BLACK HISTORY MONTH HOW CAN WE ALL BE EQUAL WHEN WE KEEP CELEBRATING DIFFERENCES?

BLACK HISTORY MONTH

HOW CAN WE ALL BE EQUAL

WHEN WE KEEP CELEBRATING

DIFFERENCES?

By Joe Ingino

Editor/Publisher

In these modern times one has to wonder why we are so confused.

How can on one hand, society force us to accept concepts/ideologies that go against our common sense and rational thinking and make the claim we are all so equal, yet on the other it celebrates obvious differences?

The news release it read:

Every February we celebrate Black History Month, a time when we honor the significant contributions Black Canadians have made and continue to make in our country. This is another opportunity to appreciate, as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau often says, that diversity is Canada's strength.”

One has to question the validity of the claim we are all equal when we have such division within equality. The questions comes down to are we truly all equal? Are we all prejudice and or bias and in part is what makes us so equal?

Is the celebration of one race’s achievement over another in itself wrong prejudice/discriminatory? This brings to question and to the realization that we all are the same under humanity but share different characteristics of equality.

If we entertain the fallacy then we must bring to further question the reasoning/logic of celebrating achievements base on color of skin.

After all the celebration clearly states BLACK. Not browns, yellow, red.

Are we to set a side for the ‘BROWNS’, YELLOWS, REDS in society. If so are we not being prejudice by isolating a people based on race, color of their skin?

Society is a system in place much like the Internet. Set forth for the general public in order to inform each other. But much like the Internet. Society has become tainted by popular thought, science, religion and government. All being piped out at us behind storm after storm of agenda based controversies. In part moulding our thoughts and opinions. Sublimenly, controlling our thoughts, choices and quality of life.

We believe what we hear not what we know based on common sense and experience. We hear what we want to hear in order to validate our confusion. Our intellect is nothing short of a skill that allows us privileges above others. We are confused by choice as have surrendered the ability to rationalize. To use common sense and to appreciate reality for what it is.

Raw and unfiltered. Modern society is so filtered that it has lost it’s essence. Social core values have deteriorated to the point that all it takes is an act against a people to spark violence in our street. Humanity has been filtered to the point that the irrational is rational and what was once deemed rational is now nothing short of insanity.

Personally I believe we are all special with special talents. Our forefathers achievements are exactly that. Our forefathers. Now note that in my quest to understand and in order to validate the fact we are all equal. I did not distinguish between forefathers as they all played their significant role in shaping history. If this is how society should act in the inclusion of equality and diversity. Then I ask again. Why do we celebrate ‘BLACK HISTORY MONTH’?

Canadian politics at the beginning of 2020

Canadian politics at the beginning of 2020
by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East
   Canadian politics at the beginning of 2020
In preparation for the opening of the House of Commons on the 27th of January, political parties are working hard to get ready for the minority government.

The liberal caucus met for three days in Winnipeg focusing on their objectives in the context of the new reality; as a minority government they will need opposition support to survive and get anything done.

We know for sure that the first, immediate order of business once the House resumes will be the ratification of the new NAFTA deal, CUSMA (Canada, US, Mexico Agreement).

Passing CUSMA is one of the priorities for the liberal government. Whether it will pass or not is another question. It seems that the Bloc Quebecois won't support the new deal without more supports for aluminum workers, and neither the NDP nor the Conservatives are clear on their support, with both parties having said they want to review it closely.

Other items on the liberals' radar, include pharmacare, protecting the environment and stricter gun control measures, but there are no specifics on what may come forward as legislation or when. They are basically focusing on their campaign promises, but how they will be able to deliver is a question mark for the moment.

On national pharmacare for example, the Liberals could face opposition not just from other federal parties, but from provinces and territories as well, since health care is a provincial responsibility.

On gun control, the implementation of different Liberal proposals would happen eventually in a multi-stage process, with a proposed ban on assault rifles coming first, and a buy-back program later, but this will be a complex issue.

Meanwhile, on medically-assisted dying, Quebec's Superior Court has handed the Liberals a due date of March 11, to make changes to federal legislation, after the court found some parts of it too restrictive, and therefore unconstitutional.

So it seems that the Liberal plan for the winter sessions may be clear - CUSMA, pharmacare, gun control, climate action - but how and when they plan to move on most of them still remains a mystery.

While the Liberals are strategizing about how they will do business in the context of a minority government, the official opposition, the Conservative Party is involved in a leadership contest, after the resignation of their leader as a result of last year's disappointing (for them) election.

The Conservatives are trying to figure out how to become the governing party again, but they might make their own situation worse. Personally, I fear they may choose a leader repellent to the West and unattractive to the rest of the country.

However, the core of the Conservative problem appears to be far more complicated. They want to please everybody, but wind up pleasing nobody. They want to appeal to socially liberal young urbanites and their cranky rural base at the same time.

They promise lavish spending and stimulative deficits plus tax cuts and balanced budgets.
They want to appeal to Quebec while not appeasing it.
They want to cut equalization and increase it.
They want to eliminate corporate subsidies and give them to everyone.
They want to have internal free trade and a milk marketing cartel.
They are trying to move left and in the mean time seeking support of their right-wing base
These counter-objectives define the essence of the Conservative split personality that must be resolved if they are to succeed.  To be successful, a political party must have a unique and unified vision for how best to govern the country so it will move ahead both economically and culturally.

I am often bewildered at how they expect the electorate to vote for them as long as they do not have original ideas on governing differently from the Liberals, but only try to imitate them.

In view of this philosophical confusion and with a full leadership contest ahead of them, the Conservative efficiency in the House of Commons in the spring session will be predictably weak.
With regard to the other official parties in the House, the Bloc Quebecois and the NDP, their role might be more important in the context of a minority government. They have not yet revealed where they stand on some issues, but that will depend on the situation and legislation introduced by the Liberals. However, I do not believe they will be eager to bring down the government. The NDP especially, which lost half of their seats in the last election, reduced to only one seat in Quebec where they had  a stronghold before, will be cautious not to trigger an unexpected election in which they might lose their party status. So they will be trying to save face in the House in order to maintain their base support.

In conclusion, it will be an interesting spring in Parliament, and there will certainly be some surprises. We can be assured however, that this upcoming parliamentary session will be less boring than it would be in a majority government context. 

Don't you think?

Gifford-Jones: “People Are Dying Needlessly of Coronavirus”

Gifford-Jones: “People Are Dying Needlessly of Coronavirus”
By W. Gifford-Jones M.D.

Gifford-Jones: “People Are Dying Needlessly of Coronavirus”
          Why “needless” deaths from this threatening virus? Because doctors, health authorities, hospital administrators and politicians have not read history. Not even the Chinese!  This week several members of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service (OMNS) were asked, “How would you treat the coronavirus?” Here are opinions of experts who study the potential of nutrients to fight disease.
Dr. Andrew W. Saul, an international expert on vitamin therapy, says, “The coronavirus can be dramatically slowed or stopped completely with the immediate widespread use of high doses of vitamin C. Bowel tolerance levels of C taken in divided doses throughout the day, is a clinically proven antiviral, without equal.”
Saul adds, “Dr. Robert F. Cathcart, who had extensive experience treating viral diseases remarked, ‘I have not seen any flu yet that was not cured or markedly ameliorated by massive doses of vitamin.”
Professor Victor Marcial-Vega of the Caribe School of Medicine responds, “Given the relatively high rate of success of intravenous vitamin C in viral diseases and my observation of clinical improvement within 2 to 3 hours of treatment, I strongly believe it would be my first recommendation in the management of the coronavirus.”
   He adds, “I have also used intravenous vitamin C to treat patients with influenza, dengue fever, and chikungunya, for 24 years.”
Dr. Jeffery Allyn Ruterbusch, Associate Professor at Central Michigan University says, “I believe all of us agree on the greatly increased benefits of vitamin C when people are placed under any stressful condition.”
Dr. Damien Downing, former editor of the Journal of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine, writes “Swine flu, bird flu, and SARS, all developed in selenium-deficient China. When patients were given selenium, viral mutation rates dropped and immunity improved.”
Several other authorities agreed that high doses of vitamin C, along with 3,000 IU of vitamin D, and 20 milligrams of zinc, was a good combination to help fight viral diseases. And Drs. Carolyn Dean, and Thomas Levy, both world authorities on magnesium, stressed that the mineral is involved in 1,000 metabolic reactions and that maintaining adequate levels improves immunity. Another over-riding opinion was that few people know that high doses of C increase immunity and destroy viral diseases.
This information is not new. During the great polio epidemic of 1949-50 Dr. Frederick R. Klenner, a family physician in North Carolina, treated 60 polio patients with high doses of intravenous vitamin C. None developed paralysis. This discovery should have made headlines around the world but Dr. Klenner’s news fell on deaf ears.
Later, Klenner proved that high doses of C could also be effective as treatments for meningitis, pneumonia, measles, hepatitis and other viral and bacterial diseases. Even the bite of a rattlesnake. Again only scorn from the medical profession.
What does this mean to North Americans? Patients with a diagnosis of coronavirus should be given intravenous vitamin C, and it will save lives. The problem is that most doctors still refuse to believe IVC is effective.
          I’m not your doctor. But my family and friends know to visit a health food store and stock up on Medi C Plus, a powdered form of vitamin C that I developed which allows for high doses to be easily consumed and which contains needed lysine and magnesium. Vitamin C pills will do, but you must swallow many of them. Start taking 2000 mg twice a day to build up immunity. If flu symptoms develop, take 2,000 mg every hour up to bowel tolerance, and see a doctor. Large doses of C cause loose stools. But better to sit on a toilet than under a gravestone.
Sign-up at www.docgiff.com to receive my weekly e-newsletter and follow me on Facebook and Twitter @giffordjonesmd.  For comments, info@docgiff.com

