"Global Warming" is a con.   A deception.   A political scam designed to divert our attention from more pressing issues. How is that possible, you say? You have been bombarded with "facts" and figures that support the idea. The scientists are sounding panicked, and the political leaders appear serious as they attend their conferences. Well, here's a fact. The total average global temperature increase over the last 100 years is less than 1 degree. We are told that Carbon Dioxide, or CO2, is the main culprit. Environmental scientists claim that human activity has raised the earth's temperature by 1.3 degrees in the last 100 years. This is silly, as there were few thermometers that could measure temperature to 1/10 of a degree in 1909, and even fewer people keeping track of temperatures over the globe. But, even if you accept that story, remember this. After the eruption of El Chichón in April, 1982 and Mount Pinatubo in June, 1991, the earth's average temperature decreased by .7 degrees. And each of those eruptions released more Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere than all human activity in the last twenty years! But, global temperatures decreased because the eruptions also released millions of tons of dust and ash into the upper atmosphere. You will notice the scientists didn't say very much about those events because it ruined a good story. Speaking of CO2, here's another source. Scallops are most commonly harvested using scallop dredges or bottom trawls. When the dredges are dragged across the sea floor they release tons of CO2 that is trapped in the sand & mud at the bottom. One bottom trawler can release more CO2 in one month, than all the cars in North America in a year. So, are the icecaps melting and the oceans rising? Yes, and the primary cause is air pollution. Almost everyone who has lived through a northern winter knows about spreading a little fireplace ash on frozen sidewalks. Not the hot coals, but the cold black ashes. Why? The black particles absorb the sun's heat and melt through the ice in a few hours. The same thing is happening on the icecaps and glaciers around the world. Scientists have found carbon particles from diesel exhaust, coal & peat fires and burning forests, spread across the surface of every major ice sheet in the world. This pollution has reduced the ability of the ice surface to reflect sunlight, by up to 14% in some places. That is why the icecaps are melting. If arctic temperatures have increased by 2 degrees, then the average January temperatures have changed from -40 to 0 degrees, to -38 to +2 degrees - and that's still friggin' cold. According to NASA scientists, "While the Earth's average temperature has gone up 0.7C in the last 30 years, the Arctic has increased 2 degrees." Suppose the rate of increase doubles in the next 30 years. That's 4 degrees by 2040. So F#*@ing what!?! There's one real fact that the activists have tried to ignore. The present average arctic temperature is the same now as it was in 1940. In 1905 and 1970 the temperatures were at low points, and in 1940 and 2008 they are at high points. The changes are cyclical, and human activities have virtually no impact on these levels. So, is "Climate Change" real? Yes, but the effect is only a fraction of the levels the environmental zealots are claiming. Consider this. Scientists have concluded the earth has a climactic cycle of 20,000 to 30,000 years. But, there has been accurate record-keeping for only the last 100 years (or so.) There is some data coming from the fossil record, but really, nobody knows exactly where we are in the cycle. Is the earth getting warmer or colder? Is the current "climate change" just a minor bump in the road, or does it mark the boundary between two trends? Nobody knows. Lots of people might guess - and they might sound very sure of themselves - but nobody really knows. What about all these violent storms and 'extreme weather patterns' we see on the news? First, the media is paid to report on the news, and if they can't find any news they'll make it up. Scruples go out the window when money walks in the door. Second, there is so much media coverage of everything (and amplified by the internet) that every event get blown out of proportion. There really is NO good reason for a reporter to be doing a live report while standing in hurricane-force winds. "If a tree falls in the forest, and somebody's there with a video camera, it will be on the 6:00 news." Third, population has extended into some areas that were virtually uninhabited 100 years ago. Now there are people in those areas to report on these new events - events that always took place but we weren't around to witness them. The bottom line is this: There is no accurate historical record to support ANY wild claims of global warming. In Conclusion... We must stop polluting the air and water. We must stop burning anything to move our fat asses around, mainly because we're running out of fossil fuels. And forget about ethanol from corn. That's another stupid political idea, supported by the U.S. farming lobby. Anyway, we need the food more than we need SUVs. You must not believe everything - or anything - the politicians tell you. You must not trust the media. I stopped trusting those bastards long ago.

