My Scottish Father Would Roll Over in His Grave By W. Gifford-Jones M.D.

 The Doctor Game

By W. Gifford-Jones M.D.
My Scottish Father Would Roll Over in His Grave

          Most people know that obesity is a health issue. But how many know that it’s responsible for 95 percent of Type 2 diabetes? Or that 50 percent of diabetes patients die of heart attack? How many readers know how obesity affects surgery? And what would make my father roll over in his grave?

          For 60 years I’ve seen obesity in children and adults increasing in North America and most of the world. It’s tragic that few people fully understand how much this epidemic affects their lives and what it’s costing society.

          My viewpoint about obesity developed over time as a surgeon. I was once asked during an interview if operating on a 300 pound patient compared to a patient half that weight was more difficult. The interviewer was shocked to hear that technically surgery on such a patient could be 10 times more challenging!

          Obesity means a longer operation, increased loss of blood and more anesthetic. Overweight patients are more likely to be suffering from Type 2 diabetes with increased risk the incision will become infected. They’re less active following surgery with greater chance of blood clot and sudden death from pulmonary embolism.

          But their problems don’t disappear after surgery. Unless weight is lost, Type 2 diabetes patients have increased risk of loss of vision, leg amputation due to poor circulation, and kidney dialysis or transplant. Moreover, half of diabetes patients succumb to the number one killer, heart attack.

          It’s because of these facts that I’ve been interested in Type 2 diabetes for 60 years. It’s also why I interviewed researchers at Eastgate Biotech Corp a couple of years ago. By using nanotechnology they’ve produced an oral insulin pill to control blood sugar levels. This is a monumental discovery that’s eluded Big Pharma for years. The finding means improved control of blood sugar, decreased risk of diabetes complications and no injections.

          I told readers that I’d purchased stock in Eastgate so I could follow its progress. But I knew taking the risk of buying a penny stock that appeared to be going nowhere was like committing a financial sin. It would make my Scottish father roll over in his grave. Then, when I asked my financial advisors about buying more shares, they thought I had gone completely bonkers.

          So far my penny stock has hit new lows. Recent interviews with Eastgate executives tell me the company requires nine million dollars to carry out clinical trials required by Health Canada. So my father would be saying, “I told you so! Never buy a penny stock!” But I’d reassure him I had not bet the farm, and besides, my investment, if successful, would benefit medical research.

          In my years as a surgeon and medical journalist I’ve never encountered a more humanitarian and potentially rewarding discovery than an oral insulin pill. It’s simply too important to collect dust.

          So I’m convinced Eastgate will eventually receive a financial transfusion. And the insulin pill will become available to millions of patients who desperately need it.

          It’s ironic that the Canadian government has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on opioid addiction. Yet it fails to comprehend the health benefits of an insulin pill. Has it forgotten it was Sir Frederick Banting, a Canadian, who discovered insulin at The University of Toronto and was awarded the Nobel Prize for it in 1923? Ideally, this discovery should be financed by a Canadian institution and the profits remain in this country.

          So, I believe the University of Toronto or Health Canada is making a major historical and financial error in not supporting this company. Its success would result in huge royalties for the benefactor due to the worldwide epidemic of Type 2 diabetes.

          I realize University officials are not without brains. But I remember once hearing that ‘if your brain is so full of knowledge there’s no room left to dream.”  That may be their problem.

          Unfortunately, my latest research indicates Eastgate is now seeking funds from another country. Hopefully, at some time I will have the pleasure of informing others they foolishly missed the boat. And my father can stop reminding me to never invest in a penny stock.
Online docgiff.com Comments info@docgiff.com

Job growth, career growth and economic development By John Mutton

 Job growth, career growth and economic

While some politicians like their Economic Development officers to go after big game like auto plants and factories, the truth that the real growth is existing business growing into broader national and multi-national markets.
With job growth comes less unemployment, comes less people on Social Assistance, comes the economic multiplier of increased disposable income being spent in our communities, however a Durham co-ordinated approach is far from being achieved.

Programs such as Employment Ontario being administered by the great people at the Durham Region Unemployed Help Centre offers programs and assistance to employers and those wishing for employment of any kind in Durham. Seven sites that administer this program in Durham with a total funding of 3.5 M dollars and supply chain and employment recruitment make the DRUHC one of the most powerful tools available for economic development in Durham, yet it is the best kept secret but with an incredible track record of success.
If you are a Durham employer, a job seeker or work in business development in the private sector or economic development in he public sector I urge you to look at the programs at www.unemployedhelp.on.ca. Don't let the name fool you, this is a huge granting and business development agency.
As we move into the Municipal election period after the Provincial election, I am committing right here, right now for the FIRST time in any Municipal campaign to actually put in job growth targets in Durham Region both cumulative and over all as well as sector based achievable job growth. The time has come for data based economic development that has job targets and is reportable and accountable by the Region rather than economic development by stealth or smoke and mirrors.
Till next week...
John Mutton
President and CEO
Municipal Solutions - Energy and Infrastructure
development are so essential to raising the quality of life in "Anytown" Ontario that while it is sexy talk, we rarely have a handle in what is going on.

My Predictions For 2018 By Joe Ingino

My Predictions For 2018
 Prediction #1.  - People of Oshawa prepare to be amazed by another tax increase in the range of 2 - 3%.  Yes you read it here first.  The level of incompetency of our municipal leadership will cost you 2 - 3% on top of the increase you had to endure last year.  One has to wonder with an influx of new housing that taxes would go down or stay the same... No and only in Oshawa.  When we get more tax cash coming in due to development do our cost also go up.  To me it means one thing.... “Poor management”.  Over spending and careless leadership.
Prediction #2.  - I see a new regional Chair taking over the Region.  Someone relatively young with a lot of municipal experience and a proven successful track record.   A person that in part may be considered an insider...but with a difference.   Most insiders only care about keeping their jobs.  This particular since he has been out of the ‘GAME’ for a while is genuine and believe it or not cares about the Region.  Not to mention that he out of all the serving/retired and or out of the ‘GAME’ has proven himself to have the qualification to lead the Region into a new and improved direction.  I will not name anyone as that may be considered and endorsement to political office and since no election has been called it would not be appropriate.   But stay tuned.  The phoenix of change will soon rise in Durham.
Prediction #3. - Oshawa tax payers prepare to be amazed by a Federal fine of about 7 million dollars against the City of Oshawa for failing to develop the Lake front properties awarded by the Feds.
Yes it has taken almost 8 years since the Federal Government has given Oshawa the Lake front property for development and Oshawa had done not a thing.  Is this Mayor Henry blind of the optimal opportunity?  Who is running city hall?
Prediction #4. - Oshawa airport will be sold and turned into a private enterprise for profit with little or no public input.   The airport will feel pressure from the Pickering airport project and the never ending operating cost.   Therefore sale of the airport will be the last resource.
Prediction #5. - During the upcoming municipal election the status quo will be re-elected and Oshawa will continue to enjoy the flat land developments we have.   The key to development is not give out lands to developers so they make money and  run.  The key is to strategically allow developers to develop high rise buildings and change the landscape of Oshawa.   Look at Aurora, Thornhill, Mississauga, Brampton.   What has happened to Oshawa?
Durham region is a fast growing place.   Unfortunately at least in Oshawa we have failed to take opportunity as we should.
We have an elected body that has no real experience in development.  No real practical and tactical vision or plan... I remember years back attending the viewing of Oshawa’s Vision for the future.  It looked great on paper and in the very expensive model.   Yet, it failed to show any clear guidelines on how this pipe dream could or would be attained.
Look at what our municipal elect have done so far.   They built in conjunction with the Feds a new court house on contaminated lands.   Great move.   To ad insult to injury they allow a friend of a friend developer to build a pathetic 5, 6, 7, 8 level condo building... deeming it ‘LUXURIOUS’, my ass.  A luxurious condo on contaminated lands.
What the city should have done is fine a true developer and propose that they erect a 40 level building in the heart of the city.  A super architectural monument exclusive to Oshawa.   No instead they allow erection of another box type structure.
But wait, not to sound grumpy and ungrateful... In GM town... our beloved municipal elect can’t even negotiate a deal with GM for the naming of our beloved John Gray’s white elephant.   Instead our city elect in the tradition of Celina St.  Our city elected opted to lift Oshawa’s dress and fornicate with a friend of a friend developer.  Now the GM Centre is know as The Tribute Communities Centre.  Yes, a ‘TRIBUTE’ to our incompetence and stupidity.   How are we expecting these community elect to negotiate million of dollars worth of development when they can’t even negotiate a mere sponsorship with the Nations largest company GM.  