Onlinedocgiff.com                                                              Comments info@docgiff.com

Nightmare on Elm Street

Nightmare on Elm Street
from Wayne & Tamara
    I just separated from my husband this weekend, and my heart literally feels torn from my inside. But I asked for it. We've only been married a year. We dated two years prior to that, and I fell for him mostly because he is The Man of all men.
He is so precious, but I took advantage of that. We clicked so well. I started having family problems with my father and brothers who are alcoholics, and I wanted to be there for them, a little too much. I ran up there constantly (they live six hours away), and I made plans to have one of my brothers move in with me to get him out of a bad situation.
My husband disagreed. Ever since, there grew a distance between us. I started seeing someone else, never sexually, but it was still cheating. A few months ago I told my husband, and he begged me to work on our marriage. So we went to counseling.
A few weeks ago I started to feel our marriage was a mistake, so I brought up my feelings. He apparently had enough of hearing it and took all necessary steps to arrange our divorce. I guess that's why I'm writing. Not only do you now know how much of a loser I am, but also that I realize giving him up is one of the hardest things I've ever had to do. Let me tell you, I've faced guns put to family members’ heads as a child and that was a piece of cake compared to this experience. I bawled and felt empty all weekend. It's Sunday night and I'm about to lose it, but before I do, I want to ask you one thing. Would it be a mistake to move up north away from it all to be with my family, or would it be wise? Judging from what I've told you about my family I think I know the answer. I just need to hear it from some people who know their stuff. Remi
Remi, your father had a disorder. It might be his fault. It might be someone else’s fault. It might be in his DNA. It might be a disease. It might be the result of converging factors. We don’t care what the explanation is. His disorder was communicable. He infected your brothers with his disorder, and he also infected you. How deep was his infection? This deep.
Human beings have an inborn bias in favor of protecting the young. But your father was so deeply infected he couldn’t or wouldn’t stop drinking, though the disastrous results on his children were right before his eyes. Now you wonder if going back to the cause of your life’s problems is the answer. That idea makes no sense. It shows how deeply you have been infected.
A contemporary metaphor about nourishing contact between parent and child compares it to a friendly game of ping-pong. The parent and child volley back and forth, living life together. The child learns good habits and routines that will embed in their brain for a lifetime, and they learn they are cared for. But if the parent’s response is erratic or volatile, not to mention uncaring or violent, the child’s brain is patterned in a way which is so harmful as to be almost wicked. That’s the problem with alcoholic parents. To state the obvious, they are drunk, and almost all of us know what it’s like to deal with a drunk. Alcoholics live in a fictitious world of imagined hurts, wrongs, and misconceptions. It’s a world of things they will not face. At the same time, they nose-dive in the real world. Either the game of volleying doesn’t occur, or it occurs in a way that is potentially deadly to the children. Our short answer is don’t go back. Our long answer will come next week.
Wayne & Tamara      Send letters to:  DirectAnswers@WayneAndTamara.com

GET READY, GET SET, GO... ONLY IN CANADA

Logic
By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher
GET READY, GET SET, GO...
ONLY IN CANADA
  The report over the news wire read:  Canadians have no need to worry about the prospect of mass quarantines, even in the likely event the coronavirus is discovered here, public health authorities said on Friday.

They said scary images coming from a now isolated Wuhan, a Chinese city with 11 million people, will not be repeated here.

“Absolutely not,” Dr. Peter Donnelly, with Public Health Ontario, said. “If a case comes here, and it is probably likely that we will have a case here, it will still be business as normal.”

Really Dr. Donnelly!!!  Nothing to worry?   Should we not be taking a proactive approach toward this very serious risk to public health?  Instead we are being told not to worry that if it happens here we should not be alarmed.

How irresponsible is this?  How can Dr. Donnelly be so casual about a real risk.   As the head of Public Health Ontario with a huge Chinese population living in Ontario and traveling back and forth to China.  One would think he be concerned.

Then again.... Justin Trudeau gets a political kick in the groin by the Iranians and turns the other cheek.  When Iran goes public with a pathetic apology that they in fact had murdered 57 Canadians in an act of retaliation for the U.S. killing of one of their top terrorist.   The killing of those innocent Canadians was just another example of how backwards the Iranian regime is.   They did not have the balls to shoot down a plane with Americans as Trump would have turned Iran into a dust bowl.
No instead Iran targets a plane with Canadian patsies.   Knowing that Canada would do nothing... yet sending a clear message to the Americans that this could happen to you.
 The same week Justin was quoted as stating that he was to issue $25,000 to the families of victims of the recent downing of a commercial aircraft by Iran.
So now we know that we as Canadians are only worth $25,000.   That our health officials do not see any urgency in keeping us healthy... as all of a sudden their opinion seems to transcend logic and common sense.
As a tax paying Canadian.  I have a message for the good doctor.   ‘Get your finger out of your ass and take a proactive approach to this very real threat and put in place systems that will assure Canadians that if the virus lands on our shores that it does not become and epidemic and or not one Canadian life is lost as a result.”
Can the good doctor meet those standards that are only common sense and responsible public service.  We can’t afford to wait and see.  We must put the restrictions that need to be put in place before we become infected.   This is why I support the Canada for Canadians party of Canada.   “Peopleism” is our people first and under their leadership.  We would ban all flights from China until this threatening epidemic is contained and adequate vaccines are developed.  Restrict anyone with symptoms of the flu and cold to wear appropriate anti infectious mouth cover.  If we do not take care of our people who will.  Responsibility starts with each one of us
Everyone doing their part will assure that the integrity of this nation is never compromised.

Canadian politics at the beginning of 2020

Canadian politics at the beginning of 2020
by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East
   In preparation for the opening of the House of Commons on the 27th of January, political parties are working hard to get ready for the minority government.

The liberal caucus met for three days in Winnipeg focusing on their objectives in the context of the new reality; as a minority government they will need opposition support to survive and get anything done.

We know for sure that the first, immediate order of business once the House resumes will be the ratification of the new NAFTA deal, CUSMA (Canada, US, Mexico Agreement).

Passing CUSMA is one of the priorities for the liberal government. Whether it will pass or not is another question. It seems that the Bloc Quebecois won't support the new deal without more supports for aluminum workers, and neither the NDP nor the Conservatives are clear on their support, with both parties having said they want to review it closely.

Other items on the liberals' radar, include pharmacare, protecting the environment and stricter gun control measures, but there are no specifics on what may come forward as legislation or when. They are basically focusing on their campaign promises, but how they will be able to deliver is a question mark for the moment.

On national pharmacare for example, the Liberals could face opposition not just from other federal parties, but from provinces and territories as well, since health care is a provincial responsibility.

On gun control, the implementation of different Liberal proposals would happen eventually in a multi-stage process, with a proposed ban on assault rifles coming first, and a buy-back program later, but this will be a complex issue.

Meanwhile, on medically-assisted dying, Quebec's Superior Court has handed the Liberals a due date of March 11, to make changes to federal legislation, after the court found some parts of it too restrictive, and therefore unconstitutional.

So it seems that the Liberal plan for the winter sessions may be clear - CUSMA, pharmacare, gun control, climate action - but how and when they plan to move on most of them still remains a mystery.

