The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

| | | hea ly a This week's photograph is of a residence in Ashburn known as the Cassady House. Standing on the west side of Ashburn Road, a few hun- Viewpoint Take a Look Back \ bd by * -$ . > Ba ie ~ y _- a EN . o£ : F 4 S$ x @ FaER dred feet south of Ashburn General Store, it was constructed in 1876. The photograph was taken circa 1955. The home is still standing. by ROXANNE REVELER Here we are. The beginning of August and I'm still waiting for summer to start. You have to admit the summer of '86 is going to go down in the record books ... main- ly because we haven't had one yet. Unless of course I slept through it somewhere along the line. ~ What is it with this crazy weather anyway? To date we have had one nice day and two crummy ones. If perchance we have two nice days in a row, and there were a few times that happened, we have four rotten ones following. It always seems to double up. Everyone seems to have their own theory as to why the wacky weather, but I think it's just a big commie plot. Why not blame the Russians for the weather? We seem to blame them for everything else. But seriously, I just finished reading an article, in my son's Fishing World magazine of all places, that says a team of French scien- tists at the Globe University Institute of Physics in Paris has theorized some climatic changes may originate in the earth's core. They suggest that changes in the circulation of molten material in the Earth's magnetic field may also slightly alter the earth's rota- tion, affecting the circulation of oceans and atmosphere. Apparently a similar theory has been pro- posed by scientists at the Academy of. Meteorological Science in Peking. Both. groups believe that even these slightest changes could have major climatic impacts, such as the El Nimo phenomenon which has been known to have powerful effects on Latin America's Pacific cost countries. So now you know why we have been hav- ing all this crappy weather. Plain as the nose on your face isn't it? Combine it with all the talk about our earth's ozone layer being destroyed and you really have some food for thought. Point an accusing finger and call me a crack-pot, but I'm firmly convinced we, the: human race that is, has brought all this nonsense on ourselves. Every time I hear about someone, from some country, testing yet another nuclear bomb, or whatever the latest gadget is now, I shudder. It makes sense, at least in my mind, that every time you blow something of that magnitude up under the earth's surface, it has to have reper- cussions. I mean, if one atomic bomb created the amount of devastation at Hiroshima and Nagasaki above the ground, what do the more sophisticated ones do when confined underground? All that power has to go somewhere, and may I be so bold as to sug- gest it is totally screwing up this tiny planet we all depend on for our being. As these underground explosions always seem to take place in a certain geographical area, is it too crazy to imagine that the for- mations around that area are being totally shaken to their foundations. Rock, or whatever is down there .... I mean way down there .... has to give eventually. When everything is shifted and shaken; would it not upset the whole ball of wax enough to cause such phenomen as speculated by the Pari- sians and Chinese? How long are the world powers going to keep this up? Until they finally crack the molten centre and find it spilling up and out at will? A scientist I'm not, but I don't think it takes a scientist to realize that this is not good, it's not healthy, and what's more it is screw- ing up our weather and 'that bothers me the most, selfish soul that I am. My parents own a tourist resort in nor- thern Ontario, I think most of you know that by now. They pay particular attention to the weather. It js of the utmost importance to them because their livelihood depends on it. They point out that it inevitably rains on Fridays. I have never paid that much atten- tion, but know we have had more than our fair share of percipitation this summer. Turn to page 18 wa Editorial Comments Weeks Of Uncertainty Anyone who has seen even part of the probe into allegations of conflict of interest against former industry minister Sinclair Stevens on television has by now probably made up their minds as to what the conclusion should be, but what about Shirley Walker? Walker, special assistant to Stevens, will live the next few months of her life with the threat of prosecution hanging over her head as a direct result of her testimony at the judicial inquiry before Mr. Justice William Parker. It will be Parker who makes the decision in his final report about what charges, if any, Walker may face. And that report may be months away. Walker's testimony lasted two days longer than was expected and has set the stage for Noreen Stevens, who is expected to be on the stand this week. During the course of Walker's 10-day testimony, she was branded publicly as a liar, not a nice situation for anyone to be in. An obviously irritated commission counsel, David Scott called her an "untruthful witness"' and raised the possibility of perjury pro- secution with her lawyer. Sparks flew many times between lawyers over Walker's testimony and, more specifically, over the production of her documents. ; Initially, Walker said she had no documents and would be helpful to the commission. For the first few days of her testimony she believ- ed, mistakenly, she was represented by the lawyer for the federal government. When it became apparen: she was without legal counsel, she was asked if she wanted time to retain a lawyer. She declined, stating she would continue on her own .... her first and biggest mistake. You know the old saying "anyone who defends themselves has a fool for a client." : After the end of the first week, Walker re-thought her position and called Donald Jack, who returned from vacation to defend her. Jack, wisely or not, advised his client that the documents everyone was talking about were now in the public domain and that she was required to relinquish them. Commission counsel then recovered two legal briefcases full of documentation: files from her home and 26 personal notebooks that outlines Walker's business dealings while Stevens was the minister. The 59-year-old personal executive secretary has worked for Stevens for over 20 years, eventually moving into a trusted postion where she handled business transactions worth millions of dollars. When she first took the stand, her testimony was punctuated with long pauses and halting responses as she maintained she did not remain involved with Stevens' private companies after she took the government posting. Once the hidden documents were produced it became obvious she did continue working for the corporation. Walker, you see, was made an exempt member of ministerial staff both in 1979 and 1984 when Stevens was appointed to the cabinet. At both times she was required to comply with conflict of in- terest guidelines, although she admitted over the course of her ex- amination that she always continued to work for York Centre Cor- ~ poration. That's a no-no. She steadfastly maintained that she never gave Stevens infor- mation about the business .... of course she didn't. It is rather odd that the notebooks .... her notebooks .... contained lists of items she intended to tell Stevens, but according to her testimony, she often "edited" those entries when she spoke to him. Of course she did. Jack claims his client has been subject to 'unnecessarily harsh' treatment by the commission counsel. He described her as an "un- fortunate woman" and urged Scott to continue his cross-examination without "further humiliating her, pillorying her and intimidating her, in the witness box.' : Jack has tried to paint a picture of a poor misguided secretary who did not understand what was going on. Perhaps that is true, but the question comes to mind that such a poor misguided soul, still - managed to hold a high position, controlling millions of dollars, in a business world that does not condone poor misguided souls. Walker has refused to give any interviews to anyone. But she has bemoaned the fact that being branded a "liar" has caused tremendous stress to herself, her husband and her daughter. ; That would appear to be quite obvious. No one wants to be caught in a lie .... it's embarrassing. But you know the best way not to get caught telling a lie is not to have told one in the first place. Perhaps some thought should have been given to that. At least that's the way it looks to me.