Crude rage faces say it better than my words can at the moment…

…true story.

Not long ago I was accused of being brainwashed because I follow politics. I tried to get more information about my alleged brainwashing from my interlocutor and was bluntly told that I never used to follow politics, so why now?

This person also reads (or at least used to read), TCL, so really would’ve been fairly familiar with how long I’d been following politics; and when I look back through my old posts I realize it’s been for a lot longer than I’d been “brainwashed” for. In fact, the only real thing that’s changed is that I’ve become critical, begun to dig a lot deeper, and think about things a lot more thoroughly.

In other words, I’m “brainwashed” because I now think and express myself a lot more freely.

Uh-huh.

I have regular discussions about politics with this person and am often confronted with their obstinate support of the Harper government. This, at least in part, is one of the reasons I’ve been so vocal (if the word can be applied to writing), about my criticisms of the numerous ways that he and his gang are trying to destroy freedom in Canada.

By “freedom” I’m not alluding to some vague notions of self-expression (though that is certainly true), I’m talking about simple physical freedoms like being able to walk down the street without fear of arbitrary arrest, or being free to express simple opinions and truths without having the government crack down on you, harass you, or spy on you secretly.

This same person, the one who accused me of being brainwashed, came from a repressive communist country where such things were a regular thing, so I assumed that this kind of thing wouldn’t sit well with them. Yet when faced with stark evidence like Bill C-38 or Bill C-11, and expecting at least a modicum of thought, some skepticism, maybe a willingness to dig a bit deeper, even if just to prove me wrong, I instead got derision.

The best retort they can muster is to call me dumb (and brainwashed), and to demand to know why such things concern me.

The real question is, why don’t they concern you?! (And I’m brainwashed)

It’s not tough to imagine, then, with people willing to live with their eyes and ears covered like this, that Harper continues on his merry way to making Canada a massive repressive regime within which citizens are expected to cower in fear and dare not speak ill of the government lest they be “disappeared” into some dark dungeon, indefinitely, with no trial, judge, or jury. The same citizens are actually fully supporting such moves, and they sure don’t want to hear how such things could possibly be bad (even if they’ve lived through such terrors themselves). Heck, why would you even need evidence at that point?

If you’re still paying attention, though, there is still some hope.

To start off with, it’s interesting to compare Harper’s latest bit of despotic maneuvering, Bill S-7, with America’s NDAA.

In the US, the NDAA (innocuously disguised as a recurring military funding bill), includes a variety of passages that allow for the indefinite detention of American citizens (in fact, anyone at all), without trial, in military Gulags not unlike Guantanamo Bay. With Bill C-38, Harper has allowed the US to legally waltz across the border with complete impunity and “remove” people at any time they wish.

Not to be outdone, of course, the Harper government is introducing Bill S-7, the “Combating Terrorism Act” (the catch-all term for everything and anything designed to separate you from your rights and freedoms these days), which has many of the same features as the NDAA. Here are some highlights to expect should this thing make it through:

• People may be put under “preventive arrest” for up to three days.
• The “preventive arrest” may be due to an alleged association with a “terrorist” (which may include everything from environmentalists to anyone critical of the government), alleged knowledge of a “terrorist” or their dealings, or — my favourite — being suspected of future involvement with terrorists.
• As with all good Kafkaesque schemes, those arrested are not allowed to know the details of their arrest or know any of the evidence against them.
• Those arrested must stand before an “investigative hearing”.
• A judge can jail those arrested for up to year if they don’t enter into recognizance, which is a fancy term for a conditional release — you have to appear regularly before a court, may have to wear a tracking device, etc.
• Such arrests can occur without any charges being laid. In other words, they don’t really even need a good reason, just that something didn’t seem right about the person.
• Any evidence that is used against the arrested person (which, of course, they are not allowed to know anything about), can be obtained from foreign sources or through torture.
• These changes would become part of the Criminal Code of Canada — everyone would be subject to them.