 

Too many people believe that, because Canada is made up of immigrants, we must automatically accept everybody who steps off the boat. They are wrong. Back in 1900 there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to Canada. People actually had to get off a boat and stand in line in Halifax to be documented. Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. These new citizens made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country, in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new Canadian households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home. They had waved goodbye to their birth place, and gave their families and children a new life. They did everything in their power to blend into the new culture. Nothing was handed to these people. No free lunches, no welfare, and no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills, craftsmanship and desire they had brought with them to build a new future. Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. The old Canadians fought along side men whose parents had come straight from Germany, Italy, France, Japan, Czechoslovakia, Russia, Sweden, Poland and so many other places. None of these first generation Canadians ever gave any thought to the country their parents had come from. They were Canadians fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. They were defending the Freedom as one people. When we liberated France and the Netherlands nobody in those villages was looking for the Ukrainian-Canadian or the German-Canadian or the Irish-Canadian. The people of France saw only Canadians. There were no hyphenated Canadians, and we all stood shoulder to shoulder against a common enemy. And we carried one flag that represented our country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country's flag and waving it to represent who they were, or used to be. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be a Canadian. After the war new immigrants continued to arrive on our shores. They all worked hard to fit in, and find their place in our national fabric. Much of Canada's infrastructure was build by new Canadians coming from all over Europe and North Asia. With strong backs and the sweat of their brows, they built our roads, railways, factories and houses. Now, here we are in 2009, faced with a new kind of immigrant. These people want the same rights and privileges - without earning them. They want a Canadian passport - while remaining faithful to their "mother" country. Too many times we here these people start a sentence, "Back home,..."   Well, that's bullshit. Being a Canadian means you adopt our country, and our flag, and our laws, and our customs, and our mode of dress. You keep your religion to yourself. You don't kill members of your family because they want to abandon your old customs. Your religious laws and tribunals mean nothing here. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. That works in every country. Even this one. If you are to be treated as a Canadian, you must leave your petty wars, hatred, and religious divisions behind. This is your home now, and it's your only home. If that doesn't work for you, then get out, and go back to "your country". We don't want your type here. The real Canadians who landed here in the 1700's, 1800's and early 1900s would be appalled by these upstarts, waving foreign flags, fighting foreign battles on our soil, and trying to make Canadians accept their religion, culture and clothing. Many of the earliest settlers that arrived in North America were fleeing religious persecution. How would they feel if they were told they couldn't say, "Merry Christmas"? I'll bet they would raise a militia to deal with the invasion. My ancestors arrived in the 1800's from England & Scotland. My father served in the Canadian navy during WWII. Both my grandfathers were in the Canadian army during WWI, and saw action in the battlefields in France. Although they didn't believe in armed conflict they went to fight anyway. One of them was Charles H. Millard. Look him up. Wikipedia It's about time we get real and stand up for our forefathers rights. We are CANADIAN, and we should remember that every day, not just November 11th. I am a Native of this Country & proud of it! No more "political correctness". No more headscarves, hijabs, burqas or "ceremonial" daggers. "Seasonal Holiday" be dammed! It's CHRISTMAS! I want the Canada of my birth back.

 

Marijuana, Cannabis, Pot, Weed, Hemp.   Whatever you call it, it's the same thing.   This article looks at the pros and cons of the total legalization of marijuana. Before we begin, it's worth noting that anal-retentive politicians and close-minded members of law enforcement will always refer to this drug as "Cannabis".   If you intend to write to your MP or police force, be sure to use the proper terms or else your message will be dismissed as the rantings of a stoned troublemaker. Serious Social Issues Most well informed adults have heard the arguments against marijuana. At the moment, the common reasons are: Using marijuana use may hinder the mental development of young people. Smoking marijuana could cause a reduction in efficiency in the workplace. Teens using marijuana will cause an increase in traffic accidents and fatalities. Marijuana use will cause serious social problems throughout the population. Marijuana is harmful to the body. The government must protect the population against the evils of the demon weed. Dispatching these arguments is relatively simple, and requires only basic common sense. 1. Using marijuana use may hinder the mental development of young people. Yes, it MAY. However, there is no confirmed medical or scientific evidence to support this position. In fact, modern medicine is just beginning to discover that moderate use of marijuana has several benefits. There IS massive evidence to prove that alcohol and tobacco do hinder physical and mental development of young people. Nevertheless, these socially acceptable drugs are still here - and legal. 2. Smoking marijuana could cause a reduction in efficiency in the workplace. Yes, it could. Again, alcohol will also reduce efficiency, impair motor skills and create dangerous situations. Some cold and flu medications can cause drowsiness and mild impairment. The answer? We don't drink on the job or before going to work, and we shouldn't use marijuana in these situations either. 