Should Canada Bring Citizens Home From China?

In this politically correct environment it can be considered racism to protect oneself from someone suspected of carrying the coronavirus. A woman on a flight was asked to wear a mask by the crew because she was coughing. She saw this as racist since she was of Asian descent and she caught a cold in Mexico. She went to the media about it. Of course this makes it difficult for anyone to make a call for protection.

Every four days the number of infected people in China doubles, and we don’t know if we are getting an accurate report. Two Canadians are quarantined on a cruise ship that has twenty confirmed cases of the coronavirus.

My question is, where might our political correctness be taking us? If we bring home some three hundred Canadians, who very possibly have been exposed to the virus in China, where it is spreading uncontrollably, what are we doing for the rest of Canada? Are we going to be able to contain the virus if any number of the Canadians from China show symptoms or test positive?

The latest word is that a plane is leaving Friday, with another one to follow next week.

Let’s consider the following. Not only will the Canadians traveling from China have to be quarantined, so will the pilot and the crew and possibly the baggage handlers, as well as airport security. When they arrive they will need further transport and some entity will need to supply them with food and accommodations, implying contact, again. They will need to have medical check-ups by medical teams who then will be exposed. If they have the virus, they will need medical care in a medical facility, meaning they will need to be transported to a hospital. Once there, more people will be exposed.

I have a deep heart of compassion. I am thinking of this as though this might be my own family and friends. But if I was in China, I would not want to be responsible for bringing the virus to Canada. I do not envy those with whom the decision rests.

In the U.S. at least one person was turned away from the Canada/US border as travel restrictions are implemented. The following are the restrictions implemented by the U.S. according to the above article.

US citizens and others who are allowed to travel to the US from China are being funneled to 11 airports where US authorities will conduct extra screening and transfer people for quarantine if needed.
All flights from China will go to those airports, and passengers who have been to China in the past 14 days and weren’t already traveling to one of those airports will be required to rebook their flights.
The “vast majority” of flights coming from China already arrive at those airports, Cuccinelli said.

 

This to me does not look anything like what the Globe and Mail recently called exploiting the situation.

Whatever decision Canada makes, let’s believe it is the right one.

Posted in coronavirus | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Plane carrying Canadian evacuees out of China will stop at YVR – Andrew Weichel

February 3, 2020, Andrew Weichel

Commentary

It remains a mystery why the news media continues to give us updates while we continue to wait, day after day, for a plane to leave the ground from Canada to China to retrieve some 300 Canadians threatened by the coronavirus. Meanwhile China praises Canada as a “bulwark of calm”, for not “exploiting the situation” as it claims the U.S. has done by restricting travel to and from China. Asia correspondent Nathan Vanderklippe, in his Globe and Mail report, states the following:

Canadian Health Minister Patty Hajdu has said the risks to Canada are low and Ottawa sees no need to keep out travellers who have been to China. “Canada believes the entry ban has no basis, which is a sharp contrast to the U.S. behaviours,” Ms. Hua said in a news conference held on the WeChat app.

Ms. Hua is identified as a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

And the WHO (World Health Organization, United Nations) is confusing the situation further by urging the world not to limit travel due to the virus. So, this being the case, why can we not get a flight into China to rescue the Canadians who, according to the Globe and Mail are “trapped in a lockdown zone”?

Posted in coronavirus | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ben Shapiro Discusses the Super Bowl Halftime Show

February 3, 2020. See it here on YouTube.

Cognitive dissonance: In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values, or participates in an action that goes against one of these three, and experiences psychological stress because of that. – Wikipedia

Women, I think it’s time we speak up about the way we are represented to the public by the darlings of the movie and porn industry.

Posted in Pornography | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Canadian governments give Huawei millions in funding while debate rages over its 5G role

Critics warn there is a serious risk that Huawei will build ‘back doors’ into the 5G technology allowing China access to Canadian private information

Tom Blackwell, February 3, 2020

Commentary

While the United States and Australia have banned Huawei’s next generation 5G systems as a threat to national security, former Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne, in 2016, announced a $16 million grant for research around 5G development and the same fiscal year the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Canada’s federal funding agency for university-based research, awarded $6.9 million in grants to university researchers working with Huawei. The funding agreements are over four years.

Will Huawei be a future threat to Canada? What do the U.S. and Australia know that Canada does not know, or is choosing to ignore? Or do we just chalk their caution up to paranoia? I prefer to err on the side of caution when it comes to privacy issues and national security.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Heritage minister clarifies government won’t be licensing news outlets following backlash

February 3, 2020 news article by Terry Pedwell

Commentary

The Liberal government is revising Canada’s broadcasting and telecommunications laws and it’s a good thing somebody is watching. As a blogger I am particularly interested in the need for freedom of speech online. The idea of licensing news sites does not sit well with me at all.

A report released last week, called “Canada’s Communications Future: Time To Act,” compiled by a panel of “independent broadcast experts” included the following recommendation, as posted in the article:

that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) or another regulatory body control licensing of all companies creating “audio, audiovisual, and alphanumeric news content.”

The article concludes by stating that,

The CRTC currently issues licenses to TV and radio broadcasting outlets but does not regulate content on digital outlets such as Google and Facebook, on websites or in print.

Let’s watch that it stays that way.

More information on the CRTC’s plans to regulate Netflix’s Canadian content can be found in a January 29 CBC article by Eli Glasner.