While the Liberals are strategizing about how they will do business in the context of a minority government, the official opposition, the Conservative Party is involved in a leadership contest, after the resignation of their leader as a result of last year's disappointing (for them) election.

The Conservatives are trying to figure out how to become the governing party again, but they might make their own situation worse. Personally, I fear they may choose a leader repellent to the West and unattractive to the rest of the country.

However, the core of the Conservative problem appears to be far more complicated. They want to please everybody, but wind up pleasing nobody. They want to appeal to socially liberal young urbanites and their cranky rural base at the same time.

They promise lavish spending and stimulative deficits plus tax cuts and balanced budgets.
They want to appeal to Quebec while not appeasing it.

They want to cut equalization and increase it.
They want to eliminate corporate subsidies and give them to everyone.
They want to have internal free trade and a milk marketing cartel.

They are trying to move left and in the mean time seeking support of their right-wing base
These counter-objectives define the essence of the Conservative split personality that must be resolved if they are to succeed.  To be successful, a political party must have a unique and unified vision for how best to govern the country so it will move ahead both economically and culturally.
I am often bewildered at how they expect the electorate to vote for them as long as they do not have original ideas on governing differently from the Liberals, but only try to imitate them.
In view of this philosophical confusion and with a full leadership contest ahead of them, the Conservative efficiency in the House of Commons in the spring session will be predictably weak.

With regard to the other official parties in the House, the Bloc Quebecois and the NDP, their role might be more important in the context of a minority government. They have not yet revealed where they stand on some issues, but that will depend on the situation and legislation introduced by the Liberals. However, I do not believe they will be eager to bring down the government. The NDP especially, which lost half of their seats in the last election, reduced to only one seat in Quebec where they had  a stronghold before, will be cautious not to trigger an unexpected election in which they might lose their party status. So they will be trying to save face in the House in order to maintain their base support.

In conclusion, it will be an interesting spring in Parliament, and there will certainly be some surprises. We can be assured however, that this upcoming parliamentary session will be less boring than it would be in a majority government context. 

Don't you think?

A reflection on our history and values with potential lessons learned for the future.
by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East

  After the excitement of the holiday season, January is generally a slow month in Canadian politics with Parliament to reconvene by the end of it. It is time for reflection, for the political parties to strategize and to get in shape for the political fight of the months coming.
  But this time around, January offered some big surprises on the international scene.
  First, Brexit in the United Kingdom seems to have a lifeline and a final decision will be made by the end of the month.
Another, much more significant event for Canada, was the violent removal from activity by the United States, of the chief architect of Iran's terror minded influence in the Middle East, the Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Soleimani.  This will certainly cause some reactions that might have a direct influence on Canada. We need to remember that Canada has a large Iranian Diaspora.
But leaving these issues to be settled on the world scene, let's take a look at our Canadian affairs from the perspective of our history and culture; those factors that are unique in the world and make us Canadians.
This is the month in which Sir John Alexander Macdonald, the first Prime Minister of Canada (1867-1873, 1878-1891) was born, on 11 January 1815.  He was the dominant figure of Canadian Confederation and he had a political career which spanned almost half a century.
He had a very interesting career, filled with effervescent political activity, a career we can learn much from, even today. He was a colonial leader and was one of the architects of the Confederation of Canada. He believed strongly in Canada as a country and dedicated his life to the advancement of it.
Exercising true political and leadership skills, unmatched even today, he forged unthinkable political alliances such as the alliance between the Conservative and Grits (the Liberals) lead by George Brown.
The two compromised and agreed that the new government would support the "federative principle"-a conveniently elastic phrase. The discussions were not public knowledge and Macdonald stunned the Assembly by announcing that he had reached an agreement with Brown to establish a Great Coalition. By the way, the two men were not only political rivals, but were known to hate each other.
The Great Coalition was a grand coalition of political parties that brought the two Canadas together (Canada East and Canada West) in 1864. The Great Coalition was created to eradicate the political deadlock between Canada West and Canada East.
The government at that time was unable to pass any legislation because of the need for a double majority. In order for a bill to pass in the Legislative Assembly, there had to be a vote in both the Canada East and Canada West sections of the assembly. As the French and the English could never agree on anything, this caused political deadlock. This coalition was intended to create resolution with long-term impacts in solving some of these problems and unify Canada. The coalition persisted by the government of the Province of Canada until the moment of Confederation.
The deadlock led to three conferences that preceded confederation. The first was the Charlottetown Conference, which was convened for the purpose of negotiating a Maritime union.
However, the politicians began to discuss the possibility of a larger union that would include all of British North America. This continued at the Quebec Conference where they further discussed the union of British North America and defined the details of the government's shape. They also settled on the division of provincial and federal responsibilities.
The London Conference revised the Quebec Resolutions and on 8 March, the British North America Act, 1867, which would thereafter serve as the major part of Canada's constitution, passed the British  House of Commons (it had previously passed the House of Lords) and  Queen Victoria gave the bill Royal Assent on 29 March 1867
The British announced on 22 May 1867, that Canada would come into existence on 1 July, 1867 of what came to be known as Canada Day.
Lord Monck the Governor of British North America since 1861 and a true believer in the Confederation and the First Governor General of Canada appointed Sir John A. Macdonald as the new nation's first prime minister. With the birth of the new nation, Canada East and Canada West became separate provinces, known as Quebec and Ontario.
There are people in Canada today; who engage in the dangerous practice of attempting to rewrite history, interpreting it from the perspective of today's left leaning influenced philosophy.  They advocate judging Macdonald's actions by today's standards and emphasizing to desperation, the negatives in his activity. We need to analyze his activity objectively, in the political context of his century, and not deny him the essential role he played in establishing Canada as a country.
As history is said to repeat itself, we are facing strong forces of separation in Canada both in the West and revival of them in the East.
So what can we learn from Sir John A Macdonald?  What about a new great coalition in this country to keep Canada united?

IRAN SHOULD BE RUNNING
By Joe Ingino 1.17.20   Iran on Friday vowed "harsh retaliation" against the U.S. attack on Qasem Soleimani, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, though no one is certain when or how the country will respond. Iran declared a traditional three-day mourning period after his death.  Well on Tuesday Iran carried out their threat by bombing American installations in Iraq.
  What is wrong with the Iraqi elite?   Are they that ignorant of the facts.  Have they not learned anything from Iraq?  Afghanistan, Lybia?   They can talk big but at the end of the day, they are no match.
The only reason the US did not unload on them is not to bring in the Russians and Chinese.
I bet as you read this there are high level negotiations on how to justify the obliteration of Iran so that all the global powers get a piece of the action.   That regime has to go.   This Qasem Soleimani was a known terrorist.  He killed innocent people according to reports.   If true, the Iranian people themselves should have got rid of him.
No instead he dies a national hero to some?  Really.   The U.S. goes in and kills him in a strategic fashion and Iran retaliates by bombing facilities full of innocent people and at large.  No real strategy.
Then Iran dares not call themselves terrorist.  Really!!!  They bomb to send messages.   To instill fear and terror.  To flex limp muscle...
On Wednesday, January 8th.  President Trump made a very out of character appearance on National television.   He did the usual finger pointing at the democrats but instead of taking an aggressive stand.  He made it sound like the death of ISIS was good for the people of Iran.
Almost pleading for the people of Iran to stand behind him the fight against terrorism.
When in reality.  Iran has acted out against the west time and time again.  Still today they are threatening further actions.... 
You got to wonder all that they are not telling us.  Like who took those pictures that CNN kept broadcasting of the out bound missiles?   Who tipped off the  bases in Iraq that there was threat inbound?
  To ad insult to injury on Saturday January 11, 2020  the Iranian government goes public to announce that the recent downing of a commercial aircraft over Iranian territory was a human error.
This is the same Iranian government that wants nuclear weapons...  Come on folks.   Let’s call it for what it is.   The Iranian apology just does not cut it.   As a human being we can respect the apology as a nation we demand action.  We lost 57 fellow Canadians. 
What is our Prime Minister doing....  attempts to blame the Americans.    Really!!!   Trump goes out and kills a killer and Iran has the right to retaliate?   Is that not act of support for terror groups?
Then if so.  Why should we take the apology to be nothing but hypocrisy and insult to the west, Canada and the world.  Who is Iran that can go around threatening and flexing muscle or else.
I think it is time to take action and do more than pretend all is well.   Iranians for the longest time have been rateling the cage of tigers.  I think it is time to turn the tiger loose.
What I don’t understand is the mentality that the Iranian government employs.   Sadam, ran his mouth, Kadaffi the same.  Where are they now?
In my opinion Iran is next.  As for those conspiracy theory thinkers... It does not mean WWIII.  Far from it.  Iran is a thorn in Russia, Chinas back side.  Do you really think they care if the U.S. liberates/invades.  The Iranian are noticing the writing on the walls and this is why they put out the hypocritical apology.  Only to turn around and do it again.   They had no right to retaliate.

THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY IS DEAD IN CANADA
  If we learned anything from our brothers to the south is that politics is about money, greed, power and all that is wrong with society.
  The old role model concept in politics does not exist.  It is not about the good for the people.  It is about the good for your career.
The Democratic party has shown time and time again that it not about the people.
Here in Canada no matter where you look.  The same appears to be the case.  The Liberals are no angels and clearly champion what the democrats in the U.S. dream about.   The conservatives go from one scandal to another.  In reality there is no real leadership in the conservative camp.
Trudeau won the election over the conservatives on name recognition and nostalgia.  The bottom line.  No matter Liberal, NDP or Conservative.  Canada is in bad need for change.  For true leadership.
Democracy in Canada is  hypocrisy.   We are led we have choice but in reality we do not.
Then what is the answer when democracy if failing across the globe?
Now mind you.  Trump in the U.S. in part is bringing back integrity to the Republican party by getting things done with the people of America first mentality.
Something we need in Canada.   I believe that we in Canada have a unique opportunity to bring to the world a new ‘ISM’.  One that incorporates all nations into one.    An ‘ism’ that is Canada’s people first.  One that will have a compassionate heart for the needs of the global community but not at the expense of the quality of life of Canadians.
I became involved with the Canada for Canadians Party of Canada. Soon to be registered to bring to Canada just that new political identity.
“PEOPLEISM” is the new way to govern nations.  
For way to long we have lowered our standards.  We have allowed politician to negotiate in many cases in their personal best interests without considering long term affects on the quality of life for Canadians.  Peopleism will invest in you.  Your family.  Peopleism is about eliminating expenditures that can offset programs to improve the quality of life for Canadians.  No one in Canada should be homeless.  No one in Canada should go hungry. No one in Canada should be denied health care services.  More needs to be done for addiction and mental health.  We must cut as a nation the corporate bleeding of jobs to foreign nations.  We must take Canada back.  We must restructure what we pay our elected officials as it is not about representation but reenumeration.  This is wrong.  Won’t you join me in the new ‘ism’?

CANADA IS BROKEN
WHO WILL COME
TO LIBERATE US?  
  We in Canada are fallen victim to the realities of a changing world.  We are slowly opening our eyes and realizing that governments of the world all are infected by the same cancer.   That being greed, wealth and power.
   No matter the country greed, wealth and power reign supreme.  No matter the political ideology at it’s core root it is all the same.  Right, left and everything in between has lost integrity and moral disciplines.
  It appears that no matter the ‘ism’.  They are all in it for the money and power.  The average tax payers has been grinned down to nothing more than just another number in a sea of numbers.
  Look at the recent fiasco with the abrupt resignation of the Conservative party leader.  Few years back again when Patrick Brown was leader he had to step down.   Don’t get me wrong.   I am not just picking on the conservatives.  The Liberals are no angels.   It is just that the Liberals marketing scheme is better than that of the NDP and conservatives.
Corruption is all around us.   Under the Liberals we are slowly eroding Canadian standards and principles and allowing the injection of foreign interest to change our laws, our policies and our standards.
This is wrong.   We as Canadians are to passive.  We utilize the ‘it will never happen here’ mentality.  This type of collective acceptance of reality has proven fatal in many other global villages.   Look at Syria!
Do you think for a moment they would face what they have?   We in Canada need to regroup and take back our country before it is to late and we are fooled into accepting the unacceptable.
The question then will be who will come to liberate us?
   As the co-founder of Canadians for Canada.  I can tell you that many of you reading this have had enough with what is taking place in Canadian politics.   We as voters have no real choice.  No matter who is in power we the average people do not benefit from it.  We are at the mercy of the policy of the day.    This has to change.  Under a CFC government our resources would be invested back into Canadians first.   Our standards raised and our integrity as a nation restored.  
The CFC would be a welcoming and inclusive party for all that choose to integrate and conform to Canadian standards, customs, culture.   It would welcome anyone from any nation that has Canada best interest at heart.   The CFC would champion human rights and freedom of speech while safeguarding that no internal or external interest compromise and or infiltrate this great nations root core.
We as Canadians need to stand tall and proud again.  We need to paint with one brush.  We need to eliminate the thought that Canada is to serve anyone’s needs but in fact Canada is the place of opportunity, prosperity and the place for advancement.
We need to restructure our social system and bring government back to the people and not in a socialist fashion. Not in a conservative ‘us, us,’ mentality and not in a liberal fashion.  As it clearly not working.  We need to create the new global ‘ism’.  Peopleism, taking care of Canadians needs first. Assuring that  we continue to be the great nation we are. Canada.

Challenging times ahead
by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East
As Canada went through the election and a minority government was sworn in, I foresee an interesting challenge for keeping our nation united and our economy moving forward. 
The economy, after a relatively good run, might slow down in the very near future. That is a natural trend but the question is; is the government prepared for it, and is we, the people prepared for it?
The news is: anyone who thinks life will continue as usual is kidding themselves. There will be winners and losers.
A slowdown is in the offing; with climate change ideology in place now, automation and the new artificial intelligence revolution will require bold management and attention. The government will need to deal with these issues soon and boldly.  It cannot take refuge in endless studies.  It must act now in order to avoid a major crisis.
Wages, inflation, jobs and the business environment all hang in the balance. And the financial system needs to be able to withstand the onslaught of risk.
"These are worrying times."
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) says the world economy will only grow 2.9 per cent this year, the poorest performance since the global financial crisis of a decade ago. For Canada, the OECD sees growth stumbling along at about 1.6 per cent.
A reluctance to invest can already be seen, mainly because of uncertainty surrounding the effects of the climate change ideology and protectionism. To avoid the damaging effects of a recession, the government will be forced to resort to economic stimulus which will add dramatically to the national debt.
The interesting thing to see will be how the federal government will use the economic stimulus this time, in view of the fact that our revenues are heavily dependent on fossil fuels, with jobs located predominantly in Alberta and Saskatchewan. 
For the moment we are in the early stages of the minority government, but because the players are more or less the same as in the previous government, they have done little public thinking on how to incorporate fast evolving issues such as automation and climate change ideology into their plans for promoting stronger economic growth.
The economic stimuli based on building bridges and roads are solutions of the past. This time the industries in the need of stimulus will be those based on the exploitation of our fossil fuel resources. The question which will naturally arise: will the stimulus be used for building new pipelines or will the government abide by the ideology of climate change, that will result in no change?
There are major risks for our national unity in alienating most of the western provinces as well as Newfoundland, another province dependent on revenues generated by fossil fuels.  On the other hand, if the minority government does not play its political cards well, it can soon be defeated. It appears for the moment, that the potential allies propping up the minority government, are all against fossil fuels, and are heavily embracing climate change extremism.
In view of these alarming issues facing our nation, why would we not think a little bit ahead and take some bold measures to affect our nation positively, with a major contribution from the Durham Region.
Here is a proposal for the government that would reduce our national carbon footprint and balance the needs of the West and the East of Canada at the same time.
We need an alliance between the fossil fuel producers and the nuclear industry for the benefit of both, and the advancement of the country.
For carbon footprint reduction, the immediate response is clearly nuclear energy with its high automation requirements, and no greenhouse gas emissions. Canada has the expertise, why not use it?
Isn't replacing fossil fuel what the long term goal of fighting global warming is all about? Yes or no? No countermeasure will succeed overnight, as demanded by child climate change ideology activist Greta Thunberg, but science can help.
Nuclear power does slow climate change. Contrary to claims by those who just don't like nuclear, every time nuclear plants close, carbon emissions go up. Using opaque financial jargon, grandiose claims for renewable energy and political spin, doesn't change this.
The build rate for wind and solar is just too slow to replace even nuclear, so it would never even get close to replacing fossil fuels in time to effect positive change.
At the utility scale for solar or wind, you have to find the enormous amount of space, emplace more high-voltage transmission lines and grid connections and figure out how to deal with their intermittency.
Consumers will pay no matter what the cost, so heavy tax increases can be expected. Keep in mind, the dreaded CARBON TAX is on its way!
Operating an existing nuclear plant is much more cost-effective than even existing coal and gas plants.
Scientific literature says that a 1,000 MW nuclear plant produces about 9 billion KWhs of carbon-free electricity each year with a capacity factor over 90%. To replace that with wind would require about 3,000 MW of new wind turbines at can$ 2million/MW, or can$ 6 billion, just in construction costs. Two natural gas plants could do it for a third of that construction price, not including fuel costs or new pipelines.
Climate scientists have warned that the anti-nuclear position of environmental leaders is causing unnecessary and severe harm to the environment and to our planet's future by prolonging carbon emissions.
The other unintended consequences to shutting down perfectly-working nuclear plants are the social costs.
Most nuclear plants are in smaller towns and cities, Pickering for example, so when nuclear plants close, the surrounding towns are devastated; just look south of the border.
Local budgets are drastically reduced. The real estate market is ruined. Taxes are increased and there are always layoffs of staff, police and firefighters.
That's because nuclear jobs are the best in the business. They have the highest salaries, and there are more of them in nuclear per MW than other energy producers. The local tax revenue is better than anything those towns can get from other businesses, even high tech and gambling facilities.
Nothing can justify such social and economic loss!
Pickering and Durham Region are you listening?!

