No Right to Self-Defence and Defence of Property

No Right to Self-Defence and Defence of Property
In Canada if your life is threatened and your property is firebombed at the same time. and even if you have the perpetrators on tappe, you get charged!!!

"Under the law, someone is justified in using force to repel an unprovoked and unlawful attack when the victim has a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm. Courts, in previous cases, have settled that a victim under attack cannot be expected to fully reflect on the risk and weigh the exact measure of how much force might be justified."

Nevertheless, in this fair land you can't touch your guns, not until you are on the point of being injured or killed.  Plus, the government wants you to suffer for even having them:

"Prosecutors continue to press two charges of careless storage of a firearm against Mr. Thomson, to which Mr. Thomson pleaded not guilty on Monday."

No matter the law allows you to use force when there is an apprehension of serious harm or death, the law will get you for having the guns at the ready, near by and not locked away where they will be useless when you are attacked.  
By pursuing the charge of careless storage, the government is saying, having guns is not nice, no matter what!

Keep Control with Breakfast

JUST EAT IT

You’ve probably heard the adage that advocates “breakfast is the most important meal of the day.” But what’s the basis for this age-old wisdom? Based on both population research and intervention studies, there are several good reasons to eat something — arguably anything — to start your day. In general, breakfast eaters:

• are less likely to be overweight or obese than those who skip.
• are typically better able to meet their daily nutrient needs than those who don’t eat in the morning.
• perform better on cognitive tests at work and school than their hungrier counterparts.
• tend to have higher grades and better test scores in both childhood and adolescence.

In other words, having some sort of meal in the morning seems to improve your body’s ability to function, and your brain’s ability to think.

QUEST FOR THE BEST BREAKFAST

So, if we know eating breakfast is good for us, what should it be? New research suggests eating protein and carbohydrates together at breakfast can help support long-term weight control, at least compared with a high-protein, low-carb breakfast.

READ THE WHOLE NP ARTICLE

Wind Power Is Dying

From Macdezart.com and www.wainfleetwag.com

Wind Power Is Dying

While the U.S. is dumping billions of dollars into wind farms and onshore and offshore wind turbines, this energy source is being cast aside as a failure elsewhere in the world.

Some 410 federations and associations from 21 European countries, for example, have united against deployment of wind farms charging it is “degrading the quality of life.”

The European Platform Against Wind farms (EPAW) is demanding “a moratorium suspending all wind farm projects and a “complete assessment of the economic, social, and environmental impacts of wind farms in Europe.” The EPAW said it objects to industrial wind farms which “are spreading in a disorderly manner across Europe” under pressure from “financial and ideological lobby groups,” that are “degrading the quality of life living in their vicinity, affecting the health of many, devaluing people’s property and severely harming wildlife.” A petition for a moratorium has been sent to the European Commission and Parliament, said EPAW chairman J.L Butre.

France, earlier his year ran into opposition to its plan to build 3,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind turbines by 2020. That year is the target date the European Union set for providing 20 percent of its energy through renewable sources. An organization called the Sustainable Environment Association, opposes wind power, saying the subsidies will “not create a single job in France.”

In Canada, Wind Concerns Ontario (WCO) has launched a province-wide drive against wind power. It said Aug. 8 it wants to ensure that the next government is clear that “there is broad based community support for a moratorium…and stringent environmental protection of natural areas from industrial wind development.” WCO claimed, “The Wind industry is planning a high powered campaign to shut down support” for the WCO’s aims. “Our goal is to store the petition until the next legislative session gets underway in the fall…”

The Netherlands has approximately 2,000 onshore and offshore wind turbines. But even though Holland is synonymous with windmills, the installed capacity of wind turbines in the Netherlands at large has been stagnant for the past three years, according to an article in February in the Energy Collective. It was 2237 megawatts (MW) at the end of 2011. That was said to be about 3.37 percent of total annual electricity production. The principal reason for the stagnant onshore capacity “is the Dutch people’s opposition to the wind turbines.” They are up to 400 feet in height.

