I was unable to post the following comment to Facebook and hope that you will be able to access it here instead:
As of now the opinion polls indicated a clear gain for the Conservatives, and a loss of appreciation of the Liberals. So far, the polls do not reflect the impact of the promised escalation of spending (another $41 billion that will have to be paid back out of tax revenues in the generations to come). Obviously, PM Trudeau is wrong about a lot of things, but right now he demonstrates, that – contrary to his much-touted assertions – budgets do not balance themselves.
We’ll have to wait and see what the opinion polls will indicate in the days to come. It seems that PM Trudeau may be disappointed, as–surely–Canadians cannot be so easily bribed by stuffing their pockets with $41 billion that the government will have to squeeze out of them first, in the subsequent years, whether the Liberals win the coming election or not.
After having used Google Chrome for a few years, switching back to Firefox made surfing the Net again enjoyable.
For many years I had been using Firefox and then switched to Google Chrome for my browser. It escaped my memory why I did so, but at the time I was not sorry that I did. A few years went by….
Google Chrome had a few glitches that I tried to address and spent quite a few days with trying to solve them, unsuccessfully. Here are some of the most prominent:
Google Chrome changed the colour scheme of my browser display to something other than the default I was quite happy with, to something that was not as nice. I never managed to get that corrected, but that was okay.
Google Chrome once had, just as Firefox did and still does, spelling suggestions for correcting misspellings as I was typing, but that got lost. In spite of repeatedly trying, often for days, to find a correction or fix for that problem, I never managed to find a solution. The feature got lost for good, and many co-sufferers and I had to do without it, but that was okay. I could live without it, no matter how much I missed it.
I never managed to get Google Chrome to provide a display of fonts that permitted me to read text clearly on Facebook. The vision in my right eye is a bit handicapped (I’ve got a scar on the cornea, in the centre of the pupil of my right eye). The type-font display that Google Chrome permits (forces) me to use does not allow me to make a clear distinction between a comma, semicolon and a period, but that was okay.
On the morning of March 13th, 2019, I noticed that Google Chrome corrupted the display of text, so that it became unintelligible.
Corrupted text display in Google Chrome browser
There were various means of making the text legible, for a moment or a few seconds, but those are not even acceptable Band Aids, let alone good solutions. For the better part of the last two days I tried to find a fix for Google Chrome, but, as usual, their recommended solution did not make the slightest improvement. That is no longer okay, and I had to draw the line.
Last night I downloaded Firefox and installed it once more. Eureka! All of the Google Chrome problems that had plagued me no longer exist. Mind you, I had to make one improvement or adjustment. I had to use the “Clear Type” option (in Windows 10: Press the <Windows Start> icon, type clear type, and follow the instructions) for finding the best possible type display. That fixed even my handicap of having trouble telling the difference between a comma, semicolon and a period. That alone made it worth switching to Firefox. Most importantly, at least for now, the solutions to any perceived problems that Firefox recommends I should use all worked. That is a welcome experience!
If you should want to switch to a different browser, first create a restore point, just in case something should go wrong and you need to go back to before you started to make your changes. (You should always do that, whenever you install new software on your machine.)
Surfing the Net has become enjoyable again. Oh, what a happy surfer I am!
Earlier today I noticed that FB has a problem and posted a comment about it.
Right after I posted it, I talked to my wife and asked her to look up on her phone what I had posted. She could not, I could not, and both of us could not find what I had posted about the problem, but, miraculously, the missing original posting is restored to its full, shining beauty, except for the ‘likes’ it had received and the comment I had added earlier. Those were still missing. I will try to see what I can do to restore them.
I went back to my laptop to try to see what I could do about it and saw that my original observation that I had wanted to show to the wife, after I had posted it, was now shown as if I had never yet posted it.
There it was, in addition, there was a little insert on the screen of my laptop, stating, something like:
“Oops! Something went wrong. We are working to fix it.”
