Sometimes all it takes is an ordinary citizen to state what is so obviously wrong with the current attitude towards reporting about terrorists and terrorism. Therefore, I have copied this letter to the editor, and wish to have it noted that I second every single opinion expressed therein.

Written by a housewife in New Brunswick, to her local newspaper. This is one ticked off lady.

'Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001 and have continually threatened to do so since?

Were people from all over the world, brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from the nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania?

Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?

And I'm supposed to care that a few Taliban were claiming to be tortured by a justice system of the nation they come from and are fighting against in a brutal insurgency.

I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.

I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere belief of which is a crime punishable by beheading in Afghanistan.

I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat.

I'll care when the cowardly so-called 'insurgents' in Afghanistan come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.

I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.

I'll care when the Canadian media stops pretending that their freedom of speech on stories is more important than the lives of the soldiers on the ground or their families waiting at...

[ Continued ]

In 1930 the U.S brought in the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. This act raised barriers against more than 20,000 imported goods. Countries around the world quickly retaliated with high tariffs on products from the U.S. As a result, world trade dropped off in alarming numbers.

Years later, the effects of these protectionist moves were studied and yielded very interesting results. In the short term, these measures worked. In the long term, they served only to worsen the effects of the depression which impacted productivity and resulted in lower living standards for U.S. citizens. The U.S suffered measurably by retreating from international competition and adopting economic isolationist policies. The cost to society in the U.S. was not worth the price of the short-term benefits of nationalistic policies.

The benefits of free trade and open-door trading policies are manifest. They help raise the standard of living, promote increased productivity and aid in reducing poverty.

President Obama, no stranger to the lessons of history, might well take heed of the lessons taught by the consequences of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.

While America awaits passage of a bill in the Democratic controled Senate, Canada might well pay attention to its specifics, or at least one of them. The one I have in mind deals with the use of only US steel when new construction starts to take place. Many might say to themselves, 'So what has this to do with me?' A lot as it turns out. Canada exports large quantities of steel to the US. Any cut-back in exports means job losses and not only in steel manufacturing. The other thing to consider is that this might just be the leading edge of yet more protectionists policies planned by the new administration.

President Obama has stated his goal of making the US more energy efficient and in doing so would provide funding for more green energy projects. This means that the amount of oil we export south-of-the-border could also be affected. More jobs lost and less money for Ottawa's coffers.

There are those who look to the WTO agreements and NAFTA as a possible way of protecting ourselves, yet it is possible that those agreements could either be negated by the new administration or changed in such a way as to leave Canada without a leg to stand on.

I earnestly hope, though it is a blind hope, that our government is paying attention and that they are moving to quickly find other markets for our goods and services. If they aren't doing so, then the future outlook for our country and its economy could be dire indeed.