The Dutch national wind capacity factor is a dismal 0.186. The German wind capacity factor “is even more dismal at 0.167,” the article said.

Expanding wind power to meet the European Union’s 20 percent renewables target by 2020 meant adding at least another thousand 3 MW, 450-foot wind turbines to the Dutch landscape “at a cost of about $6 billion.” Not surprisingly, the Dutch people found that to be far too costly—“an intrusion into their lives and an unacceptable return on their investment, especially when considering the small quantity of CO2 reduction per invested dollar.”

An added 3,000 MW of offshore turbines also was rejected. The capital cost was figured at $10 to $12 billion. The cost was judged to be too much and the wind energy produced too little. “The energy would have to be sold at very high prices to make the project feasible.” The article added, “The proposed Cape Wind project in Massachusetts is a perfect example of such a project.” Environmental Lawyer Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in July wrote an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal blasting the project off Cape Cod as “a rip-off.” Recently, the Netherlands became the first country to abandon the European Union target of producing 20 percent of its domestic power from renewables by 2020.

In Denmark, the Danes became aware that the poor economics of their heavily-subsidized wind energy is a major reason for the nation’s high residential electric rates. Opposition to the gigantic onshore turbines was so great that the state-owned utility finally announced last year that it would abandon plans for any new onshore wind facilities.

The Energy Collective article also reported that a CEPOS (Center for Political Studies) study found that 90 percent of wind energy sector jobs were transferred from other technology industries and that only 10 percent of the wind industry jobs were newly created jobs. As a result, the study said, Danish GDP is $270 million lower than it would have been without wind industry subsidies.

The Australian government, like the U.S., has placed a major emphasis on deploying renewable sources of energy, especially wind energy. As in the U.S., Australia set a target of 20 percent of its energy to come from renewal sources by 2020. The government provides generous subsidies and tax breaks to wind energy developers. But medical studies on farmer families living within 5 miles of wind farms found health problems ranging from sleep deprivation to nausea. Similar health effects have been discovered in other locations, including in the U.S.

Because wind blows only intermittently, Britain has determined that it will have to construct an additional 17 natural gas-powered plants as back-ups to wind to keep the lights on by 2020. These plants will cost 10 billion pounds, according to a posting by the Institute for Energy Research. One analyst was quoted as saying, “Government’s obsession with wind turbines is one of the greatest blunders of our time.”

Onshore wind power today costs about $0.13 per kWh. That’s nowhere near either the objective of the U.S. Department of Energy or the cost of competing power sources. The wind turbines jutting into the sky all across the country exist only because of the massive federal subsidies. Is this considered a failure by Obama officials? No way. Obama’s 2012 budget proposal increases renewables spending by 33 percent.

Wind farms in Texas that will cost $400 million over the next two years produce, incredibly, an average of only one job for every $1.6 million of capital investment. So the state’s comptroller general figured, according to a December 20, 2010 story in the Austin American-Statesman.

As long ago as 1973, then-President Nixon called for “Project Independence” in reaction to the OPEC oil embargo. The project was to achieve energy independence through development of alternative energy sources, such as wind, solar and geothermal power. So, there’s nothing new about renewable energy.

The Obama 2012 budget asks for $8 billion for “clean” energy, mainly wind power subsidies. As recently as Feb. 7, the secretaries of Energy and Interior announced plans to launch dozens of offshore turbines miles out at sea, while admitting the expense would be unknown. Despite generous subsidies, wind power is expected to provide no more than 8 percent of electric power in the U.S. by 2030.

The American Wind Industry Energy Association, the wind lobby group, said the top five states for wind energy were Texas, Iowa, California, Minnesota, and Washington. It said the second quarter of 2011 saw over 1,033 megawatts of capacity installed. It also maintained that wind is second only to natural gas and U.S. wind power represents more than 20 percent of the world’s wind power.

Over the next half century, say, it’s possible some new technologies will revolutionize energy. But, if so, they surely will come from the private sector — not government.

