Your wish is my command?

Vincent J. Curtis

28 May 20

The People's Daily today published an op-ed written by two M.D.s and one Ph.D. that argued for making the wearing of face masks mandatory.

Progressivism believes in rule-by-expert and the moral equivalent of war.  But success depends upon the expert chosen to be the ruler.  The trifecta of doctors who wrote “Evidence based case for making face masks mandatory” should not be on the short list for Emperor-expert because they advocate for face-mask fascism.

The eminence of Dr. Theresa Tam and Dr. Anthony Fauci needs no introduction.  They were and are the expert-rulers.  Both are on record as saying that face masks are unnecessary and perhaps even harmful, and these facts are acknowledged by the three blind mice.  (Health authorities have changed their position)  Tam and Fauci have since changed their minds and are now on board the face mask train.  “Scientific data shows that [home-made face masks] provide a significant benefit in reducing transmissibility,” squeak the mice.  “Science tells us that universal masking is one piece of the solution, so what are we waiting for?” they urge at the top of their voices.

Actually, common sense says that, and said that back when Tam and Fauci were scientifically advising against them, but never mind.  The real issue with the blessed trinity has to do with the compulsion aspect so beloved by progressivism.  If you believe you can bring about Utopia, what would you not do, and what could justify opposition?  The mice advocate for face mask fascism, and that is why they shouldn’t be trusted as expert-Imperator.

We need to “internalize”, advise the mice, the loving benefits of mask-wearing, “my mask protects you, and yours protects me,” or some such hooey.  Health authorities have “fallen short of the mark of requiring the wearing of masks in public be mandatory.”  But heroic others have stepped up in their place, so goes the fascist narrative.

“What is desperately needed are laws and penalties to ensure compliance.”  Never mind pushback from those who advocate for civil rights for we are assured from another authority that a pandemic is the just kind of thing that warrants the overriding of civil rights. (the moral equivalent of war.)

“Time is of the essence!” they squeak; we can’t rush into stupidity fast enough!

If the credentialed triumvirate offered common sense advice, that would be fine.  But inside every progressive is a tiny fascist waiting to command, and what was sensible as advice became a call for fascist rule.

I don’t believe in fascism, and if the three wise guys think laws and penalties should be enacted to enforce their views, I invite them to be the first to enforce such an edict personally.
-30-

Get Normal Now!

Vincent J. Curtis

27 May 20

The Hamilton People's Daily ran an article by an instructor of "numeracy" for journalists.  The piece was an eye-glazer, and what became apparent was that the facts and figures he was discussing had nothing to do with what was important in respect to the pandemic in Canada and to the response to it.

Here are a few figures the J-School math tutor didn’t mention in his article.  Approximately 260,000 people die each year in Canada from all causes: 79,000 from cancer, 51,000 from heart disease, 13,000 by accidental causes, 6.000 from influenza and pneumonia, and 4,000 by suicide, to name a few.  This means that in the 75 days since the beginning of the lockdown, over 53,000 people have died from all causes in Canada, while Covid-19 deaths number 5,000.

Given the shutdown and the turning over of the health care system to the treatment of Covid-19, there is no telling how many cancers went undiagnosed, heart attacks and strokes not treated due to fear of going to hospital, how many additional suicides, drug addiction, and alcoholism were caused by the lockdown itself.

Of the 5,000 Covid-19 deaths in Canada, 4,000 occurred among the elderly, primarily in nursing homes in Quebec.  Practically no one under 40 has died as a result of Covid-19, while those under 70 have a 99.9 percent chance of surviving an infection.

The geographical distribution of deaths is also peculiar.  More than half of Canada’s deaths occurred in Quebec, and the overwhelming number of those occurred in Montreal.  The hot spot in Ontario is Toronto, and Toronto is far better off than Montreal.  The rest of Canada has microscopic numbers of cases, the third largest province is B.C. with 160 deaths, followed by Alberta with 130.  For this, the entire country was shut down.  I assure you that if Edmonton was the center of the storm, Toronto would not be shutting down its parks and beaches and Quebec would take no notice.

The special hazard the virus posed for those over 70 was known at the beginning of March, before the lockdown began.  Instead of isolating seniors and focussing protective efforts on them, the country, the media and the politicians, went into full panic mode and shut down the entire economy, and made a farce of civil rights and democratic government in doing so.