Posted in CRTC, Freedom of Expression, Netflix, News | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Note to My Followers About Change Coming to this Site

I’m sure you’ve noticed fewer posts here over the years. My time of writing about the writing process seems to be fading into history. I’ve decided that’s OK. Over the next few months I plan to change my focus. I hope you will stick around as I start to write about a variety of subjects of interest to me.

As I read news and opinion columns, watch videos and podcasts, or even read books, I constantly find myself wanting to share segments that stand out for me. I read and hear memorable things I want to record. I need a place to archive these quotable insights so that they don’t disappear into the thin air of yesterday’s news.

There will be many categories, since I’m a very curious person and want to know about a lot of topics. You will notice my slight lean to the right on issues. I welcome alternative views and respectful dialogue. I especially encourage my readers to correct me if I accidentally happen on fake news. I’m pretty astute when it comes to this, but, hey, it can happen.

So, come along for the ride. Let me know what you think about the change. It’s a little scary because you will see my personality coming out. But it’s also scary because I’m not sure I understand all of the political correctness protocol involved. I’m sure there will be times when I will veer off a little. Who knows what that will mean?

Thanks for your continued support. I deeply value my readers.

 

Posted in Change, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Right to Die with Dignity

Today I was angry. It felt as though something boiled over in me when I read the subject line of an email addressed to me: Help us protect the right to die with dignity. In Canada our government is trying to pass legislation regarding euthanasia. There is a “consultation questionnaire” which Canadians are encouraged to respond to at justice.gc.ca

I received the email from the BC Civil Liberties Association. I don’t recall ever signing up for mail from the BC Civil Liberties Association. In their letter they threaten that if we don’t offer medically assisted dying (MAiD) in Canada then it will “lead to premature deaths by suicide by some individuals.” Which frightening alternative do you prefer? The outcome is precisely the same.

I, frankly, don’t see any difference between shooting someone in the head at short range,  or injecting someone with a needle, or subjecting a person to the electric chair. And to me it is not compassion to help someone kill themselves. Frankly, I’m not there yet.

You will note that the questionnaire assumes all are in favor of assisted dying which until now was called murder or homicide or manslaughter and was considered the worst criminal offense because it ended a life.

Our government now wants to put some new guidelines, some parameters, around helping someone to kill themselves. No, the survey never asks if you are in favor of having medical professionals help someone to end their life. It only asks about which parameters you consider important in preparing for the procedure of terminating a life.

What made me angry is that suddenly “assisted dying” is a “right.” And it is a right that needs to be protected. In other words, we want to make sure you get to die, and that nobody interferes with that.

“Mature minors” should have the right to assisted death, we are learning.

The whole purpose of this new legislation is to ensure that “eligibility is broadened to individuals who are not near death.” This is what the BCCLA states in their email to me. The BCCLA adds:

The additional “safeguards” that the government is contemplating are unnecessary and potentially unconstitutional barriers to MAID.

Oh, I have so many questions around this, but our government’s mind is already made up. This is the next new “right” Canadians will be privileged to have protected.

In July 2016 the federal government passed legislation permitting medical assistance in dying. Since then 6,700 have died with medical assistance. A recent court ruling in Quebec has made it necessary for Canada to broaden the eligibility for euthanasia. You can read about it here

The Court declared the “reasonable foreseeability of natural death” criterion in the federal Criminal Code, as well as the “end-of-life” criterion in Quebec’s provincial law on medical assistance in dying, to be unconstitutional.

My problem is with assisted dying being a “right.” Do doctors also have a “right” not to assist dying? Do hospices have a “right” not to assist dying? A hospice in Delta, BC has been ordered to offer MAID by February 3 or lose government funding, even though the facility states that MAID is not compatible with the purposes of the Hospice Society.

“To not allow Medical Assistance in Dying brings with it potential human rights violations,” said former board president Jim Levin, who is in favor of MAID at the hospice.

The hospice has posted their statement here

Hospice palliative care and MAiD substantially differ in multiple areas including in philosophy, intention and approach.[xi] Hospice palliative care focuses on improving quality of life and symptom management through holistic person-centered care for those living with life threatening conditions. Hospice palliative care sees dying as a normal part of life and helps people to live and die well. Hospice palliative care does not seek to hasten death or intentionally end life. In MAiD, however, the intention is to address suffering by ending life through the administration of a lethal dose of drugs at an eligible person’s request.

We are to believe that removing barriers to this “procedure” is reflective of the “evolving views” of Canadians in just the past couple of years. There is a sense of pride over how progressive Canadians have become. However, hospices want to provide a “safe space” where death is not hastened. Will our government deny this right?

We are being told this is just another “choice,” needing protecting. It is another one of our “equality rights.” It is not the right to die that is being questioned. We all have that right. Nothing has changed in that department. But what is different now is, the right to have a medical professional condone your suicide and help you with the act.

It is particularly cruel to those who are vulnerable and those with disabilities.

As stated, here this irreversible procedure could easily be the result of “temporary anger, depression, a misunderstanding of one’s prognosis, ignorance of alternatives, financial considerations, strain on family members or significant others, or improper persuasion….”

I am very concerned when assisted dying suddenly becomes a “right” which has to be protected. This is not like the other rights we have seen come to the forefront in recent years. This does not make your quality of life better. It ends it. I am also very concerned about our move towards a flippant view of the sanctity of life. We all know this ends up down the slippery slope of who decides which life is worth preserving.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment