A Couple of Quickies …

 

First the Supreme Court of Canada:

They have done it again – just last week I did a blog on this rogue Court in regard to its ludicrous decision to strike down a Governments use of essential workers during strikes.

This after having recently given the RCM Police the right to unionize.  So come a strike – there is no one left to keep the peace. 

And now these Jurists in Santa outfits have abolished Canada’s law against Assisted Suicide.

In doing so, the SCC – are you ready for this – relies upon section 7 of the Charter which guarantees an individual’s ‘right to life’.

How the Court interprets – and 9 to 0 in fact, that the right to life includes the right to death – is beyond me and not only that, it gives protection to those who snuff out that person’s life.

One son called into chat line and told of his hospitalized father who was on dialysis that his doctor gave him over the weekend to agree to go off dialysis or he the doctor would forcibly take him off which would lead quickly to death.

The son said the old chap was not ready mentally to die – in fact they often went out of snacks – a beer and a cigarette together. 

The father died on the Friday saving him from participating in his own death.

And this was happening before the Court opened the flood gates.

Either life is sacred or it is not. 

To me it is sacred and the Court is dead wrong.

But regardless – this is not a matter the Court should be dealing with – it is a societal issue which must be handled by the Peoples’  Parliamentary Representatives.

It does though give new meaning though to Patrick Henry’s declaration in 1775 ‘give me liberty or give me death’.

Then – Dual Citizenship:

Just today, Mohamed Fahmy was released on bail by Egyptian authorities after Canada lobbied hard for his release.

For some reason the new Government in Egypt believed Fahmy was in cahoots with the Muslim Brotherhood and he has been incarcerated for over 400 days - but whether he was or not guilty of an offence –  Canada should not have become involved.

Fahmy immigrated to Canada from Egypt in 1991 and after completing his studies and obtaining his Canadian Citizenship he worked outside of Canada and eventually became the Cairo Bureau Chief for Al-Jazeera.

And his parents reside in Cairo.

Gives new meaning to citizenship of convenience.

But at the very least, since he has dual citizenship – Canadian and Egyptian – and since he is in Egypt – he is 100 % their problem – not ours.

As many of you know – I do not believe in dual citizenship – how can one possibly be loyal to two separate supposedly independent states?

That said, if he were living here in Canada and had broken our laws I would not take kindly to Egyptian officials sticking their noses in our business just because he was also one of their citizens.

Until dual citizenship is deep sixed – I am also willing to have Canada lobby other countries – say Iran – if one of our dual citizens ended up in jail there but that of course is conditional on him or her not also being Iranian.

So if you are a dual citizen and find yourself in trouble in your other citizenship country – don’t come whining to us which Fahmy continues to do to his discredit. 

 As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’

 

Canada’s Terror Bill C-51 …Part 2….

 

Now some possible examples of how cases could be handled in this new legislative environment.

Some, you will see, are similar to recent events here in Canada.

Before I deal with this though I want to stress that as a Libertarian – my greatest goal is to see that there is little or no restriction when it comes to one’s enjoyment of the Fundamental Freedoms found in section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

• (a) freedom of conscience and religion;

• (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

• (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

• (d) freedom of association.

The greatest of these rights is found in 2(b) which encompasses the Freedom of Speech.

In regard to that Freedom – as I pointed out in an earlier Blog, this Freedom does not extend to permitting you to cry fire in a crowded theatre unless of course the joint is in fact on fire. But beyond that, there had better be a very good reason to limit what people want to say.

Sadly, in the case the Jihadists – there is a very good reason for further restrictions … We Are At War With Them.  

So keeping this in mind – lets look at the following five examples and see how they could / would be dealt with given the current state of our law and the about to become into effect - Bill C-51

Case One:

Jihadist /  Muslim / Islamic Terrorist sneaks up on a unarmed guard at the grave of the unknown soldier here in Ottawa and cowardly shoots him in the back.

He will be charged with first degree murder and will not be eligible for parole for at least 25 years.

