Thursday, July 27, 2006


This is just to remind all of you that this weekend, the last of july is the Feast of Essence (yes I put it in)

Also to remind you that the holiday is traditionally (although not essentially) inaugurated on the friday night with the drinking of slurpee and the watching of Dr. Strangelove.

This year most people I know will be out of town. Liz is going home to look for a wedding dress with her mom, Adam will be at a goat show, and feiner and glenn are usually busy.

Anyway maybe it will be a quiet feast where I can catch up on some well diserved R&R and SLEEP!

Anyway Happy Feast everyone!



Monday, July 24, 2006


So the Bell City Chase (see previous post) was truly h'Awesome.

As Liz and I were styled "The Scrambed Eggheads" the day started with fluffly scrambled eggs with cheese (and coffee!). The race itself started with a scavenger hunt in downtown Ottawa at 10am_on a Saturday...

Once you were done with that you had to complete 10 of 15 tasks all over the city. While Liz and I did not make the top 25 we could have done much better than we did if we had just concentrated on the events downtown and in one of the other clusters. However we decided that we just wanted to make the best time possible while experiencing all the really cool events (which just happened to be the furthest and most awkward to get to:). This included a zip line over Hogs Back Falls, and canoeing through rapids on the Ottawa River and other fun things.

We are definately doing this again next year. I think our goal should be to have as much fun and enjoy as many cool events as possible while beating our time.



Thursday, July 20, 2006


Liz and I have watched longingly like hapless saps over the past 4 years as the Bell City Chase has taken place in Ottawa. Well this year, we're not just waiting to say 'aw shucks we should have... I guess we'll pretend to do this next year etc etc..." Oh no! This year we are actually doing the race

If you look hard enough you can probably find us on the teams list. We are to be known as the 'Scrambled Eggheads'. We have a logo, and inshallah also some spiffy matching pants. I doubt we'll win. But my honest and true goal is to be in the top 25-50 of 400 teams.

There's been a lot of other stuff going on making the last 2 weeks or so particularly unpleasent but we are both looking forward to this (and planting some stuff in the soon-to-be-garden-and- not-just-patch-of-mulch in front of the house).

Wish us luck!

Oh and one point, the only point that really matters, on this
- In a properly functioning emergency management environment no senior official let alone the PM would ever be in a position to even consider using his official transport as a rescue bus. It doesn't matter if its a photo op, it doesn't matter if its 'the right thing to do', what matters is that the Prime Minister of Canada has felt the evacuation, an evacuation being managed by his government and Canadian officials is inadequate enough that he has to personally step in. This my friends is not a well run government.

Also check this out... what FIVE priorities!?

So happy I didn't vote for you guys.



Monday, July 17, 2006


"I think Israel's response under the circumstances has been measured."
PM Harper

"Seven Canadians – including six members of a Montreal family – were killed in Lebanon on the weekend."

Not including the numerous lebanes civilans, and civilian targets (civilian airport, and port) that the Israeli's have hit.

Yes every country does have the right to defend itself. However, israel is now invading another country making it quite acceptable for Lebanon to defend itself against israeli aggression. Hezbollah's pupetteer's are in Syria, why not deal with syria?

Lebanon has kicked most of the syrian troops and secret police out of their country after the Harriri affair and has elected a moderate and friendly government. By attacking lebanon as Israel has done in the past days will accomplish only to generate more support to hezbollah. The lebanes government has been shown to be weak and inneffective in dealing with the situation, however in such a situation the population will be more inclined to side with hezbollah and other extremists groups.

Invading lebanon was a bad decision geo-politically and morally.

I truly hope Israel will face the sanctinos and the international denunciation that north korea and iran have faced for to me they are now in the same club. They've also killed seven Canadian citizens including small children. In another century this would have been a declaration of war against us.

Damn you to hell Olmert.


Friday, July 14, 2006


The other night Adam (Schlegel), Becky and I took in a Live ( concert at the poorly named "Blues"fest ( in Ottawa.

The concert RAWKED. I can't remember a live concert I've enjoyed quite this much in some time. There was a nice balance between songs from their new album and their old classics. There was also a minimum of lawnchairs, which is rare for ottawa's 'cool' scene. I was fairly impressed.

