Are Canada’s Scientists Being Silenced?

The Canadian government is muzzling scientists, according to a complaint filed by Democracy Watch and a western Canadian university’s environmental law clinic earlier this year.

The nation’s information commissioner has confirmed her office’s investigation into the complaints.

The complaint claims Canadian scientists are being “muzzled” by being forced to request permission from numerous federal departments prior to talking to any media outlets.

The 26-page complaint (with over a 100 pages of appendices) alleges this breaches the Access to Information Act.

In an era when it’s virtually impossible to keep anything public private, thanks to social media, this complaint at first seems silly – as if the scientists just don’t want to have to fill out all the paperwork to report their findings.

However, this complaint isn’t just about the paperwork – it’s about freedom of speech and reporting on environmental issues which affect us all.

We’ve seen big businesses and government use this tactic to quash media attention from controversial issues before.

Cigarette companies used the tactic to try and convince us that their products were actually good for us – which we now painfully know is hogwash.

By forcing mounds of paper upon anyone requesting information, the cigarette companies made it almost impossible to learn the true dangers of smoking.

The Soviet government made it hard for journalists to find reliable information about most things during the Cold War, often forcing mountains of paper to be filed, which made it too time consuming to get and report on anything out of that part of the world.

But the Canadian government?

Really?!?!

Canada isn’t a communistic country, and freedom of speech and access to government has always been something Canadians never worried about.

It just is unheard of.

Hopefully, the Canadian government is not trying to stall environmental research, by delaying or denying scientists access to the press, and to each other’s reports.

Because if that is what really is going on – it’s not just a dark day for science in Canada – but a hurricane of hurt for free speech everywhere.

Real Freedom is Only for Those Who You Can’t See

Yesterday, Canada’s highest court ruled in some situations, Muslim women can wear the full face-covering veil called a niqab, while testifying in court, due to religious reasons.

The niqab provides only a slit across the eyes, allowing women wearing it to see, but fully covers the rest of the face.

Canada’s Supreme Court ruled narrowly in favour of allowing the Muslim woman to wear the full-face covering in an Ontario provincial court, as she’s the victim of a horrible rape.

One of the great things about being Canadian, is our acceptance of other cultural and religious beliefs. It’s also our greatest fault – because it doesn't work the other way ‘round.

For years, first responders have had serious reservations about serving Muslim women wearing the niqab. Be it a slight fender bender, a major car crash, a house fire, or – as in the case of the woman who won her right to wear such a garment in a public court of law – a rape case – the job of all first responders is to ensure the safety and security of all those involved.

This requires the ability to SEE with their own eyes the whole situation, including the faces of those affected.

There have been numerous reports from ambulance, police, fire and other first responders, where women in the niqab have refused to remove their coverings.

In at least three Canadian situations, paramedics were forced to wait until the women passed out from their injuries, so they could legally assist an unconscious victim, by removing the niqab, to perform necessary life-saving care.

In extremely oppressed cultures – and you can’t get much more extreme than covering your whole face – they don’t have the openness to accept other cultural or religious beliefs.

So when they come to an open and free country, and are told for their own safety and security, they must uncover their face so we can see them, they refuse.

However, they aren’t dumb – one might argue they are psychotically smart – because they not only hold true to their beliefs, but they use their new found free country’s laws to further those beliefs here. They cry about their rights and freedoms under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms being violated when asked to remove their coverings.

Freedom of all forms of expression – be it cultural, religious, or anything else – is the foundation of what makes this country great.

However, there is always a line which has to be drawn, even when freedom is concerned, for the public’s greater good.

And the public’s greater good isn't served by allowing people to cover their faces where either their own or another’s safety and security is at issue.

Wearing a full-face covering mask – which it essentially is, because it masks the identity of the person wearing it – shouldn't be allowed in any place where you interact with others.

We communicate so much through body language, and facial expressions, covering your whole face really does more harm than good. From signalling your intentions when four cars stop at a four-way stop sign at the same time while driving, to simply going into any store or bank and not being mistaken for a robber or a thief.

balaclava (a full-face sky mask), I’d probably be taken down at gun point by police. I could claim I was just wearing it to protect myself from winter’s chill – which would be understandable in a cold climate country such as we have here in Canada. 

However, I’d probably still be charged with mischief, as we Canadians know what is and isn't acceptable in our society.

So how come our nation’s highest court allowed something which isn't really acceptable in our society for a select few?

Newtown Shooting the Media and You

Horror, shock, disgust, anger, rage, sympathy, sadness.

These are some of the many feelings we all went through, as news of the tragic shooting of innocent little kids in small town America spread.

The president of the United States cried as he responded live on television to the mass murder in Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Newtown CT.

Last night, parents, families, friends, and neighbours all gathered in a small school gymnasium, while local religious leaders offered words of hope and prayer during the public memorial service for the victims of another act of random violence in America.

American President Barack Obama gave a solemn message of hope, saying that we cannot go on allowing this sort of thing to happen. This isn't the first time the American president has addressed parents and families of a school shooting.

World leaders issued statements, expressing their horror over the incident, and offering their condolences for the families and friends of the victims.

Parents all over the world echoed thoughts of hugging their children extra tight that night on all the major social networks.

Today has been labelled “Hug Your Kid Today” to encourage parents to hug their children, and tell them they love them.

Maybe tomorrow will be “Bring an Apple, Not a Gun to School” day?

When I was a kid, the most violent thing anyone ever witnessed was the occasional fist fight between two jocks trying to woo the same cheerleader.

Back then, it was too much testosterone and the foolishness of a youthful mind which occasionally caused someone to get a black eye.

These days, social pressures on our youth – and us all – build up until we explode. Most just punch a pillow, write a nasty blog, or maybe snap at their spouse.

Then you get those with access to guns.

They shoot people.

Innocent people.

People going on about their daily lives, not aware that today is their last day on Earth.

Over the next few hours, days and weeks, as the victims are laid to rest, the media will focus on the never-ending question about gun control in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

The American Constitution’s Second Amendment tells citizens of that once great land, they are not only allowed to carry fire arms, but encourages them to use them to defend their freedom.

That fine piece of legalize – which is defined as the Supreme Law of the United States of America – was written in May of 1787, and adopted in September of that year by the Constitutional Convention. The law of the land was ratified by the then 11-member states, and went into effect on March 4, 1789.

Back in the 1700’s one could understand the logic of allowing people to own and use guns to defend their property. It was a very different time, long before the microchip.

The world was an unsettled place – a global wild west. The French Revolution began with the fall of Bastille on July 14, 1789. The Spanish captured the British schooner ‘Northwest America’ near Vancouver in June of that year.

It was the same year that Benjamin Franklin wrote: “there is nothing certain in life, except death and taxes.”

It was a time when governments were battling each other for land.

No wonder the founders of the United States of America wrote into law, the right to carry and use guns.

Times really have changed.

Wars still exist – but not in the land of the American dream.

Or do they?

Every time a crazed gunman goes on a killing spree in the States, the media, politicians and others raise questions about whether or not the law of the land should be amended, eliminating the right to bear arms.

And every time a crazed gunman goes on a killing spree in the States, the largest political action group in that country – the National Rifle Association (NRA) goes quiet at first – they took down their website today pending a slew of media attention and anti-gun lobbyists. Then the NRA enlists famous American cowboys to continue the fight for the right to carry and use guns.

It’s no longer a war over land, but over the right to shoot someone.

The NRA argues that guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

But it’s people with guns that kill people – often without guns.

It’s time the American constitution was amended to keep in touch with the reality of our modern times. We no longer need worry about someone coming onto our land to try and take it from us. The wild west is no more.