonsense, The question posed by .Gold- water comes right from the heart —of a parasitic monopoly class, « .. why should people who have had enough ambition and intelli- gence to inherit a department store be taxed to suppost slug- gards and incompetents?” (The reader can add his own list to the “department store” example, which could include the bulk of British Columbia’s resources, including the Columbia River), Pacific ‘orless keeping up wit I think that Adlai Stevenso?, Mb abdicated his position in the fie! . is a serious cosv@ Y of leadership . - stand before the Secur! thereby before the wo rationalize the Ane : military action on the bas! eS chery the U.S. that the Coe accords are being violated by ; Vietnam and others is, in my IY ke : ment, inexcusable. lam sad Adlai Ste himself to be so used, fo sadorship is not worth that. —WAYNE MORSE, (D- U.S. Senate May 21. Most Canadians for @ very By time have realized that the billio” and billions of dollars poure so-called defence of Can brought no real protection has nation and that our defence © vs aa me O} to a large degree been a 90 tba Joneses in the NATO alliance: _ FINANCIAL POST, April 4, 1964, — : Y - ... The prospect of & Rep n party controlled by an extrem|s! ” tion is disturbing .- - oh = me It is a dangerous thing ot rhe to inject into our public life a f divisive force as Goldwater inca We are a great continenta ciety, politician running makes it his vocation fo § : to embitter the sectional, racial, i ideological issues that we mee to live with and fo outlive. aes -fom Nor can we afford the tom-t0 b- A suo" and the flagpole sitting whic ef the stitutes for serious consideration? ~~ terrible issues of peace and wor —WALTER LIPPMAN, dea” of U political commentators: fo - Poverty in modern America ben be a permanent state, concen rou among certain disadvantaged gf 1 and in many cases continuing 9° tion after generation. rd CLARK REPORT: TOW" loyment But Barry “wants an invert) gation” says “Opserver poses the question: pauper with a clear cons' really object to having his ined tives (for being poor) ext by a Senate committee?” Such a procedure could re lead toa “detente” in the bly “against poverty,” and probar come up with a thriller entitled, #1 was 2 P® for the FBI”... or the ® If all this sounds a little surd, just go down to your a employment Insurance comm sion office and watch The iP d recommendations on how ! a the jobless out of theif une ployment “benefits” in ae Not a “war on poverty” “ty “war” on the victims of pov | ; mn (I i Ih il ey wil pS Vancouver 4, B.C. of postage in cash. Subscription Rates: ‘ae ‘Canadian and Commonwealth countries (except Australien $4.00 one year. Australia, United States and all oft countries; $5.00 one year. Authorized as second class mé by the Post Office Department, Editor — TOM McEWEN .. Associate Editor — MAURICE RUSH Circulation Manager — JERRY SHACK Published weekly at Room 6 — 426 Main Street “Phone MUtual 5-5288 Ottawa and for payment j June 12, 1964—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—PO”