From the Big Green Lie

McGuinty/Smitherman’s “Green Energy Scam” is generating lawsuits from all over the World!!!!

By thebiggreenlie

Will 2012 be the year that Ontario taxpayers will not only see their public services cut because of the Green Energy push that has been forging ahead full speed for over 3 years now but in addition to having our bought and paid for necessities of services ripped out from under us by the guys who actually spent our money poorly, we should expect to reach deep to pay the LAWSUITS coming!

Japan lodged a complaint with the World Trade Organization initially and now the European Union is after their “pound of Ontario flesh” due to the piss poor decision making on the wild Green Ride Smitherman and McGuiinty took us on over the past 3 years.

Millions of Ontarians told these guys to stop this, yet away they went.  Using CANWEA and their stable of “talking mules” they rammed the Wind Turbine Industry down taxpayer’s throats and now must answer for their actions on the public stage.

Let’s watch them spin their way out of this mess!  OR spend their way out!..with OUR money!

EU launches WTO suit on Canadian renewable power

Wed Jan 11, 2012 REUTERS

GENEVA (Reuters) – The European Union has escalated a trade dispute over Canadian provincial rules for solar and wind energy subsidies by asking the World Trade Organization to set up a panel to rule on the case, the WTO said on Wednesday.
The EU’s decision to resort to legal measures against Canada, after the failure of direct talks to settle the dispute, will come as little surprise because Japan has already trodden the same path in an identical case.
The EU and Japan say the Canadian province of Ontario is illegally restricting trade by giving an subsidy to local producers of renewable energy equipment and services.
The scheme guarantees above-market energy prices for renewable power that uses a certain amount of Canadian-made equipment or services, a provision that the complainants say is against the WTO’s rules.
The EU says Ontario’s scheme demands solar projects must have 40 percent of their initial development made up of local products and services, while wind energy needs 25 percent.
The EU has put the request for a dispute panel on the agenda of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body when it meets on Friday January 20, six months after a panel was set up to adjudicate on Japan’s complaint against Canada.
READ THE REST HERE:

WHO Rejects Mercury in the Mouth

WHO

• The World Health Organization (WHO) released its final report on dental amalgam, and has taken a stance against the use of mercury in dentistry, urging “a switch in use of dental materials” away from amalgam
• WHO noted that amalgam releases a “significant amount of mercury” into the environment and raises “general health concerns,” while alternatives are readily available
• In December 2010, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) panel recommended the FDA make sure that all consumers and all parents know that amalgam is mainly mercury, and stop amalgam use for children and pregnant women. The FDA is set to make an announcement on dental amalgam by the end of 2011
• As a result of enormous public pressure from dentists, health professionals and consumers, we are on the brink of prompting real change in the fight for mercury-free dentistry; you can help us reach the tipping point in order to bring about permanent change

NDP Defection

No surprise, the Liberals achieve a new high, at the bottom.  The Now Dead Party Defector states, voters voted for Layton not the party, and Jack?  He dead.

WINDY LEAKS

Interesting site, nice name, clever pun!  Subtitled, What your government won't tell you about Industrial Wind Turbines.

NorthAmercianPlatformAgainstWindPower is no joke!   Opposition to industrial wind turbines is GLOBAL, but not in Ontario!  Dalton the Dolt and crew think they are in the forefront of advancing the Green/Greed energy boondoggle (another Ontario first, hurray).  In fact, they are on the rump of something that's about to burst.

Adverse Health Effects of Wind Turbines:  The government of Ontario insists that the health effects are not bad and has set up a pro-forma panel to study the effects.  Of course, government studies ALWAYS find evidence/conclusions to support the government policy/position.  This Video is very sad but powerful evidence of what happens to your health, your livestock, your pets and your property values.  The same thing happened on Wolfe Island in Ontario, while the power company's advertising lies about that fact.  WATCH this Video.


Now, Australian Liberal Party concedes ill effects of wind turbines and will require 2km setbacks for Turbines: australian-liberal-party-concedes-negative-effects-promise-2k-setbacks