THE TAX GAME

THE TAX GAME
   Are we that stupid?  We are led to believe that service charges are good for us.  That convenience charges are must in order to make our lives simpler when in reality we are paying for what those that demand us to pay should be giving us any way.  Primarily good customer service.
  In my eyes and correct me if I am wrong, the more people coming to Oshawa the more tax revenue the city will have.  This meaning that for the average citizen taxes should not go up but down if not stay frozen.
Not in Oshawa.  The game here is make excuses in order to pay for bad decisions by a council with no direction.
Allow me to explain.   Last year the people of Oshawa got hit with a 3% increase from the City and a 3% increase from the Region.  A Region that has a very strong excess fund.  To the tune I believe 5 million.  Then why the increase?
 Here in the city of Oshawa.   Last year 3%.  This year it on the books as another 2.6% meaning a defenite 3% again to up to 6%.  Depending how council votes.    Those preparing the budget blame the increase population. I say malarkey.   Logically, the more people the more tax revenue coming in.  The more money for the City.  After all.  Most of the surge in population is due to the new developments inwich most bring their own infrastructure and the city has no real additional costs.  Then why the increase?
The increase is not due to increases in cost to operate but instead it is masked in order to pay down the debt owed to the Region.
Ha, to the same region that will hit us probably with another 3% in the name of infrastructure.
  We in Durham region are nothing but modern day slaves. No one questions and those that do are punished dearly.
   Most citizens just don’t want to get involved.  The reality is that so far it will be costing every citizen in Oshawa 6% increase over two years.
Why is this allowed to take place?   Could it be that the leadership is running the SS Oshawa a ground?   For example.  Since the building was erected by our beloved John Gray at now deemed Tribute Center.  It has cost each citizens dearly.   Every year we must pay for bad management and poor decision making.  This facility has been loosing money since it was built.  Would it not make sense to sell it?  Would it not make sense to get management that gets  results.
No instead it has become a norm that this facility is a money loosing asset and management has no incentive to change.  They know the city will pay.  And tomorrow is another day.  What we need is new management, new council.  In the U.S. they impeach for a lot less then incompetency.  What can we do here to stop this open tap of expenditures on our dime?

"HE WENT FOR HIS GUN AND I WENT FOR MY GUN AND I BEAT HIM TO THE DRAW."