This has nothing to do with the host of our terror bills – the criminal code provides for this penalty as it has since the death penalty was abolished back in the 1970s.

If I had my way – the Jihadist would be sentenced for life without the eligibility of parole.

Case Two:

Jihadists / Muslim / Islamic Terrorists plot to blow up a Via Train and on route are caught with their plans and instruments of destruction.

Again the appropriate charge is under the Criminal Code – section 465 (1)(a) allows for a life sentence for everyone who conspires with anyone to commit murder.

Here as well I would insist that life in prison means just that – life with no possibility of parole.

 

Case Three:

Same set of facts as in case 2 save for the fact that the Jihadists in our case 3 are still in their planning stage – that is to say, they have not yet set out to do their dirty deed.

Under the previous Terror Legislation they could be held in custody for 3 days if the police was able to convince a judge that there will be a terrorist attack launched.  Under Bill C-51 they can now be held for up to 7 days if the Judge can be convinced that a terror attack may happen.  So 4 days longer and the test is reduced from will happen to may happen.

For me this is not a significant change and to top it off – these characters will be entitled to be release on a peace bond which, as I have mentioned previously, they are most likely to ignore with distain.

My solution here would be to lock them up for the duration of hostilities with the Jihadi Enemy.  We need our own Guantanamo Bay Detention Centre.

Case Four:

Jihadist / Muslim / Islamic Terrorist goes on line to explain how to build a simple but deadly bomb and then encourages all Muslims to build and deploy it and to kill as many infidels as possible.

It is currently illegal to counsel or actively encourage someone to commit a specific terrorism offence and with the introduction of Bill C-51 it broadens that ban to include promotion of terrorism or the international advocacy of it.

The offending Jihadist would be subject to a maximum prison sentence of up to five years in prison.

Slap on the wrist anyone?

By now you will likely have caught on to my solution that is to say, lock then up for the duration of the Jihadist War. 

 

Case Five:

My final case will no doubt be the most problematic for our left wing friends.

Bill C-51 nor does any other laws of Canada deal with the ‘Ordinary Jihadi Sympathizer’. 

So what do you do with the dolts who express admiration for the actions of Islamic Extremists such as ISIS?

We have seen ISIS and their ilk – bury babies alive; gun down children in their schools; kill teenage boys watching soccer; rape, enslave and kill girls and women with abandon; behead total innocents for being non-believers and most recently, burn to death a caged Jordanian Pilot.  

And we have multitudes of Jihadi Sympathizers singing their praises.

So what should we do with them … are you ready for it … imprisonment for the war’s duration on the basis that they are established themselves as being treasonous 5th columnists.

If they can vocally lend their support to such barbarians and for whom we are at war – the Right to Free Speech and the other Freedoms should not exist.

Solution

• Given that there is nothing in current Canadian law to deal with the situation set-out in Case 5.
• And given the weaknesses I have identified in Cases 3 and 4.
• And given that all the Terror Bills now in effect here in Canada do not even define who a terrorist is … it could be a bunch of raging grannies.
• We in Canada should establish a Terror Bill just for application to the Jihadists and their domestic sympathizers.

Such a Bill would be a work in progress – adding Jihadists groups as required. It would initially include ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram and so on.

As new Islamic Terror groups are formed – they will be added to the list. 

Is This Likely?

No.  Our politicians do not have the guts to take this step given that they fear the blow back that will come from the left.

But that is not to say it would be wrong to do this.  In fact, should Islamic Terror continue to stalk the  world – the day may well come when our politicians will have no choice but to do so.

It will be little comfort to the families and friends of those innocents who will die simply because of their failure to act.

As I see it …

‘K.D. Galagher’ 

 

Terror Bill C-51 …Part 2….

 

Now some possible examples of how cases could be handled in this new legislative environment.

Some, you will see, are similar to recent events here in Canada.