Direct Answers from Wayne & Tamara - Personal Shopper

Direct Answers
from Wayne & Tamara
Personal Shopper
When I married my husband, he always put thought into gifts. They were wrapped with care, then lovingly presented. It was part of his upbringing. Now, when I receive gifts, it’s all for show.
How I dread Christmas. If we put up a tree, he wants things under the tree. But he never takes time to think what I'd like. He takes me shopping just before the big day. Despite the fact I do all the other shopping for the family, suddenly it's my responsibility to be available to go out and pick out a gift for "me" at the last minute. The only reason he goes shopping at all is so, when his friends come over for holiday cheer, they see how thoughtful he was. I do all the preparations, baking and decorating, and all he needs to do is show up. No matter what I do he's always there to take credit for all "we've" done. He has no idea how much thought I put into gifts for him. I take note of things he mentions and surprise him with the appropriate gift. But usually he returns it, rather than exchanging it for something else. I feel so hurt.
The emotional pain I feel from my birthday in October to New Years is unimaginable. Forty years ago we almost split up due to this behavior. Anyone would agree I am not a materialistic person. To me it's the thought, not the gift, that counts. I have few wants or needs, I only desire genuine feelings of the heart!
That is only the start of our issues. He shares no intimacy. I feel as though I am married to my son. We both recently retired, and I feel the only reason we're together is so he's fed, has a roof over his head and all the bills are taken care of. I'm crying on the inside and feel like I'm going insane.
Patricia

Patricia, perhaps it happened so slowly you couldn’t see it. Perhaps you didn’t want to see it. Perhaps only in retirement has it become too painful to ignore. But the depth of the rut you made has trapped you.
Your husband doesn’t think he has a problem. He likes things the way they are. You are the one with the problem. It’s as if you’ve lived in a house 40 years and always wanted the couch to be a different color. Why didn’t you switch things up years ago?
A common problem in letters we receive is a writer pointing the finger at someone else, instead of pointing the finger at themselves and asking “What do I need to do?” Change doesn’t come from hoping someone else will take the hint. Change requires direct action.
Your husband retired from his job a short time ago, but he retired from your marriage years before. When you went along with the charade of the presents, he made you a coconspirator in a fraud against his peers and against your own best interest. Why don’t you do what you want, and let him cope with it?
Staying in this spot is something you have to own. Then decide what, if anything, you are going to do about it. We are not trying to be hard on you. We are pointing out a simple fact. You can only control yourself and your own actions.
Change is hard. But if we don’t change, we wind  up with the life we are willing to put up with.
Wayne & Tamara
Send letters to: DirectAnswers@WayneAndTamara.com

By W. Gifford-Jones M.D.

 The Doctor Game
By W. Gifford-Jones M.D.

Have you ever wanted To Say,
“I Told You So”
          This week, a big thanks to Dr. Freddie Hamdy, Professor of surgery, Oxford University, England. Why? Because, for many years, I’ve advised readers, diagnosed with early prostate cancer, to take their time when deciding which treatment is best for them. Some authorities have disagreed with me. Now, I can legitimately say, “I told you so”.
          Does this mean I’m smart? No. I was just lucky years ago to interview Dr. Willet Whitmore, a world authority on prostate cancer at Memorial Hospital in New York City.
          At the time Whitmore remarked, “The survival rate of this cancer has little to do with the type of treatment. Rather, it’s related to the biological nature of the cancer.” In other words, how malignant is the cancer? Some cancers are pussy cats,   others raging tigers.
          Now, Dr. Hamby says, “We have learned that prostate cancer, detected by a PSA blood test, grows very slowly, and very few men die of it when followed over a period of 10 years, only around one percent, irrespective of the treatment assigned.”
          Researchers followed 82,000 British men who had taken a PSA test. 2,700 were diagnosed with prostate cancer. Of this number 1,643 agreed to be randomly treated by either surgery, radiation treatment, or regular surveillance, to detect whether the cancer spread.
          The result? The study, reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, showed that all three treatments resulted in very low rates of death from prostate cancer. But those men who decided on active surveillance, showed a slightly higher risk of the cancer spreading, but not a significant risk of dying, after 10 years.
          Further words of wisdom expressed by Whitmore have proven true. He stressed that deciding on either surgical or radiation treatment can be associated with troubling complications. This was confirmed by the recent Oxford study.
          For instance, several months after surgical treatment, nearly half the men complained of urinary incontinence and were forced to use diapers. Moreover, after surgery, 88 percent could not have an erection, compared to 78 percent treated by radiation. Radiation therapy, however, also caused more bowel problems than those treated by surgery. .
          But men who waited and were followed by active surveillance did not get off scot-free. Eventually, 50 percent required either surgery or radiation treatment. But this also delayed potential complications.
           Every year 24,000 men in Canada and 180,000 in the U.S. are diagnosed with prostate cancer by the controversial PSA test. Currently, in Canada, the test is not recommended. Advocates of the test say this is a tragic error as they claim it saves lives. Others say it’s diagnosing too many men with cancers that are slow-growing, may never kill them, and that needless treatment results in troubling complications.
          This is why Dr. Whitmore claimed the PSA test should not be done in men over the age of 65.Why? Because they will, in all probability, live another 15 years without treatment. So why take the risk of worrisome complications?
          It is well to remember these facts. Autopsies show 50 percent of men age 70 have prostate cancer and one of three over 85. Moreover, although one in seven men is diagnosed with this disease in his lifetime, only one in 28 men die of it. Obviously this shows that not all men need to be treated.  As Dr. Whitmore remarked, “Getting older is invariably fatal, cancer of the prostate only sometimes!”
          The final decision of how to treat early prostate cancer must always be a decision between the patient and his doctors. This study shows that anyone diagnosed with an early prostate cancer doesn’t need to make a decision within 24 hours.
          Some men may decide they cannot live knowing they have a small amount of cancer and it must be treated. Others, knowing the results of the Oxford study, will accept a watchful waiting approach. And conclude it is better to live with the devil you know, than face the possible complications of treatment. So it requires the Wisdom of Solomon to determine which way is the best to treat this unique malignancy.
It is ironic that Dr .Whitmore died of this cancer.
Online docgiff.com Comments info@docgiff.com