It’s interesting to see how the October 23rd vote on this bill went down: unanimously voted in by both Conservatives and Liberals. I’m sure I’ve stated my belief more than once that they’re now essentially one and the same apparatus (McGuinty’s latest escapades also illustrate this quite well). Literally anyone outside of these two parties voted against it.

It’s also worthwhile to read the discussion at the second reading of the bill, even just to get a sense of the basically blasé, done-deal rhetoric that proponents could muster (when they could be bothered to speak on such trivial matters at all) — oh, and don’t forget 9/11!

To me it seems self-evident that anyone and everyone should be at least slightly concerned about such laws and, moreover, the types of government that would be continuously bringing them forward. The only way to avoid concern is to be completely oblivious to everything when presented with it, to deny reality when it’s staring you in the face, and to sing the praises of our glorious leader even as he’s setting up mega-prisons and the means to fill them with anyone who doesn’t toe the line.

But I guess I’m just brainwashed.

 I received a chain email yesterday:

The day that Albert Einstein

feared may have finally arrived.

Having coffee with friends.

A day at the beach.

Cheering on your team.

Having dinner out with your friends.

Out on an intimate date.

Having a conversation with your BFF

A visit to the museum

Enjoying the sights

You may have seen this already. Apparently it’s been making the rounds on a number of websites in various versions.

Whether or not you’ve seen it, though, it’s obvious that what this is is a not-so-subtle, inter-generational jab at the youth of today. And, at first blush, it has the appearance of being backed by one of the world’s foremost thinkers.

But once you dig a little deeper you quickly realize that this take on the “idiots” of today’s generation is really more of a reflection on those who perpetuate it.

Take the most obvious point, for example — the Einstein quote. It’s a fake. This is demonstrated on site after site; and really the thing that Einstein feared about technology is how dangerous it has become (in the form of things like the hydrogen bomb, for example). In fact, use of the word “idiot” by Einstein seems highly unlikely. Additionally, the quote in it’s current incarnation doesn’t seem to exist anywhere prior to 2012 (and I remember a reference to something similar dated to around 2000).

In any event, it ain’t Einstein. And you know how people could verify that? Technology, for starters!

But lets assume that the quote is correct, regardless of who said it.

A “generation of idiots”?

The pictures show kids on mobile phones — disconnected from the world around them, maybe, but what about this makes them “idiots”? Well, if a two-way interaction with a screen makes them “idiots”, what does it make the generation that precedes them?

Learning

Spending quality time

 Partay!

Yeah, that knife can cut both ways, and the older edge goes just a little deeper. Besides, the progenitors of these “idiots” are the ones responsible for making them that way (either that, or they’re a bunch of irresponsible goofs).

I also couldn’t notice the use of the acronym BFF in one of the images — something that came about as a result of the need for brevity in text-based conversations on small screens. Kind of ironic. Almost as ironic (maybe intentionally — if only it had been communicated with finesse), as one of the replies that to the thread that was broadcast back out to the email herd:

“Sad isn’t it
Sent from my “contract free” BlackBerry® smartphone on the WIND network.”

I rest my case.

The idea that Ford would easily win a re-election if ousted was making the rounds before the judgement was announced. And, of course, every fool pundit and their dog was claiming that, for sure, he would be re-elected. Hands down. No doubt.

After all, the people of Toronto love Ford and think he’s doing just a great job with everything!

Sites like Canada.com have dedicated more than one column to propping up a man who, by his own admission, can barely tie his own shoelaces. The National Post typically marches in lock-step with the Ford dictatorship, so they’re not shy about showing their own support. And, of course, the Toronto Sun might as well be called The Rob Ford Daily, though that future is uncertain since he recently turned on them.

Yup, it’s pretty much a done deal … if Ford runs again, he’s a shoe-in and his ouster will just be  a huge waste of time! Easy!

Toronto Sun poll (November 26)

Toronto Star poll (October)

Toronto Star poll (November 26)

Metro News poll (November 26)

Globe and Mail poll (November 26)

Global Toronto poll (November 26)

Globe and Mail poll (October)

Hamilton Spectator poll (November 26)

So…yeah…there you go; when it comes to Ford, the bullshit just won’t stop. The media lackeys … erm … pundits, may not have learned that lesson, but at least it looks like the voters have.

