Socrates, Climate Change and the Robotic Mind

What would Socrates ask our Climate Scientists about Global Warming?

https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-history/socrates

If Socrates, the ancient Greek philosopher, were alive today what would he be asking the climate scientists in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)?  Our history books tell us  that Socrates was put to death not because he was accusing anyone of corruption. Rather he was forced to drink the poison hemlock by his fellow legislators because he would not stop asking questions. Apparently if they attempted to answer his questions it would show the wrongness in their ideas. It seemed a lot easier to just kill him than to face the contradictions in their own  behaviour.

With this in mind these may be very dangerous times for anyone who is asking questions about what is really happening with our global climate. For example, it seems like an outrage to question the pronouncements made by the self-appointed IPCC, even though the IPCC has close connections with global corporate interests.

https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/270-general/52944-exxonmobil-and-saudiaramco-to-write-intergovernmental-report-on-impacts-of-global-warming.html

In our modern age are we afraid to look for facts and evidence regarding what is really happening to our global climate because we fear we may also face the hemlock if we do not agree with the prevailing theory’s? To be fair few of us are putting our lives on the line if we point out the inconsistencies in the official climate change story but we do face ridicule from the gatekeepers of the” truth” and the chance that our status in our professional lives will be greatly reduced.  Is this fear of losing respect causing us to ignore the inconvenient truth?  Are we acting unconsciously by mentally shutting down and not asking pressing questions, in effect acting in a robotic manner, by just going along with the world views of the global corporate media?   If so, will it ever be possible for the citizens of this planet to demand scientifically established facts by independent researchers regarding the potential changes in our global environment?

Climate Change, Panic Scenarios, Killing Scientific Debate. The Dark Story Behind “Global Warming”

The world is in chaos; seemingly. Riots are occurring in Iran, Hong Kong, Chile and Venezuela to name a few. We had the Arab Spring and the Occupy movements rise up and then fizzle out. There is the yellow vest movement in France and the oddly named Extinction Rebellion movement originating in England and now spreading worldwide.  We have a reality TV show staring Donald Trump that we are glued to on a daily basis. And now the issue of the Coronavirus. Is this an accidental release of a virus from a wild animal in a market in Wuhan, China as reported by mainstream media, or is this some type of biological warfare? Given its history of distorting the truth how is it possible we could ever find the truth from the corporate media?

Would Socrates ask, is this global media circus possibly just a part of a public distraction strategy by the owners of the corporate media to keep us from thinking about possibly even more important matters such as the loss fundamental freedoms and democratic processes around the globe? Should we ask, are these corporations not the ones that have caused this global instability in the first place? As well, why should we give up our democratic rights to the very people who have reaped huge profits and power while destroying the natural environment of this beautiful planet?

No doubt things have to change if we are going to save what is left of our planet and keep what is left of our civilization going. We have to end the attack on our ecosystems from electromagnetic radiation, chemically poisoned food, microplastic in all organisms, extinctions and drastic declines in all species, global biological warfare and so on. No matter what your opinion is on what is causing our weather to change I think we can all agree that we have to protect this planet from ongoing harm. The most important question is, who is going to call the shots for these changes, the citizens of this planet or the rich and the powerful through their control of our political, economic and monetary systems?

It seems the most dangerous thing a person can do these days is to think for themselves, and to ask questions that challenge the corporate agenda. Corporate media including our beloved Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) along with hundreds of thousands of spin doctors from public relations firms, think tanks, including economists and so on, are telling us that the planet will burn up soon if we do not “accept the truth” about global warming.

But what is truly happening to our global environment? Who does the research? Who shapes the narrative and creates the terms of reference? Who decides the real facts of the matter? Who decides what sort of changes are needed? What processes are a legitimate expression of the will of the people of this planet? According to the global corporate media it seems the only answer is the IPCC.

But should we be writing the IPCC a blank check? Should it concern us that climate scientists are almost all funded by corporations?  An oft quoted phrase is that 97% of climate scientists agree that human activity is creating the greenhouse gases that result in global heating. Why is it that a person labelled a climate change denier if they ask questions about how this consensus came about or if there is really a consensus at all?

Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming

An example of corporate control includes a related issue, the public relations campaign to promote the world wide roll out of the 5^th generation of wireless technology. 5G is a new and potentially devastating wireless technology that threatens not only our human right for privacy, but also the health of all living species on the planet. You might ask what does 5G have to do with the climate change issue?  What if it can be shown that the influential people promoting groups to fight climate change like Extinction Rebellion are also intimately connected in the business of 5G?

https://www.globalresearch.ca/uk-really-leading-rebellion/5679379

It is possible that planetary heating is mainly due to human activity. It is possible that CO2 is the main driver of green house gases that is creating global heating. However, is it not also possible that many of these scientists could be biased to a point that their projections of the effects of global warming may be greater than what the facts support?

The ability of humans to deliberately alter the weather has to be considered when discussing climate change. There is a possibility that we are all being deceived into believing that the global climate is changing by people who are physically altering our weather.

Dr Nick Begich – HAARP Technology to control the Weather

https://www.globalresearch.ca/haarp-the-military-s-pandora-s-box/17902

It seems this is an idea that just may be too strange to fit into the paradigm we have created in our minds of what our world is about.  Is our fear of this possibility not letting us consider it?

An example of corporate medalling in scientific research is the quality of the research coming from the electrical industry regarding the safety of the new global 5 G network.  Dr Henry Lai, a researcher who has examined the effects of radio frequency radiation (RFR) on human health found that about 70% of studies funded by Industry showed no health effects from everyday exposures.  Astonishingly Dr Lai also found almost the exact opposite, that about 70% of independent non corporate funded research showed that exposure to everyday levels of RFR caused harm.

http://phiremedical.org/research-issues/

It could be said that Dr. Lai’s findings indicate that there is bias in scientific research on the health effects of EMR. We all agree, that it is not scientific to ignore bias.  Most of the research on the health effects of RFR is funded by industry. With that in mind, why should the public trust climate scientists any more than we trust electrical industry scientists?

It has been said that Socrates rejected any attempts to pass off another person’s ideas or the beliefs of the majority as truth.  The self declared leaders of the fight to protect our planet from overheating claim that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. The problem is there is no one single scientific study that proves that CO2 is the main driver of climate change.

https://medium.com/@pullnews/what-i-learned-about-climate-change-the-science-is-not-settled-1e3ae4712ace

Just because the corporate media claim that there is a consensus amongst climate scientists that CO2 is the main driver that causes climate change does not make it a fact. Scientific facts are created when   phenomena created under strictly controlled conditions have been replicated by others using the same controlled environment and methods. This has not been done to prove that CO2 is the main driver of planetary heating.   Why should we keep accepting the truth as exposed by the IPCC in the same manner that the public has accepted the unproven pronouncements of the electrical industry scientists?

Let us not forget however that we do not need absolute proof that C02 is the main driver of climate change to justify taking action to reduce the production of C02. If we dramatically reduce our use of oil and gas and coal, we will benefit in a thousand ways by reducing environmental pollution other than reducing planetary heating. We are in so much trouble that doing anything to protect our natural environment is good.

Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons on the short term is acceptable. But in the long run we have to address some pressing issues. What are the real forces that are destroying our planet and who is controlling these forces? How are we going to create trustworthy sources of information to help direct us?  Moreover, we should be asking how much is the corporate media and our corporate controlled universities affecting our opinions? We may have to dig a little deeper into our collective consciousness to begin to answer that. Or would it just be easier as in Socrates case, to shoot the messenger?

Why is it that we crave certainty? Why do we fanatically seek to be absolutely right which makes others absolutely wrong? Why are we so easily satisfied that we know the truth even though our opinions could be based upon biased information? Does our lack of understanding of the issues not create the ability of the owners of the corporate media to steer events in ways that will have the best results for them?