Organ donation not a moral or racial Issue By Diane Bujold

Organ donation not a moral or racial Issue
By Diane Bujold
Just as disease is no respecter of race and culture, donated organs are not subject to moral issues or racial profiles. When the medical professionals treating Delilah Saunders made the sad decision to not place Ms. Saunders on the waiting list for a liver transplant, they did not do so out of moral judgment about her alcohol habit or addition. Nor did they base their decision on her race (Ms. Saunders Inuk).
There are many factors to consider when placing a person on a transplant list. Receiving an organ is not a normal type of surgery. You just don't go into a hospital, receive your new organ and walk out after a couple of weeks ready to resume your previous lifestyle. It doesn't work that way.
There are stringent procedures in place for good reasons in order to ensure the best possible outcome for organ recipients. People of all races, cultures and ethnicity are on transplant lists and none can jump the que. Even then, not everyone on a transplant list is fortunate enough to receive a new organ on time to save their lives nor are there any guarantees that the organ donated will work in its new host.
However, when a person is placed on a transplant list, that person should be made aware of the life changing effects this operation will have on them (if successful) and be absolutely mentally, emotionally and physiologically prepared to accept those changes.
I have a friend, Jan (not her real name to protect her privacy) who received a heart transplant twenty-five years ago. She told me that not only did she comply with all of her medical team's recommendations before being placed on the transplant list, but she was also made aware of the aftermath of receiving her new heart.
Jan received her new heart at the very last of her struggle as she would not have lived another week otherwise. She was fortunate.
Jan is limited in all sorts of ways as to what she can and cannot do on a daily basis. But she has life. She was given a gift that she cherishes with every fiber of her being and never takes for granted. That is why she chose to follow to the letter everything her medical professionals advised her to do (including abstinence from life choices that could compromise her fragile health).
Jan concluded her story by telling me that, for her, there is a moral obligation to keep herself as healthy as possible by adhering to the doctors' advice in every way because someone had to die in order for her to receive what she called "the most precious gift".  Jan said that organs are not harvested by the thousands and placed in cold storage just waiting for people who need them. She explained to me that most organs are donated out of someone else's tragedy.
In her on words, Jan said, "I often think of the family of the person whose heart is beating inside me now. They lost their loved, one probably through an accident as most are, and then they had to make the decision to give away their loved one's heart while they were in the midst of a grieving a terrible loss. I take good care of my heart. It would be inconceivable for me not to have done what I was told beforehand in order to receive it in the first place." I agree with that statement. After all, I would like to know that the person who received my loved one's heart was a person who respected and appreciated the implications.
Jan complied with all the medical professionals' requirements from the very beginning so that her new heart would have every chance of adapting to her body and not die in her chest and go to waste as a result of any carelessness on her part. "So, for me," she said, "there was, and still is, a moral obligation."
Medical professionals do not base their decision on moral grounds. They are there to perform a function to help enable a person to live but there are rules to follow for the patient. It is not a simple procedure.
After receiving her new heart, Jan was put on a slew of medication that she must take for life. She was made aware that her entire lifestyle had to change in order to allow the new organ to heal, to adapt and to function well. One of the medications is actually an immune system suppressor. This means that her immune system is more susceptible to infection than most people. Because of this, she cannot put herself in situations where she might catch even a cold. She cannot allow friends to visit her at home if they have the slightest hint of a cold or flu. She cannot travel to places where the risks of encountering foreign bacteria that could put her life in serious peril, more so than the average person. The reason for this immune system suppressor is because the body knows when a foreign object has invaded it and works to build a defense against it. Without this suppressor, the body would quickly develop an attack against the donated heart and kill it as a foreign object.
In speaking with Jan and doing a little research, I have learned that the liver is a different matter as it is not simply a pump, like the heart. The liver has a chemical function and therefore more complex in that sense. I do not know how successful liver transplants are as opposed to heart transplants and I would have loved to have the time to consult with a medical professional on the issue, but I would venture to say that the preparation for such an operation as a liver transplant should definitely entail total abstinence from alcohol at least six months beforehand and complete abstinence for life after the surgery. One cannot return to the same lifestyle and expect everything to function normally nor should anyone expect that drinking alcohol beforehand will not in some way affect the outcome of a liver transplant.
It seems to me that Ms. Saunders' family, friends and the Aboriginal community want to turn this into a racial and a moral issue. I can understand that in light of the situation, it may be easier to clutch at the proverbial straws and point the finger in an attempt to pressure the medical industry into making an exception in Ms. Saunders's case. But how fair would that be to those others on liver transplant lists doing everything they are told in order to ensure the best possible results?
After reading the above and perhaps doing some research of your own, my hope is that the reader will see the issue for what it really is; a complex procedure that cannot be left to chance as organs are very far and few in-between. They just don't grow on trees.
I truly hope that something will change soon for Ms. Saunders and that she finally receives the liver transplant she so desperately needs. Nobody wants the worst to occur.  But let's not make this into a racial or moral issue when it simply couldn't be farther from the truth.

STILL AMAZED By John Mutton

Regional Talk
By John Mutton      
  Today I write my column on another day where it's too cold for the road salt to work. Going from the bitter cold to what seemed like a balmy 12 degrees back to minus 30 degree weather will take a toll on roads and much of our concrete and asphalt infrastructure.

I am still amazed that in Durham, we have not been able to coordinate our local Municipal snow plows with the Regional snowplows so we don't have snow plows lifting blades or not dropping salt because they are simply on a local vs regional road or regional vs local road. That is the essence of duplication.

In Oshawa the Region and the City are trying to negotiate having some Regional Roads like Park St return to being the property and responsibility of the City vs the Region. Why has this never happened? Quite bluntly, the City do not want the ongoing maintenance and capital costs of the road. As long as this is something that needs agreement, I doubt it will ever happen. Where residents should be concerned is that if a road should not be a regional road, why should residents of Pickering, Ajax, Uxbridge, Scugog, Clarington and Whitby pay for a local road in Oshawa. It would work the same if the issue where in any of Durham's 8 municipalities.

I know duplication exists and I know common sense is sometimes rare when it comes to parochialism. I guarantee this will not exist when looking after the taxpayers of Durham if I have anything to do with it. It has been said many times, there is only one taxpayer.

Till next week...

John Mutton
President and CEO
Municipal Solutions - Energy and Infrastructure

Oprah Said What!!! by Joe Ingino

Oprah Said What!!!
  Oprah’s God like  speech to the masses at the Golden Globe was a moment of intense viewing... It was as if she was about to split in half and Hillary to pop out.
Instead, Oprah with the flare of Hollywood stood there and said, “I want all the girls watching here, now, to know that a new day is on the horizon! And when that new day finally dawns, it will be because of a lot of magnificent women, many of whom are right here in this room tonight, and some pretty phenomenal men, fighting hard to make sure that they become the leaders who take us to the time when nobody ever has to say "Me too" again.”
Wait a  minute... is that statement not prejudice?   I can understand the context.  But is the statement not bias towards girls and women?
What if a white man stood there and said the same about young boys and men?  Would it not be deemed as bias and prejudice and totally out of line?
Then the question lingers why is Oprah able to get away with it?  
To ad insult to injury.   The most untrusted news source CNN is quick to deem it a Presidential candidacy speech.   Really?   Are we not out to stop bias and prejudice?
I like the opening statement by Seth Meyers, “Good evening, ladies and remaining gentlemen.”
Part of that had to do with the general side lining of Golden Globes host Seth Meyers. The late-night star described himself aptly as “like the first dog they shot into outer space” as an awards host in the post-Weinstein Hollywood era. And he didn’t seem ready for the altitude at first, claiming early on that he’d been a second choice to host after various women said no.
This was in service of an unworthy joke about how women feel uncomfortable in hotels now because of Weinstein, and worse still, didn’t feel true. (He’s another straight white guy hosting an awards show! What else is new?) What did feel true was a staging of Meyers’s Late Night bit “Jokes Seth Can’t Tell,” in which members of protected-class communities get the opportunity to deliver the punch lines of jokes that, up until very recently, any other straight white guy hosting an awards show would have felt empowered to tell.
Is this going to be the new world order?  Is equality not something all can enjoy?   You have the Trump bashers making statements that Trump is a racist a bigot and does not respect women.    Really, I have yet to see any of those allegations made public.   I believe that Trump in the year in office has accomplished many great things for all Americans.   For the young boys and girls.  For the middle ages men and women.  For elderly men and women.   Not in one instance was there reference to bettering women over men.   Child over adult or youth over seniors.   I have yet to see how a cry to young women as Oprah did can’t be seen as bias and discriminatory. The underlying monster is politics and how battered we as a population truly are.   We suffer from a general overwhelment.   Deep inside we all want good in the world but we fail to understand the world enough to appreciate that utopia is not what we should be striving for as in perfection there is imperfection.
Seth in his jokes made references such as:  Happy New Year, Hollywood! It's 2018, marijuana is finally allowed and sexual harassment finally isn't. There's a new era under way, and I can tell because it's been years since a white man was this nervous in Hollywood. For the male nominees in the room tonight, this is the first time in three months it won't be terrifying to hear your name read out loud.  Satire with a strong social punch.  A punch that at times is hard to comprehend as it brings to question the change that we undergoing if it is for the good or the compromising of our civilization.  There is no question that there should be no discrimination, bias and or prejudice against no one.  If so then why did Oprah draw such line in the sand?

For The Love of Hate by Joe Ingino

For The Love of Hate
  What is wrong with America?  Have we finally lost our common sense and National pride?  I can respect freedom of speech and human rights.   What I do not understand is public defiance and civil unrest in the name of democratic freedoms.
In these modern time it appears that as soon as a white police officer wrongly uses excessive force against a minority that it has granted minorities a license to go out and riot.
It appears that in these modern times, to hate a President is the ‘IN’ thing.   I wonder if during Kennedy’s Presidency the same took place.   After all Kennedy was one that took the world by the horns and shook it.
Trump seems to be doing the same.  Trump in my opinion is a man that has his own cosmic significance and purpose.   He has gone up against the system that was stacked against him and has come out on top every time.  Yet, Trumps sublime TV network CNN can’t go 15 seconds with putting out his name to millions of people.
We the ignorant population eat it all up.   We talk about it during out day and we create opinion based on hearsay. 
We have become a population of people that love to hate and hate to love progress and change.  It appears that due to our daily failures we have  become blind and are easily manipulated to oppose success.   To look for fault and or fracture.
We live in a system that is not for us to succeed but for us to fail.  A system that has as oppressed by our own ignorance of the actual facts.
I remember at the University during my graduate years... a professor joking and stating.  We are the educated ignorant as no matter how smart we know within our disciplines.  We know nothing but what we are told and hear.
The system has each one of pigeon holed into a mind set.  Outside of that mindset we are truly ignorant of the real facts.  As I written. We are modern day slaves.  Instead of chains we are held in captive  by our necessities/commitments/responsibilities.    We are constantly punished and made to work harder through our many financial commitments.   We live in a world that has us believing we have choice.  In reality our choice is controlled by our ability to work hard for the system.
Romantics have noted that ‘Love and Hate’ are the means to the end in a philosophical “yin yang” model.
Instead of praising a President that is actually making significant changes.   It appears at least according to CNN that the village people want him out.
Now since when has bias news reporting been confused with ‘fake news’.   Or is ‘fake news’ the new or old ‘bias news’. 
As a journalist I remember the many phone calls for being labeling a particular slant based on what was printed.  In reality in 99% of the cases it was what it was.   If a particular side was predominant then that was what it was.  Today it appears that due to financial gains, bias is predominant... and when money can’t reach you.  Some media outlets like CNN have turned to ‘fake news’.  I say this due to the fact that look at the experts they bring on their show.   Everyone is an expert...  DAM now I am doing it... I am turning on to a CNN.  Every time I rag on CNN I am giving them public exposure.   For the love of hate.  Can we just all wake up and see the truth?   Ha, keep dreaming Dorothy.  The truth is not for all to know as much like in that Tom Cruise movie.  “WE CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH”.   If anything we are good ignorant modern slaves with opinions.   

Mr. President, tell your lawyers: 'You're fired!' Larry Klayman

Mr. President, tell your lawyers:
'You're fired!'
Exclusive: counters those claiming Flynn matter not a problem for Trump.

No matter how hard President Trump’s lawyers try to spin it, or favorably disposed media try to downplay it, the criminal charges filed today, with the entry of a plea against and cooperation agreement concerning retired Gen. Michael Flynn, do not bode well for the White House. Flynn pleaded guilty of one count of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and with yet another leak from the special counsel it appears that no jail time will be recommended, only probation, if Flynn cooperates with Mueller and his team of Trump-hating leftist and Muslim lawyers and gives up the goods on the president, his associates and his family. Indeed, the speaking criminal information made public today in the open court of the Honorable Rudolph Cantreras speaks to Flynn’s admissions of likely so-called collusion (however legal in reality) with Russia over the removal of sanctions imposed by former President Barack Obama.