No one can say that this was  a “Leftie” conspiracy against Rob Ford — the judge who passed the judgment was in favour of the Harper government in the Guergis case.

And despite the blatantly false, grossly uninformed, and incessantly misleading bleating of ardent Ford supporters like CP24’s Stephen Ledrew (I’m sure Jerry Agar won’t be far behind), Hackland’s judgement was not a mere “technicality” (“highly unlikely” to go anywhere, according to Ledrew, mere moments before the verdict was delivered), or based on “Ford helping the kids”.

And despite CP24’s best attempt to spin the verdict by showing the “range of responses” from Twitter, which included one outraged respondent and a question about how long Ford has to appeal, my own experience both online and off (I’m sitting in a downtown coffee shop as I write this), shows an overwhelming amount of joy and a feeling that justice has finally been done. Not a “he got his” feeling, but a “law prevailed as we knew it must” feeling — something I’m sure, based on all the feedback I’ve seen, Ford supporters just can’t wrap their heads around. And there aren’t many of them around anymore (this is why I’ve mused more than once about the real conspiracy, the one that’s propping Ford up).

I can honestly say that I knew in my heart of hearts that this had to be the verdict. As I’ve stated in numerous previous posts, the judge’s job is to make sure that the law is followed, and in this case the law was very clear. Ultimately, as Ruby, the lawyer who brought the case against Ford, said in a televised conference shortly after the verdict was released, Rob Ford did this to Rob Ford. That was so plainly and painfully obvious to anyone who read the details of the case that any judgment to the contrary would’ve been a shock, not the other way around. Not that it’s stopping Ledrew and the CP24 team from trying to push this lie into the “range of responses” and trying their damnedest to steer the conversation in this direction.

But if you still don’t believe how un-shocked I am at this verdict, just scroll back through a few past Ford conflict of interest posts on TCL and compare the language I used to that used by the judge himself (be sure to read the whole judgement while you’re at it):

Hackland: “In view of the respondent’s leadership role in ensuring integrity in municipal government, it is difficult to accept an error in judgment defence based essentially on a stubborn sense of entitlement (concerning his football foundation) and a dismissive and confrontational attitude to the Integrity Commissioner and the Code of Conduct. In my opinion, the respondent’s actions were characterized by ignorance of the law and a lack of diligence in securing professional advice, amounting to wilful blindness. As such, I find his actions are incompatible with an error in judgment.”

TCL: “The real problem with Ford, aside from believing he can pick and choose which laws to follow, is that he’s personally offensive, and has been from day one. He shows no remorse for any of his actions, and if he stays in office there’s no reason to believe that things will get anything but worse. Much worse.”

Hackland: “For the reasons set out above, I have concluded that the respondent contravened s. 5 of the MCIA when he spoke and voted on a matter in which he had a pecuniary interest at the meeting of Toronto City Council on February 7, 2012, and that his actions were not done by reason of inadvertence or a good faith error in judgment.”

TCL: “This can easily be seen as vote buying — you donate to Rob’s foundation, he gets you tax receipts and special favours when he gets into the Mayor’s seat. Even if that never happens (though with Ford, it most likely would), the chance of it happening is eliminated by having things like the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (in fact, that’s the sole reason for this law to exist in the first place!) Maybe Robbie didn’t know that it could be perceived this way? Not a fucking chance.”

Hackland: “In assessing errors in judgment, just as it may be relevant to consider the position of a novice elected councillor with limited experience with conflict of interest issues, it is also appropriate to consider the responsibilities of the respondent as a long-serving councillor and Mayor. In my opinion, a high standard must be expected from an elected official in a position of leadership and responsibility. Toronto’s current Code of Conduct is modelled on the recommendations of The Honourable Denise Bellamy, who conducted the Toronto Computer Leasing Inquiry, in 2005, when the respondent was a member of City Council.

