Election Season

Election season. I can just feel it coming.

The most wonderful time of the year. 

NOT.

"Since a politician never believes what he says, he is quite surprised to be taken at his word."~ Charles de Gaulle

Spring Has Sprung

Spring has sprung ... a bit later than usual perhaps (admittedly both outside my window and on this blog).

It's a good thing the seasons change, I suppose, else you might never see me around these here parts. Hey, what can I say? Sometimes the truth really does hurt.

Okay, I need something witty now for the ending.

Anybody? Any ideas?

Anything at all?

Crickets. 

Damm, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. It is, after all, that time of year.

The Great White UP

I heard this on the radio this morning. And I haven't stopped chuckling since.

"Americans like to name their storms.
This last snow storm we had they called Hercules.
But as a Canadian, I prefer to call it winter."

Anti-Bullying Legislation a Good Thing, Right?

Following the debacle of the Rehteah Parsons case last year, I was a little unsure of how the noises being made by both the provincial and federal governments about tightening up both the law and the legal process around the issue of bullying were going to work out.

Unsure because, really, can you actually legislate bullying out of existence?

And as far as Rehteah's case went, a sexual assault is a sexual assault is a sexual assault, is it not? Even if the police refuse to properly investigate the matter?*

But be that as it may, I initially thought it was a good thing when the federal government recently announced changes to the Criminal Code making it a criminal offence to spread intimate pictures of someone without their consent. After all, what could go wrong with that, right?

A lot, apparently. At least, a lot when you're talking about a federal government that is willing to be more than a little sneaky and turn its self- this proclaimed anti-bullying legislation into ... what exactly?

Apparently only about one and a half pages of the 65-page Bill actually deal with making it illegal to spread an intimate picture of someone without their consent.

The rest of the Bill varies widely, much of it giving the police new powers to obtain digital information (including lowering the standard required to get a warrant to obtain such information from having "reasonable and probable grounds to believe" a crime has been committed to having "reasonable grounds to suspect" a crime has been committed). And let's not forget the provisions about obtaining production orders against financial institutions for banking records.

But, wait, there's even more.

One section of the bill makes it illegal to use a device to hook up to a telecommunications service without lawful payment. It’s not clear whether computer programs count as a device, or if the proposal could be broad enough to punish something as common as hooking up cable without paying for it or accessing a locked Wi-Fi signal. 

Now whether or not these amendments are "good ideas" is not really the point.

No, the point is this - how dare the government try to sneak in all these totally unrelated criminal provisions under the heading of "protecting children from cyber-bullying"? And how dare the media go along with that characterization, happily proclaiming the new legislation as being about protecting our children from cyber-bulling, full stop, until someone stood up and demanded that the truth be made known?

This is so whether or not one thinks these amendments are a good idea. And I say that despite the fact that one, in particular, I do believe is a very good, appropriate change. Just not one to be characterized as above.

You see, one of the amendments expands the definition of “identifiable groups” that can be the subject of hate speech to include a person’s age, sex, mental or physical disability and national origin. And this particular change, I firmly believe, is a very good thing.

One of the reasons why the writer of this vile hate-filled "letter" could not be prosecuted was because individuals with physical or mental disabilities were not included as an "identifiable group" under sec. 318 of the Criminal Code.  You see, while it is a crime in Canada to "advocate or promote genocide" based on colour, race, religion, ethnic original or sexual orientation, neither age, race, sex nor physical or mental disability was included. From which one can only (wrongly) presume that it is, indeed, okay with Canadians to advocate killing off, amongst others, persons with disabilities.

That it was only after this incident that the government stepped up to amend that section is sad. But the fact that they are willing to do so now is a good thing. Although apparently they were not so anxious for anyone to actually realize they are doing a good thing ... after all, they could have scored points with many Canadian citizens had they proclaimed the fact that they were making this change instead of hiding it among so many other hidden amendments.

By the by, no one should have any trouble with this particular amendment, should they?

Well, the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, of all people, apparently is not in favour of this proposed amendment.

“Imagine your rant about children today. Your rant about men this, women that. The question is what on earth is contemplated here,” said Vonn. 

“Which is not to condone hate. We don’t do that. But we are talking about some very serious provisions of the Criminal Code. 

In particular, Vonn said she has heard concerns from the Palestinian community that protecting national origin could criminalize harsh criticism of Israel.