 H. J. Rogers
A Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the Harvard Law School 66. 

HIM TO THE DRAW."
       THESE WERE THE LAST WORDS MY FATHER SAID TO ME.  THIS WAS SHORTLY AFTER THE TURN OF THE PAST CENTURY, NOT TOO LONG AFTER HE LEARNED THAT HE HAD LOU GEHRIG'S DISEASE.  HE SHOWED UP AT MY OFFICE, TOLD ME THAT HE WANTED TO TALK TO ME AND WE WENT INTO ANOTHER ROOM.  IT WAS AT THAT TABLE THAT HE TOLD ME HOW THE STORY OF HOW THE WAR ENDED FOR HIM.
       BUT LET ME TELL YOU HOW THE WAR BEGAN FOR ME.  ON THE MORNING OF 7 DECEMBER 1941, MY FATHER, MY SAINTED MOTHER, AND ME MOTORED FROM FT. BENNING, GEORGIA, TO ATLANTA.  THE PURPOSE OF THE TRIP WAS TO BUY THEIR FIRST HOME, A SMALL TRAILER THAT MY MOTHER WOULD DRIVE BACK TO WEST VIRGINIA AFTER MY FATHER SHIPPED OUT TO NORTHERN IRELAND IN EARLY 1942.  NO AMERICAN SAW MORE COMBAT THAN MY FATHER IN WW II.  HE WAS PART OF THE INVASION OF NORTH AFRICA, SICILY, AND THEN UP THE BOOT OF ITALY [CHURCHILL  CALLED THIS ''THE SOFT UNDERBELLY OF EUROPE''] ENDING AT THE PO VALLEY IN THE NORTH IN THE SPRING OF 1945.
       THE WAR ENDED FOR MOM AND ME WHEN WE WENT TO ST. PAUL'S METHODIST CHURCH IN PINE GROVE [A SMALL TOWN IN THE OUTBACK OF WETZEL COUNTY] AND SANG ''THE BATTLE HYMN OF THE REPUBLIC.''   THE WAR HAD BEEN SUCH A BIG THING IN OUR LIVES, I THOUGHT, AND NOW DADDY WAS COMING HOME.  "WHY AREN'T THERE MORE PEOPLE HERE, MAMA'', I ASKED?  SHE SAID SOMETHING LIKE "THEY HAD BETTER THINGS TO DO, HONEY.'' BUT WHAT COULD BE BETTER THAN GREETING A WAR HERO, I THOUGHT.
       THINGS WOULD NEVER BE AS GOOD FOR ME AS THEY WERE FOR ME THERE ON SIMPSON HILL IN PINE GROVE.  I WAS THE STAR ADORED AND WORSHIPED BY ALL.  THE FIRST CHILD AND THE FIRST GRANDCHILD ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FAMILY.  WHEN I TOOK ''THE FIRST STEP'' OF 12 SOME 35 YEARS LATER, I SAW RATHER QUICKLY THAT IN AA AND NA THAT ONE RECEIVED THE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT OF ''GRANDMOTHER LOVE''.
       MY MOTHER WAS YOUNG AND ATTRACTIVE AND HAD STOLEN MY FATHER FROM HER YOUNGER SISTER (SOMETHING THAT WAS TOLD TO ME BY A GREAT AUNT IN SO-CAL WHEN I HITCHHIKED OUT THERE AFTER MY SECOND YEAR OF LAW SCHOOL.)  SHE WAS THE FAVORITE OF THE LOCAL DOCTOR WHO TOOK A SHINE ON ME AND WOULD LATER GIVE ME A DOCTOR'S HANDBAG (DOCTORS MADE HOUSE CALLS BACK THEN.)  HE WAS ALWAYS THERE TO GIVE ME A ''BOOST'' AND ONCE WHEN I HAD SOME  FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES IN LAW SCHOOL, HE MAILED ME A WAD OF CASH.
       THE LEITMOTIF, THE BACKGROUND BUZZ AS IT WERE THAT FOLLOWED ME UP UNTIL I WAS 6 OR 7 WAS ''POOR LITTLE BOY.  HE'S SO SWEET, TALKING ALL THEY TIME.  SO FULL OF ENERGY.  AND HE WILL PROBABLY NEVER SEE HIS FATHER.''  MY FATHER HAD BOUGHT INTO THAT MYTH.  YEARS LATER HE WOULD TELL ME ''WHEN I SHIPPED OUT, I NEVER EXPECTED TO SOME BACK.'' AND THE STATISTICS BACKED HIM THIS.  THE MORTALITY RATE OF A 2nd LIEUTENANT IN COMBAT IS NOT TOO MUCH MORE THAN THE DEW ON THE MORNING GRASS.
       BUT LET'S GET BACK TO MY FATHER AND ME AT THE TABLE.  HE TOLD ME THAT FOR THE LAST YEAR HE WAS A LIAISON BETWEEN THE AMERICAN ARMY AND THE ITALIAN PARTISANS.  THEY WERE MOSTLY COMMUNISTS WHO HAD OPPOSED MUSSOLINI SINCE HE TOOK OVER AND THEY WAGED A BITTER, VERY PERSONAL GUERILLA AGAINST THE ITALIAN FASCISTS.  FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN AMBUSHED AND KILLED 13 SS MEN, HITLER PERSONALLY ORDERED A 10 FOR 1 REPRISAL.  ''AND THAT WAS WHEN ITALY AND GERMANY WERE ALLIES'', MY FATHER TOLD ME.
       WHAT FOLLOWS IS THE REPLICATION OF WHAT MY FATHER TOLD ME IN HIS WORDS SOME 10 OR 15 YEARS AGO:
I was coming back to the base and about halfway there I saw two soldiers hitchhiking and I picked them up.  I said that I had to stop at Graves Registration but that I would take them to where they were going after I was done.  Well, they stole my jeep and the Army in its wisdom took the cost of the Jeep out of my pay.  Also, they docked me extra because an officer isn't supposed to be driving a Jeep.  He's supposed to have a driver.  Well, it's just a few days later--the War's almost over and the Jerries are surrendering in droves--and I see this big column of soldiers marching up the road, they're raising this big cloud of dust.  As they got closer I could see that they were Germans and they were all carrying their weapons because the Italian partisans would have killed them if they could.  There was a full Colonel leading them standing up driving the Jeep AND IT WAS MY JEEP.  He didn't have a driver either!!!  So the Colonel went for his gun, etc.
       HE WENT ON AND TOLD ME HOW HIS LAWYER HAD SOLD HIM OUT.  DIDN'T PLEAD HIS CASE WELL, ETC. FOR EXAMPLE, HE HAD HIM APPLY FOR A PURPLE HEART RETROACTIVELY.  HE HAD GOT HIT WITH SOME SHRAPNEL A YEAR OF TWO EARLIER.  SAID IT DIDN'T LOOK GOOD, LIKE HE WAS ASKING FOR MERCY.  AT THE TIME I JUST WROTE THAT OFF AS TYPICAL WETZEL COUNTY HARD-HEADEDNESS.  A LAWYER THERE CAN NEVER ''WIN'' A CRIMINAL CASE:  IF THEY GUY GETS CONVICTED, HIS LAWYER LET HIM DOWN; IF HE GETS ACQUITTED, HE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED IN THE FIRST PLACE AND YOU SHOULD GIVE HIM HIS MONEY BACK.  
       I ONLY BROUGHT MY MOTHER TO TEARS ONCE, WHEN I WAS 12 OR 13.  MOM WAS BERATING ME ABOUT WHAT A TERRIBLE CHILD I WAS (and rightfully so!) AND I INTERJECTED WITH ''SO LOOK AT YOU.  YOU WERE GOING TO BE AN ARMY OFFICER'S WIFE, TRAVELING ALL OVER THE WORLD, WEREN'T YOU?  WELL LOOK AT YOU, LOOK AT WHERE YOU ARE NOW?  IT WAS AT SOME POINT AFTER SHE QUIT CRYING---MINUTES, HOURS, DAYS, WEEKS OR YEARS,I DON'T REMEMBER BUT NOW, RIGHT NOW I CAN HEAR HER SOFT VOICE SAYING  Your Father got into a lot of trouble just as the War was ending.  Don't ask him about it, it will only make him mad.  Maybe someday he will tell you about it, maybe he won't.  Just don't ask him anything about the War.  Let him tell you.  Let him tell you, Herbie.
       IT WAS IN A CONVERSATION WITH A NEW MARTINSVILLE LAWYER (WALTER ''DIRT'' BALL) WELL OVER 60 YEARS LATER THAT MY FATHER ''SPOKE'' TO ME AGAIN.  "DIRT'' LISTENED QUIETLY AS I TOLD HIM THE STORY AND WHEN I WAS FINISHED HE SAID QUICKLY AND WITHOUT ANY HESITATION HE KILLED HIM.''
       ''DIRT'' WENT ON TO TELL ME ABOUT HIS FATHER WHO WAS IN THE PO VALLEY AT THE SAME TIME.  THE GERMANS HAD OVERRUN THEIR POSITION AND HIS FATHER WAS AWARDED  A SILVER STAR, A BRONZE STAR AND A PURPLE HEART FOR HIS CONDUCT IN REPELLING THE ATTACK.  HE WAS (LITERALLY) STABBED IN THE BACK.  ''THOSE GUYS HAD BEEN IN COMBAT FOR OVER THREE YEARS'', HE SAID.  ''THEY WEREN'T GOING TO PULL A GUN AND NOT USE IT.''  WHEN ''DIRT'' SAID THAT I THOUGHT ''THAT'S WHAT MY FATHER ALWAYS SAID TO HIS LITTLE GUN 'FREAK' SON: 'NEVER PULL A GUN UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO USE IT'."  IN MY IGNORANCE, I THOUGHT THAT THIS MEANT READY TO USE.  IN THE DAY [WHAT AN ODIOUS PHRASE, ALTHOUGH NOT NEARLY AS BAD AS ''WHATEVER''], I THOUGHT PULLING A GUN ON SOMEONE WAS JUST ONE WAY TO SETTLE AN ARGUMENT.
       SO IT'S AS CLEAR AS I WANT IT TO BE THAT MY WAR HERO FATHER [NOTA BENE: I HAVE REMOVED THE ITALICS AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS ARTICLE] BY SAYING ''I BEAT HIM TO THE DRAW'' WAS SAYING SOMETHING THAT ANY KNOWLEDGEABLE PERSON---OTHER THAN HIS ''WAR WIMP'' SON---WOULD UNDERSTAND.  AND THE REASON THAT MY FATHER FELT HIS LAWYER LET HIM DOWN IS THAT HE BELIEVED IN HIS HEART OF HEARTS THAT HE ACTED IN SELF-DEFENSE.  AFTER ALL, WHAT CAPTAIN WOULD DARE TO PULL A GUN ON A FULL COLONEL?
       THIS IS NOT WHERE THE STORY ENDS THOUGH.  THERE ARE LOTS OF LOOSE ENDS.  HOW DID MY FATHER GET OUT OF DOING THE FULL 10 YEARS AT HARD LABOR IN THE FEDERAL PRISON AT LEAVENWORTH?  WHEN DID HE GET HIS VETERAN'S BENEFITS RESTORED?  THE PRISONERS WHO WERE FOLLOWING THE COLONEL WERE NOT ''REAL'' GERMANS BUT RUSSIANS WHO HAD BEEN CAPTURED ON THE EASTERN FRONT AND SENT TO ITALY IN GERMAN UNIFORMS.  AT POTSDAM THE ALLIES HAD AGREED TO SEND THEM BACK TO JOSEF STALIN.  WERE THESE ERSATZ GERMANS UNKNOWINGLY MARCHING TO THEIR DEATH?  WHO WAS THE GOLEM OF TRIESTE?  WHO WAS HUGH THOMPSON, JR. AND WHY DO I CONSIDER HIM THE GREATEST HERO OF OUR ADVENTURE IN VIET NAM?  [HINT: HE WAS A HELICOPTER PILOT.]      WHAT PART DO THESE ITEMS PLAY, IF ANY, IN MY FATHER'S STORY?
       IF YOU SEE ME AND WANT ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED, IT WILL BE NECESSARY FOR YOU TO MAKE AN IMMEDIATE $20 CASH CONTRIBUTION TO MOI.  IF YOU WANT A TELEPHONE REPLY, PLEASE CONTRIBUTE $100 TO HERBERT JOHN ROGERS, d/b/a, H. JOHN ROGERS CAMPAIGN FUND @ WesBanco.  Account # 0074008476. 
Routing # 043400036.  If you want a personal appearance, call (304) 455-3200, wait 15 seconds after my message for the beep and pledge $5000 in small, unmarked bills upon arrival.
       Editor's Note:  Mr. Rogers in his hubris forgot to mention that he is THE FAVORITE SON (The Evangelist Jeremy Gilbert from Paden City said that Mr. Rogers is G-D'S FAVORITE SON) for President in the 2020 Democratic primary.  Mr. Rogers in his political evolution has gone from Roosevelt Democrat to Libertarian and is currently a "DIXICRAT".  He has sought and received the blessing of the members of the PIPELINERS PENTACOSTAL PALACE, the "new wine'' in the old bottle of the First Methodist Church in New Martinsville.     
"HE WENT FOR HIS GUN AND I WENT FOR MY GUN AND I BEAT

The problem with federal judges!