While the usual inexperienced political pundits on the conservative side of the spectrum rushed to made glowing assessments that if this is all Mueller has, then President Trump is “out of the woods,” those with any degree of real criminal defense experience, particularly in the legal culture of the Washington, D.C. swamp, know better.

The simple and hard fact is this: Given all of the illegal grand jury leaks of the Mueller prosecutors over the last many months that Flynn would ultimately be indicted for several alleged crimes, some of which if provable are very serious, the general pleading only to this very limited charge shows that the special counsel got a lot in exchange, implicating, at best, those in and around the president for other alleged crimes.

While I believe Flynn to be an honorable man and hero, the other hard fact is that Mueller and his hack prosecutors were without any doubt threatening to destroy him, his son and his family if the general did not “turn state’s evidence.”
And, as the old adage goes, a sinking and drowning man will grab on to anything to save his life, even if the suborned perjury at the request of Mueller is necessary to save oneself and his family.

That in simple terms is why today’s events, caused by a special counsel who is the product of both the Democratic and Republican establishments – most of whom would like to see the Trump presidency incinerated short of a nuclear attack by North Korea – is so dangerous for the president and all of his men and women who, only for now, have been left standing. And, to underscore the partisanship of Mueller, he chose to make his plea and cooperation agreement with Flynn known in open court, and elsewhere, on the very day of President Trump’s biggest legislative triumph to date: the passage by the U.S. Senate of tax reform, after the House of Representatives voted similarly a few weeks ago.

Mueller thus intended to take the media focus away from this Trump victory by smearing him with the Flynn criminal charges, plea and a cooperation agreement before a federal judge in Washington, D.C., who was nominated by former President Barack Obama.

 While I am not casting any aspersions on Judge Cantreras, one hopes that he will administer to the sentencing of Flynn impartially, as well as address any further criminal leaks of grand jury information by Mueller and his prosecutors.

I fully expect that over this weekend we will hear a drumbeat from the president’s lawyers, Ty Cobb, John Dowd and especially Jay Sekulow, the latter of whom has taken on the role of legal spokesperson, that all is well in Gotham. And, while I like Jay and think that he is a fine religious-rights lawyer at the American Center for Law and Justice, he, like his other two colleagues, is ill-suited to now wage a strong defense of the president and those around him in the months ahead.

Indeed, Ty Cobb, the great-great-grandson of the famous baseball player, has “struck out.” And, I have had my own experience with Cobb during the Clinton years, when he ran interference for the Bonnie and Clyde of American politics by representing John Huang, the suspected communist Chinese spy Bill and Hill placed at Ron Brown’s Commerce Department. There, Huang, who had worked for the Chinese Riady family and its Lippo Bank before moving to the Democratic National Committee and then Commerce, was believed to have passed classified economic information to the Chinese as a quid pro quo for the Chinese government illegally lining the coffers of the Clinton-Gore re-election campaign in 1996.

Not coincidentally, the Riady family were huge donors to Bill Clinton when he ran for governor of Arkansas and later the presidency. In several depositions I took of Huang, where he was held in contempt by a federal magistrate judge over 150 times for refusing to answer my questions under oath, Cobb was present to protect not just his client but also the Clintons. Why, then, would President Trump want him as his criminal defense counsel?

As for John Dowd, he is pure Republican establishment, that same establishment that has repeatedly tried to drive a stake in the president’s heart. And, Jay Sekulow, while loyal to the president, lacks the experience and thus depth to represent him in a criminal defense setting.

Now that Mueller’s handwriting is on the “Trump White House Wall,” the president must now be true to himself and his instincts and retain seasoned and hard-hitting criminal defense lawyers outside of the incestuous Washington, D.C., legal swamp – where most attorneys put their own clubby political and other interests ahead of their clients. The best defense for the president is a good offense. In this way he can keep the ball away from the Mueller team.

At Freedom Watch I filed suit late last week to have Mueller removed as special counsel based on the continuing criminal leaks and conflicts of interest. You can see our complaint at www.freedomwatchusa.org. It’s time the president hire lawyers who will also go on the offense and not only join our case, but also sue Mueller and his friend James Comey for the illegal wiretaps and unmasking the FBI and Obama administration initiated on the Trump Tower and team.

Now is not the time for President Trump to listen to his legal defense team and be consoled that all is going well. It’s time to wake up and with new lawyers go on the offense before it is too late. In the famous words of The Donald, “Your fired!” At this perilous point, the president does not need any more ill-suited conflicted, weak and inexperienced “apprentices”!