TCL: “Thing is, Ford had gotten the book of rules just like every other Councillor — of which, of course, he has no memory but does have a clear recollection of what he ate for breakfast that morning (that’s the actual reply) — sat in and voted on meetings with reports by the Integrity Commissioner where conflicts of interest were clearly spelled out, had access to Ana Kinastowski who heads City Hall’s legal department, and could also use a part of his office budget for independent legal advice if he wants it. And don’t forget how many times Ford had recused himself in the past when the conflicts of interest were laughably far removed from him. And just in case there was any doubt, Ford is reminded how Sandra Bussin had mentioned that Ford might be in a conflict of interest prior to the meeting, and that according to the same document he kinda remembers signing, the final responsibility for such things lies with him.”

I could go on but it’s kind of beating a dead horse. And I have to be upfront and say that I’m definitely not the only person to point out these “discrepancies” in Ford’s thinking and statements.

But no matter what I think or say, it’s very satisfying at the end of all of this to know that common sense, as reflected in law, has prevailed. On occasion, the law actually works!

Ford is now busily figuring out how to spend the next two weeks before he has to give up his seat. Apparently there’s an appeal in the works and we can be pretty sure the Supreme Court is going to be hearing of this outrage. In the meantime, though, City Council is thinking about if they should appoint an interim mayor or if there should be a by-election. Ford won’t be barred from this so presumably he could run (and win), once again. Considering the amount of bad blood he’s racked up so far though, even if he throws his name into the ring, I can’t see him winning again. Sorry, Ledrew, but you’re wrong on that one too.

I know — I didn’t follow up much on Rob Ford’s conflict of interest case of a few months ago, although I’ve been eagerly awaiting a verdict.

I actually went down to the court house on the first day of the trial to hear him give testimony, and it was pretty much what I’d expected. There was a lot of side-stepping and claiming that during his decade or so at City Hall, he’d never really read the rules, barely talked to any legal aid, had most of his decisions made for him, and ignored the advice of fellow Councillors — what more could you expect from a mayor?

I tweeted from the court room so I’m sure Twitter will have some record of exactly how things went down that day, but there was really nothing new learned on that occasion except the amount of derision in the court that morning. Justice Hackland warned against “outbursts” when someone produced a quiet snicker at one of Ford’s remarks. It may have been the one where he said, “You read it to me, but I haven’t read it,” (referring to a previous conversation that he’d had with Clayton Ruby about reading the rules and which, apparently, failed to make any impression), but really there were so many that I could easily be mistaken.

In any event, it just smacked of one giant insult against common sense to hear the man speak and try to wriggle his way out of responsibility for his own actions.

The reason I mention this is because, at long last, the court is supposed to be delivering its verdict on this coming Monday (at 10 a.m.) In practical terms, Ford may not be mayor come Tuesday morning. That would mean not only a possible by-election, but also Ford’s absence from any municipal politics for a number of years (so presumably Harper would immediately take him on in some cabinet position).

Let justice, law, and the truth prevail!

It’s either that or this is yet another excuse to cut and slash and force people into abject poverty while handing over billions to banker buddies and wealthy mega-corporations. Either way, it’s a future of indentured servitude and some pretty bad times under the name of “austerity”.

I mean, how many more times are we going to hear the same bullshit coming out of the government about how they need to cut services and “tighten belts” (exactly like their municipal lick-boots like the Ford stooges), but that eventually we’ll make it out of our financial morass, only to discover that, OH NO! THINGS ARE NOW WAY WORSE THAN EVER! Oh, but this time around, we’ll for sure balance books by the next election (and just to make sure, we’ll fraudulently steal more time at the helm).

There are still idiots out there who believe that what’s happening in Greece (and, at this point, the rest of Europe and pretty much everywhere else), is the result of laziness, or unionization, or other complete and utter nonsense, but it’s getting hard to find people who keep buying the same crap over and over again in the face of blatant lies, theft, open criminality, and every other type of scumbaggery imaginable.