Before I deal with this though I want to stress that as a Libertarian – my greatest goal is to see that everyone has little or no restriction when it comes to their enjoyment of the Fundamental Freedoms found in section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

• (a) freedom of conscience and religion;

• (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

• (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

• (d) freedom of association.

The greatest of these rights is found in 2(b) which encompasses the Freedom of Speech.

In regard to that Freedom – as I pointed out in an earlier Blog this Freedom does not extend to you  crying fire in a crowded theatre unless of course the joint is in fact on fire. But beyond that there had better be a very good reason to limit what people want to say.

Sadly, in the case the Jihadists – there is a very good reason for further restrictions … We Are At War With Them.  

So keeping this in mind – lets look at the following five examples and see how they could / would be dealt with given the current state of our law and the about to become legislation Bill C-51

Case One:

Jihadist /  Muslim / Islamic Terrorist sneaks up on a unarmed guard at the grave of the unknown soldier and cowardly shoots him in the back.

He will be charged with first degree murder and will not be eligible for parole for at least 25 years.

This has nothing to do with the host of terror bills – the criminal code provides this penalty as it has since the death penalty was abolished.

If I had my way – the Jihadist would be sentenced for life without the eligibility of parole.

Case Two:

Jihadists / Muslim / Islamic Terrorists plot to blow up a Via Train and on route are caught with their plans and instruments of destruction.

Again the appropriate charge is under the Criminal Code – section 465 (1)(a) which allows for a life sentence for everyone who conspires with anyone to commit murder.

Hereto I would insist that life in prison meant just that – life with no possibility of parole.

 

Case Three:

Same set of facts as in case 2 save for the fact that the Jihadists in our case 3 are still in their planning stage – that is to say they have not yet set out to do their dirty deed.

Under the previous Terror Legislation they could be held in custody for 3 days if the police was able to convince a judge that there will be a terrorist attack launched.  Under Bill C-51 they can now be held for up to 7 days if the Judge can be convinced that a terror attack may happen.  So 4 days longer and the test is reduced from will happen to may happen.

For me this is not a significant change and to top it off – these characters will be entitled to be released on a peace bond which. as I have mentioned, they are most likely to ignore with distain.

My solution here would be to lock them up for the duration of hostilities with the enemy.  We need our own Guantanamo Bay Detention Centre.

Case Four:

Jihadist / Muslim / Islamic Terrorist goes on line to explain how to build a simple, cheap bomb and then encourages all Muslims to build and deploy it and to kill as many infidels as possible.

It is currently illegal to counsel or actively encourage someone to commit a specific terrorism offence and with the introduction of Bill C-51 it broadens the ban to include promotion of terrorism or the international advocacy of it.

The offending Jihadist would be subject to a maximum prison sentence of up to five years in prison.

Tap on the wrist anyone?

By now you will likely have caught on to my solution that is to say, lock then up for the duration of the Jihadist War. 

Case Five:

My final case will no doubt be the most problematic for our left winger friends.

Bill C-51 talks about Terrorism but makes no attempt at applying it specifically to Islamic Extremist – those who have declared War against us in the West.

Lisa MacLeod has proven once again…

 

That there is little integrity or loyalty in too many of our politicians.

For those abroad – Ms. MacLeod is a member of our Provincial Legislature for Ontario.  Until late this week, she was a contender for the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party but has now decided to withdraw from the contest.

And why? 

Because the Federal Member for her riding – former Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird - earlier in the week announced his retirement from politics thereby opening up his Ottawa riding for another.

Lisa MacLeod anyone?

Yes, the dear lady is looking at it and why not – it would cut down on her commuting to Toronto each week and put her in a position where she could almost walk to work on Parliament Hill.

In saying she was in fact actively considering running for Baird’s riding she mentioned that there are important things for her to do here in Ottawa such as ‘being part of 2017  - 150th anniversary of the founding of Canada’.

It doesn’t get much bigger than that for a politician.  Why they’d get weak in the knees just thinking about all the photo ops such an opportunity would provide.