Oh and in case you were wondering why I think the "blues"fest is misnamed it is simply because at Ottawa's blues fest, much like ottawa's jazz fest, very very few of the headlining bands are actually bluesy or jazzy. Live is not blues, nelly furtado is certainly not blues. Neither is great big sea, ani defranco, or sam roberts all who played the 'blues' fest this year.

I seriously just think we should have a giant 'MUSIC' festival here in Ottawa. Combine their so called jazz fest (where the tragically hip and jann arden often play - WHAT!?) and the so called 'blues' fest. Have more (ie. some) free stages a la jazz fest in Montreal and have acts from all genres which is essentially what already happens. I have a problem mislabelling things.

Anyway Mr. Harper has truly become a nuanced politician and Prime Minister:

From Hansard on October 29, 2002:

"Mr. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, this party says we do not have to accept the Kyoto accord; we will do the made in Canada plan here. We will not accept this international obligation."

From today's meeting between PMs Harper and Blair on G8 issues:

"Harper said Canada isn't abandoning the Kyoto process, even though the government has said Canada's targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions are not realistic."

Mr. Harper you are shrewed indeed. Its too messy a legal and optics issue to outright withdraw from the protocol but you clearly have no intention of trying to meet the targets either. I hope the made in canada plan, whenever it arrives, at least addresses something in a credible way.



Wednesday, July 12, 2006


While I find the author of the article below spends too much time talking about Al Gore's new movie (which I haven't seen) he does have some very good points on climate change and climate skeptics. Its worth a read even though it is from The Star.



"The Toronto Star
Showey Yazdanian
Special to The Star

Kilimanjaro weeps; As the ice caps melt on the mountain tops, politics is defeating intelligence in the debate over Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth, by Showey Yazdanian

If you haven't seen it, here's a quick synopsis of An Inconvenient Truth, the global-warming movie that has ignited a firestorm in the U.S. and inexplicably nothing in Canada Al Gore says that carbon dioxide levels are going through the roof on account of fossil fuel burning. He correlates carbon dioxide levels with hotter temperatures, and calls it "global warming."
He then claims that global warming is responsible, at least in part, for things like the melting of the snows of Kilimanjaro, the shrinking of the Alpine and Peruvian glaciers, the 1995 collapse of Larsen Ice Shelf B in the Antarctic, the rapid decline of Lake Chad, the melting of Arctic permafrost, the thinning of ice caps at the North Pole, the spread of diseases like SARS and the West Nile viruses and the recent flurry of hurricanes like 2005's Katrina.

The U.S. right wing has reacted venomously to this movie made by the former Democratic contender for president. On June 27, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works released a statement that included quotes such as, Gore's "arguments are so weak they are pathetic," "a propaganda crusade ... mostly based on junk science" and "this man is an embarrassment to U.S. science ... "

Step back a moment. First of all, in Canada, can you imagine Environment Canada issuing an official denunciation of a movie? Since when do government members review films? Second, bear in mind the substance of the film. If Gore had declared the end of gravity, or claimed DNA to be optional, he couldn't have been condemned any more baldly - his critics have exhausted the dictionary of abuse.

Gore acknowledges himself to be merely a messenger. At best, his rendition of the science is correct. At worst, he is selective in his choice of sources.

So as for its accusations of "junk science," the Senate Committee doth protest a little too much. Furious with the former vice-president, it produced a small but vocal battery of scientists who maintain there is no vigorous, scientific proof of the purportedly cataclysmic effects of global warming.

And those scientists are quite right. They're also quite dishonest. Even the most zealous of global warming skeptics will admit the modern scientific method requires rigorous, exacting methods of proof that are literally impossible for the climate scientist to attain - ever.
Consider the methodology of the modern experiment. One begins with a hypothesis. Let's imagine the following bloodthirsty scenario. After a few years of pottering about in my little garden, I begin to suspect that salt kills slugs. One starts with a question - for instance, "Will a garden slug die if it is sprinkled with table salt?" One then designs a good, if not infallible, test take 20 slugs from the same garden, of the same type and age, put them in identical boxes of soil and feed them identical diets for nine days. On the tenth day, sprinkle half of the boxes with salt, and the other half with sugar. Then take inventory of dead slugs. If there are significantly more dead salty slugs than dead sweet ones, repeat the experiment, fly to Sweden to collect a Nobel Prize.

Why is this a good experiment? For one thing, it is reproducible - identical conditions yielding the same results on multiple occasions. Also, there exists a "control group" of unsalted but otherwise identical slugs, allowing one to weed out every variable except one and thereby pinpoint the cause of death.