Facts are created by asking questions. Facts are often incongruent with our world view. When our worldview is challenged our first emotion is fear. It seems the elephant in the room is that we are not dealing with the fear of climate catastrophe which causes the mental blind spots we all have when we are confronted with unsettling issues. Most importantly what happens when a majority of us give into this fear and share a view that is not based upon facts and evidence?  Will we all think and act robotically to support an illusion that will perpetuate this crisis or will we keep our minds open to new information by asking unsettling questions that when answered truthfully will steer us towards better understanding of our world and into a brighter future.

Walt McGinnis is an EM Radiation tester, master electrician, and seeker of the facts, who lives on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada, walter@powertothepeople.ca

The Champix Coup in BC

Walt McGinnis   – reporter for Citizens Forum

In 2011 Christie Clark, the Premier of the province of British Columbia, announced the provincial Pharmacare program would cover a drug named Champix to help people quit smoking. Champix is   a powerful psychoactive drug made by Pfizer.  Many health authorities think that Champix poses a grave threat to the public’s health.

The way the government of BC approved Champix ignored health and safety concerns while being improperly swayed by the drug lobbyists. The new NDP government is set on covering up the Liberals wrong doings while leaving  many  unanswered questions swirling around this incident.

In 2012 a research group called the Therapeutics Initiative was about to release a study on Champix. There have been many concerns worldwide that the drug may have played a role in hundreds of suicides. But the Liberal government would hear none of that.

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Quit+smoking+drug+suspected+suicides+Canada/10717006/story.html

Instead of accepting the Therapeutics Initiative report the Liberal government fired the researchers and hid the study from the public claiming the researchers had breached the privacy of those in the study. At the time no one knew that the Liberals had no evidence to support their charges.  This devastated the lives of the seven health researchers and played a role in the death of one researcher named Rodney MacIsaac, which ironically was, in spite of some unusual circumstances, ruled a suicide.  As well, because there are still many concerns regarding the safety of Champix, the drug could still be harming tens of thousands of people trying to stop smoking today.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/concerns-of-a-link-between-quit-smoking-drug-and/6591456

What was the real reason for Christie Clark to fire the researchers?  Perhaps it was because Clark wanted to suppress a report by the researchers that showed that Champix, a drug she approved in 2011, and is still covered by the BC PrarmaCare, was linked to suicides worldwide, and should not have even been allowed on the market by Health Canada, let alone be covered by the BC Pharmacare program.

Tens of thousands of dollars in political donations to the B.C. Liberal Party by Pfizer may have played a role in the Liberal government’s promotion of the drug.  Drug companies and pharmacies donated nearly $600,000 to the B.C. Liberals between 2004 and 2012. A report like that being prepared by the Therapeutics Initiative could erode confidence in  Champix and cause billions of dollars of lost sales worldwide. Christie Clark and the Liberal government made sure that report would never see the light of day.  Strangely Adrian Dix and the NDP are continuing the cover up of what may be criminal actions of the BC Liberals.

http://rabble.ca/babble/alberta-and-british-columbia/bc-liberals-forced-to-reinstate-wrongly-fired-therapeutics-initi

A brief history of a drug deal gone bad and the cover-up by both the Liberals and the NDP.

In 2011 Premier Christie Clark announced that the Provincial PrarmaCare Program was about to begin covering Champix and another drug used to help people quit smoking. The government had no independent scientific opinions of the safety of Champix.

https://thetyee.ca/News/2015/06/19/BC-Anti-Smoking-Drug

In 2012, the Therapeutics Initiative was looking into the safety of Champix. Roderick MacIssac and Rebecca Warburton were researching the government program that prescribes drugs to help British Columbians stop smoking when they were fired. Their report has never been made public.

Margaret MacDiarmid was the Minister of Health at the time of the firings.  She was appointed by Clark just two days before the seven health care researchers were fired over what has been shown to be false accusations of breaches of privacy.