The only explanation for still believing anything that Harper and his criminal buddies dole out is to simply and boldly ignore reality and the regular headlines of massive bank corruption, or to not be able to see the painfully obvious when it’s publicly announced that those same banks are now running much of Europe (and directly responsible for the rape and pillage of the nations under their control). How stupid do you have to be?

Is it any wonder that Harper is so ardently trying to keep anyone from looking into how he manages your tax money? And you can be sure that the money, or savings, or whatever you want to call it, isn’t going to help you.

Take, for example, the “controversial” Multiple Sclerosis Liberation Therapy that the Harper government just killed. In case you’re not familiar with it, it’s a fairly simple, painless day surgery that many MS patients have found helps them to lead much better lives.

It’s fairly risk-free if done by a trained professional; it involves widening a vein in the neck with a tiny balloon (via a vein in the leg and using only local anesthetic), not unlike a riskier procedure regularly done in high-blood-pressure arteries for heart attack patients (done every single day here in Canada). The most expensive and time-consuming part of Liberation is actually the MRI that’s done to assess the patient.

All the doubters out there (many of whom have a direct interest in keeping MS patients at the status quo), have put out a great campaign to convince everyone that the procedure is incredibly risky, not bothering to mention that the risk comes from the people and places where the procedure is currently being done — the kinds of places they maintain you need various inoculations just to visit. And, statistically, you’re much more likely to have “complications” from government-approved medicine like yearly flu vaccinations.

These are the same people who advise patients that things like diet, proper rest, exercise, and lifestyle really don’t matter and that treatments like chemotherapy should be first and foremost (shit you not!) I’m speaking from personal experiences with one of Toronto’s top MS doctors here, straight from his mouth to my shocked ears.

Just because you may not know anyone with MS, however, doesn’t mean that Harper’s deceit won’t affect you. Consider that what his government rejected was simply a study to see if the Liberation Procedure even works; not to implement it, train people on it, etc.

Consider also that a typical Liberation treatment has to be done maybe once every couple of years or so (sometimes not even that), at a cost of about $10,000, while current drug treatments like Copaxone or newer ones like Tysabri (which are still not well understood or studied!), can cost upwards of $100,000 per year — and that doesn’t take into consideration the cost of medical professionals like nurses to administer the IV drugs (plus facilities for them), additional testing like regular blood work, or extra complications like PML, possible birth defects, etc.

The costs, any way you want to tally them, are way too high to be justified.

You know, maybe Liberation isn’t a good answer, but you’d think that being cheaper, easier, much less dangerous, and seemingly quite helpful, it would be worth a look. But no, Harper is working hard to make sure that you’re as dependent as possible for less effective, more expensive, and more dangerous treatments, whenever and wherever possible.

And you’re paying for it! Yup, your tax money is being used for back-asswards, experimental, extremely expensive, and in many cases quite dangerous treatments that do not have any additional benefits for MS patients except to keep their conditions from worsening. I suspect that most people would agree that this makes sense as a last resort, not as a first and only one.

And that’s just what I happen to know because of Sarah and mine’s experience with the medical community and the government. If the amount of willful, known, clear and apparent waste, squandering, and criminal behaviour were ever exposed, I full expect our society would easily revert back to the days of the French revolution. I, for one, would not mind a few heads rolling — I’ll take figuratively, so long as commensurate jail terms are included.

An oldie but still a goodie. Hard to believe that things have actually gotten worse since then, huh?

The terror is culpable:

I’ve returned from my prolonged sabbatical and ‘familial difficulties’!

So where do I begin? Jerkface downstairs terrorized us to the point where I finished half of my prescription bottle ofAnti-anxiety meds, some with Amaretto… Cops, tears, and LITTLE SLEEPING ; I had to protect my family.

Re:my MS– I’m just OK. I’d be much improved but I am starting anew as of today. Pls wish us luck on all fronts.

Fronts: sleeping,improved nutrition, excersize, moving, annnd Wedding plans! :ad

Everyday I’m amazed that sleeping right beside me is my best friend and I also get so excited that I stress out my body lol.