Well, what they did was not quite good enough, because the ‘likes’ the original post had received, and the comment I had added are still missing.
Still, given that FB apparently is instantly aware of what I post on FB, I am confident that they will see fit to restore the ‘likes’ that the post had received and the comment I had added. Nevertheless, even if FB is no longer capable or willing to make its presence known, as I try to do that, I will try to keep you posted of what evolves.
Sorry to report that sharing from WordPress to FB did not work for me. FB will not let me do that.
12:16 I posted this comment to the formerly ‘disappeared’ and now restored discussion thread:
Earlier I reported that FB has a problem that needs to be fixed. This post and discussion thread disappeared from the version of my timeline that is publicly visible. In other words, what I see differs from what others can see of what is on my timeline.
Everything appears to be back to normal, even the likes that the original post had and the comment I had added have been restored. That is very nice to see, except that now GoogleChrome is in on what apparently is becoming a brawl FB is getting mean. That is not how a guardian angel watching over my shoulder would do [it].
12:26 Oh Dear, FB did not permit me to post that comment. That is a good thing, because that permitted me to make a run to Fort Saskatchewan, to pick up medication that had been back-ordered, and to buy groceries that we had not been able to pick during the bad weather that had prevailed for the last two weeks. It gave me time, as well, to make a few edits.
I had tried to report that repairs had been made and were successful. Look what happened now. A guardian angel watching over my shoulder would not be like that. This is not fixing things, it adds aggravation. It is outright mean!
What FB meant by that is not that they could not, but that they would not let me, but here I go. It is most definitely ‘later’, and I will try again.
Eureka! FB really fixed it. I tried posting the progress report once more, a few minutes ago, and what I could not do before now worked fine. Check it out and see how well it worked.
Here is to hoping that what is well will stay well. A great “Thank You!” to my guardian angel, Facebook. “I am truly glad that you could fix what needed to be fixed.”
P.S.: Jack de Hoog and Carl Garnham advised that earlier today FB and Instagram experienced big outages, to which I responded,
“…thanks for telling me about the outage. I’ll add a note about it to the record of my experiences. It does not seem to be connected to what I struggled with this morning. Why would the problem involve a posting about Donald Trump’s endorsement of Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, but not any of my interactions with FB immediately before and after that specific posting? Why would that outage be so selective and pick that tiny window of time, but not what I did before and after it?”
Here is Facebook’s announcement about the outage they experienced today:
We’re aware that some people are currently having trouble accessing the Facebook family of apps. We’re working to resolve the issue as soon as possible.
10:49 AM – 13 Mar 2019
We’re focused on working to resolve the issue as soon as possible, but can confirm that the issue is not related to a DDoS attack.
You’ve got to break a few eggs when making omelets.(1) The revolution devours its own children.(2)
Lately I noticed that some discussions are turning to the revival of the topic of the so-called “sex war” (a.k.a. gender war). It is curious why anyone should wish to make the attempt.
Sex War vs Gender War — Interest over Time, Worldwide
It will be difficult to revive interest in the topic, given that the public appears to have tired of it, but should it be a growing concern?
“Sex war” or “Gender War” are not only inexact terms, they are far from close enough to be accurate or even appropriate. “Sex war” or “Gender War” implies that: there was a formal declaration of war; the two sides make at least an attempt to conquer one another; there are clear dividing lines between the warring parties, and other things. One is that there is an aggressor and a defender, another that there is a reasonable expectation of cessation of hostilities, when an armistice is declared, after one party is victorious, the conquered party admits defeat and tries to negotiate terms of surrender, and both parties either agree to fight, so as to settle their differences, or perhaps settle for peace and keep it.
None of that is true or even in sight, in relation to the so-called “sex war.”
It would therefore be more accurate to consider that the “sex war” is something quite different from a war. The evidence strongly suggests that the conflict between the sexes is a consequence of an escalating campaign of totalitarian oppression that targets all men but primarily husbands and fathers, a campaign of totalitarian oppression that targets fathers within or without families, while not sparing families with fathers.