"And the L-rd set a mark upon Cain . . . . " Gen. 4-15. By H.J. ROGERS

 H. J. Rogers
Harvard Law School '66
    
        The Biblical Mark of Cain is not intended to be a punishment, nor lead to some form of punishment.  In the words of Gunther Plaut, editor of The Torah which is used in most Reform synagogues, "[I]t is not a hand of rejection but a sign of protection."   The person who best expresses my own conflicted feelings with regard to those who kill is the Irish poet Oscar Wilde in his long poem "The Ballad of Reading Gaol".  Wilde spent a couple years in prison on what might be loosely called a morals charge today.  During his routine exercise walks, Wilde would observe another prisoner walking in another ring in the opposite direction:
        I walked with other souls in pain,
            Within another ring,
        And was wondering if the man had done
            A great or little thing,
        When a voice behind me whispered low,
            "That fellow's got to swing."
        I can see clearly now that it the not the murderer per se that attracts me.  Murder, any murder for any reason, is a terrible thing, so very terrible that even a man like Albert Camus, a Nobel prize winner who rejected any morality based on Judeo-Christian precepts, could reject it categorically:  "There are some causes worth dying for but none are worth killing for."  Equally terrible is what is done to a person convicted of murder: They are locked away in a tiny cell for years to prevent them from "cheating the hangman".  What is humorous in a way is our attempt to make killing humane.  To my mind the Chinese do it best with a small caliber bullet to the base of the skull.  The organs are immediately "harvested" and the next-of -kin is sent a bill for the bullet.
        Nothing attracts public attention like a murder trial.  In the mid-1950s, we my family living in a little coal patch near Wheeling.  A man named Walter Rabulsky was accused of murdering a bar girl and dumping her body along the railroad tracks.  The trial was highly publicized and based on circumstantial evidence.  My parents were quite divided, arguing the evidence as it appeared each day in newspapers.  My mother was certain that Rabulsky had done it while my father was skeptical about the quantum of evidence.  Rabulsky's acquittal was almost a personal triumph for my father.
        The trial was one of the few things that brought excitement to both of my parents, so I was surprised at their relative lack of interest at the next big murder case that occurred in Wheeling.  I had expected them to be as enthusiastic as they had been about the Rabulsky case, but they were almost indifferent.  The perpetrator in this case---a young boy murdered a playmate in the crawl space under a house on Wheeling Island---was clear and thus the "who-done-it" element was not present.  I read the early stories eagerly but not even my mother wanted to talk about the case.  Nonetheless, I was determined to skip high school, hitchhike the eight or 10 miles to Wheeling, and see with my own eyes someone who had to swing.
        Tommy Williams was the defendant's name.  He was 13 or so but was being tried as an adult because of the heinousness of the crime.  The testimony was to the effect that Williams and an even younger boy had lured the third boy under the house with the intent of killing him.  Because the City-County building was under construction, the trial was held in the banquet hall of the Greek Orthodox church on lower Chapline Street.  When I opened the door to the courtroom, I was surprised by the fact that there were only a handful of spectators.  The facts of the case doubtless sent a shudder through the minds parents in the  early part of the Eisenhower era.  It is one thing to preach to kids to be wary of strangers.  It is another thing when one's precious is lured away by playmates and one of them beats the child to death.
        The trial was a classic battle of psychiatrists.  It was the first time I had heard the phrase "Oedipus complex": The victim was a surrogate for the father who came back from the war and supplanted young Tommy in his mother's affections.  "Sounds like you," my mother said, unimpressed with the summary of the psychiatrist's testimony that she read in the newspaper.  "I'm not going to let you use that excuse if you kill someone", she laughed.   My father was less kind when he found out that I had been skipping school to go to the trial.  He called me a "ghoul".
        "But Pop," I said, "I want to be a lawyer.  That's why I'm going to the trial."  I was lying through my teeth but the answer pleased him.  My fascination with murderers was certainly not the reason that I eventually became a lawyer.  I went to law school as a prerequisite to entering into politics.  The murder mystery of the Orient Express still bores me.  It was the transgression of the natural law that fascinated me (making me an odd bedfellow with Justice Clarence Thomas) at the time.   Hemingway's idea that killing was a divine attribute exercised by a mortal was what first intrigued me.  The terrible fate that awaited people convicted of this terrible crime completed the equation. 
  Mary Wright, the grandmother of megalawyer and Democratic Congressional candidate Ralph Baxter, also attended the trial.  She lived in Pine Grove which made her commute over 60 miles one way.  She was driven by her husband Earl who rode to work at the Hope Gas facility in nearby Hastings with my grandfather John Henry Stewart.  Earl Wright had to take off from work to drive his "ghoulish" wife to and from the trial. When the trial was over, Earl resumed riding with my grandfather.  For the next few days, Earl would regal my grandfather with second hand accounts of the trial. When my grandfather came home in the evening he would tell his wife (also named Mary) about the proceedings.
        When the story of the trial passed from my grandmother to my mother on a Sunday afternoon telephone call, my mother learned that the thing than had most impressed Ralph Baxter's grandmother about the proceedings was how Tommy Williams's older brother had sat behind him every day in the courtroom, listening to every word of the testimony.  It was Mary Wright's opinion that the older brother was probably in on the murder, possibly even the instigator.  "I wouldn't put it past him" Mrs. Wright told my grandmother.
        "I didn't have the heart to tell your grandmother," my mother said with a smile, ''that her precious grandson was the person that Mary Wright thought was in on the murder."
        Years later I would tell Tom Goodwin, the man who prosecuted the case (I would try a civil case against him), and a half dozen years later one of the defense attorneys Jim Byrum (in 1962, he would meet me at the door of a 12-step program) about how I had seem them ''strut their hour upon the stage'' when I was just a high school student.  Also, I would meet with one of the psychiatrists (a Dr. Osterman) about a client of mine at his office at 3 or 4 a.m.  He kept weird office hours, which would lead to his murder in the late 1970s.  I was later appointed to represent the accused murderer (a fellow named Barrett from eastern Ohio) on a post-conviction review case.
        [Osterman was a proponent of electroshock treatments and the murderer administered his own form of "shock treatment" to Osterman with a 12 volt battery.  The word on the street was that this was a hit disguised to look like a drug robbery.  According to scenario suggested to me by a local "doper" lawyer--Steve Herndon, a conversation between Osterman and a lawyer in his building about an underaged patient lead to the hit.
If Herndon knew what he was walking about, this lawyer ended up involved in Barrett's trial.]  
        Williams was sentenced to the old maximum security prison at Moundsville for life with mercy, which meant that he would be eligible for parole.  When he sentenced Williams, the judge said that because of his youth, he was to be accompanied by a guard at all times when he was out of his cell.  This was to protect him  from sexual predators.
        In 1963 between college and law school, I would spent 6 or 7 months as a guard at the prison.  The place was as tough as it was reputed to be.  An old guard once pointed out Williams at my request.  Like me he was now in his early 20s, quite indistinguishable from the hundred or so other inmates milling around the yard.  I asked about whether he had always been accompanied by a guard.
        "Oh, yes.  He was accompanied everywhere he went until he turned 18.  It was in the order of commitment, you know.  He would have been a prize catch for one of the old cons," the old guard said.  Then he smiled and gave me half a wink.  "Of course, the guard would turn his head every now and then.  By then he was community property, if you know what I mean."  I had a few opportunities later to speak with him but never did, basically because I didn't know what to say.  After all, I had grown up with sports and girls and college while Tommy had grown up, well, he had grown up here, in the constant company of guards who would for reasons of their own occasionally turn their heads.  And then it got worse.

INSURANCE FOR THE INSECURE By Joe Ingino

Logic
By Joe Ingino 
Editor/Publisher

“I live a dream in a nightmare world”
  
INSURANCE FOR THE INSECURE
  I say let’s put a stop to insurance companies rip off scheme.  Why should a consumer pay four thousand a year on insurance when their vehicle is only worth five hundred dollars.
Why should insurance companies get away with short changing victims of accidents when it comes to paying out for damages.
Why should insurance companies be allowed to extort and dictate who pays what.
Why should insurance companies make millions a year with little or no overhead...
We live in a shameful world.  It is dog eat dog.  Fairness and doing what is right is a myth.
We are led to think we are on righteous path when in reality we are modern day slaves working to the drumming beats of corporations and social confusion.
I have a plan that the government should entertain.  Instead of sending billions to foreign lands to be used to purchase more weapons to continue the civil unrest so that these nations can turn around and bleed us of more money.  I say put a stop to it.
I suggest the government dissolve all these vultures we know as insurance companies.   Replace them with this system of dealing with accidents.       No one pays insurance premiums.  In the event of an accident.  The government will loan that individual the amounts required to compensate for damages caused.   The individual will be responsible for re-paying back the government in installments, (much like a loan) or their license to drive may be suspended.
With this.  There be no more lawyers, courts and the usual short changing consumers as it happens now.  Did you know that if you are in a car accident.  Some lawyers may take up to 60% off your settlement.
Under the new proposed system.  The money would go to the victim directly to cover any damages.  Adjusters for the government would be sent to assess the damages and issue the appropriate awards to compensate.
Did you know that if you are stabbed or shot on any Ontario street.  That your life is only worth 100k to any insurance company.   Did you know that if you have a million dollar policy.  In some cases in order to collect on that policy you have to prove you were worth one million dollars.
Read the fine print.
You may have figured it out by now.  I have an issue with insurance companies.... the so called professionals...  and we look down at the adult entertainers.... at least you pay and you know what your buying.  With the insurance companies you get fucked month after month only to be denied claims and or given dimes on the actual retributional amounts awarded.
We live in a sea of the ignorant.   The less we know how something works the more corporations make off our ignorance.   Look at the legal system.  You can’t fight a simple claims court without representation of some sort.   Most people have no clue how to fill out the forms and or present.
Why is the system made so confusing to the average person.  Why is it that at schools they don’t teach courses that educate young minds on how to deal with the real issues of our world.
In the case of insurance companies.  How to buy direct instead of a broker.   How to save money when negotiating rates.  How not to be taken by empty fears that they try to push at time of signing.
This planet is a funny place.  Nothing is really what it seems and the more you understand it the more you see it for what it truly is.
 Mark twain said it best.
“The more I learn about people, the more I like my dog.” and this is true for all of humanity.