The problem with
federal judges!
By Larry Klayman
The chief justice of the Supreme Court, the ever leftist-oriented John Roberts, many months ago strongly criticized President Trump for speaking plainly about the biases and political inclinations of federal judges. The president's criticism came in response to a ruling by the Honorable Jon Tigar, an Obama appointee on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, perhaps the most openly leftist of all district courts in the United States – and that says a lot given the makeup of most lower federal courts, particularly in the District of Columbia. Judge Tigar, who is the son of far-left activist attorney Michael Tigar, who not coincidentally intervened in the 9th Circuit case involving my client Sheriff Joe Arpaio, arguing that the sheriff's pardon should be nullified, had just issued injunctive relief thwarting the administration's asylum policy to limit rampant illegal immigration. After Trump simply pointed out that another Obama judge had ruled against him, Chief Justice Roberts issued this pubic statement:
"We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for." [Adam Liptak, "Chief Justice Defends Judicial Independence After Trump Attacks 'Obama Judge,'" New York Times, Nov. 21, 2018.]
Roberts' ridiculous defense of the political and other biases inherent in the federal judiciary is dishonest, and it is why conservatives and many others have lost confidence in the chief justice, who might just as well be head of the Supreme Court on Pluto. Even the left and its Fake News Media know that federal court rulings in cases that involve or even touch on politics, or social issues like abortion, usually go along partisan lines. That is why the media of all political bents generally make reference to which president, Democrat or Republican, appointed a federal judge to the bench.
I have said many times, including in my autobiography, "Whores: Why and How I Came to Fight the Establishment!" that one can predict with great certainty how a federal judge is likely to rule based on the political party of the president who appointed him or her. There are exceptions, but not many, and when there is an exception, its usually for other reasons, such as a judge not wanting to rule in favor of a party that is controversial, such as with many of my clients. Here, a federal judge may not want to be seen siding with a party who has been smeared heavily by the media or elsewhere, lest he or she also then be smeared for ruling in that party's favor. Again, there are exceptions, but very few.
Yesterday, two rulings came down from the most politicized federal district court in the United States, short of Judge Jon Tigar's one in San Francisco, ruling against my clients Dr. Jerome Corsi and Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The two rulings, dismissing their cases, were largely the result of these extra-judicial currents and forces.
The Corsi case was primarily against Special Counsel Robert Mueller for having illegally surveilled and threatened my client with indictment if he would not lie under oath and implicate President Trump in crimes as part of the Russian collusion grand jury investigation. On behalf of Dr. Corsi, I alleged constitutional violations under the Fourth and First Amendments. You can view our complaint at www.larryklayman.com. The first judge assigned to the case, as related to other cases I had brought that involved some of my clients, the Honorable Richard Leon, a Bush appointee, decided not to keep it on his docket, probably because the judge himself was likely under surveillance by the intel agencies, I had learned. The case was then was bucked over to a Clinton appointee, the Honorable Helen Segal Huvelle.
A few weeks ago, an oral argument was held before Judge Huvelle, which I wrote about, and it was clear then, as ultimately occurred Thursday with her dismissal, that she would conjure up politicized grounds to protect her fellow Washington elite comrade, Robert Mueller.
Sure enough, in a very contrived decision, Judge Huvelle dismissed the case, mostly claiming that we did not show in the complaint that Mueller had ordered the attempted suborning of perjury and illegal surveillance of Dr. Corsi. What made this ruling most dishonest was that my client need only have alleged these facts in the complaint. Absolute proof would have been obtained through later discovery in the form of document requests and oral deposition testimony.

In response to the dismissal, which is being appealed, I issued this statement, which was reported in various publications:
"Judge Huvelle's decision was largely politically influenced and sadly comes as no surprise. In today's world, the elite establishment club in Washington, D.C., are 'protected species,' who are above the law. The American people are beginning to understand, and it is a dangerous situation when the judiciary provides cover for the elite and powerful. We saw that same thing in the years leading up to July 4, 1776."
Interestingly and regrettably, another politically tinged decision came out of the federal court in the District of Columbia yesterday, this one issued by a judge I have generally a high regard for, the Honorable Royce C. Lamberth, who has made many good rulings in my clients' favor, particularly during the Clinton administration. Judge Lamberth, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, effectively ruled in dismissing a defamation complaint I had filed for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, that while America's Toughest Sheriff was defamed by CNN, Rolling Stone and the Huffington Post, who falsely called him a "convicted felon," we had not pled actual malice with enough specificity to allow the case to go forward.
At the oral argument in the Arpaio case, I had told Judge Lamberth that I would amend the complaint if he wanted more specificity. But rather than asking me to amend, he dismissed the case with prejudice even though his decision admits that the sheriff was defamed.
Why did Judge Lamberth do this? In my view because the leftist media had made Arpaio so radioactive that even my favorite jurist got cold feet, preventing this case to go forward lest similar scorn come down on him as he faces the prospect of holding Hillary Clinton's feet to the fire in a FOIA case involving the destruction of her 33,000-plus emails.
I had seen this approach before with Judge Lamberth during my days at Judicial Watch, and while I do not agree with it, I have always been thankful that he did frequently stand up to the elite in the nation's capital. Given that we can easily be more specific as to the actual malice requirement for defamation against a public figure like the sheriff, I will now file a new complaint with more detail, have it assigned as related to Lamberth and hold the judge to his own words.
All of this underscores why federal judges should never have been given life tenure by our Founding Fathers, as they are not accountable to We the People. And, it also points out why state judges, who generally can be voted out of office, suffer from "less fun and games" on the bench.
If this nation is not to go the way of another revolution, we need to find a way to depoliticize and disinfect the federal judiciary. Otherwise, we will be right back to July 4, 1776.

HAS ANYONE HEARD OF THE WORD TREASON?

HAS ANYONE HEARD OF THE WORD
TREASON?

   
 By Joe Ingino b.a.
                                    Editor/Publisher

“I live a dream in a nightmare world”
HAS ANYONE HEARD OF THE WORD
TREASON?
By defenition, TREASON is defined as: In law, treason is criminal disloyalty to the state. It is a crime that covers some of the more extreme acts against one's nation or sovereign.
Now excuse me for asking a stupid question.   Is the media not committing acts of treason every time they report false news?   News companies like CNN.  A place that takes a clear side on arguments and creates it’s own circle of so called experts in just about any topic.  As long as they support the democratic agenda that CNN so closely favors.
First it was the Mueller report and the Russians.  Now it is an attempt at impeachement on a conversation that took place between the U.S. and the Hungarian president.
I have a question.   Is anything that the President does confidential?  What next the democrats are going to expect to have TOP SECRET documents released to the general public?
Are those that serve under the president by law forced to maintain some sort of confidentiality and or loyalty to the office?
It appears that those so called whistle blowers are nothing but disgruntled employees.  People that are clearly what is wrong with democracy.  People that have proven to be careered ‘me, me, me’ types with no consideration for the betterment of the population at large.
Democracy does not mean just because you lost an election that you have the right to destroy a country.   It does not mean that because you have the right to freedom of speech that you use it as a tool to push your selfish agenda.
Then they talk about that In the United States, the "deep state" is a conspiracy theory which suggests that collusion and cronyism exist within the US political system and constitute a hidden government within the legitimately elected government. 
 Conspiracy theorists believe that there is "a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process", or consider the deep state to encompass corruption prevalent among career politicians and civil servants.
The term was originally coined to refer to a relatively invisible state apparatus in Turkey "composed of high-level elements within the intelligence services, military, security, judiciary, and organized crime" and similar alleged networks in other countries including Egypt, Ukraine, Spain, Colombia, Italy, Israel, and many others.
Once again... if this stands true.   Are these not acts of treason by government officials.  Are they not deemed acts of terrorism against the state?
I don’t understand why in North America we have grown to hate success.  Could it be that there are so many failures that it is a given to have anyone successful?  Trump may not be an angel from heaven.  But he surely has proven himself to be an exceptionally good business personal and a leaders.   I sometimes wonder how he keeps going on day after day?   After all the scrutiny and all the harassment.  Is it worth it.  After all he is donating his pay to good causes.
What keeps him going?  Love for nation.  Call of duty.   All I know is that in my opinion Trump has proven to be the best American President.   He keeps his word and he keep on the path of what he deems greatness.  What more can you ask?  As for impeachement... it would be a great travesty for the American people to loose such an asset over he said, she said.