Therefore, it stands to reason that women and children in families with fathers as well become victims of the campaign of totalitarian oppression that is without a doubt aimed at penalizing and punishing all who dare to yearn being members of families with fathers.
That is a reasonable explanation of why women and the children with them who are in fatherless families are without a doubt the victims of collateral damage. After all, how can there be so many women and children who are victims of the “sex war,” when it ostensibly makes all women the winners? Consider:
It’s Official: The Experiment Has Failed
For the best part of thirty years [50 years as of 2019 – Walter] we have been conducting a vast experiment with the family, and now the results are in : the decline of the two-parent, married-couple family has resulted in poverty, ill-health, educational failure, unhappiness, anti-social behaviour, isolation and social exclusion for thousands of women, men and children. — Rebecca O’Neill
Surely, a war that, instead of providing all women with the spoils of war turns vast numbers of them into victims requiring assistance from Father State, is far more likely a hoax gone terribly wrong.
Ten thousand years of a successful symbiosis of families and civilization that made civilization great cannot have been all wrong. As shown in this example (it is one of many), it was not. It had made civilization thrive and an ever-increasing number of people prosper:
Humanity Unbound: How Fossil Fuels Saved Humanity from Nature and Nature from Humanity
The liberation from mankind’s dependency on the slavery of muscle power is without a doubt due to the efforts of many men who gave their lives to search for, explore and develop alternative sources of energy. Should there be any doubt that humanity owes men a great debt of gratitude? Why, instead, would anyone feel compelled to vilify men and the families they love and who love them in return?
Sources of the introductory quotes
You’ve got to break a few eggs when making omelets.
“François de Charette was one of the leaders of a Royalist counter-revolt in the Vendée region of France during the French Revolution. The War in the Vendée, as it’s now known, lasted several years and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. In March of 1796, Charette was captured by republican forces and put on trial, during which, according to Walker’s account:
It was remarked to him that he had caused the death of a great many persons. Yes, he replied, omlets are not made without breaking eggs.
Charette, you’ll be shocked to learn, was soon after executed by firing squad. As for the metaphor—especially tasteless in his rendering since the broken “eggs” were dead human beings—it originated in French (on ne saurait faire d’omelette sans casser des œufs) as early as the 1740s and made its way from there into English. But it seems Charette was onto something. A scan of the OED’s later citations suggests that the expression has an unfortunate fondness for body counts….” (More)
The revolution devours its own children.
QUOTATION: Revolution is like Saturn, it devours its own children.
ATTRIBUTION: Georg Büchner (1813–1837), German dramatist, revolutionary.
Trans. by Gerhard P. Knapp (1995). Danton’s Death, act I (1835).
In the original German: die Revolution ist wie Saturn, sie frißt ihre eignen Kinder. The phrase is usually translated using devour.
It appears that the celebration of International Women’s Day (IWD), taking place annually on March 8th, usually runs on for about a week, after which the celebrations of Marxist identity politics that favor women will gradually taper off, to settle at a somewhat higher level than they were at before the promotion of IWD was raised to a fever pitch. The annual cycle can be observed in the following graph.
United States, Interest in IMD vs IWD, Comparison, Google Searches, 2004 to 2019
Notice that, in the United States, interest in IMD outranked interest in IWD for the first time in any month and year in November 2018, 3 : 2, respectively.
The annual changes in the extent of the level of interest in IWD are most likely a reflection of the extent of funding available for promoting women’s issues. Funding out of tax revenues and private sources, to address an ever-increasing number of women’s issues, is substantial. The more of it is provided, the more of an effort is being made to advertise the fact that, although women live ever longer, more comfortable lives than men, women nevertheless experience ever escalating levels of oppression by men.