WELCOME TO A COLD 2018 By John Mutton

Welcome to a cold 2018. I cannot remember a winter this cold in the Greater Toronto Area, maybe in the 70's perhaps.

It is too cold for road salt to actually work at this point. The new anti icing spray that our highways are treated with is a godsend.

The bitter cold this January is also followed by many a Municipal budgets that are usually a little better to swallow in election year, however Durham Taxpayers are paying way too much.

As I have mentioned many times, we can bring taxes down in Durham Region, I for one know how and I plan on doing so upon my return to public office.

In Durham we are funding many services that we have no mandate or responsibility to fund. However, the inability to say no to special interest groups and social related issues is putting a financial strain on our residents in the middle, working class, let alone affordability for those making less income.

Upon return to elected office, I will immediately look at what the economic impact has been from the dozens of international trade junkets that have occurred both in the public eye and by stealth. I refuse to pay for a vacation when we don't derive investment or job growth.

Bottom line is that money is being spent where it shouldn't be and when we need real funding for real pending issues like Lake Ontario Shoreline flooding where only beads and trinkets are available in comparison.

Time for change has come, is here and Durham can do better!

John Mutton
President and CEO
Municipal Solutions - Energy and Infrastructure

M103, Islamaphobia and the death of critical thinking

  M103, Islamaphobia and the death of critical thinking
By Diane Bujold
  It truly insults my intelligence when I hear the word "racist" attributed to a person who questions our government's open-door policy on people from Islamic backgrounds. Immigration as such is not the issue. Islam is not a "race". If you're going to result to insults, at least find a new terminology. The term "racist" should only be attributed to those who are prejudiced against a "race" i.e. a person's skin color. And from what I've experienced anywhere in Canada, there are very few racists.
  I also resent the word "Islamaphobia". Being afraid of, or very concerned about, the large influx of immigrants from the Islamic world does not make a person "Islamaphobe".  A phobia is an irrational fear of something. Being well aware of what is happening around the world and being concerned that the same will reach our shores in a short time is not "irrational". It is a legitimate concern.
  There is such a thing as the Islamization of the Western world. Anyone with half a brain and the inclination to honestly do a little research will soon become aware of what is happening around the world through large influx of Islamic migrants.  Germany, Switzerland, England and France in particular have suffered enormous casualties through Islamic terror. Being concerned that what has been - and continues to happen - all over Europe may happen in Canada does not make me "phobic". Rather it is based in a sad reality.
  Canada needs immigrants. But inviting everybody and anybody without concern for the open statements of world domination that many in the Islamic world themselves proudly profess as their intent, to me, is a recipe for disaster.
  Being concerned about our changing demographics in favor of people who want to destroy our democratic rights & freedoms and at its core, want to want to establish a Caliphate governed by Sharia law, is not a "phobia". It is a realistic concern given a social system attached to the practice of a Political, Judicial, Educational and Religious Ideology that has not changed in 1400 years, and a culture that does not want to integrate but rather to 'dominate'.
  This said, I know very well that many Muslims come here to escape the tyranny of an oppressive regime and only want to live in peace and raise their families. I've met several of those people and I can tell you that they have no desire to return to an existence of tyranny such as the one they left behind. We hear from them from time to time in social media, but not nearly as often as we'd like. Those are the legitimately peace-loving immigrants I want to see establish themselves and prosper in our democratic multicultural system.
  But let's not stupidly keep our heads in the sand. There are those too who adhere to the principal of world domination as dictated by their understanding of their holy book and the teachings of their radical Imams. They are not hard to find as they openly profess their beliefs. Why, just recently in Montreal, didn't an Imam insist on the construction company next door to their mosque remove the two female workers from the site as it offended the Muslims inside? As our demographic changes to include more and more people of the Islamic faith, I think it would be more prudent for our government to ensure that new immigrants share our values rather than want to practice such things repressiveness as the suppression of women. Haven't we come too far to backtrack into the dark ages? By the way, the construction company apparently complied with the Imam's demands as they relocated the two female workers to another site. I say shame on them for complying.
  There are many examples of how this ideology is taking root in our country and many Canadians are bending over backward to shamefully accommodate it. Much of what extremists say though, is often not published in mainstream media because for some reason that escapes me, the powers that be do not want the rest of us to know what how prevalent it is. That kind of convoluted logic doesn't serve any good purpose that I can think of. In a society that prides itself on multiculturalism, everybody should have a voice and those who seek to destroy our freedoms and way of life should be heard loudly and clearly so that we (Muslims and non-Muslims alike) can all make informed decisions as to who we will vote for; the leader who supports such things as Sharia Law or the one who supports Canadian rights and freedom of speech. We are not babies. We should have the right to choose.
  I once dated a Muslim man whose country of origin is Iran. I asked him what made him decide to come to Canada. He told me that in the 70s, it was great living in Iran. People had freedom and dressed in Western clothes and listened to Western music. He said that women wore bikinis on the beach and the young people wore tie died t-shirts (even showed me a picture of himself in tight jeans and a colorful hippy type shirt,… very cute). He said that he decided to leave after things had "changed" and people "lost many freedoms" at the end of that era. Today, I understand it to mean the establishment of Sharia Law where severe punishment - even death - follows any criticism of the regime. Now if a man like that made the decision to immigrate to Canada because of lost freedoms in his homeland, what makes anyone think that he would welcome the establishment of Sharia Law in his adopted country? I'm quite sure many Muslims would feel the same way.
  Our Prime Minister seems to have taken a shine to anything and everything Islamic. But is he being a bit too biased in favor of Islam and forgoing any sound measure of critical thinking while at the same time completely disapproving of others? M103 would suggest so. After all, why are some people allowed to criticize while others are being shamed into silence with such labeling as "Islamaphobes" and "racists"? It makes no sense.
In a society where freedom of speech still exists, the questioning of the decisions on the part of our law makers should be welcomed by everyone regardless of whether we agree or not with the question posed.
  In other words, I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it. And in a democracy, that freedom should never be squashed by the likes of M103 and those who seek to destroy freedom of speech.