It’s time to recognize the mistake and re-open the economy and everything else immediately.  Get normal now!  We can save the recriminations for later, but the death caused from keeping the economy closed now outweigh any benefit it may have in respect of Covid-19.

(Funny that J-School has a math tutor; math and science programs don’t have tutors in basic grammar.)
-30-

The pandemic of denormalization

Vincent J. Curtis

26 May 20

The pandemic is giving Canada and much of the rest of the world a belly-full of progressivism.  Progressivism believes in rule-by-expert and the moral equivalent of war.  Progressives believe that they can bring about a Utopia on earth with the right legal structure and a sufficient exertion of government power.

Progressives can be ruthless.  Since they believe they can bring about Utopia, what would they refrain from doing to bring it about?  What could possibly justify opposition to their aims and methods? Snobbery is a natural outlook of the progressive.

One of the tactics of progressivism is denormalization.   Opponents aren’t just wrong, they’re not normal.  They deserve nothing. When people get tired of the lockdown and protest absurd and arbitrary rules, they are denormalized: they’re denounced as “selfish,” and “irresponsible,” and associated with a “rise in the number of cases” - without proof.  The media denormalizes part of their audience, and politicians, their constituents

President Donald Trump is routinely denormalized both as a president and as a human being.  His supporters are likewise denormalized (you ain’t black unless you support Biden.  Sarah Palin wasn’t a real woman.).

The coronavirus pandemic gave progressivism a glittering opportunity.  The country is now governed upon the opinion of medical “experts.”  The national lockdown is enforced with the moral urgency of a war.

This pandemic won’t last forever, however hard the government and all the tiny tyrants try to milk it.  People are getting used to the method, and after it happens to you, you are no longer intimidated so easily by denormalizing.  It’s happened to a lot of people.

If enough people get denormalzied, by news media and politicians, progressivism will have lost its most powerful psychological weapon.
-30-

News from Neptune

Vincent J. Curtis

21 May 20

I see the People’s Daily published the latest dispatch from the planet Neptune, where it has its very own correspondent, a retired professor of Neptune-studies.  Conditions on Neptune resemble a dystopian hell and, luckily for us on planet earth, the only place anything like Neptune is New York State.  There, its bully-governor sent patients still infectious with Covid-19 back into retirement homes because that was his rule.  The consequences were as disastrous as they were predictable, and the unapologetic governor now blames his rule on the Trump Administration’s CDC.  He acknowledged being surprised that two-thirds of all Covid-19 deaths in his state were from people who had followed his lock-down orders to the letter.  Being progressive means never saying you’re sorry.

A bright, shining example lies further south, in Florida, governed by Trump-protégé Ron DeSantis.  In a state with lots of seniors, DeSantis focussed protective efforts on them, making hospitals keep seniors with Covid-19 until they were completely free of the virus.  DeSantis never shut down the state, and today Florida’s death toll is, like, two percent of the national total, with New York State having fifty percent.  DeSantis looked at South Korea, Europe, studied the numbers and the treatments, and then acted empirically.  Young people on sunny Florida beaches posed no danger to public health.

Luckily, viruses from the planet Neptune have little chance of infecting anyone here on earth.
-30-

Trump Walks the Walk

Vincent J. Curtis

20 May 20

Once again, the basket-weaving drop-outs who type editorials for the People’s Daily are barking about science.  Specifically, they condemn President Donald Trump for taking hydroxychloroquine as a prophylactic against a Covid-19 infection.  “It’s dangerous!” “There’s no science” proclaim the croakers.

Donald Trump is walking the walk; he’s recommended it, and he is taking it.  This is unlike progressives who are exempt from the ramifications of their own ideology, such as Professor Neil Ferguson, but I digress.

Actually there is plenty of science around hydroxychloroquine.  It was developed in the 1930s, and has long been used as an anti-malarial prophylactic.  It also is used to treat some auto-immune disorders like lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.  Its safety profile is well documented, and anyone who has visited climes where malaria is prevalent has probably been prescribed it.

Covid-19 is too new for there to be much reliable science concerning treating it.  There is simply too much anecdotal evidence of benefit from hydroxychloroquine to dismiss it as a treatment.  Its known benefit of moderating immune response gives it theoretical respectability, since fatality from Covid-19 often occurs as a result of the extreme immune response it generates in the body.  The absolute, condemnatory reports, allegedly scientific, against the effectiveness of the drug makes me suspicious, given the prevalence of Trump-hatred.  Thousands of front-line health care workers take it prophylactically.

