Forum Post: Of Tar Sand, or Oil Sands
Posted 9 years ago on May 24, 2014, 12:48 p.m. EST by shoozTroll
(17632)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It seems Canada doesn't like it when it's referred to as tar sands.
"I attempted to enter Canada on a Tuesday, flying into the small airport at Fort McMurray, Alberta, waiting for my turn to pass through customs.
“What brings you to Fort Mac?” a Canada Border Services Agency official asked. “I’m a journalist,” I said. “I’m here to see the tar sands.” He pointed me to border security. Another official, a tall, clean-shaven man, asked the same question. “I’m here to see the tar sands.” he frowned. “You mean oil sands. We don’t have tar here.”
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/05/23/3428984/canada-war-on-environmentalists/
It would seem that repression follows oil barons, wherever they "roam".
[Removed]
Tar is supposedly a derivative of coal so oil sands may be more technically correct in identifying the Canadian sands' genre of processing and end product. The valuable material is really bitumen so black-wax sands can make descriptive sense. In any case, we just need to know that it is a very high-molecular-weight (relative to gasoline which is mostly heptane and hexane) fossilized hydrocarbon formed from the Artic-flowing ancient Mississippi River deposits.
Using tar sands or oil sands terminology as an identifier for friend or foe regarding environmentalism is a bit myopic but that is Harper's Canada!
Mentioning myopic Canada, it can certainly spy short-range from Montreal on the communication data of U.S. east-coast cities. Due to Canada's being a member of the Five Eyes anglophone global spying network, buying Canadian communication equipments may just be the same as buying the so-called utmostly secure equipments blessed by the Never-Say-Anything agency. When such agency touted the security of the equipments, hadn't it just said something?
[Removed]
[Removed]