“International Women’s Day (IWD), day (March 8) honouring the achievements of women and promoting women’s rights. A national holiday in numerous countries, it has been sponsored by the United Nations (UN) since 1975.” —Encyclopaedia Britannica
IWD has strong socialist roots, came into existence early in the 20th Century and, as the Encyclopaedia Britannica article explains, is celebrated on March 8 each year to commemorate the role a women’s strike played in the Bolshevik Revolution.
For the record, International Men’s Day (IMD) is officially and predominantly celebrated each year on November 19, but don’t look for it in the graph. People, apparently not even men, don’t have much interest in it. Keep in mind, things that can be taken safely for granted need no promotion.
It appears that the only time of the year people become interested in IMD is to look for it on the Internet when IWD gets celebrated, to determine whether there is such a thing as an IMD.
Encyclopaedia Britannica does not appear to have an entry for International Men’s Day, but Wikipedia does.
“International Men’s Day (IMD) is an annual international event celebrated every year on 19 November. Inaugurated in 1992 on February 7th by Thomas Oaster, the project of International Men’s Day was conceived one year earlier on 8 February 1991. The project was re-initialised in 1999 in Trinidad and Tobago. The longest running celebration of International Men’s Day is Malta, where events have occurred since 7 February 1994.“ —Wikipedia
It remains to be seen whether November 19 will remain fixed as the day on which all people in the world will remember that men have rights, too. A universal, international consensus has not yet been firmly established. Still, as it befits them, men’s rights are a distant second to, a close century behind, women’s rights in the progress of international social evolution. As of now, the social tradition defined four centuries ago is not that easily overcome:
“It is an amazing thing to see in our city the wife of a shoemaker, or a butcher, or a porter dressed in silk with chains of gold at the throat, with pearls and rings of good value….and then in contrast to see her husband cutting the meat, all smeared with cow’s blood, poorly dressed…. but whosoever considers this carefully will find it reasonable, because it is necessary that the lady, even if low born and humble, be draped with such clothes for her natural excellence and dignity, and the man [be] less adorned as if a slave, or a little ass, born to her service.”
— Lucrezia Marinella, Venice, Italy, 1600 The Nobility and Excellence of Women Together With the Defects and Deficiencies of Men
Google Trends Compare: IMD vs IWD,
Worldwide Breakdown by Region
The worldwide comparison breakdown by region is remarkable on account of that, in general,
In the countries of the former USSR, the interest in IMD is substantially greater than in the allegedly capitalist nations of the so-called free West, while,
In the allegedly capitalist nations of the so-called free West the interest in IWD is substantially greater than in formerly or presently socialist nations.
Well, that is too bad. That is a fine example of censorship by Google. Perhaps I managed to find a truth that hit a nerve, and Google does not want anyone else to be able to see it for what it is. It makes one wonder why Google Trends goes through the trouble of identifying a string of code that is helpful in seeing a new truth, and then refuses to make the connection required to display it.
Google Trends quite clearly urges visitors to its page to “Paste this into any HTML page:” (followed by the script that would, if Google so wishes, produce an interactive preview of the page). Maybe Google should add a proviso: “If you are a men’s rights activist, don’t bother doing it, because we will refuse to make the required connection.”
Curiously, when I look at the display of the preview that Google Trend refuses to connect to on my wife’s smart phone, the embedded code for the preview works just fine, and a smarth-phone version of it is displayed. The following graphic will have to do for laptops and desk-top computers. It is linked. At least theoretically it should lead to the interactive screen that Google Trends had offered to make available for display at HTML web pages.
Bruderheim, Alberta, Canada, has no official weather station. As far as I know, it does not even have an unofficial weather station that provides temperature readings that any published temperature values for Bruderheim are based on. Temperature values published by any single weather app on offer are derived from extrapolations made from surrounding weather stations.
Of course, the problems with widely varying temperature readings or calculated values may not exist where you live. Still, it would be a good idea if you were to go through an exercize such as the one that I describe in this. This is not the first time I tried to do it for Bruderheim. The outcome always showed widely varying results.
Does anyone feel assured through such an exercize, that the climate predictions or projections so loved by climate alarmists are accurate? I don’t, and neither does anyone else who uses even a bit of common sense.
The closest official weather station (operated by Environment and Climate Change Canada) is at nearby Elk Island National Park (10km from here, as the crow flies).
Which temperature declaration for Bruderheim is the correct one?
What is the infamous consensus of climate scientists for the end of the century based on? Were the right pick and the right calculations made? The evidence indicates on first glance that they were not,
The weather app (The Weather Channel) for my cell phone says it presently is -26°C in Bruderheim. It also says that the temperature “now” is -32°C in Bruderheim.
The only nearby official weather station (operated by Environment and Climate Change Canada, about 10km from here, as the crow flies, in Elk Island National Park) maintains that it is presently -27°C.
Temperature measurement at Elk Island National Park
Our thermometer in our backyard in Bruderheim reads -24.5°C.
Climate predictions are based on projections made from temperature trends that are calculated from averages of temperature measurements in specific locations.
If temperature measurements and estimates of current temperatures for a specific location disagree, then the average current temperature for that location is incorrect and not worth a hill of beans.
If average temperature estimates are wrong, then average temperature trends are wrong.
If average temperature trends are wrong, then temperature predictions or projections are wrong.
Temperature predictions or projections based on inaccurate temperature measurements or estimates of current temperatures for specific locations are the more wrong for any time in the future and locations, the farther into the future and distance they extend.
What should we bet our money and our personal and national welfare on, or should we?
Tim Ball, an eminent, Canadian climate scientist, has some thoughts about that and expressed them in this:
“Time For Skeptics To Expose National Weather Offices: Canada, A Case Study With National And Global Implications.”
We don’t live in Edmonton but in nearby Bruderheim, Alberta, about 50km NE from Edmonton. It generally gets to be a bit colder here than in the big city. We don’t have the benefit of a large Urban Heat Island effect. That effect is quite substantial, but even Bruderheim, a town of about 1,300 residents, has a bit of an Urban Heat Island effect, compared to surrounding ruralities.
It was -31°C in town, this morning, while one of our friends stated that it was -37°C, this morning, ten miles to the NE, and another friend, living just outside the fence at Elk Island National Park, saw that his thermometer read -44°C last night.
Cold Winters in History compared to now
The current winter is a darned cold one, week after week.
The weather permits to set all sort of records. One must make sure to pick the right selection criteria for that. The TV weathermen are really good at it. They pick them right and produce a record temperature (high or low) for a lot of days.
That was not in Edmonton. The article states: “Environment Canada recorded a frigid minus 46.1 C, or minus 58.4 C with the wind chill, at the Edmonton International Airport at 5 a.m., said meteorologist Pierre Lessard.” The Edmonton International Airport was then (and still is, as far as I know) outside the Edmonton city limits.
The Edmonton Journal article mentions the year with the previous coldest winter: “The city’s longest cold snap was in 1969 when the temperature never got warmer than -20 C for 26 consecutive days. The Journal handed out certificates to survivors.”
Well, I had the year wrong (I was off by a year), when I was looking for information on that, but the Edmonton Journal, I am fairly sure, has the temperature wrong. I am quite certain that the criterion was -10°F (-23.3°C). Still, it is not the first or only time I’ve been wrong. I was also wrong about the number of weeks. It was that cold only for 26 days. I had thought that it had been that cold for about 6 weeks in a row. So much for the accuracy of my memory.
During the winter of 1975/76 even Edmonton had a day when the temperature went as low as -46°C.
My long-range prediction, going by the seat of my pants? I’ll be considerably warmer in June, with only a slight chance of frost on any given day. Yes, I have seen it snow even in June, once or twice during the last 55 years or so. It does not even have to be below freezing for that to happen, but we rarely get a lot of snow in this part of the world, especially not during June.
It was cold last night, but tomorrow it is supposed to warm up to -4°C, and then we are in for another week or so of much colder, unseasonably cold weather.
What about Climate Change? Are things warming up or getting colder?
You decide whether things are warming up or getting colder, with regard to the climate trend. The following is a graph of temperature measurements and their daily averages (T = (Tmax + Tmin) / 2), for Elk Island Park National Park, the closest and only nearby official weather station operated by Environment and Climate Change Canada.
For anyone who wishes to get an idea of whether growing conditions are changing in Alberta, as time goes by, here are links to a viewer that shows growing conditions near Elk Island National Park for the years 1961 to 2017, in terms of:
That is a huge advance for true gender equality in the United States, perhaps for world peace as well. We have to thank the NCFM (National Coalition for Men). The announcement was made in a 2019 02 23 NCFM press release:
That does not mean I agree that it is a good idea to have affirmative action principles applied in training women for combat.
Even if no affirmative action principles were used (the lowering of standards for women until they are able to pass them), it is not a good idea to have women serve in combat.
Not even if only the strongest and hardiest women (those that can measure up to the standards used to select men for combat) are chosen for combat, it is still a bad idea to have women serve in combat.
Much and enough has been said about it over the years, about the pros and cons of having women being conscripted into the military. It does not need to be repeated here, but you may wish to look it up if you are undecided.
Start with reading the decision:
Is military service by women a good idea?
One consequence of women in combat is that we may see fewer ads by Google, because Google ad policies prevent them from displaying their ads on web pages that display or describe violence. Perhaps that will help to bring about world peace. That would be a good thing.
Think of the effect violence in military actions in foreign nations will have on American voters, and the journalistic principle of “If it bleeds, it leads” will apply when women have the privilege of making the exhilarating experiences described in this article:
A Grand Adventure. Except It Isn’t
Posted on September 18, 2005 by Fred Reed
A friend recently asked me what I would tell a young man thinking about enlisting in the military. (He had in mind his son.) I would tell him this, which I wish someone had told me: ….(more)
Google had told Fred Reed that they took offence to that article. See what Fred Reed’s reaction to that was:
Googled, Gobbled, and Throttled: The Road to Samizdat
Posted on July 16, 2015 by Fred Reed
Cometh the censor. Sort of.
My site, Fredoneverything.org, has, or had until a few minutes ago, several Google ads, which served to bring in a modest amount of money, perhaps $200 a month….(more)
Think of what it will do for world peace when such consequences of the privilege of being involved in combat will make it out of the confines of Fredoneverything.org and into the mainstream media. It will, most certainly!
Nothing will serve better to do it than when that sort of bleeding is being done by women. No matter how much Google wishes to censor it, when women do the bleeding, their bleeding will do the leading. That may then help to put the leash on spending for the military/industrial complex.
I presented the NCFM’s court victory in a Facebook discussion thread. Paul Neubauer commented:
“Service could mean something other than military duty. The point is that only those who are willing to be responsible and subject to demands for their sacrifice should be permitted to vote.” —Paul
Yes, that is possible, and in a number of countries it is legally possible to be drafted but for pacifists to serve in a non-military capacity, in non-military positions or activities. Curiously, only nine country in the world have conscription for women (now add the U.S to that for an even ten). I am not sure whether women who are conscripted may serve in an either a military or pacifist capacity, or whether they will even be doing any combat duties. (See the following links.)
“Norway becomes first NATO country to draft women into military”
“China, Eritrea, Israel, Libya, Malaysia, North Korea, Peru and Taiwan draft women into the army. In 2002, Sweden also considered female conscription on the grounds that excluding them goes against the ideology of equality.” Source: “Women in the military — international” —CBC
Well, Sweden does not appear to have the draft for women, but how nobel of the Swedes to have considered (in 2002) making women equal to men.
So far, essentially only men are being legally compelled to do the doing and dying, whether that is while doing military or pacifist duties.
We’ll have to wait and see whether the U.S. Texas [District] Court ruling will lead into a direction that will treat men and women as equals with respect to serving.