And of course at her press conference she said that everybody is urging her to take the jump from Provincial to Federal Politics.

Pretty hard for the dear lady to resist.

But hold on.  Today’s papers report that neither John Baird nor her neighbouring Tory MP the Honourable Pierre Poilievre appear to be on her fan bandwagon.  These two are the most important personages that a prospective candidate for the vacant riding would want to have on board.

It does make one wonder how strong her groundswell of support really is?

But what really irritates me in all of this is the fact that over the course of the Liberal Party Rule in Ontario – over the course of the last 10 years, dear Lisa has been in her Queen’s Park seat and has experienced personally and up close how disastrous that Liberal Government has been.

Why she even ran for the Tory leadership since she felt that she had the necessary credentials to finally wrest control power from the Grits and restore Ontario to its rightful place as the engine of our Great Nation.

But she was prepared to jettison all that for a shorter commute and of course for all those Sesquicentennial Photo Ops.

The beleaguered citizens of Ontario be damned.

As I see it …

‘K.D. Galagher’

 

The Greatest Danger Facing Humanity ..

 

If you guessed ISIS, you would be incorrect … the correct answer is and has been for some time – the likelihood that Iran gets and is able to accurately launch an Atomic Bomb.

Indeed, it most likely has that capacity now.

The ablest political analyst today – Charles Krauthammer had this to say earlier this week in the National Post:

“It took Nazi Germany seven years to kill six million Jews.  It would take a nuclear Iran one day.”

Sobering – is in not?

And yet, the little guy in the White House dithers and sputters ineffectively along in negotiations with his counterparts in Tehran. He does not even admit that Terrorists equal Extreme Islamists.

Even Netanyahu has shown himself to be all bark and no bite and I am coming to the realization that even he is not the man to bell the cat.

Pity.

But my essay today is not about the greatest danger facing the West – it is about the second greatest danger – namely Islamic Terrorism and, more specifically - how Canada’s latest Terror Bill C-51, tabled this past Friday, measures up in protecting Canadians.

To keep your suspense to a minimum – allow me to quickly say …. it doesn’t.

This will be a two part Blog.

One clear indication that the Bill amounts to nothing is the fact that both opposition parties only concern about it is that it does not provide for adequate oversight in regard to the activities of CSIS.

Nothing of concern regarding the Bill’s actual substance.

I have no problem with providing more oversight – the more the better – but that will not lessen the danger of future domestic attack at the hands of Muslim Extremists.

The Bill’s major and only significant new substantive change relates to the Canadian Government’s power to ‘arrest … up to 7 days’ … from 3 days in the current law – and to issue a ‘peace bond for those who may commit a terrorism offence’ when the old legislation stated it would only apply to those ‘who will commit a terrorism offence’.

So dear reader that is the guts of the new proposed legislation – preventative detention increases from 3 to 7 days and now applies to those who may commit as opposed to those who will commit.

And the penalty – the issuance of a peace bond.

You know, the same one that has so ineffectively protected women from their boy friends / husbands for eons.

In other words ‘be a good boy or girl and keep the peace and be of good behaviour’.

You can just imagine a real terrorist abiding by that promise.

Why didn’t they add – and ‘go to Mosque 7 days a week’?

Now don’t you feel safer.

Better to simply lock them up until hostilities cease.

It won’t add to the cops bag of effective tricks and no wonder the left leaning parties – the Dippers and the Grits are okay with it … other than wanting more oversight that is.

But the Bill’s two greatest deficiencies pertains what is not in the new legislation.

First – the Bill does not adequately describe what is meant by terrorism. 

I can tell you what terrorism is in 2015 – it is Jihadists / Muslim / Islamic Extremists.  Full Stop.

You know the guys and gals who have declared War against the West.

The Bill should make it clear that it only applies to those who are members of groups which have declared War on us and include a living schedule to add and subtract.  For instance – the current list would be incomplete if it did not include such groups as ISIS, Al Qaeda, Taliban, Boko Haram.