Trump is walking the walk.  The drug is safe, and was prescribed by a physician.

Basket-weaving majors: shut-up about “science!”
-30-

Hype Fear, Destroy Trump

Vincent J. Curtis

18 May 20

I understand why American media want to keep people scared and in line about coronavirus - why they want to keep everybody at home and away from work.  If the economy stays flat, Trump loses in November.  And if, contrary to their advice, the economy is reopened and the number of deaths “spikes”, they can blame Trump for those deaths.

But I don’t understand why the same thing is being done in Canada.

One of the things Dr. Theresa Tam failed to explain to the Arts majors, J-school types, and basket-weaving drop-outs at her press conference when she showed all those bell curves, is that the areas under the curves were the same.  Tall and narrow or low and broad, the areas under the curves were equal, meaning the number of deaths they represented were the same.  When Tam spoke of ‘flattening the curve’, she didn’t mean that fewer people would die, she meant that fewer people would die all at once.  The health care system wouldn’t get overwhelmed with hospitalizations: sickness and deaths would be spread out over time.

But, drunk with power, and seeing the curve flatten, Tam and other tiny tyrants changed the objective to killing the virus, no matter how long it took.  This simply isn’t sustainable.  If, on reopening, deaths “spike,” it is only the curve asserting what is already baked in.  We can’t stop it.  We can’t delay the inevitable forever; we might as well reopen so we can get to the other side of this thing.
-30-

Die of Anything BUT Coronavirus!

Vincent J. Curtis

17 May 20

When this pandemic panic finally subsides, the progressive project will lie in ruins.  Progressivism believes in rule by expert, and the moral equivalent of war.  It contains a heavy dose of moral narcissism, since, if you believe you can bring about Utopia, what would you not do, and what could justify opposition?

The skeptical few who understood how science really works were silenced by a mob shouting, “follow the science,” and “listen to the experts!”  Well, let’s see how that worked out.

Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London, was the modeler epidemiologist who forecasted catastrophe: 2.2 million deaths in America, and 500,000 in the U.K.  His numbers justified the lockdowns.  However, peer reviewers at the University of Edinburgh tested Ferguson’s program and found it “a buggy mess” and “totally unreliable.”  Ferguson himself was disgraced when it was discovered he continued his affair with a married woman despite his call for social lockdown.  Meanwhile, the U.S. won’t reach 100,000 deaths despite the best efforts of New York State.

Canada has had 5,000 deaths attributed to coronavirus, of which 4,000 occurred in the vulnerable 80+ demographic.  That leaves 1,000 for everyone else, and none under 20.  Meanwhile, Canada had 7,000 deaths from influence and pneumonia, routine numbers.

That Canada destroyed the livelihood of millions for the sake of a thousand, when 7,000 by influenza is considered unremarkable testifies to a bizarre moral outlook: it is better to die of anything but coronavirus.
-30-

Chinese Communist Enablers

Vincent J. Curtis

12 May 20

The editors at the Hamilton People’s Daily have cut loose, Tourette-like, with another rancid gas attack on President Trump.  After condemning him for everything concerning China, at the end the editorial concedes that, on the facts, Trump is right.

It takes a great dose of amnesia for the People’s Daily to call Trump’s handling of the crisis “arrogant and chaotic.”  If memory serves, Trump was condemned as a xenophobic racist for banning flights from China in late January, when few western experts had an inkling of what was coming and the Chinese and W.H.O. were lying about it.  Since then, his handling of the crisis has relied heavily on expert advice.  Canada has followed the same procedures except three weeks later.

The blessed editors blame Trump for America having a high proportion of deaths by Covid.  They seem to forget the contributions by NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio, who encouraged New Yorkers to mingle, and Gov. Andrew Cuomo who arrogantly ordered elderly still contagious with Covid into nursing homes. Not surprisingly, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut are where most of the Covid deaths occurred.  And nobody believes the numbers coming out of China, nor should they.

China blocked people from Wuhan from travelling within China, but permitted them to fly out to Europe and America.  If that isn’t the most callous racism, then racism doesn’t exist.  The Chinese regime lied to protect itself, and it’s still lying.

The Chinese communists don’t need any more enablers.
-30-

The Lie Blair Tells

Vincent J. Curtis

8 May 20

As we are gradually learning, both in Canada and America, the police don’t have to be truthful with you.  Minister of Public Safety Bill Blair used to be Chief of Toronto police, and it is clear from his statements on the firearms ban that being truthful forms no part of his tactics.