Reproducibility and control are the bedrock of much of modern experimental science. When one is studying a system that is complicated, finding the right control group is often the stickiest task of the experiment.

Climate science is different. The planet is not amenable to being poured into a test tube. For one thing, we can't do a "control" experiment - there's only one Earth.
We can't really do any controlled experiments at all. As Richard Lindzen, professor at MIT and one of the world's most voluble global warming skeptics has stated, "... the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing ... even without any external forcing."

His point is that numerous factors affect the earth's climate, including ocean currents, wind currents, water temperatures, human activity, perhaps even solar variability. All of them are in constant flux. We have no means of isolating one whilst keeping all of the others constant. All we can do is count dead slugs, i.e. measure.

Now, although it's impossible to carry out a controlled experiment on the Earth, we are currently in the process of executing the snazziest uncontrolled experiment in the history of the world.

It goes a little something like this. Take the entire planet. Dig impossibly huge holes in it. Each and every day, go to the holes and scrape out about 85 million barrels of oil. Then burn the oil in the open air, occasionally spilling some of it into the ocean. And then ... wait. If the planet disintegrates, maybe do something.

Now that's bad science.

But it's not too far from the "science" of global warming skepticism. Even skeptical scientists don't disagree that the earth is warming up, and most of them don't even doubt that humans are responsible, at least in part, for the warming.

What they want is sensational proof of harm. Unfortunately, the only way to furnish this proof is by means of a potentially fatal experiment keep burning fossil fuels until something really bad happens.

It seems strange. If I gave you a prize-winning stallion, would you feed it a steady diet of fried
rats? No? But no one has ever proved that fried rats are bad for prize-winning stallions. It might well be a very healthy diet. Yet because the gift is so precious, you would probably take cautious care before taking any chances.

It seems that in the case of the planet, the onus has been reversed.
An Inconvenient Truth is a good film; it is interesting, convincing, well-presented and contains absolutely beautiful cinematography. I hope that you will watch it.

If your opinion of the film though is "Gore really got the science right" or "Gore has no clue what he's talking about," unless you fall into a hair's breadth of the global population, I believe you have drawn the wrong conclusion.

One cannot opine on science. Science isn't something that lends itself particularly well to opinions. All one can do is evaluate the methodology.

An Inconvenient Truth is the global warming gospel according to Gore, and like all acts of witness, it is fundamentally unscientific. It is a book report. It is not a science paper.
This is not surprising. A science paper is high on detail and almost entirely bereft of entertainment value. For as long as people like us are unable - or unwilling - to use primary sources to educate ourselves about our planet, for better or for worse, we rely on people who aren't - people like Al Gore.

Gore attributes a lot of things to global warming - including the manifestation of certain new diseases, the mutability of certain species populations, and the distribution and frequency of natural disasters. His confidence has the trappings of arrogance, and it is fair to say some of his studies are too scantily explicated to be truly persuasive.

But Gore is merely the messenger. And if you're going to trust anyone on these issues, you can do a lot worse than Gore. He is a smart man. Keep in mind that no one has accused him of garbling the facts; his critics merely reject his facts. Gore might have neglected to present some of the more nuanced views on global warming, but he has devoted a large chunk of his life to learning about it.

Whatever you do, don't disagree with Gore merely because he is Gore. Ralph Klein, for instance, stated, "I don't watch movies much, and I don't listen to Al Gore, in particular, because he's a Democrat, and not only that, he's as far left as you can go."

Incidentally, on the same topic, Klein also snapped, "The United States needs our oil. I don't know what he [Gore] proposes the world run on, maybe hot air?" This is literally the worst argument I have heard for continuing unabated use of fossil fuels.

Klein's reasoning is bad. One cannot allow oneself to be goaded into the ridiculous creeds of partisan politics. The left thinks it's a good idea, ergo, the right says it must be a bad idea (and vice versa). It's absurd.

The Earth and its atmosphere are not partisan. If the climate scientists who predict dire consequences for global warming - and it really is the bulk of them - are correct, the stakes are just too high for this daft political childishness. And there's no scientific evidence that a little bit of energy conservation ever hurt anyone.