Perhaps some legal education is called for here.

First of all, "rants" are not criminalized. Neither before this proposed amendment nor afterwards.

What is (and, just for the record) has been criminalized) is "advocating or promoting genocide" and "publicly stirring up and inciting hatred" against an identifiable group. So unless someone would believe that you're seriously calling for the death of all children or all members of the (presumably) opposite sex you should be okay.

And about those Palestinians - correct me if I'm wrong (and I know you will) but aren't chances pretty good they were already covered by the term "ethnic origin"?

Then again, should I really be surprised?

After all, we have a government that is unethical enough to try to put this one over on the very people it has been elected to serve and a media who was either too complicit or too stupid lazy to actually do its homework (as in, actually read the proposed legislation) and initially call foul.

Why would I expect the BC Civil Liberties Association to be any better? My bad.

* The much-belated recent police investigation falling, in my mind, in the category of "Too Little. Too Late."

NOT Giving Up the Ghost

Nope. Most definitely NOT Giving Up the Ghost.

But, maybe, just maybe, giving up all pretense that this is, in fact,an active blog. Because, really, it's not been looking much like one lately. And, were I to be completely honest with myself [and if not me, then who??], it hasn't for quite some time.

Don't get me wrong. It's not like the blog is actually going anywhere.

No, Free Falling is not going to disappear, fall off the face of the earth or anything like that. It will continue to ... well, Free Fall, I guess. And that is why I am making a point of most emphatically stating that I am NOT Giving Up the Ghost.

But, once upon a time, I use to write about politics and current events. A fair bit, in fact, if my Blog Archive does not deceive my eyes. Alas, not so much [cough, cough] now. But I have decided to make a conscious decision [Did that even make any sense??] to cut myself some slack about that. A lot of slack, in fact. It is what it is and I am (finally) prepared to accept that.

Although, as an aside, I must say that I do have to wonder if I am just shouting into the abyss right now with no one to hear my words but myself. Once upon a time, I use to have regular readers, you see. But now, perhaps not so much. Of course, once upon a time, I also had Lex's readership to draw upon. Again, sadly, now not so much.

Just for the record, I haven't given up blogging, though. A Primer on Special Needs and the Law is still going strong. Which reminds me, if anyone is out there interested, I can cross-post my second 5 Minutes of Fame television debut for you to take a peek at.

But back to the topic at hand.

Then again, I guess I have pretty much summed up the topic at hand. The blog will still be here. And I imagine I will post from time to (unspecified) time. Just because I can.

It's funny; I've never thought of myself as vain and yet I must admit I really do enjoy ~ looking ~ at my blog. I like to make it pretty (must be a gurl thing). So who knows ... I might just find myself changing the background around more than I do posting. And if so, so be it.

Oh yeah, there is one other thing I like to use Free Falling for besides actually, you know, blogging at. It's a great place to keep my own blog roll in one place. Although, were I to be honest, I haven't been using that much lately, either.

But we shall blame that on Facebook - giant time suck that it is; yes, we shall. And, of course, it doesn't help any that I now boast not one, but two Facebook business pages, both clamoring for content at all hours of the day and night.

But, hey, just to prove that Ye Olde Blogroll is still alive and well, I added a new blog to it the other day. [Quick game - can you guess which one it is?] Now, if I can just make sure I get here to actually read them.

And, of course, lest we forget (and I know I never shall), this little spot in cyberspace also boasts The Best of the Best of Neptunus Lex. 'Nuff said.

And so I bid you a fond adieu (at least for now).

And leave you with this naval aviation video.

                         

Just because I can.

D-D-D-D-Done Did

Remember that project I really had to get going on? The one I posted about a year ago? Yeah, that one.

Well, I am pleased to report that it is now, finally
DONE DID. **

Yep, that's right - it only took me one year from the time I first posted (aka 14 months after the Blue Jay actually turned 19) to get this far.

But, hey, in my defence, I now have an actual COURT DATE. For next month.

I know, hard to believe, isn't it?

Although, also in my defence, the delay was not entirely my fault (she proclaims loudly, for all to hear).

One good thing that has come out of the process of applying for guardianship of the Blue Jay, on my own, is that I now definitely have a greater appreciation of the struggles faced by those families who choose to proceed unrepresented in a guardianship application (with the help of my Kit, of course).

