Fear, Aquarium Cleaner, Bleach, Sheep, Tyranny, Masks, Vaccines, Pedophiles, Viruses and Horse Dewormer. What is going on?

In a sane world, many of the above things would not be related, but yet, here we are.

In March of 2020 in North America, a Virus was running rampant. It caused the government to impose lockdowns to prevent the rapid spread of the disease so the healthcare system did not get overburdened. In Europe, these lockdowns started earlier, in February, and in China in January. A global pandemic.

Over 4 and a half million people have died from the virus so far, and nearly 1/3 of those infected have reported suffering long term effects from the virus, even after it is no longer in their system. As of the time of this writing, 226.2 million people globally have been confirmed to have contracted Covid-19.

Governments around the world started to act, quickly. They imposed lockdowns. Mandated wearing of masks, once they realized their effectiveness, and started funding research on a vaccine. A vaccine that was built off the previous groundwork done on the SARS vaccine a decade ago. A vaccine that was never finished because SARS had mutated into a less virulent and less threatening strain.

But, there was more happening in the world than just a virus. Many had become frustrated with their governments and there was a large misinformation campaign going around demonizing certain politicians, calling them pedophiles and child traffickers, amongst other things. When the virus came along, those spreading this misinformation used the virus as another tool. They claimed the virus was a hoax, not real, despite the number of deaths.

Many believers of these conspiracy theories refused to follow public health guidelines. They refused to wear masks. Ignored lockdowns and continued to gather, and started demonizing the health professionals who were working to end this virus. But people were dying. People were getting sick, and being hospitalized. Hospitals were being overwhelmed, and many had started canceling elective surgeries. In some areas, doctors were being forced to make decisions on who to treat, and who to let die.

Despite the misinformation about it being a hoax, fear began to spread, but those with an agenda to “fight the establishment” had more tricks up their sleeves. The virus, they claimed, was not only not real, but it was part of a global conspiracy to strip away your rights, to make people compliant and to follow orders. To make them like sheep. People started looking for ways to fight the virus. A western nation leader suggested injecting bleach to fight the virus, as bleach was found to effective at killing it on surfaces. Suddenly calls to poison control centres surged. Another drug was touted as a cure for the virus, chloroquine. While it’s effectiveness against the virus is now considered to be nothing but hyperbole, at the time, many still believed in its effectiveness. An elderly man, not able to get a prescription for the anti-malarial drug, died after ingesting aquarium tank cleaner, which had chloroquine phosphate in it. His wife was hospitalized for the same reason.

Fear had caused this man to do this. Afraid of dying from a virus, this man listened to politicians instead of health professionals, and when not able to get a prescription, found a different product with a similar name and drank it. All the while, people who support that politician, and that ideology, called everyone else ‘sheeple’ for what they say is ‘blindly following the government.’ They accused those who supported the health measures of living in fear, of allowing the government to control them. Of participating in the government’s attempt at global tyranny.

The group accusing those taking precautions against a deadly virus of living in fear, but they were the ones who were afraid. Whether it was from the virus, or some fictitious tyranny, or perhaps the feeling that the world had changed and they did not know how to deal with it. But they were afraid. Afraid enough to consider injecting bleach or drinking fish tank cleaner. Afraid enough to storm the capitol building of a nation to stop the certification of an election.

The saying goes, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to repeat it. Over a year after the aquarium cleaner incident, there is another drug that has been touted as an effective treatment for Covid-19. This, unlike the last time, comes after an effective vaccine has been made available, and free to all. This drug is an anti-parasitic medication called Ivermectin. It is effective as a way to control parasites, such as worms. It is a prescription medication, but it has not been shown to be effective against the virus. So instead of taking a proven vaccine, people have started to get Ivermectin from other sources. In this case, from a veterinary grade medication meant for horses and (ironically) sheep. And they are taking it. Many have started to loose the internal protective lining of their intestines, some are going blind.