Lately we’ve been location hunting and talking about event details etc etc… oh, and petty arguments. Public quarrels r my specialty I found out…

My honey and I don’t usually fight so I just started to cry!
We ate lunch and rectified everything! (We pushed forward the wedding date which has helped create a sense of complete calm in Sarah’s head).

I know deep inside that P and I will be together for eternity so a few months won’t be a big deal, right?

I have a lot more to say but tonight I am going to bed…

Goodnight and sweet dreams!

xoxoxo
<3 SarahD

You’ve probably read the hubbub about the US’ use of drones in Afghanistan.

In case you haven’t, drones are the unmanned, remote controlled planes that the US has taken a liking to in order to kill people abroad with basically no risk to their own personnel. And the Americans are killing lots of innocent people in their incessant search for those scary terrorists. Lots.

Obama even has an extra-judicial “kill list” for the people he feels need to get blowed up real good.

Obviously, with Al Qaeda hiding in people’s assholes, it’s necessary to bring a barrage of indiscriminate hell fire down on those turban-wearing heathen overseas (and put electroshock collars on any suspicious Americans at home, just in case) .

Those terrorists sure are scary, aren’t they? So are all those criminals lurking just outside everyone’s doors in the bushes. That’s why it’s necessary for the TSA pedophiles (sorry, “authorities”), to rape (sorry, “search”) you at random anywhere you may go now, and why it’s also become necessary to deploy those drones domestically. And of course they need to be armed (despite assurance to the contrary).

Okay, so why am I talking about this?

Well, a blog post I wrote earlier this year seems to really be hitting a nerve with readers, and I think those same readers would be shocked to see what’s just around the corner right here in Canada (the stuff I mentioned in that post is just a drop in the bucket).

Although I don’t like to discuss bummer subjects like this, it’s best we all get to collectively standing up against the crap that Harper and his Conservative buddies have in store for us (to be fair, the Liberals are just an arm of the same group of criminals these days).

You see, biggie defense contractor Raytheon put in a bid, a while back, with the Canadian military, which was actively seeking its own fleet of UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles). On the surface, this might seem like a good thing — we gotta bomb the shit out of Afghanistan, don’t we? Even if you agree with that, you have to question where exactly those UAVs would be used since Peter MacKay announced (about half a year back), that we’re getting out of Afghanistan.

It would’ve been speculation, of course, that UAVs would be used domestically here in Canada in the same capacity as in the US, without some sort of official-sounding documentation. I figured the government’s own website would be fairly official:

Beyond Afghanistan:

A long term UAV solution, in the form of the Joint UAV Surveillance Target Acquisition System (JUSTAS) Program, is currently being developed that will include domestic and deployed operational UAV capabilities.

By the way, you may want to have a look at, and save, the link soon: http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/mobil/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=2719. When I originally researched this story, I had linked to the desktop version of that tidbit and it’s since mysteriously disappeared.

Of course, the story doesn’t end with announcements for future plans. The Canadian military is in full swing and purchasing fully weaponized UAVs for a variety of missions (to be deployed at home at some point, keep in mind).

But at least the domestic deployment not happening yet, is it?

Of course it is.

RCMP are now deploying their drones over Manitoba, claiming they’re just for monitoring traffic accidents and dangerous situations. Maybe the drones are actually for those pesky environmental “terrorists”? They’re already flying in Ontario looking for drugs, which is an excuse to do just about anything these days. And yes, it’s both law enforcement and military flying the sky-bound killing machines for use right here in Canada and abroad (including places pretty far away from Afghanistan).

In fact, if you do a search on Google, it’s a good bet that you’ll find plenty of additional information that I missed — it’s almost commonplace now (if you’ve been paying attention).

And do I believe that these things will be deployed over Toronto any time soon? I’d be shocked to hear that they haven’t been buzzing my apartment for quite some time now. And that goes for every atrocious activity that the US is engaged in domestically too — Harper’s track record demonstrates he gets all wet at the mere thought of it all.

Surveillance and possible death from above, unlicensed proctology from below — the future sounds like a big ball of fun!