Conscription in Israel
Israel is one of the few countries that have conscription for women, but conscription and serving by no means treats men and women as being equal. This may be an eye-opener for those who believe that the Israeli Valkyries do everything that men must do:
The example of the Israeli Valkyries that is being paraded by feminists is a hoax that can only be pulled on those who aren’t forced to live there.
“First of all, EVERY man is obligated to do military service of 3 years active service (at age 18) + minimum of [one] month every year till age 58. It’s mean that men are property of the military MOST of their lives while their life-expectancy is MUCH LOWER then women’s.
In the same time, women do military service of hardly 2 years (1 year and 8 monthes), it’s NOT an obligation and they can get away from it VERY easily by writting a letter while men need to see MANY committees that hardly ever agree to listen and [are] VERY hard to get [to].”
That is by someone who’s not happy about being discriminated against in Israel, in what he calls “a democracy for women only”. (More)
It is far from certain that U.S. women will be truly equal to men, as far as conscription and serving in the military goes, no matter what the law may say. As the saying goes, “There’s many ways of skinning a cat.” The complaining Israeli would say, “There’ are a few easy ways by which women (but rarely men) can avoid serving in the military.”
More guns less crime is, at first glance, a non sequitur. John Stossel produced and published a video that debunks the myth that mass shootings are far more common in the United States than they are anywhere else in the world. He identifies that more guns will in fact reduce crime.
(The link to the video that is supposed to be displayed here may take some time to load. Refreshing the page may make it load faster the second time. If you are impatient, click on this link to an alternative copy of the YouTube video: “Media Hype Questionable Gun Control Study“)
The reaction by some who welcome those news is predictable. For example,
“Another brilliant exposure of the deviant agenda by people who hate America.”
That is an overreaction. At least to some extent, Occam’s Razor (the problem-solving principle that essentially states that “simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones”) must be applied. Don’t assume a conspiracy when simple stupidity will suffice to explain why a screw-up happened.
The study by University of Alabama Professor Adam Lankford that started it all is a product of shoddy research (the evidence of which he is naturally not voluntarily disclosing). That is not necessarily due to ill will but more likely due to laziness. Still, it makes the study report as false as a deliberate lie would have. Now to the second part of the story.
Media Bias and Fake News
Lies always take on a life of their own, a lively one when they deliver what people expect or wish to hear. None of the individuals who propagate the lies need to do it out of ill will, but those endowed with ill will propagate the lies as eagerly as anyone else, out of greed for attention or simply to raise circulation numbers to increase advertising revenues.
Nevertheless, all who promote the lies neglected to check the veracity of the false claims, either deliberately or out of laziness.
Half of the blame lies with all those who bought into the lie that the United States outrank every other country, with respect to mass shootings. They are as guilty as the originator and those who simply passed it on without questioning it. Unfortunately, given that there is essentially nothing in place to hold journalists accountable, the media will more readily produce what their audience is inclined to want to hear than do the work required to give their audience the uncomfortable truth, namely that the disclosure is not as horrible as many wish it to be.
That is the nature of media bias. Call it media prostitution if you want. Still, it makes the media the most prolific producers of fake news.
At least Donald Trump has the common sense to see it for what it is. He expressed it in terms that the common man can understand, to paraphrase: “Fake news. I don’t want to hear from you. You media guys produce fake news, nothing but fake news.” He is right, not necessarily in absolute terms but generally. The MSM hate him for it.
Most fake news appear to come from the mainstream media (MSM). At the very least, they reach a large sector of the potential audience. The social media now give the MSM a run for their money. The reach of fake news produced by the MSM is shrinking, while that of fake news produced by the social media is growing, which has the MSM worried. Don’t fall for any of it.
Here are some tips on how to avoid falling for fake news.
The SNC Lavalin scandal and the role of Justin Trudeau, Canada’s Prime Minister, in obfuscating an objective examination of that scandal are wending their way through the judiciary and Canada’s Parliament, respectively.
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer says he’s [said he was] hopeful an opposition motion to call a public inquiry into the SNC Lavalin controversy will pass.
The NDP introduced the motion Tuesday in the House of Commons. The Conservatives say they will [said they would] support it.
But with a Liberal majority in the House, the motion can be [was] easily defeated.
Yesterday, 2019 02 20, Andrew Scheer’s hopes were dashed in a vote in the House of Commons, with 124 votes for and 160 against the motion. The debate leading up to it was instructive. Maclean’s has more on the affair:
Let me ‘speak my truth’ says Wilson-Raybould
Politics Insider for February 21: Trudeau’s tries the apology route, Wilson-Raybould gets a standing O from the opposition and a budget promise that sounds familiar by Maclean’s | Feb 21, 2019
There is no remedy, no silver bullet. Our Prime Minister is untouchable, his power far too great, not that he is above reproach, but here is a bit more about the powers of our Prime Minister.
As long as he is power, his power is greater than those of many of the most absolute monarchs in history. His power is in the order of the power of, for example, the Roman emperors, with an important difference.
Much like the power of our prime ministers, the power of the Roman emperors depended on how well they were liked by the
Aristocracy (use your imagination on what the equivalent of that is in Canada, but SNC Lavalin is just one example of many);
Legions (the Canadian equivalent is our Armed Forces);
Praetorian Guards (that would be the RCMP, right?);
Senate (the Canadian Senate has some but far less of the power of the Roman Senate). and the
People (our voters).
Another agency must be added to that list in Canada, the media. The latter is close to 100 percent liberal and largely under control of, and most definitely favorable to Liberal prime ministers. Even Maclean’s, a supposedly conservative magazine (the only one in Canada), gets a $1.5 million annual publication grant from the federal government. (The Report Newsmagazine could have had one of $250,000 a year but declined, to maintain its independence.)
The Canadian equivalents of most of those agencies (except the Armed Forces and the Senate) are more powerful than their equivalent agencies were in Ancient Rome.
There is a very grave difference between then and now. A large number of Roman Emperors ruled only for a short time, and only relatively few died a natural death, with arguably the majority of them having been either assassinated, murdered or motivated to commit suicide (as otherwise they would have been executed). In 69 AD, for example, there was a succession of four emperors following the suicide of Nero. The latter had been declared hostis publicus (enemy of the people) by the Senate and was slated for execution in “the ancient manner,” that is, to be stripped naked, having his head clamped in a wooden fork, his body flogged with sticks and then thrown off a cliff.
That may happen to Trump but cannot possibly happen to our glorious leader, notwithstanding that Trump is being vilified far more unjustly than Nero ever was, even though Trump is a far more benign and benevolent ruler with far fewer powers than Nero had and Justin Trudeau does have. Regardless of the unlikely event that St. Justin will ever be considered by a majority of the people to be an enemy of the people (he’s got far too much power and influence for that to happen), there are no powers in Canada that will replace him, unless the people will come to their senses and vote him out of office. How likely is that to happen? The next Canadian federal election (see summary of polls), which is scheduled for October 21, 2019, will tell.
So, we have what the Romans did not have, a democracy in which people can vote. A lot of good that is doing us, but it certainly is tailored to keep Liberal prime ministers in power and immune from investigation, let alone have the current PM deliver on his election promise of providing a transparent government.
Yes, the website for Fathers for Life and its affiliated blogs are being slandered and censored.
Whether you are a fathers-rights activist, a pro-family activist or a skeptic of environmental alarmism, it is quite likely that your website or blog is being slandered and censored, too. It is being done on the sly. No one will tell you about it. If it happened, you will have been found guilty and were sentenced in the Star-Chamber court of a multinational corporation (by an obscure clerk, in an obscure office), and it is not likely that you will be able to appeal.
Check the rating of your website or blog.
I had asked O2 to review and explain their website rating policy in regard to Fathers for Life. They did not respond.