The rest of the world is pleading with them to listen to the specialists, but they dig in deeper. ‘The specialists are in the tyranny, they are trying to control us. They want to take away our rights. They want to dominate us.’ As if every nation in the world could agree on anything, much less global domination. Now, we look forward to an unknown period of time, as we try to fight a virulent virus, deal with a portion of the population that is so afraid of not having control, that they will spread the virus further and longer, while blaming everyone else for that exact same thing.

My thoughts on Akin and Rape.

Unless you have been socially disconnected (which if you are reading this is a very unlikely scenario), you have heard of Republican Todd Akin's comments on Rape. If you have not, then you should first hear them here.



He has publicly apologized for his statement, but obviously he believes them. He co-sponsored a bill with Rep. Paul Ryan that would make abortion (in ANY circumstance) and several forms of birth control pills illegal. This "personhood" bill would give fetuses full status as human beings under the fourteenth amendment of the United States.



Democrats and other Republicans have asked Akin to step down (including Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney), which he refuses to do. I do not know if he can be forced to step down, but many Republicans are telling him he should.



Of course he should. You do not make a statement like that, whether you believe it or not, and after the MASSIVE public backlash stay in the race. You are just begging to lose the race. He stays in for one reason, and one reason only, pride.



But, what about his statement? Is he right? Is he wrong? Well, the vast majority says he is wrong. Of course he is. There is absolutely NO scientific evidence that his statement is even remotely true. In fact, quite the opposite. He believes it, but that isn't the point.



Why is he even calling out different types of rape? Rape is rape. Period. End of Story. If a woman says no and a man forces himself on her, it is Rape. Nothing else in this situation matters. This is, I think, one of the most contentious parts of his statement. The GOP is trying to distinguish "forcable" rape from other types because it makes it easier for them to pass laws outlawing abortion.



This brings us to the real meat of the argument. Pro-Choice or Pro-Life. I stand in a unique position in this argument, and I know I am not alone, but few tend to think of the middle ground. Pro-Life people, like the GOP, are literally trying to ram their opinions down your throat. The far left Pro-Choice are saying that you can do what you want. It is YOUR body.



I am Pro-Choice. That said, I am very deeply against abortion, and consider it reprehensible. Now many will look at that statement and say, "You can't be both."



Uhhh, yes I can. I am against abortion. I think it is reprehensible, and wrong. That said, it is not my decision. It is not my place to make that decision for you, or for anyone else. I am against it, but it is your body. It is YOUR CHOICE. I think the real crime is when your freedoms, rights and liberties are taken away from you.



Pro-Lifers will argue about the child's (or fetus's) rights, but this leads to a whole new set of problems. The thing with many Pro-Lifers, is that they are so concerned with the life of the unborn child, they tend to forget about everyone else's life. Especially in the case of a victim of rape, you have a woman (or girl, as some cases of rape are with underage females) who did not plan for a child, did not want a child, and this situation was forced on her. How can you tell this person that you must now raise a child you did not want because some guy decided he wanted to get funky?



On top of that, I have dicovered that in 31 States in the United states, the father in this situation (I will call him the 'rapist') can actually bring the mother (I will call her the 'victim') to court to gain custody or visitation rights to the child. REALLY? Now, not only are you telling this victim that she must have the child, but you are also tying her to the rapist for 18 years, where she must allow the rapist access to the child she never wanted in the first place. Forcing her to associate with the man who forced himself on her against her wishes. How is this in any way right? How is this in any way Just?



There is only one answer to that question: It is NOT.

The Legalization of Mara Jew Wanna

Ahhh, the legalisation of Marijuana (yes, I do know how to properly pronounce the name). After seeing a post on facebook by Cheech and Chong calling for the legalisation of marijuana, I thought about why it should, or should not and considered the ramifications of the legalisation.

I'll start with my conclusion on legalising Marijuana: I think that it is not the right choice. Now for my reasoning.

While many see this as an issue on the negative effects of marijuana, the reality is there is no concrete evidence that smoking pot is any more dangerous than drinking or smoking cigarettes. In fact, it is the opposite - many studies have shown that smoking pot is actually safer than either of the other substances. So why do I say no?