Global warming skeptics have a song. It's a very loud one, and it sounds like this. "We can't prove that human pollution warms the earth (even though this one's not really contested by anyone any more), increases the frequency of hurricanes, accelerates the spread of disease, or causes glaciers to rapidly melt. Until the Earth is in critical condition, there's no problem. Gas up, break out the Russian roulette, let's party. Al Gore sucks."

When you burn a log, both the log and the smoke it creates are permanently irretrievable. I don't really know how well this analogy holds, but if we imagine the log as 85 million barrels of the Earth's oil a day ... do we really want to find out?

Toronto's Showey Yazdanian is
a Ph.D. candidate in chemistry at
Cornell University. ID @ "

Monday, July 10, 2006


Another year another Montreal Jazz fest

While I did enjoy the music much like last year the 'hit' of the day for me was the blues act at the labatt blue 'soiree blues' stage. The other acts were ok but did not have a sound that really pummelled the senses.

Ok I'll roll it back a bit. First off liz and I went into MTL friday night and stayed at my aunts place. While my aunts place is about 30 minutes outside of the city it is in the country, has a pool and always well stocked with food and good hospitality.

Saturday morning after some confusion we met Schleggy and Brooke. It was good to see that Adam's leg had recovered enough to let him drive and walk around. We caught a bit of some noon hour jazz and then finally decided to go to the Planet_Arium. On the way we ran into the Montreal Caribana parade.

Planet_Arium was good although later in the day Liz found out that the museum of contemporary art is hosting an exhibit of one of her favourite artists "brian jugen" This of course means we'll have to go back. Back to montreal, in the summer... aw schucks. For the record I also think this guy is kind of neat. His lawn chair 'sculptures'? are really impressive.

We ate at Mesa14 a trendy mexican place with some of the best mex food i've had in Canada. Then it was back to the jazz fest for some afro-jazz, then the blues. Which rawked! Riot and his rithum devils stole the show at the blues stage. I'd definately see these guys again. Liz and I then wandered around sampling some of the other shows and taking in an amateur acrobatics act. Then bought some CDs and I got a shirt.

It was back to my aunts place and then Ottawa yesterday. The only crappy part about going to montreal is the part where you have to leave!



Friday, July 07, 2006

COMMODITY UPDATE (and Warming to Iggy)

First a quick update on the whole temporary help, my job, stupid government HR issues:

I sent a few emails to the Minister of Public works and cc'ing the pm (we know this one) and the President of the Treasury regarding both the press release on temp help and the large problems facing human resources in the government.

I nearly fell off my chair and had a heart attack when someone from Min. Fortier's office called me. She said she completely understood and that she was in a similar if not quite as awkward position. However she was only hired for a term of one year and after that anything was possible.

After a nice discussion about families and security of employement concerns she said she would pass on my letter and concerns to a few people she thought might be able to do something.

Then the real kicker... the staffer says to me: "although the minister is a busy man we of course do get to speak with him often. I'm not sure mentioning this to him would do any good. He's a very wealthy man and I'm not sure concerns of people like you and me would mean anything to him. I don't know if it would register..." This is one of the Ministers own staffers!

While I appreciated the candour it really let me know what kind of people we are dealing with in this government and more than that just how widespread human resource problems are. No wonder so much stupidity comes out of government. The only people willing to stick around are those who love what they do and RAWK it; or those who can't make it anywhere else. There are far more of the latter.

As for IGGY take a look at the article below.

While I have some concerns with the specifics of a blantant carbon tax and Carobn capture and storage he is the first liberal candidate currently stil in the race (John Godfrey, we hardly knew ye) to come out on the importance of Climate change and propose some specific things that could be done to address it.

Come to think of it I can't rember when any politician came out with clear and specific ideas on how to address this issue nationally.

From the National Post:

"Beyond Kyoto: The National Post has invited candidates for the federal Liberal leadership to share with readers their vision for the country.

The following was submitted by Michael Ignatieff.

Canadians want to reduce the gap between our strong environmental values and our weaker environmental record. While most Canadians rate the environment as one of their top concerns, we know that we haven't done all we can: Canada recently ranked 28th out of 29 nations in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in a study of environmental performance in 10 categories, including air, water, energy, waste, climate change and transportation.

The evidence is conclusive that rising greenhouse gas emissions pose an unacceptable risk to our planet's climate. But there is a growing consensus that Canada may not be able to meet its Kyoto target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions to 6% below 1990 levels by 2012. This cannot be a license for the Conservatives to abandon Kyoto, however. We must remain leaders in the Kyoto process, and Canada should continue to work with our international partners to set mandatory targets for reducing emissions.