Said repeatedly by him and in the Orders-in-Council, the firearms banned have no place in Canada because they are such a threat to public safety.  But what are the facts concerning public safety?  And do we still believe in “evidence based in policy making,” or not?

In its 29 Sept 2018 edition, the Hamilton Spectator ran a sidebar headlined, “Selected Causes of Death in Canada.”  This article reported that in 2016, there were 260,000 total deaths in Canada; 79,084 from cancer, 51,390 from heart disease, 12,524 accident, 6,235 influenza and pneumonia, 3,978 suicide, and 611 homicides.  Of these 611 homicides, 220 were by “shootings.”  Out of these 220, more than half were committed by handguns, leaving less than a hundred to be committed by long guns.  There is no further breakdown specifying how many of this hundred were committed by assault-style firearms, but I’m going to say that the number is approximately zero.

In short, there is no statistical basis for saying that assault-style firearms are such a dire threat to public safety that they have to be banned - and grandfathered in the possession of those too untrustworthy to have them!

Canada, your government is lying to you.
-30-

Gun Grabbers' Double Talk

Vincent J. Curtis

7 May 20

No one is surprised when told that politicians talk out of both sides of their mouths.  In the matter of the Trudeau gun-grab, the facial twitching is exceeds alarming.  Keep in mind the arrogant boasts, “follow the science” and “evidence-based policy-making.”

The most egregious examples of doubletalk concern the treatment of aboriginals.  A special carve-out for aboriginal use of these newly prohibited firearms is made in the amnesty portion of the regulations.  The regulations complain of the “inherent deadliness” of these assault-style firearms and the danger they pose to public safety.  Yet the carve-out for aboriginals exists because they use these firearms to hunt seal.  In addition, the regulations observe that indigenous persons are victims of homicide involving firearms at a much higher rate than the Canadian population, and their proportion appears to be increasing from 10.4 % of all homicides in 2014 to 13.5 % in 2016.  So the people who are far more likely to get killed are the ones who are permitted the continued use of these inherently deadly firearms!  The government apparently can’t decide which of their therapeutic prescriptions to take more seriously.

The Governor-in-Council did not say how many of those indigenous victims of homicide were killed by these assault-style firearms, however; or say if the proportion increased because of a drop in homicides by all causes among the Canadian population.  It made no mention of the microscopic number of people actually murdered each year by assault-style firearms.  The facts would be embarrassing.

In justifying the gun-grab, the G-i-C declared that mass shootings were commonly perpetrated by (not with) assault-style firearms, and referred to Nova Scotia, Montreal, and Toronto.  The problem is that none of these mass shootings took place with assault-style firearms, and that these occur once every thirty years or so.  The Nova Scotia killings were not done by an assault-style firearm, and nine of the twenty-two victims were burned to death in a fire.  The Montreal massacre of 1989 was done with a Mini-14, not considered an assault-style firearm until this gun-grab was announced.  The Toronto killings must refer to various gang-violence killings over a span of time, but no single mass shooting incident occurred.  In short, there is no Canadian experience to justify the gun-grab.  Nova Scotia isn’t it, and banning the Montreal massacre rifle after, lo, these thirty years without any other incident since then seems strange and belated.

The G-i-C claims that the inherent deadliness of assault-style firearms make them unsuitable for civilian use and a serious threat to public safety.  Yet these firearms have been in Canada since the middle 1970s, and only now it’s discovered that they represent a serious threat to public safety?  They are unsuitable for public use, they exceed safe civilian use, yet the Mini-14 is commonly used for hunting seals and for varmint control on farms and ranches.  And the government contemplates a grandfathering regime to follow the amnesty period!

The G-i-C refers to the modularity of the AR-15 platform, and mentions the ability of the lower receiver to accept a different kind of upper receiver “according to the needs of the occasion.”  But what could those unmentioned needs and occasions be?  They surely are not to make the rife more “inherently deadly?”  In point of fact, entire recreational events of sport shooting have grown-up around the AR-15 platform; but to make mention of this would undercut the claim of the “inherent deadliness.” the “threat to public safety,” and the “exceeding safe civilian use “ claims.  It simply cannot be admitted how kinetic these sporting events are and how many people are involved or the “exceeding safe civilian use” claim gets laughed out of court.

It is universally believed in the gun-owing community that the Trudeau gun-grab is founded on a pile of lies.  It is political gesturing gone wild.  It is not based on “science” or “evidence.” The evidence is adverse, the science non-existent.  The gun-grab is a payment to a political prejudice.

The Trudeau gun-grab is yet another of his attacks upon respect for the rule of law.  He is violating the civil rights of scores of thousands of law-abiding Canadians directly, and the manner of implementation is a violation of the norms of law-making in Canada.  Expect the foul and unjust gun-grab will be resisted commensurately.
-30-

A Good Kind of Racism

Vincent J. Curtis

6 May 20

The Orders-in-Council that banned many kinds of firearms in Canada, many previously unrestricted, contains a bit of racism.  But it’s a therapeutic kind of racism – you know, the good kind.

Many people wondered why the Mini-14 wasn’t made restricted after the passage of the Firearms Act in 1995.  The Mini-14 was the firearm used in the École Polytechnique killings; the AR-15 was made restricted, but the Mini-14 was left alone.  The reason for that decision was that the Mini-14 was widely used by aboriginals in the far north to hunt seal.  They would be put into legal jeopardy if the government restricted or prohibited the gun used to kill 14 women, and so the government restricted the uninvolved AR-15 instead. They had to look like they were doing something!

In those days, the government recognized that under Section 15 of the Charter, the provision of equal treatment and equal benefit of the law without discrimination, meant that one racial group could not have a privileged access to a type of firearm.

The government of today no longer respects Section 15.  The Amnesty section of the Orders-in-Council contains a proviso that aboriginals who use the Mini14 for hunting will be permitted to continue using it as before.  If you are not aboriginal, that ranch rifle you used against prairie dogs and gophers yesterday is now prohibited from use today.

Racism isn’t bad when it’s therapeutic.  Therapeutic racism trumps the Charter.
-30-

Ban printing presses, they're more dangerous

Vincent J. Curtis

5 May 20

Saying that assault rifles were designed to kill the maximum number of people in the shortest possible time is rather like saying that printing presses should be banned because they were designed to distribute the maximum number of lies and blasphemy to the maximum number of people.

As a technical matter, the automatic fire capability of the assault rifle was intended for the suppression of enemy fire, and to enable the maneuver of your own troops.  The purpose of the thirty round magazine was to enable the infanteer to finish the assault without having to reload his rifle.  Of course, none of this matters because the Trudeau gun ban isn’t about actual assault rifles and normal capacity magazines.

Assault rifles were banned in Canada in 1977.  What we are talking about are rifles that resemble military rifles, but aren’t.  In contrast, your father’s or grandfather’s Lee-Enfield hunting rifle started out as an actual Long Branch No. 4 military rifle that was sold after the war as surplus on the civilian market.  The number of rounds lawfully carried in that Lee-Enfield is twice the number of the “assault-style” rifle.  To say nothing of the proven German-killing power of the .303 cartridge as compared with puny .223 cartridge of the “assault-rifle.” 

No doubt about it, the printing press, with its capacity to print and distribute lies and blasphemy, in the hands of irresponsible propagandists is far more dangerous to the public than AR-15s in the hands of law-abiding gun owners.
-30-

VE Plus 75

Vincent J. Curtis

3 Mar 2020

May, 1945, opened with good news: Hitler was dead.  His successor, Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz, wasn’t a big time Nazi like Heinrich Himmler or Hermann Goering, meaning the war would not be prolonged.  The weather too was improving.

In Holland, 2^nd Div, under Maj-Gen Bruce Matthews, had wrapped up the Battle of Groningen, a remarkable feat of urban combat.  To protect the civil population, the Canadians fought without artillery support, relying only on direct fire from tank main guns.  The success of that battle created the Delfzijl pocket which 5^th Div, under Maj-Gen Bert Hoffmeister, cleared up by May 2^nd.  Thus ended organized resistance in Holland.

Meanwhile, the 2^nd Canadian Corps protected the British left flank.  Operation Duck saw a forced crossing of the Ems and Leda Rivers in Lower Saxony and the capture of the North Sea port town of Leer.  Duck was conducted by a reinforced 3rd Div, under Maj-Gen Ralph. Keefler,  The 9^th Bde, under Brig John Rockingham, attacked across both rivers and established a bridgehead.  7^th Bde,, under Brig Thomas Gibson, passed through the 9^th, and captured the town of Loga,  The 8^th Bde, under Brig J.A. Roberts, on May 1^st began a drive northward towards Aurich, reaching it on the 4^th.  Meanwhile, the 1^st Polish Armoured Division, under Stanislaw,Maczek, captured Emden and Wilhelmshaven.

On May 2^nd, before Hamburg surrounded and Lubeck fell, the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion saved Denmark from Soviet occupation.  Churchill promised the Danes that the British would liberate Denmark, and Monty planned Operation Eclipse accordingly.  To make sure the Soviets didn’t get there first, he ordered the 3^rd and 5^th Parachute Brigades of the British 6^th Airborne Division to dash across the base of the Jutland peninsula from Lauenburg to Wismar on the Baltic coast - a distance of over one hundred kilometers.

Spearheading the 3^rd Brigade was the 1^st  Canadian Parachute Battalion, B Coy riding on the Churchill tanks of the Royal Scots Greys, while A and C Coys were carried on board RASC trucks.  The tanks were refueled in Lutzow, and there the Canadians encountered nearly three thousand rear echelon German troops and thousands of civilians who together were ready to surrender to allied forces, escaping the Soviets.  The Germans were instructed to toss their arms by the side of the road and walk, unescorted, westward.  Racing eastward at top tank speed again, the Canadians reached Wismar early on the afternoon of the 2^nd  and established a roadblock, supported by 17 pdr anti-tank guns, east of the town.  Thousands more Germans and several hundred allied PWs reached Canadian lines at Wismar.


Before nightfall, the Soviets arrived.  Tense negotiations, facilitated by Russian-speaking Canadian paratroopers, took place between Maj-Gen Eric Bols, GOC 6th Airborne Division, and the Soviet commander.  The 3^rd Guards Tank Corps was stopped from trying to roll over the rapidly strengthening British-Canadian position.

On May 4^th, German forces in the Netherlands, northwest Germany, Denmark, and Norway surrendered unconditionally to 21^st Army Group, coming into effect on May 5^th.  On the 5^th, British forces began occupying and liberating Denmark while the Red Army cooled its heels east of Wismar.

In 2^nd Canadian Corps area, the town of Bad Zwischenahn, site of a major Luftwaffe base, was summoned into surrender by 4^th Div on May 1^nd and was immediately reserved as the next HQ location for 2^nd Corps.  Oldenburg fell to 2^nd Div on May 2^nd. 

The Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders had the distinction of being the last formation in 21^st Army Group Command to encounter opposition.  Advancing towards Spohle, they were hit with heavy SA and 20 mm fire and AP shells fired from a German SP gun.  A SAR tank was knocked out at noon.  KIA/DW May 4^th – 5^th  were: Sgt Robert W. Johnston, L/Cpl Romeo Ciccone, Pte Ubald W.  Laneville, and Pte Joseph Mitchell; a further eight were wounded.

Then, relief.  Dazed German soldiers streamed into allied hands, and beginning May 6^th attention turned to organizing the peace.
-30-

The Lockdown is Illegal in Canada

Vincent J. Curtis

4 May 20


The Glorious Revolution of 1688 commenced the modern era of British (and Canadian) constitutional law.  A foundational Act of Parliament of the new era was the Bill of Rights of 1689.  Among the provisions of the Bill of Rights was the declaration that “the pretended power of suspending the laws and dispensing with laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament was illegal.”

It also declared that, among the wrongful policies of the overthrown King James II, was “the execution of laws without the consent of Parliament.”

Today, regal authority is exercised through members of the cabinet and, in particular, the Prime Minister.  Just because the Prime Minister, Prince Justin, is an elected member of Parliament, that does not change the fact that Orders-in-Council are acts of regal authority in the British-Canadian political system.  It is in no wise clear that Orders-in-Council issued by the cabinet automatically have the “consent of Parliament.”  Parliament in Canada consists of the House of Commons as a whole and the Senate.

The entire regime of restrictions by which the economy of Canada was shut down, and people deprived of their jobs, and prevented by order from visiting their own property seems to be in violation of the Bill of Rights, 1689.  The consent of Parliament is obtained by legislation, and any legislation that violates the Charter of Rights, such as freedom of peaceful assembly, association, (Section 2(c) and (d)), and the right to move within Canada and gain livelihood (Section 6) requires the invocation of the Notwithstanding Clause.  This has not been done.

Therefore, it seems that the entire regime of measures ordered by the Prime Minister and the various Premiers of provinces are illegal, being straightforward violations of civils rights, both ancient and modern.