Another province calls Trudeau's carbon tax bluff

Another province calls Trudeau's carbon tax bluff

Wearing thin is the insistence from carbon tax proponents across Canada that there was no other way this could have played out

588 words

By Paige MacPherson
Contributor
Canadians for Affordable Energy

When the Alberta government introduced its carbon dioxide emissions tax, ministers often

Click image to download

claimed that if they hadn't, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would impose his own tax, leaving taxpayers worse off.

More than a year later, New Brunswick is challenging that 'we have no choice' assertion. In December, Premier Brian Gallant's government announced that instead of introducing a new carbon tax, they are rebranding a portion of their gasoline tax as a carbon tax and redirecting the cash into a fund to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Critics of the New Brunswick's plan are skeptical. Redirecting existing funds means less money for general revenues and seldom do taxpayers see governments do more with less. A green fund can easily become a money pit of black hole proportions (see Ontario).

But while federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna directed some disapproving comments at New Brunswick - and repeated that Ottawa will impose the federal price on any jurisdiction that doesn't apply it - to date it's all talk.

With N.B. voters going to the polls in 2018, Trudeau is unlikely to push an unpopular carbon tax on would-be Liberal voters, threatening Gallant's Liberal government.

Voters know they're already paying carbon taxes by another name anyway.

Carbon tax proponents insist that increasing the cost of carbon (on things like gasoline) will encourage people to use less of it.

Gas taxes have gone up. Before the current NDP government came into office, Alberta's gas tax was increased by four cents to 13 cents per litre, without a carbon tax. New Brunswick's gas tax is already a weighty 15.5 cents per litre - more than 50 per cent higher than the 10-cent federal excise tax.

If you want high taxes on people driving their kids to school and moving groceries from farms to shops, you already have it.

In Alberta, the environment minister continues to scoff at scrapping the tax, which United Conservative Party Leader Jason Kenney vows he'll do. The minister maintains that Ottawa would have acted if Alberta hadn't introduced its own new tax (never mind that Alberta's was imposed earlier and at a higher rate than the federal plan).

But the list of provinces challenging that in one way or another is growing.

If Trudeau is bluffing, several premiers are now calling it.

Manitoba's government challenged Trudeau's declaration by imposing a carbon tax at half the federal price.

And a carbon tax was noticeably absent in Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall's climate change strategy.

New Brunswick's plan employs political wordplay. Saskatchewan's strategy of simply saying no is much clearer. For any government that sees the value in affordable energy, the only fair solution is no carbon tax at all.

But New Brunswick's plan has illustrated again that despite Trudeau's declarations, the provinces have their own priorities and, importantly, their own taxpayers to answer to. That's a wake-up call for carbon tax enthusiasts, as well as Alberta government ministers still clinging to the defence that Ottawa will drop a carbon tax on the province like a lump of coal in their stockings.

It's a political game of chicken. In the meantime, Alberta taxpayers have been paying the carbon tax for a full year. As an added New Year's treat, the tax increased by a further 50 per cent on Jan. 1.

Wearing thin is the insistence from the Alberta government, and carbon tax proponents across Canada, that there was no other way this could have played out.

Emails destroyed, justice denied?

Emails destroyed, justice denied?

What part of 'Don't delete government emails' did these Ontario cops not understand?

By Karen Selick
Contributor
Troy Media

Click image to download

Deleted government emails have been hot news in Ontario since former premier Dalton McGuinty's aides David Livingston and Laura Miller were charged with deliberately destroying records relating to cancelled gas-fired power plants.

Now an unrelated Ontario trial has revealed another alleged incident of deliberately deleted government emails.

In late 2015, government employees and police raided Glencolton Farms near Durham, Ont. It's the home of dairy farmer Michael Schmidt, who has for decades advocated the legalization of raw milk sales in Canada. The farm is now an incorporated co-op owned by about 150 shareholders.

When bureaucrats and police officers began seizing milk products and computers, about 70 people (co-op owners and their family members) rapidly converged on the farm to defend their property. Someone - not Schmidt - drove a tractor across the driveway, making it impossible for the government's van to leave. Dozens of people milled about, questioning the legality of the intended seizure (or, as they saw it, theft) of the milk.

The standoff ended after about five hours with the government unloading its van and the co-op members then permitting the empty vehicle to depart.

No one was arrested that day. But eventually, five people were charged with obstructing police officers. One was Schmidt, who the prosecutor cast as the blockade's mastermind, despite markedly conflicting evidence from witnesses.

While awaiting trial, the accused filed a freedom of information request. They especially wanted to find out why only five of them, out of 70 present that day, were charged. What criteria had the government used in deciding who to prosecute? Was this prosecution actually designed to put Schmidt in jail and silence his repeated, annoying advocacy on raw milk?

They eventually received a copy of the notebook of lead investigator Const. Ken MacPherson of the West Grey Police Service. His notes made references to emails exchanged between himself and other investigators. The accused asked for those emails. To their consternation, they were told that MacPherson had "resigned from [the police] service in June of 2016 and his email account including all sent and received emails was deleted at that time."

What? The chief investigating officer in a criminal case leaves his job while a trial is still pending and all of his electronic correspondence is destroyed? Is this what normally happens at the West Grey Police Service? How many other cases were on MacPherson's plate when he left? How many other accused people have been denied full disclosure because officers resign or retire and their email accounts are destroyed? And considering that the charges relating to the destroyed gas plant documents had been laid only six months earlier, how could it have escaped the police service's attention that destroying all of an officer's emails might be problematic?

The Police Services Act of Ontario gives clear guidance on this subject: it's considered misconduct for an officer to wilfully or carelessly cause the loss or damage of records belonging to the police force. It's also a Criminal Code offence to wilfully destroy computer data. Someone might be in a wee bit of trouble.

In any event, the Crown dropped the charges against two of the accused and a third was acquitted before Schmidt went to trial. Schmidt was convicted in October 2017 and sentenced in November to 60 days in jail. A few days later, the Crown quietly dropped the charges against the fifth accused.

One obvious inference is that the goal of the exercise was indeed to put Schmidt in jail and that charging the others was mere window dressing. Once a conviction was secured against Schmidt, the others were superfluous. The missing emails might corroborate this.

Both the current chief of police in West Grey and the Crown counsel prosecuting the case declined to be interviewed for this article.

Schmidt is appealing his conviction, his sentence and a judicial ruling that prevented him from accessing the destroyed emails on the computers of the people who MacPherson corresponded with.

Meanwhile, a formal complaint about the destroyed emails under the Police Services Act, and possibly under the Criminal Code, seems warranted.