"Made in Canada" solutions mean nothing unless they are part of an international agreement with teeth. But we must bolster our Kyoto commitments with stronger action at home. We need to make tough choices now because the cost of neglect is just too high. Tough choices mean recognizing that it's just not enough to rely on voluntary initiatives and subsidies to encourage reductions in harmful emissions. The rules of the free market dictate that emissions will continue to rise unless the environmental cost of emissions is reflected in the financial cost of doing business.

If we are serious about adressing climate change, we need to implement policies that provide financial and regulatory constraints to prevent the free dumping of emissions into the atmosphere. We need an open national debate on the options available to us. We need to understand, first of all, that environmental policy should not pit one province against another. Policies can be designed to make sure that they do not penalize one region of the country or sector of the economy.

Secondly, we need to understand that a good environmental action plan should be implemented gradually, in step with the normal rate of new investment. We need to show the world environmental leadership without jeopardizing our international competitiveness. Good environmental policy needs to be developed in consultation with all the stakeholders, including the provinces, the energy sector, experts and environmental groups, but it shouldn't be captured by any one group.

It must serve all Canadians. One policy which should be considered is a direct tax on greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. Harper has made it clear that a direct federal tax is not even on the table for consideration. He wants Canadians to believe that even a balanced, revenue-neutral plan to curb emissions is political death in energy-producing provinces such as Alberta. That would be to ignore the passion that all Canadians, including Albertans, feel for their environment, and the deep desire of all segments of the population, including the energy sector, to be good stewards of their natural resources.

Some people try to paint a direct tax on greenhouse gas emissions as a plot to punish Alberta for its success. Let's be clear about this: Any direct emissions tax must not be a disguised transfer of Alberta oil and gas wealth. Tax payments should not be included in federal general revenues. An emissions tax should be offset by reductions in other taxes, so that there is no net tax increase. This would represent an environmental tax shift from taxing activities we want to encourage to taxing activities we want to discourage. Any payments received in excess of the tax reductions would be returned to the source province to fund emissions reductions and other programs, which can be the catalyst for a boom in sustainable development.

We need to work in partnership with the energy sector if any climate change plan is to succeed. Putting a price on carbon emissions creates a real bottom-line incentive to make choices that reduce emissions over time. An emissions tax should be set at a modest level at first but could be scheduled to rise gradually, so it affects new investment decisions immediately but does not render existing equipment unprofitable.

To protect our international competitiveness, industries whose exports were threatened by a domestic tax on emissions could be given some tax exemption and assistance with emissions reductions. Critics of a direct emission tax suggest there are many different approaches to tackling climate change. It is true that getting the policy mix right is crucial and requires a frank and principled dialogue. But in the end, I am unequivocally committed to pursuing a solution that effectively answers the climate change challenge. We need to get tough, and we need to do it before it is too late.

Positions based on mere political convenience and rhetoric are not an option. One proposed alternative to a direct emissions tax that needs to be evaluated is a program to allow carbon-emitting industries to trade emission allotments among themselves under a gradually reducing cap. Under such a regulatory regime, industry would be required to buy permits for emissions above their permitted amount.

Like the direct emissions tax, a cap-and-trade program puts a price on the cost of industrial emissions. It also requires, over time, the development and adoption of non-emitting technologies, thereby creating business development opportunities in this field.

Other possible additional market-oriented regulations include a carbon-management standard and sequestration requirement, so that the fossil-fuel industry takes responsibility for the fate of the carbon it extracts and stops releasing it into the atmosphere. We also need tougher standards for vehicle emissions, and for power consumption by buildings and appliances. The federal government must also work with the provinces to set a standard for the development and use of alternative energy sources such as biofuels and wind power. In addition to these efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, a responsible environmental policy must include a plan to clean up, protect and conserve our freshwater supply.

The quality of the air that we breathe must not be compromised further, and we need a plan to address smog in our urban centres. Let's be the very best in the world at making cleaner cars, cleaner trucks and world-class public transportation systems. Canada can be a world leader in sustainability. Canadians know that we are the stewards of the world commons, the climate and our biosphere.

We hold our environment in trust for our children and the generations that follow, and we take that responsibility seriously. We reject the false polarity between meeting environment challenges and economic success. Leadership means finding balanced and effective solutions.

A great leader once observed, "People and nations behave wisely -- once they have exhausted all other alternatives." The time for action is now.

- Michael Ignatieff is the Member of Parliament for Etobicoke-Lakeshore, and is a candidate for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. "



Wednesday, July 05, 2006


This was issued yesterday

I spoke to my temp agency about this and while many of the specifics remain to be confirmed, my HR Associate (with Excel HR), has informed me that PWGSC is currently requesting that all staffing agencies who have won bids to provide staff to the federal government re-bid for seven (7) spots. This process is expected to take several weeks. There are approximately 141 staffing agencies who will be forced to compete for these 7 spots.

What I have been told, from my HR Associate, is that all current government contracts will be honoured until the date of expiration, but any extensions may not possible pending the bidding process. For those of us currently employed through such an agency it may mean that our agency loses the bid resulting in the loss of our positions once our contracts expire. We will be forced to compete for places in the 7 agencies that win the right to provide staff to the government, and if they are overburdened this will be by no means certain. More than likely however it will mean looking for work in greener pastures.

Further, my agency has informed me that even if our agencies win their bid, PWGSC will mandate that each employee must be paid no more than the 'average' for each category - referenced as 'market rate' in the PWGSC link. In other words if you are a senior officer with 20 years worth of relevant experience you will only be paid the 'average' wage for your category. It remains unclear whether the 'average' is based on what the agencies currently pay or TB salary guidelines. Regardless it could mean a significant pay cut for some.

Lastly, the agency informs me that they are currently preparing further and clearer information on this rather unpleasant situation and will provide this in due course. While there remains a fair bit of information to clarify and confirm, there are clearly some bad times ahead unless my position is formalized. I'm constantly reassured that 'things are happening' but unless they happen before September 29th, the date my contract expires, I'm out on my ass. No severence, no nothing.

In my office we currently have some excellent and very dedicated people here who are affected by this situation. Many of us have been temporary employees for well over a year and in most any other line of work we would likely all have some form of benefits package and some level of security independent of outside forces. Most of us are here because we care about the issues we deal with on a daily basis and would rather do this than 'sell toasters' at six figures. I sincerely hope that the government does not pursue this initiative and more imporatantly I hope it actually gets to the root of the issue.

Focussing how temp agency employees and contractors can be used is a good idea. However this will not be effective unless the government addresses the root of its Human Resource problems which is not enough stable funding to hire people and treat them with respect. If the government currently relies on temp help for many of its 'regular' positions, throwing us out of work isn't going to help. Give us REAL JOBS STEPHEN! Just remember, our generation will have to shoulder an enormous burden to sustain your generation's health care and pensions... if I were you I'd set conditions where we want to do this. Othewise... off on the ice floe with the lot of you. If your generation has taught us anything is that we must look after oursevles because you boomer sure as hell haven't and won't.



Tuesday, July 04, 2006


It was a good and most importantly RESTFUL weekend.

Dan came up friday night and arrived shortly after I got home. We went to the manx for supper and scotch and I thouroughly enjoyed blowing his mind with the Glengarioch '88. Currently one of my favourite scotches along with the Abunad'h, the Bowmore Dawn, Ardbeg: 10, 25, ugleidagh (sp?), lord of the iles, Balvenie 21 Port Wood, and the Blair Atholl 12.

Anyway we then got gelato and went home to wait for liz where we chatted and had an enjoyable evening. Saturday we tried out a new deli (thats A 'new' Deli not New Delhi) for lunch and most of the guys went down town. Liz and I went home and got ready for the BBQ we were having later in the day when folks came back. BBQ was good.

We found a great spot near the supremem court to watch the Fireworks and they were fairly good. Not as good as symphony of fire but fairly good.

Sunday Dan and I hit the works for lunch ( then went to the war museum hoping to meet up with TJ and Brooke but found Feiner and Jen Geisbrecth (+bf) instead. After looking at tanks I took dan to pub italia which is ottawa's best place to find over 100 beers many of which are hard to find belgians!

Then off to supper with TJ, Adam, and liz at stone faced dolly's since Sweetgrass ( was closed in order to prep a new menu.

Later on that night we played about 20 games of BANG where the higlight of the evenign was watching TJ 'get blowed up good' every time the dynamite was played. Bad luck...

That's all for now... a good weekend had by all I think.