ARE WE WORTHY OF REMEMBRANCE? By Joe Ingino

Logic
By Joe Ingino
Editor/Publisher

“I live a dream in a nightmare world”

ARE WE WORTHY OF
REMEMBRANCE? 
 In a society that is all about ‘ME, ME, ME’.  In a society that carries on with apathetic attitudes towards humanity.   Are we worthy of remembering those that have fallen before  us.   Men and women that have sacrificed for our freedoms, our civil and human rights?  Men and women that have paid the ultimate price in the preservation of our culture, customs, traditions and way of life. 
Are we anything but hypocrites to once a year stand out on a cold day to remember the efforts that we violate on a daily basis?
Look how we treat our veterans.    We can pay 10 million dollars to a hockey player.  Yet, a wounded veteran... or any veteran for that matter will never ever see anything close to a million.  They in most cases are left at the mercy at the policy  of  the government of the day.
True condolence is not remembrance once a year in a show of false pretense.   As a government.  In oder to show true appreciation.   Every veteran and or immediate family member to a veteran that has passed should receive a set amount of money as appreciation for their or their family members contribution to this great nation we all call home.
No, instead we fill our eyes with tears in a false and in my opinion demeaning act or remembrance.  Is this what our forefathers fought for? Is this what our current troops are fighting for?
A pat on the back and a few words of encouragement.  While the rest of the population lives their lives in many cases in violation of the principles that of those that are serving and risking life for?
Like really, lets call a spade a spade here.
In our modern society if you believe in Canada first you are labeled a Nationalist.  If you express your point of view on the invading by foreign norms, traditions and customs you are labeled as suffering from a ‘PHOBIA’.  Is this what those soldiers gave their lives for?   Did they not die protecting the right to express our opinion without persecution?  Did they not serve with fear and uncertainty in their hearts..knowingly that they where serving their beloved country, Canada?    Are we to label these fallen as had suffered from a phobia?   A bunch of Nationalists.   We live in a confused society.  Forced to comply or else.  During remembrance day.  We should not be remembering those that served.  But reward them as they should.   And if our hearts leads us so passionately to remember and our eyes need to fill with tears in the process.  We must keep in our hearts the principles and convictions of those that have served.  Canada first all enemy or opposing our great nation second.   Right is right and wrong will be made right.  Now whipe your eyes and take action.  CANADA FIRST.
“When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.”  Mark Twain

Remembrance Day, time for reflection...

Remembrance Day, time for reflection...
by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East
November 11th is a day to stand in silent reflection of so many other days that have come before it. It is a day that remembers those brave Canadians who consolidated our nation.

At the 11th hour on the 11th day of the 11th month, more than a century ago when the guns of the Great War at last fell silent, the fury of conflict was replaced by a deafening silence.

After more than four years of this intense conflict of country against country, human being against human being, we were faced with all we had done, all we had lost and all we had sacrificed as a nation.

Despite detractors and those who would rewrite history today, in an attempt to minimize this important event for our nation, Canadians will stand strong in defending the sacrifices of their ancestors for a better, free and strong Canada for centuries to come.

We need to remember the wise words of Nobel peace prize laureate and a holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel:

"Without memory, there is no culture. Without memory, there would be no civilization, no society, no future."

Remembrance Day isn't just about war and those we've lost, but about ideals and what we stand for. It's about respecting our past and looking hopefully forward, and more than anything, thanking those who have served.

From the trenches of the First World War, to the Second World War and the Korean War, to the deserts of Afghanistan, years have passed defending the beliefs and values that we as Canadians stand for.

One hundred and one years ago, on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month, the armistice between Britain, France, and Germany went into effect, bringing an end to the First World War.

More than 625,000 Canadian men and women had served, 154,361 had been wounded and 61,082 had lost their lives-a full 10% of those who served our country, lost their lives for our freedom.

The year 1918 and the end of the First World War-the origin of Remembrance Day-seem so long ago in the context of many of our lives here today.

But at the same time, the reality of war is only as far away as a veteran, a family member, friend or neighbour who has been touched by that war or those that have followed. Similarly, much of who and what we are as a nation, was defined by war.
And so today, we take the time to reflect, remember and honour those who fought for our freedom in the First World War, the Second World War, the Korean War, Peacekeeping operations and the recent war in Afghanistan

We also remember those who stayed in Canada, and served on home soil.
On this day we remember the brave members of our Canadian Armed Forces who left behind what they loved and lived for to carry out their job with purpose and pride.

It's a feeling many of us will never have to experience.
As husbands and wives, sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, and brothers and sisters, these brave citizens are certainly not faceless.

They are friends and neighbours.  They have dreams and goals. 
And they have plans for the future.
That's why it's important that Remembrance Day has become such a significant part of Canadian culture. 

Over the course of November 11, communities across our great country will gather around cenotaphs and war memorials to honour our men and women in uniform and the sacrifices they have made and will continue to make
We are not celebrating war; we are celebrating freedom and nationhood thanks to those who made the ultimate sacrifice for us and future generations of Canadians.

We pause to reflect on those who've, indeed, made the ultimate sacrifice.  They put themselves on the line out of a sense of duty, to defend our freedom, human rights, democracy and the rule of law.  Their unwavering bravery has made all Canadians proud. 
That these brave citizens would put themselves on the line to defend freedom, human rights, democracy and the rule of law is most honourable.  It's a debt of gratitude the rest of us can never repay.
The least we can do is what we're doing at this very moment in coming together for a moment of silence to think of them, the risks they took, and their sacrifices.

We'll forever remember, never forget.

Halloween Should Scare Up a Big Boooo!

Halloween Should Scare Up a Big Boooo!

If you are looking for a holiday tradition that has lost any semblance of common sense, look no further than Halloween. Today, it has few redeeming qualities.

Let’s focus on only the health issues associated with children consuming ridiculous quantities of junk. Halloween candy comprises the lowest quality food on the market – cheap, sugary chocolate bars, chewy treats, hard candies, salty chips, soft drinks, and who knows what else – all questionably packaged, and gleefully handed out to unsuspecting youngsters as if it were the best thing on Earth. What a crock!

Mary Poppins sang that a “spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down”, but that should be a rare occasion. Today, I see children spooning far more than that into their mouths on a daily basis. Come Halloween, it is scary what children consume.

I don’t seek to be a spoilsport, depriving children of a holiday they most anticipate. But we must do better in safeguarding their health interests. The last thing we should be delightfully teaching our children is to mindlessly fill their pillowcases – yes, for many it is that much candy – with the stuff that will cripple their chances for a long and healthy life. To the contrary, we should be teaching them to despise the whole endeavour, and to be much more thoughtful about what they should demand when they knock on a door yelling “trick or treat”.

Here are my suggestions:

Parents: Talk with your children and help manage their expectations for Halloween’s after-dark exploits. Go door to door with you kids and don’t be random or rushed where you go. It’s quality social interactions with neighbours that should be celebrated, not the quantity of candy collected.

Grandparents: Reinforce the message that we should spend more time on having fun than hurting our health. Join your grandkids for the walkabout. It will be good for the kids. It will be great for your health to walk about too.

Kids: Do your research. You have the tools like never before. Know that there are 30 grams of sugar in 1.4 ounces of Skittles. That’s about 2.5 tablespoons of sugar per 3 tablespoons of Skittles, or the amount you put in one hand.

Teachers: Spend time discussing the issues with students. Don’t parade costumes around the gymnasium. Give children the education they need. Teach them about the consequences of obesity. Tell them how hard it will be for them to get a job when their teeth are missing, or how much it will cost to replace a tooth.

Doctors: Be role models. You carry great responsibility. Explain to children that they have autonomy over their own health, but that it requires hard work. Make sure they know that they must start young to develop the habits that will serve them well for a lifetime.

Companies: Be responsible. If you are producing products that you know are harmful, then get out of that business, or better, be a leader within it and sunset such products while building new healthier lines.

Retailers: Be creative with the spaces in your stores where you know parents and children are influenced. Imagine how you can direct purchasing power along new healthier avenues. Remove the candy from your checkout lanes and refill the space with thoughtful gift items that children could deliver to lonely residents in their communities. Work with parents to reshape the nature of Halloween.

Activists: Demand accountability and challenge those who profit by inducing Type II diabetes in our children. Devise usable, evidence-based decision-making toolkits and communication campaigns. Help families and communities craft alternative fun.

Determining the historical and cultural significance of Halloween is not for me. My job is to advise on matters of health, and I can say with confidence that this holiday needs an overhaul.

Online

docgiff.com

Comments info@docgiff.com