3. Teens using marijuana will cause an increase in traffic accidents and fatalities. This is one of the most distorted 'facts' presented about the effects of cannabis. One particularly anal group ran a set of TV ads claiming, "Over 80% of traffic fatalities among teenage drivers involve the use of marijuana." What the ads failed to mention was alcohol was involved in 100% of those accidents. Excess speed, inattention and inexperience contribute to almost all teen motor mishaps. We have been unable to find a single instance where marijuana use was the SOLE cause of a traffic accident. Fact: The influence of the recent Street Racing films and the use of mobile phones have contributed to more teen traffic deaths than marijuana. 4. Marijuana use will cause serious social problems throughout the population. Anyone who reads the papers will realize the true root of this country's social problems. These include guns, and the violence portrayed in movies, video games and music videos. Ever notice how the opponents of cannabis always forget to mention alcohol as a primary cause of many problems? Well, here's a news flash. Adultery, domestic violence and child abuse are the major problems facing all of us, and none of them are a result of marijuana use. 5. Here is the biggest load of unsupported hogwash. Marijuana is harmful to the body. No medical investigation, no scientific study, not one unbiased inquiry has ever found any evidence of significant physical or mental harm from the moderate use of cannabis. There are two key words here. Significant. Any chemical, drug or food - used to excess - can cause damage. Overeating will cause significant damage. The constant use of mobile phones may cause significant damage. Many drugs being advertised on TV have disclosed side effects that can lead to disability and even death. Now that is significant. Tobacco does cause serious damage. Why is it legal and cannabis is not. The second word is "moderate." Pumping up a lab rat with a dose of chemical one hundred times the normal amount is not evidence. There are a lot of ways to kill a rat. Marijuana is one of the least effective ones. 6. The topper. The government must protect the population against the evils of the demon weed. Oh, I see. The government is going to 'protect' us. The way they protected us from SARS. The way they protected us from West Nile Virus. The way they protected us from Walkerton water. The way they protected us from gun violence. The way they protected us from corrupt law enforcement and greedy politicians. The way they protected us from second hand tobacco smoke. The way they protected us from dangerous dog breeds. The way they protected our citizens from wrongful imprisonment and torture. The way they protected our economy in the NAFTA agreement. The Canadian government has one of the world's worst records for protecting it's citizens from anything really dangerous. But they are very good at protecting their own interests. The bottom line? There is no sound scientific or economic reasons to maintain the ban on marijuana. So, are there any good reasons to legalize it? Read on. And the critics say... When the federal government introduced a bill to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana the usual gaggle of critics and lobbyists joined the "pot" fray and warned this bill will mean more young tokers and a rash of stoned drivers on the road. David Griffin, president of the Canadian Police Association has been quoted as saying "What we need now is to send a clear message to Canada's young people that drugs are harmful, that drugs and driving kill." Doesn't he mean "Drinking and driving kill"? Would somebody tell Mr. Griffin that alcohol is a drug. It may be a socially acceptable drug, but it is a harmful drug nonetheless. Tobacco is a drug. Its harmful effects have been well documented, both to the smoker and those around them, yet we allow it to persist. Any drug, any liquid, any food taken in excess can harm or kill. Too much cough syrup can impair a drivers judgment and skill, but I've never heard of anyone being busted for possession of Benadryl. What gives marijuana such a bad rap? It is precisely this lop-sided reasoning and fear mongering that ruin the critics credibility. And before we pay any attention to the critics we should look at their success rate in predicting dire consequences. "If women are allowed to go topless in Ontario we'll be up to our necks in smut. Families won't even be able to go to the beach." So, how many half naked women have you seen wandering the streets? Remember, it's still legal for a woman to go topless in public in Ontario. It's true that for much of the year our climate is not suitable to exposing skin. Nevertheless, the law was passed, the furor came and went, and life goes on. "If gambling is legalized it will destroy families and ruin the economy. Compulsive gamblers will run riot in the streets." Well, we're still here. Toronto, Niagara and Orillia did not become dens of sin and evil, and the government bean counters fell silent when they saw the tax revenues come rolling in. The law was passed, the furor came and went, and life goes on. "No alcohol could ever be sold in a corner store. You must go to the government controlled Liquor Store, fill out the order slip and a clerk will get your bottle for you." Remember those days? Now you pick out your own purchase or go to the wine stores that are popping up everywhere. And what about Quebec and Alberta? They haven't descended into chaos, and there's beer and wine available all over. The laws were changed, the prohibitionists came and went, and life goes on. A real history lesson You probably heard about Prohibition. It was a measure designed to reduce drinking by eliminating the businesses that manufactured, distributed, and sold alcoholic beverages. From 1919 to 1935 the U.S. Constitution took away license to do business from the brewers, distillers, vintners, and the wholesale and retail sellers of alcoholic beverages. So, did people stop drinking? Of course not. The legitimate companies went out of business and criminal enterprise took over. The stupidity and futility of