Steven Fletcher wishes he were dead?

Being among the most vulnerable to its potential abuse, the handicapped are at the forefront of the battle against legalized assisted suicide and euthanasia.  So Steven Fletcher is going against the grain when he comes out in support of legalizing assisted suicide:

... Mr. Fletcher’s experience has prompted him to support those who argue in favour of legally assisted suicide for people with terminal illnesses. “I think those people should have the opportunity to ask for help to close life’s circle,” he said, a position that puts him at odds with his party. ...

So, Mr. Fletcher holds up his own situation following his terrible accident as justification for legalizing assisted suicide. Does this mean he wished he'd killed himself to avoid the temporary pain of his injuries and/or the quadriplegic state he now endures? It seems so, which would imply he wishes he were now dead. If so, he should go ahead and fulfill that wish. He has my blessing. But he shouldn't be seeking to involve the rest of us in killing him. Suicide should be strictly DIY.

And, let's be frank, legalized assisted suicide would soon morph into legalized euthanasia. That's what these death cultists really have their black, cowardly hearts set on. Legalizing assisted suicide is just a foot in the door.

Useless "enforcers" of the law

Lorne Gunter describes a bizarre case in which a Calgary woman's property has been taken over by a "Freeman-on-the land":

If the facts of the case are as reported, Andreas Pirelli is surely as guilty of stealing Rebekah Caverhill’s property (one half of a duplex) as he would be had he been able to stuff it in a duffle bag and run off with it.

... In return for three months’ free rent, Pirelli agreed to do some reno work on the unit. Instead, according to Caverhill, Pirelli declared himself a Freeman-on-the-Land, essentially a sovereign citizen to whom Canadian laws and taxes do not apply.

Pirelli allegedly gutted much of Caverhill’s duplex, painted his bedroom black (all of it: walls, floors and ceiling) and then declared it an embassy for his sovereign state of ... well, his sovereign state of himself.... 

... What is especially frustrating is police are timid about helping Caverhill regain her property. They have told her her complaint is a civil matter, not a criminal one, so they cannot help. ...

They sometimes say that "the law is an ass". In this case, if it is as the crown and police claim, they "cannot help", the law is a complete MORON. But I don't really believe that. The so-called "Freeman" is a fraudster and vandal who, by his own admission, has effectively stolen Ms Caverhill's property - illegally removed it from her possession and control.

In another less "complicated" day in the not so distant past, this vandal, fraudster and thief would have simply been removed, charged, jailed and tried in court. Today, the "authorities" overthink the situation and decide to do nothing. This is more evidence that our well-paid so-called "enforcers" of the law are becoming useless, politically correct idiots.

David Suzuki's ignorance and extremism exposed by Aussies' tough questions

Ezra Levant: " Suzuki was on Australian television and was asked hard questions from scientists in the audience.  Questions he would never be asked in Canada.  Watching an unscripted David Suzuki ... reveals how misinformed and out of touch he is. ... "

"Nothing says 'inclusive' like racial segregation"

David Thompson on liberal arts indoctrination at an elite university:

Diversity and Inclusion - To be cultivated, obviously, with racial segregation: 

In order to create a safe space, this programme is open to people of colour only. A similar conversation for white students, faculty and staff is planned for the spring semester.

You see, it’s a “conversation,” one that’s all about “healing and mutual respect” and “engaging with diverse views.”

I’m actually rather tickled by the notion of students needing a “safe space” at Hamilton College, an elite New York liberal arts college with an endowment of around three-quarters of a billion dollars and where tuition is a mere $46,ooo, excluding room and board. This, after all, is one of the most cossetting and exquisitely PC environments on the face of the Earth. ...

If it were only Hamilton College infecting young minds with this kind of insanity it might be funny.  But nearly every university and college in North America has similar programs doing similar damage to millions of students and wasting untold $billions.  It's an unmitigated disaster.

Smart meters and the potential for encroachment by Big Brother

People object for a number of reasons to the new "smart meter" technology being installed by power companies across the country. Russell Irwin, the first guy in the above video, just doesn't want a new meter ("shoved down his throat") saying his original analog meter works just fine.  Others object to the installation of the remote metering WiFi technology on their premises, fearing adverse health effects. The second fellow, Len Miller, objects on grounds of privacy and the potential for government to monitor his activities.
 