It goes back to the principle that if we do not know who we are fighting – we will not be victorious.

There is one more omission – and I suspect that this one would generate lots of huff and puff from the Opposition.

The Bill does not apply to sympathizers of these Barbarian Groups – what I have heretofore called the 5th Column.

If someone makes it known that he or she or they sympathize with Islamic Terrorists – I say lock them up – we are at war and we cannot afford to let these bozos roam free.

Anyone here in Canada that has anything good to say about these bloodthirsty murderers is not deserving of your sympathy nor access to our rights and freedoms.

If this denial of rights troubles you realize that they will still be much better off than that poor Jordanian Pilot who was caged and set afire.

As I said, this will be a two parter – and next time I will provide you with examples of sample cases that have come – may come our way in this ongoing war.

As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’

 

 

 

Chalk Another One Up For The …

Court … The Supreme Court of Canada of course.

These 9 busy little beavers continue unabated in changing the social fabric of our once proud and democratic country.

Their latest foray came down yesterday where they gave the right to Provincial Civil Servants designated ‘essential’ to organize and of course strike.

Heretofore Governments could designate certain bureaucrats as being essential in order to keep the wheels of government turning in times of strike.  These wheels will now be silent.

And who will suffer – well you the taxpayer of course – the one who pays their inflated salaries and deflated work loads.

When that happens all hell will break open but the fearsome 9 will simply hunker down behind their cozy benches.  Let’s hope their pay cheques too get disrupted when that day arrives as surely it will.

Just recently this august body decided in a similar fashion to allow the RCMP to unionize and I wrote a blog on the consequences of their doing so.  In a nut shell – the police and the armed forces must be neutral and as we have seen time and time again – unionization of public servants inevitable pits them against politicians and the voting public alike.

But the dear Court motors on obliviously in the implementation of its left wing agenda.

The fact is, the decisions taken by the Court are fundamentally changing society when in fact, they should be taken by the people through their elected Members of Parliament.  Full Stop.

With each decision of the Court and the Para Courts and the Commissions – the democratic rights of the majority are being seriously eroded and no one appears to care that much.

Revolutions and wars fought and lives laid down for freedom and today in 2015 it is being lost – not with a bang but a whimper.

As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE EDITOR

 

Tasha Kheiriddin's article, concerning autism and sex education , which appeared in your paper today, filled me with both hope and disappointment.

'Hope' that so much can be done for autistic kids - as evidenced by how Ms. Kheirriddin worked with her own child to successfully overcome so many of its negative aspects.

But also 'disappointment', with her blatant attempt to lump her success with the Ontario Liberal Government's distorted sex education plan.  That is to say, some of the exercises used by Ms. Kheirriddin such as 'reading faces' is to be incorporated into sex ed and she is quite okay with that.

Well I am not.

Some background:

Our family has personal experience with this tough diagnosis and the numbers affected do appear to be growing and affecting boys more than girls. 

Dalton McGuinty, when first elected Premier, campaigned on providing greater help for these kids but it was one of the first promises he conveniently jettisoned. 

What autistic children need is the type of intervention that Tasha Kheiriddin employed with her daughter and yet currently there is no concerted effort on the part of educators to see this done.

It does not mean though that all children are in need of this type of intervention which indeed Kheiriddin readily admits in her piece. 

Nor does not mean that 'reading faces' is needed by either young autistic / non-autistic children as part of Big Brothers efforts to sexually educate them.

As I see it.

K.D. Galagher

Note:  I was and remain quite annoyed that this woman would use the plight of autistic children in a bid to support the Ontario Liberal Government’s plan to introduce sex education to children as early as grade one.  This should await biology classes in later years and only then in reference to heterosexuals since this is and will remain the norm despite efforts of the politically correct to the contrary.  If parents believe their children need to learn about alternate life styles – that is up to them and not up to the State to teach.

As I see it – K.D. G.