prohibition allowed organized crime to flourish as never before. Alcohol was a tremendous source of income to gangsters like Al 'Scarface' Capone. The U.S. treasury department estimated that Capone's Chicago mob netted over $400 million in 1928 from the sale of beer and hard liquor. That's $4.4 billion in today's money. When the politicians came to their senses and repealed prohibition the criminals were put out of business. Legal alcohol sales resumed and the government received the tax dollars, instead of spending the money trying to stop the flow of booze. Do we see any parallels here? Instead of illegal distilleries we have "grow houses." Everything else is the same. Wasted police resources and lost government income, as the profits go into the pockets of the criminals. Lesson: Human desires and weaknesses can not be legislated out of existence. Forget the rhetoric and put the passionate opinions aside. Consider the following: 1. How much money is spent on investigation, arrest and prosecution of marijuana growers, dealers and users? Wouldn't that money be better spent on health care and education? 2. After many years and billions of dollars spent, has the "war on drugs" been won? Isn't the situation getting worse instead of better? 3. How much money could be generated by the taxes on regulated marijuana sales? 4. What could the police accomplish with all the money and manpower that is no longer required to enforce existing marijuana laws? 5. What would happen to the dealers and "pushers" if marijuana was legally available? Wouldn't legalization deal a heavy blow to organized crime? 6. Has there ever been any factual evidence that decriminalizing one activity has led to more serious crimes? Isn't it true that violent crime and hard drug usage has been reduced in areas where marijuana is available? Consider the following. Ottawa lowered the taxes on cigarettes to put the cross-border smugglers out of business. Why not legalize marijuana and put the illicit growers and dealers out of business? We keep coming back to the tobacco paradox. No intelligent person could ignore the mixed messages. "Tobacco will kill you and injure the people around you, but it's ok. Marijuana may not cause serious harm, but it's bad and illegal." Why? What good will come What about hemp as an industrial crop? Why do we ignore the benefits of growing this plant to produce paper, clothing and oil? The bottom line is, the authorities are scared that the smoke-able variety of hemp will be seeded among the industrial crop. if marijuana was legal it wouldn't happen and it wouldn't matter. What about the Netherlands? The Canadian government obtained seeds and plants to study at the C.E.F.* Why haven't we looked at their society to see the effects of providing for - and thereby controlling - human vices, instead of engaging in the futile effort of blindly stamping them out? *Central Experimental Farms: A division of The National Research Council of Canada - Your tax dollars at work. Amsterdam is famous for having tolerant laws regarding cannabis. Despite the critics predictions of social chaos and rampant drug abuse, it hasn't happened. Hard drug use has declined. Violent crime has been reduced. Gang activity is down, and there are fewer serious social problems than before legalization. What about the medical benefits? If marijuana was legalized wouldn't medical research be accelerated? Shouldn't patients that realize benefits from using marijuana be allowed to find relief from their pain? Here's an idea. The rest of the world doesn't seem to want our Canadian beef. Fine. Instead of producing a commodity that we can't sell, lets use that land to grow industrial hemp. Think of the benefits. Vegetarians will applaud the reduction in cattle farming. Canada won't be spending money to subsidize the cattle industry. The cattle farmers will become hemp farmers - instead of going bankrupt. The hemp can be used to make paper. The tree huggers will love that. Save the forests. The paper mills will have a constant renewable supple of raw material. No more environmental protests. No layoffs. Hemp will grow on land that is unsuitable for most crops. It doesn't require insecticides and pesticides to maintain quality, and rarely need fertilizing. It grows like a weed because it is a weed. Here's a thought. Remember the big fuss about legalized same-sex marriage? Do you recall the Religious Right making dire predictions about the downfall of our society? Well, it didn't happen. What did happen was a significant boost to the tourist industry. Suddenly there was a good reason for millions of people to visit this country, and Canada's leaders were hailed as trailblazers on the road to human rights and equality. Can you imagine what would happen if Canada legalized marijuana? The massive influx of tourists and their money would quell any moral arguments. People have an amazing capacity to abandon their trivial objections when their pockets are full of cash. We might even make enough money to forget the government bungling of the SARS affair that cost us so much in national pride and income. Some people might argue the legalizing cannabis would upset our American neighbors. Well, that's tough. The Americans don't want our potatoes, softwood lumber and cattle, but they're not shy about raping us for fresh water reserves, electric energy, crude oil and pacific salmon. If we have to play hosts to their draft dodgers and 'moral objectors' we might as well have the grass to entertain them. As a critic of "critics" I will make a prediction. Someday soon (and the sooner the better) marijuana will be legalized. We'll have the Beer Store, the Liquor Store, and the Grass Store. The law will be passed, the furor will come and go, and life will go on. There will always be a tiny percentage of the human population that will abuse something or use something to excess. That can not be prevented, except through education that changes our attitudes and redefines the concept of "fun", and that will take generations. So what's the problem here? Why are we stuck in the last century? Simple. Our leaders have their heads so far up their asses they can't see the light of day. We'll probably have to wait for a whole generation of anal old farts to die off before Canada can move ahead.