People who feel oppressed by their governments have a right to be, because they are, and illegally so.
-30-

Trudeau's Unexplained Mysteries

Vincent J. Curtis

3 May 20


In the course of justifying his ban on AR-15 rifles, Justin Trudeau said something exceptionally stupid, even for him; and anti-gun media use it gleefully.  He said, “You don’t need an AR-15 to shoot a deer.”

Well, an AR-15 was a restricted firearm, which meant that it would be illegal to shoot a deer with one because the only lawful place the rifle could be shot was on an approved target range.  Not just any range, an approved range.

Of course you don’t need an AR-15 to shoot a deer, or a seal, even if it were legal.  There are many other kinds of firearms that could get that job done.  But why would an AR-15 be particularly apt to shoot a deer or a seal if one was so minded?

The AR-15 shoots a cartridge of modest power.  It is effective on vermin and game up to about 90 kg in weight, and in the case of a 90 kg deer, one should get close enough that the first shot is lethal.  This is where the AR-15 is particularly apt to shoot deer.  The rifle is exceptionally accurate, meaning the bullet is going to go where the shooter aimed it.  In addition, being semi-automatic, if a follow-up shot is needed, the rifle is reloaded immediately and, crucially, without disturbing the shooter’s aim.

Since the magazine of an AR-15 is by law limited to five rounds, it remains an excellent hunting rifle for small to medium game without being the threat of mass murder it is alleged to be.  Mass murder and killing deer with an AR-15 are already illegal, so how society is made substantially safer by making ownership of one by a law-abiding gun-owner illegal remains unexplained.
-30-

Fear the Government, Not the Virus

Vincent J. Curtis

2 May 20

RE: Trudeau "bans" 1,500 firearms in Canada

Fear the government, not the virus.  That is the lesson to be taken from recent events.

The government’s handling of the coronavirus has been a disaster – economically, socially, and medically.  By creating a climate of fear, the government justified a lockdown of the economy.  They quarantined healthy people, and rights guaranteed under the Charter disappeared as if they were never thought of.

The rule by expert turned out to be an illusion, as the so-called experts did not know how to cope with something they never experienced before.  Told to follow the science, the experts followed faux science - models absent actual data, and instead of evidence based reasoning we were treated to arrogance, incompetence, and sanctimony.  We went from not transmittable to highly contagious, from don’t wear masks to wear masks, from a deadly virus to one that is often so asymptomatic that we underestimated the infection rate by a factor of twenty.

All the while we were told that if we protested this grotesque violation of our civil rights, we would be responsible for the deaths of untold numbers of people.  Not what one would call a scientific statement, but it cowed most people.

Mr. Trudeau chose this moment to further strain belief in the rule of law by attacking the rights of the most law-abiding section of society, the owners of restricted firearms.  These people are the most law abiding of citizens because any violation of the law, even a complaint by a spouse or a neighbor, can lead to the seizure of their prized possessions.  A criminal background check is run on every gun owner every day by the miracle of computers.

When the Firearms Act was passed in 1995, it created a registry for restricted long guns.  Unlike handguns, long guns required no registration, and so there was a pool of newly restricted long guns that required registration.  The Liberal government of that day, led by Jean Chretien, promised that registration would not lead to confiscation.  Mr. Trudeau just turned his predecessor into a liar.  The government of today would not know exactly how many long guns of certain types are in this country – and who owns them – but for the registry.  It will be through the registry that the national police will be able go to someone’s house and demand that a long gun be turned over on pain of arrest.  And, given the circumstance, the threat of gun-play by the police.

There is no basis in law at present for the ban.  The Order-in-Council is an act of pure executive authority without a legislative basis, which is why it is a challenge to the rule of law.  It is possible for the executive to be lawless, too; and a lawless government is more dangerous to society than any lone gunman.  If the executive is lawless, why should anyone else follow the law, or obey the executive?

Speaking of lone gunmen, a gun ban and confiscation scheme would not have stopped the Nova Scotia killings.  The gunman had no firearms permits, no lawfully owned guns, and the police did not know he had any.  It will be the law-abiding gun owner who gets his prized possessions seized, for the crime of foolishly following the law.

Trudeau has done much harm to this country, but the greatest harm will be the loss of respect for the rule of law among the most law-abiding of citizens.  We have more to fear from government than we do from any virus.
-30-