First, the meters belong to the energy company and are installed by agreement between the buyer and the supplier of energy. If you want power you agree to pay for what you use.  If the company decides to upgrade its metering equipment that's strictly its business unless the equipment can be reasonably shown to be harmful to the customer.  If all BC Hydro did was use WiFi technology to remotely collect monthly power usage data, presumably reducing meter reading costs, then who could object?
Well, lots of people would anyway.  People like Russell Irwin and those who fear the health effects of WiFi. But neither has reasonable proof of harm.

Of all the objections against smart meters, the only legitimate one, so far, is Len Miller's objection based on privacy concerns.  The potential for future encroachment of Big Brother is a real threat that needs to be addressed.  [Miller's completely unacceptable treatment by the idiot thugs of the Vancouver Police Department is a separate and much more urgent matter.]

I wrote to BC Hydro last year with my own concerns about privacy and the potential for smart metering to be used by government to manipulate and coerce energy use (for example to enforce "climate change" policy).  Their response:

Thank you for contacting us regarding BC Hydro’s Smart Metering Program.

Our customers trust us to protect their privacy and security, and we recognize and take that responsibility very seriously. That’s why extensive privacy provisions are in place for the Smart Metering Program.

BC Hydro takes the responsibility to protect your privacy and security very seriously. 

BC Hydro has been collecting electricity consumption information for 50 years through a safe, secure and regulated process. The Smart Metering Program is no exception.

Privacy is governed by the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, for which the Office of the Privacy Commissioner here in British Columbia provides oversight. BC Hydro has worked closely with the Commissioner’s Office over the past few months and will continue to work closely with their office to put in place the most stringent privacy standards, and to ensure privacy is built into the entire system.

Your information will remain private and secure with the new smart metering system because: 

• Smart meters do not contain personally-identifiable information. The only information stored on the meter is hourly consumption information. The information is encrypted much like online banking.
• Smart meters cannot detect what appliances you are using or when. Smart meters only measure how much energy a home used or generated in total. This is the same information we have always collected, just more frequently – up to three or four times per day rather than once every two months.
• BC Hydro does not sell or disclose personal information to third parties. The information collected will be handled in accordance with the B.C. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act – just as it is now with your existing meter. 
• The smart metering system uses multiple layers of security. Multiple layers of security ensure that any single point of vulnerability will remain contained and will not compromise the overall system. We have hired online experts to test our systems and develop the strongest possible protections.

All personal information will then continue to be handled in accordance with the British Columbia Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

We do not have an opt out option. BC Hydro is committed to working with you to understand your specific concerns. We understand that some customers are uncomfortable with radio frequency based technology and that’s why we are working with those customers on a case by case basis to find mutually agreeable solutions.  The options available to you will depend on your individual concerns and circumstances.  In addition, the costs associated with customization will also vary depending on your unique circumstances.

Your concerns have been noted on your account and a smart meter will not be installed at this time until we have communicated with you further.  [They installed the meter without further communication].

I suspect that was a pro-forma response.  And they didn't address my point about the potential for manipulation to enforce policy for "fighting climate change".

D*ck maintenance

"The IPCC must take everybody for fools. "

Ross McKitrick:

... [the IPCC's AR5 report claims:] “In summary, the globally-averaged surface temperatures are well within the uncertainty range of all previous IPCC projections, and generally are in the middle of the scenario ranges.” Later, in Chapter 9, it states with “very high confidence” that models can correctly simulate global surface temperature trends.

... The IPCC must take everybody for fools. Its own graph shows that observed temperatures are not within the uncertainty range of projections; they have fallen below the bottom of the entire span. Nor do models simulate surface warming trends accurately; instead they grossly exaggerate them. (Nor do they match them on regional scales, where the fit is typically no better than random numbers.)

...  since we are on the verge of seeing the emergence of data that could rock the foundations of mainstream climatology, this is obviously no time for entering into costly and permanent climate policy commitments based on failed model forecasts.  [Someone call Stephen Harper.]

Terence Corcoran: The tide is rising on climate models and policies