Was MacDiarmid put in place so that she could claim ignorance of the facts? Was she set up to take the fall if things went wrong instead of the previous Health Minister Michael deJong?

http://www.theprovince.com/health/local-health/former+health+minister+opens+over+ministry+firing/17457764/story.html

Deputy Minister of Health, David Whitmarsh made the firings. He misinformed MacDiarmid on several key aspects of the case including telling her that there was a breach of privacy by several researchers, and that the RCMP was involved with an investigation. Neither point was true. He was fired the following year but Whitmarsh has never been held accountable for his actions. The RCMP say they tried repeatedly to get information from the provincial government, but it never came.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/health-ministry-firing-investigation-stonewalled-by-b-c-government-documents-show-1.3101364

On January 8, 2013 this sordid tale took an even darker turn. Researcher Rodney MacIssac was found dead in his apartment. He had been dead for a month. The cause of death was hypoxia due to carbon-monoxide poisoning.

Mystery surrounds B.C. health ministry scandal that stopped pharmaceutical research and saw seven employees fired

On October 10 2013, a full seven months after MacIsaac’s body was discovered, the B.C. Coroners Service finally officially ruled the death a suicide.

https://www.straight.com/news/502066/dismissed-bc-health-ministry-researchers-death-officially-ruled-suicide

According to the coroner’s report, MacIsaac shut himself in a small room, placed towels under two doors, and started a gas-powered generator. The machine ran exhausting carbon monoxide until its fuel ran out.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ndp-claims-liberals-halted-stop-smoking-drug-research-1.1356260

In June 2015, Adrian Dix, then the Health critic for the NDP, called for a public inquiry.
RCMP documents obtained through a Freedom of Information request by the Vancouver Sun show that  police were not given evidence by the Liberal government to investigate the wrongdoing which was used to justify the firings, despite the government telling the public an investigation was ongoing.

This is what Dix had to say then.

“They {the Liberal government} claimed {that there was} an RCMP investigation that simply didn’t exist”.

“They failed to provide any information, even though they led their press conference announcing the dismissal of these workers saying there was an ongoing RCMP investigation … it shows a government that frankly, intentionally — from the beginning — misled the public about this issue and continued to do so for years.”

www.cbc.ca/…/canada/…/health-ministry-firing-investigation-stonewalled-by-b-c-gov…

It is now June 2018. Adrian Dix is the Minister of Health. Strangely Dix has changed his mind and has not asked for a government inquiry.

As well, Dix has not allowed the public to see the contents of the report on Champix from the Therapeutics Initiative.

Champix is still approved by Health Canada and covered by BC PharaCare.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/health-drug-coverage/pharmacare-for-bc-residents/what-we-cover/drug-coverage/bc-smoking-cessation-program

Was foul play involved in the death of Rod MacIssac? Why did it take so long to declare it a suicide? Who wrote the note left on his laptop?

Strangely it took the Coroner’s office over seven months to declare MacIsaac’s death a suicide. As well the coroner’s office has been accused by the family of deleting a letter left on MacIsaac’s laptop at the death scene. The coroner claims that nothing was deleted from the laptop. It is not entirely clear if the note was written by MacIssac, if the note was actually meant to be a suicide note or if it was written by others, perhaps his killers, to look like a suicide note. .http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Fired+health+researcher+suicide+note+deleted+Coroners+Service+family+says/11195247/story.html

And the biggest question of all was what did the coroner find at the scene that made him wait seven months before he ruled it was a suicide?  We may never know if the BC provincial government has its way.

——–end

Toxic Sludge and the CRD – Part 2    

  – Walt McGinnis – Citizen Reporter Feb 16, 2018

 The un-elected Capital Regional District whose board is chosen by our local mayors is at it again putting lipstick on the pig that they have created. By deciding to use land based treatment of sewage at McLaughlin Point the toxins will be partially removed from the ocean but the CRD are now stuck with chemical laden sludge and with no safe place to put it.

Victoria’s local TV station, CHECK News, reported today with the assistance of the CRD public relations department, that our ocean waters near the sewage out flows were being contaminated by pharmaceuticals and that 95% of these chemical would be removed by the new sewage treatment plant due to open in 2020.  Sounds good doesn’t it?

However a not so little detail CHECK failed to report on is the fact that these pharmaceuticals will now be captured in the left over sludge from the sewage plant and that sludge would be stored permanently at Hartland Landfill. Why will the sludge have to be stored permanently you ask? The answer is because these chemicals will make the sludge toxic and unsafe to incinerate or to spread on farmers’ fields. The CRD appears to have fixed one problem for about 1 billion dollars while possibly creating an even greater threat to our environment.

In the Focus magazine article, Will sewage treatment in Victoria benefit the environment ,by Katherine Palmer Gordon, June , 2014, retired University of Victoria ocean physics professor Chris Garrett  is quoted as saying  “secondary treatment doesn’t destroy many contaminants. Some are still discharged into the sea, and others simply get concentrated in the leftover sludge instead of the liquid effluent.

Whether that’s worse for the environment or not depends on what you do with the sludge. If you dispose of it on land, it may contaminate surface and groundwater. If you incinerate it, it may produce dioxins. What’s the environmental impact compared to the contaminants being absorbed and buried in the sediments around the outfalls? We don’t know, because an objective comparison hasn’t been done.”

That is a very clear explanation of the situation. The CRD on the other hand will not say this. They have no solution for the problem they have created so instead they are attempting to manufacture a reality in which the problem does not exist. This is a message to the CRD. You can put lipstick on a pig but we all know it is still a pig.

–Walt McGinnis citizen reporter

It appears Premier Horgan’s China visit to promote Liquefied Natural Gas investment and the Green party’s leader threats to bring down the NDP government over LNG production is a set up that will justify Weavers withdrawal of support for the NDP and bring down the government which will in turn take the referendum on PR off the table.

This is all fresh after Justin Trudeau’s betrayal of the Canadian people over the same issue. Will BCers buy it and just take another hit to their wishes of a better democracy?

Weaver and Horgan are singing and dancing and tweeting their way into the confused minds of the public, much to the delight of Petroleum Industry and their advisors that are uncomfortably close to the men.

In a Jan 23 Globe and Mail article by Justine Hunter reports Andrew Weaver, the leader of the BC Green Party as saying: “You can’t have LNG and meet (greenhouse gas reduction )targets. … This is that sword I would die on.”

In the article the Green Leader acknowledged that a snap election would derail his party’s efforts to seek changes to the province’s electoral system – which was a key demand in its negotiations with the NDP to support a minority government. Weaver said, “I didn’t get into politics to change the voting system,” I got into politics because I saw innovative, leading climate policies being dismantled and I believed the BC NDP were serious about climate action.”

The problem with those statements is voters are hardly interested about why Weaver got into politics. What the voters are concerned about is will he keep the promises he made to support PR that got him elected. These are two separate things. Weaver got elected because the main thing he campaigned for was to change the first past the post voting system to a Proportional Representation system. But now Weaver is putting all that in jeopardy. The question is why?

In the deal to prop up the NDP government the NDP have pledged to hold PR referendum and to campaign for PR. So Weavers job is to keep the NDP minority government going until the referendum is held and a regular election is scheduled. That is what the majority of Greens want and that is what this province needs; an end to the dictatorship of false majority governments where the party with 40% of the vote has 100%of the power while 60% of the voters have no voice.

            Manufacturing Terrorism in Canada

— Walt McGinnis – citizen reporter   Jan 19, 2018.

On July 1, 2013 John Nuttall and Amanda Korody were arrested and charged for carrying out a terrorist attack on the BC legislature lawn.

On June 2, 2015 the jury for the BC Supreme Court trial found the pair guilty for plotting the bombing. Their lawyers immediately asked for a stay in proceedings arguing that the couple was the victims of entrapment by the RCMP. In several conversations that were  secretly taped by the RCMP  listed in the judges, Reasons for Judgment,   the couple  believed they would be killed if they did not carry out the wishes of their handlers.

Beyond just being the victims of entrapment it appears that  Ms.Korody and Mr. Nuttall were used as the fall guys in a fake  murder plot manufactured by the highest offices of the RCMP.

On July 29, 2016 the Honorable Madam Justice Bruce agreed saying: “Simply put, the world has enough terrorists. We do not need the police to create more out of marginalized people who have neither the capacity nor sufficient motivation to do it themselves.”

Judge Bruce ordered a stay in proceedings.  Mr. Knuttall and Ms. Korody were set free.

In January 2018 Appeal hearings began on behalf of the federal Liberal government, headed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Many Canadians are wondering on what grounds an appeal is warranted.

In her Reasons for Judgment in the original court hearings   Judge Bruce explains how the RCMP manufactured the fake terrorist attack by forcing two vulnerable people living on the edge of society to plant bombs, that unbeknownst to them were unarmed, intending to murder people celebrating Canada Day on the British Columbia Legislature lawn.

 Astonishingly the RCMP has admitted that they had 243 police officers fabricating and carrying out the plot. Orders came directly from Ottawa. Millions of dollars were spent, leaving everyone asking the question: why? The answer to that could shake to the roots our concepts of who we are as Canadian citizens.

  Below are excerpts of what the judge said in her original ruling. Her words leave no doubt the RCMP are the real criminals in this case.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH  COLUMBIA

Reasons for Judgment     Before: The Honorable Madam Justice Bruce

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/16/14/2016BCSC1404.htm

[671] ……    This was not a situation in which the police were attempting to disrupt an ongoing criminal enterprise; rather, the offences committed by the defendants were brought about by the police and would not have occurred without their involvement. By any measure, this was a clear case of police-manufactured crime.

[672] …    the actions of the police went far beyond presenting the defendants with an opportunity to commit an act of terrorism. The police engaged in a multi-faceted and systematic manipulation of the defendants to induce them into committing a terrorist offence.

[674]  I find that an average person, ————–probably would have come to the same conclusion as the defendants. That is, that the undercover officers were part of a sophisticated terrorist organization and would not hesitate to eliminate them if they failed to meet their expectations.

[677]     I am also satisfied that the deceit practiced upon the defendants constituted an implied threat. Any reasonable person would have concluded that the members of such a terrorist organization were ruthless. The defendants were so convinced that Officer A and his associates were part of Al Qaeda that they came to fear the officers would kill them if they did not complete the terrorist plan that was orchestrated by the police.

681]  … ( an eavesdropping device)  at the Sundance Motel recorded Mr. Nuttall cautioning Ms. Korody that if they failed to complete their part in the mission Officer A would go from being a nice guy to a “fucking monster” and when he articulated Officer A’s four contingency plans for them, which all included their demise..

704]     The fact that Officer A chose to give religious advice at all is objectionable; however, preaching ideas that promoted the use of violence and allaying the defendants’ doubts about killing people makes his conduct far more sinister. When Mr. Nuttall said that he and Ms. Korody had serious doubts that killing people would please Allah, Officer A gave him the same spiritual advice about pre-determination that violent extremists use to radicalize people.

[709]     What is most concerning about Officer A’s conduct is that he used religious advice as a means of quelling the doubts the defendants had about using violence to achieve spiritual goals at critical times in the operation. As the project progressed, Officer A’s manipulation of Mr. Nuttall’s beliefs about the Islamic faith became more and more intrusive and directive until he became almost dictatorial……

735]     It was the RCMP who decided that the pressure cooker devices were a viable, feasible plan for Mr. Nuttall. They set about to convince him and Ms. Korody that this was the only plan that could possibly succeed and to discourage them from considering any other plan.

738] Officer A essentially ridiculed Mr. Nuttall’s rocket plan and said that the only plan he and Officer C would support was the pressure cooker plan.

[741]  In Victoria when they were alone together the evening before the final event, the defendants expressed the belief that they had to go through with the plan or be killed.

[743]   …  Having finally, and with great effort, refocused Mr. Nuttall on a terrorist plot that the police believed Mr. Nuttall might be able to accomplish, Officer A and the other undercover officers, as directed by the investigative team, began to eliminate every obstacle raised by the defendants to the completion of a pressure cooker mission…… Nuttall remained concerned about his lack of knowledge so Officer A instructed Mr. Nuttall about C4 and its properties. Mr. Nuttall did not know how to make a detonator so Officer C offered to supply remote detonators and Officer A assured Mr. Nuttall that detonators would not present a problem. Later, while shopping for the bomb parts, Officer A had to give Mr. Nuttall detailed instructions on how to make a timer from an alarm clock. The defendants did not have a place to construct the devices and so Officer A promised to find them a remote and quiet location. The defendants had no ability to transport themselves and the pressure cooker devices to their targets. Officer A promised that he would provide any necessary transportation, as well as a safe house for their stay on the Island and after the mission.

744] …Mr. Nuttall’s behavior did not demonstrate any hurry to carry out a jihadist mission. Both privately and in conversations with Officer A, the defendants expressed concern that they were being rushed into the pressure cooker plan.

[755] … the RCMP’s role in the terrorist plot was far more extensive in comparison to the roles played by the defendants. The defendants were the foot soldiers but Officer A was the leader of the group; he made all of the arrangements and gave the defendants instructions and directions at every stage of the operation. Without the police, it would have been impossible for the defendants to carry out the pressure cooker bombing.

[763] When Mr. Nuttall said it would be good to target an office building, it was Officer A who had to remind him that on Canada Day there would be no one in the office building. When Mr. Nuttall complained that they were being rushed, and required two days for a recce, Officer A redirected him and asked him to think about where all the people would be on Canada Day. In response, Mr. Nuttall said downtown. Without asking him to be more specific, Officer A drove directly to the Parliament buildings and pointed out two bushes that he told the defendants would make good hiding places for the devices.

764]  …..the defendants ultimately chose bushes closer to the Parliament buildings despite their knowledge that no one would be killed. They believed their message would get more sympathy if the building was damaged but no one was killed.

[765] ….it was clear that Mr. Nuttall did not believe that this was his plan or his operation. He wanted to blow up a truck not plant pressure cooker devices. Officer A lost his temper with Mr. Nuttall and, quite honestly in my view, exclaimed with a tone of frustration that he had planned everything and all Mr. Nuttall had to do was plant the devices.

[768 ., the role the police played in the mission is even more offensive because they violated the Criminal Code in order to accomplish their objectives and almost all of their actions were unsanctioned and beyond the scope of the s. 25.1 authorization secured by the RCMP.

[775]    … This is truly a case where the RCMP manufactured the crime; this is not a situation where the police simply “instigated, originated or brought about” the offence. The police took two people who held terrorist beliefs but no apparent capacity or means to plan, act on or carry through with their religiously motivated objectives and they counselled, directed, urged, instructed and molded them into people who could, with significant and continuous supervision and direction by the police, play a small role in a terrorist offence.

[777]     This bare summary does not capture the true nature of the police conduct because it was the day-to-day dealings with the defendants, which were recorded and videotaped, that demonstrate the absurd character of the undercover investigation. When Mr. Nuttall broke down after the failed train plan and confessed that he was not a general and could not be expected to create a workable plan, Officer A assured him that he would be taken through to the end, “one baby step at a time”. And this is what the police had to do, not for public safety, but to bring the undercover operation to a conclusion with an arrest for terrorism offences. Manipulating, cajoling, instructing, instilling fear, offering friendship, offering reward, offering religious guidance, throughout the operation, the police led the defendants to this endgame.

[836] – — There are no remedies less drastic than a stay of proceedings that will address the abuse of process. The spectre of the defendants serving a life sentence for a crime that the police manufactured by exploiting their vulnerabilities, by instilling fear that they would be killed if they backed out, and by quashing all doubts they had in the religious justifications for the crime, is offensive to our concept of fundamental justice. Simply put, the world has enough terrorists. We do not need the police to create more out of marginalized people who have neither the capacity nor sufficient motivation to do it themselves.

[837]     Accordingly, I find this is one of the rare cases where a stay of proceedings is warranted due to an abuse of process. I thus enter a stay of proceedings with regard to Counts 1 and 4 of the Indictment and I enter an unconditional stay in regard to Count 2.

“Bruce J.”

These court documents listing the actions of CSIS and the RCMP belie an ideology that allows for almost any tactic that will lead to a conviction of their victim regardless of their guilt or innocence. This is a trend lived out in several alleged terrorist plots in Canada and is also shown in Canada’s extradition laws that have led to the torture of Maher Arar, Omar Khadr and several other Canadian citizens.

 The results of the Trudeau governments appeal will show what kind of society Canadians live in. Is this a free and open society or some kind of police state that condones using coercive tactics that steal fundamental freedoms from us all?

Toxic Sludge and the CRD

–Walt McGinnis Citizen Reporter Jan 15, 2018 Victoria BC

The McLaughlin Point Sewage Treatment Plant will produce hundreds of tons of toxic sludge that will be stored permanently at the Hartland landfill. How could the Capital Regional District directors make such a terrible series of decisions that led to this? And the worst thing is we cannot do a thing about it because the CRD is not elected.

It appears that the directors of the Capital Regional District and their public relations staff are trying to maneuver around two big problems of their own creation.

The CRD problems started when they approved the undersized McLaughlin Point treatment plant which will be overwhelmed soon after it is opened, according to their engineering company, Stantec.  With the plant being overloaded chemicals will have to be added to the process. As a result the plant will produce chemically laden sewage sludge that is deemed to be toxic and cannot be used safely in anyway, including incineration.

Things began to get strange on Jan 11, 2018 when the CRD with director Lisa Helps taking the lead announced that they would not be burning the sludge but for reasons unrelated to protecting the environment. They claimed that they would not have enough garbage to mix with the sludge in order for it to be incinerated to create electricity. The shortage of garbage was the deciding factor. Incredibly they did not mention any concerns about the sludge’s toxicity. It was a public relations maneuver that takes your breath away for its brazenness.

In fact the CRD have never acknowledged the environmental damage that the burning of chemical laden sludge would cause. It seems that the CRD has been more concerned about covering their behinds than protecting our health.  As a result of their shenanigans we will end up with hundreds of tons of toxic sludge stored permanently at the top of our watershed at Hartland Landfill, ready to trickle down into our environment.  It will be an accident waiting to happen, a constant threat to contaminate our streams our lakes and our water wells for many generations.

Read more about this in an article by David Broadland  in the Nov 7, 2016 Focus Magazine article called The CRD hid McLaughlin Points fatal Flaw.

http://www.focusonvictoria.ca/novdec2016/the-crd-hid-mcloughlin-points-fatal-flaw-by-david-broadland-r14/

The article states; the sludge can’t be incinerated, used as fertilizer, or recycled in any useful way. UBC engineering professor Dr Don Mavinic, an expert on sewage treatment, told Focus in 2014: “This is a huge problem in Ontario right now. It’s become very contentious. Very few landfills will accept the sludge now. Most incinerators won’t touch it. Ontario has ended up with this chemical soup that has to be stored somewhere because you can’t do anything with it.”

 This article points out several other major flaws with the design of the treatment plant that should also be noted as more problems unfold.

  On Jan 11, 2018 the Times Colonist reported that the sludge will now be dried and stored and “perhaps sent off to be burned as fuel in cement kilns.”

http://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/crd-halts-search-for-another-way-to-deal-with-sewage-sludge-1.23141565

Perhaps Director Lisa Helps, the CRD staff and the editors of the Times Colonist all know, but dare not mention, that this sludge is toxic to all lifeforms and cannot be reused safely in any manner.

Perhaps the public should be informed about the risks the CRD are taking with our health.

Perhaps as well, we should think about why we are not demanding that the CRD directors be held accountable for their actions by, for starters, holding free and fair elections for  the directors of the CRD.

I asked CRD director Lisa Helps by voicemail if she was aware that the chemical laden sludge could not be incinerated safely. She has not returned my call.