The reasons are threefold:

Legalising marijuana will create several companies that will produce the substance, which is to be sold in stores. These companies may employ several thousand people, but compared to the tens of thousands of marijuana pushers out there, this will actually result in a net loss of income for many. These pushers will, with the loss of revenue due to the fact that you can get pot at your local 7-11 will be forced to push other, more deadly substances to remain solvent. This will increase crime and death (both through crime and through overdosing on these more dangerous substances).

Marijuana will also become heavily regulated. The initial pot that stores will sell will most likely be of poor quality, and while the free market may force quality upgrade, with all things corporate, quantity will supersede quality. In addition, the government will most likely tax the heck out of it, causing pot to raise in price. In addition, it will cause unforeseen effects, as "being high" will be treated as "being drunk" and enforcement will be writing a lot of citations for this.

Lastly, it will signal a large cultural change that is too dynamic to happen at once. There will be protests from anti-drug organisations and supporters and it will certainly change the political landscape.

However, all of these factors arguing against the legalisation of pot, also argue for the decriminalisation of possession of small amounts. The US War on Drugs isn't really serving anyone when they persecute people for having a joint in their pocket. That person now has a permanent criminal record, and his future is now in jeopardy. This culminates in a type of class warfare, where "pot smokers" are relegated to lower classes because of the difficulty in finding work with a criminal record, and thus breeding more poverty and crime.

So, while I argue that the legalisation of marijuana is a poor idea, I do support the decriminalisation of marijuana. The amount of money local law enforcement can make through citations will help support better policing, which can then be used to find and catch the pushers of the more dangerous drugs, and it will prevent many promising people from getting permanent records that will lead to their exclusion from employment. It will still hold drug pushers and growers criminally responsible, and it will not really change the political landscape as much.

In addition, doing so will lower crime rates and reduce prison populations. It will keep relatively innocent people out of the crime/jail cycle, and reduce overall crime. Maybe not by a massive amount, but it will be significant enough to be noticed. I don't think we are ready to make legal what is illegal, we need to do this in small steps, and look foreward to see where we need to stop. Legalising pot may not be the right idea, but what we are doing now isn't the right idea either.

Cyber-Security Act Stopped?

The new Cyber-Security bill has been rejected due to a lack of votes. Today, the US Senate failed to get the required 60 votes to bring the new Cyber-Security bill it needed for cloture.

So what does this mean? Well first of all, it is a win for the internet. For a while, anyways, we have managed to stave off a poor piece of unneeded legislation, but complacency is the enemy of progress. If we think the war is over, we have already lost. Parts of this legislation will undoubtedly show up again, either as their own pieces of legislation, or as parts of other bills. It has been done before as SOPA/PIPA pieces were being tried as their own bills.

The Internet Defense League has arisen from the ashes of SOPA, PIPA, ACTA and this bill. It is a collection of Internet-savvy companies and people who want to see the internet kept the open and free thing that it is (yes, I am a member). It includes companies such as Cheezburger, Techdirt, Mozilla, Open Media.ca, Imgur, Reddit, and Grooveshark.

Individuals can join as well as companies (this is how I joined).

How is this going to help. By creating pressure on lawmakers, we can work together to keep the internet free, and can even be a force of good, shaming those who would resort to 'cyber-security attacks'. People have a right to be free, and not to be spied on by our governments.

Canada has a harder climb than the US does, with the C-30 bill, but we can still put much pressure on our government (Stephen Harper at the time of this writing) to turn down our own Cyber-Security bill in Canada.

That, and politicians need to show that new legislation is needed, and that our current laws don't already cover things (which they do). We don't NEED the cyber-security legislation. It is just another excuse to take away our rights and freedoms. In Canada, we are guaranteed our right to Privacy by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Law Enforcement officials need a court-issued warrant to be allowed to circumvent that. There is NO reason the police should have the ability to circumvent that without a court order. If there is suspicion of wrong-doing, then a warrant can be issued. If there isn't, then the police have NO RIGHT to invade our privacy.

These legislations are not for the children, or for business. It is slow steps taking us from a democratic society based on freedom and justice to an Orwellian nightmare where we live under the constant supervision of "Big Brother". If things continue the way they are, 1984 will become a reality, not just fiction.

Can someone explain to me how that is "for the children?"

Violence and Gun Control

For any American readers, I would like to remind you that I am a Canadian.

Last night (July 19th, 2012) a terrible tragedy happened in Aurora, Colorado. Twelve (as of the time of this post) people have died, and fifty nine more injured after a lone gunman opened fire in a theater showing a midnight screening of Batman: Dark Knight Rises.

James Eagen Holmes entered the theater, clad in S.W.A.T.-style body armor, wearing a gas mask and released a canister of gas (I do not know what kind, but presume it is simply a smoke-screen type gas). He then opened fire.

He was captured by police with little incident.

So how does one become armed to the teeth, with body armor, smoke-screens and all that? Quite simply, bad laws.

The United States of America is a nation built on many principles, including their "Right to Bear Arms." Now, I do not deny people the right to own a firearm, but there needs to be better laws in place.

We need to prevent incidents like this, like the columbine massacre, like the Virginia Tech Massacre, or many others. Stricter gun laws are definitely a place to start. Now I am not saying that people can't own guns, but guns need to be less accessable to just anyone. Teacing responsible gun ownership is good, but the United States has too many incidents with firearms for things to keep going on as they are.

The US needs better laws surrounding the ownership of a gun, and more controls for people who own guns. These incidents need to be curbed, as each successive generation is becoming more and more desensitized to violence.

But.... Olympics?

So, yeah, one of the craziest things I have read in a while (about a week). So evidently the London 2012 Olympics is running a censorship campaign relating to istelf. You see, it wants to stop all negative comments, derogatory terms, false claims, misleading comments, or otherwise objectable content from leading people to their website.

It's in their Terms of Use.

5. Linking policy

a. Links to the Site. You may create your own link to the Site, provided that your link is in a text-only format. You may not use any link to the Site as a method of creating an unauthorised association between an organisation, business, goods or services and London 2012, and agree that no such link shall portray us or any other official London 2012 organisations (or our or their activities, products or services) in a false, misleading, derogatory or otherwise objectionable manner. The use of our logo or any other Olympic or London 2012 Mark(s) as a link to the Site is not permitted. View our guidelines on Use of the Games' Marks.

Umm, yeah. Someone let them know that's NOT how free speech works. Under section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms we can say what we want about the Olympics, they can't really stop us.

So, can they stop us from linking to their site? No, they can't. You see, hyperlinking is like telling someone where to find a place. I am in person allowed to say "Hey Steve, don't go to The Company Over There at 1234 Main St. They are real douchetards!!!!!"

I can do the same on the internet. "Hey people of the internet, don't go to the London 2012 Olympic Site over here. They are real douchtards!!!!"

Higgs Boson and God

Today, science did not take a step foreward, it leaped!

As the famous astronaut Neil Armstrong once said "One small step for man. One giant leap for mankind!" Of course, Neil was talking about the first man to set foot on the moon. The first man to walk on a terrestrial body that was not Earth. It truly was a giant leap for mankind.

But today, man just made an even larger leap. Today, we confirmed the existance of a new Boson particle. This particle acts and looks, and interacts just like the thoerized Higgs Boson Particle. While they stopped JUST short of confirming that it was the Higgs Boson, it is certain that it is.

So certain, that most have already accepted it as fact, and even those that haven't accepted it as fact, most realize that we just need to make sure, one last time.

So what's the big deal? Well, the Higgs Boson particle explains how the "Big Bang" actually formed the universe. It explains how planets, stars, nebulae, and other things are formed. It explains how the universe exists, and how it formed. It proves that it was the Higgs Boson that created the Earth and the heavens. It almost completely disproves the existance of a creator entity.

Yeah, that's right. Proof. Not that theists accept anything as crazy as 'proof', 'evidence' or 'facts', but still. This is why the particle was nicknamed the "God Particle", not that that name is appropriate.

Mankinds knowledge and understanding of the universe have taken a leap foreward so far, it outshines things like a Man on the Moon, or even the sequencing of DNA. A discovery almost as important as the discovery of Photons, or the Atom.

One of the greatest scientific discoveries of this generation.