Struggles such as having to coordinate affidavits between two different doctors. And, more importantly, having to find some sucker good-hearted lawyer soul willing to swear those (and other) affidavits, pro bono like.

And, not just pro bono, but actually, like, willing to attend at the doctors' offices. Because, believe it or not, doctors do not attend at lawyers' offices. Oh no, lawyers attend at doctors' offices. And never the twain shall meet. Let's just be clear about that.

And hey, who knew? Besides the fun involved in actually figuring all that out, that can, in fact, take just a little bit of time.

But, at any rate, I am very pleased to announce that I have made it this far.

Particularly because, going forward, the matter really is pretty much out of my hands. We have a court date set, you see. Which means the day (only a few weeks hence) will dawn (whether I like it or not) and I will be completely prepared because, really, what choice do I have?

That's right ... it is now officially out of hands.

Which, really, come to think of it, is no doubt a very good thing.

** No, it may not be a DONE deed. 
But I DID, indeed, get to the point where it is out of my hands. 
So there. Take. That.

Humpty Meets Dumpty. Again.

Having a particular interest in special education (gee, I wonder why), I subscribe to a couple of Education newsletters. They're both US-based, of course, but something is better than nothing, says I.

So it was that today I came across a synopsis in Education Week stating that a Tennessee Senator wants to pass a law requiring counselors and other school officials who learn that a student has engaged in homosexual activity to report this information to the parents. Thinking that this sounded interesting in a warped sort of way (and admitting that the thought that some right-wing politician strikes again did cross my mind), I clicked on the story.

The only thing is that (in my reading, at least) the story doesn't quite work as advertised - what the synopsis and article purport to say and what the proposed Bill actually says simply do. not. mesh.

The proposed Bill, you see, would provide that

1. classroom instruction, course materials and other informational resources that are "inconsistent with natural human reproduction" will be classified as" inappropriate" for students from pre-K - Gr 8;
2. any counseling by a school counselor, nurse, principal or assistant principal of a student who is "engaging in, or who may be at risk of engaging in, behavior injurious" to their or another's "physical or mental health and wellbeing" must be done, if possible, in consultation with the student's parents and the parents must be notified that such counseling has occurred; and
3. the parents must be notified of a student "whose circumstances present immediate and urgent safety issues involving human sexuality".

And that, right there, is the problem, you see. Or, at least, the problem I see.

Because, for me at least, a requirement that the parents be notified in the case of a student whose "circumstances present immediate and urgent safety issues involving human sexuality" is very different from requiring notification in the case of homosexual activity. This despite the fact that it would appear that the good Senator, himself, might believe otherwise.

Admitting that, if perhaps you are a total homophobic, you might consider any and all homosexual activity to present immediate and urgent safety issues involving human sexuality, might I suggest that just because you say it or think it does not make it so?

Don't get me wrong, I am not making a comment on the "rightness", "wrongness" or "morality" of homosexuality; what I am saying is I find it very hard (read: impossible) to make the stretch that would equate homosexuality with "urgent safety issues".

The Senator, apparently, considers homosexuality to constitute an urgent safety issue because of the possibility of contracting HIV and AIDS. Putting aside the rather awkward fact that you can also contract HIV through heterosexual contact, doesn't any form of sexual activity open you up to the possibility of contracting various sexually-transmitted diseases (some of them pretty nasty, by the way)?

And, by the by, doesn't heterosexuality by a female open her up to the possibility of pregnancy, which some might see as potentially dangerous (be it physically, emotionally or mentally) depending on the age of said female? We are, after all, talking about students here.

But. Back to my original point (yes, of course, I had one; why do you ask?).

Much along the lines of 'Humpty Dumpty Strikes Again', just because you say it doesn't make it so. And, just as an aside, when you attempt to legislate, you might just want to choose your words carefully. Or else you may just run the risk of legislating "human reproduction" right out of existence, which I'm thinking might have some might nasty consequences, in and of itself.

The Law of Unintended Consequences being what it is.

Only in Nova Scotia, You Say ...

H/T to the Chronicle Herald

Legal Edumucation

It looks like the South Shore Regional School Board finally got themselves some.

This story has received so much play over the past week that I seriously considered not wasting my life time with it, but ... really, I couldn't resist.

Not when I've waxed poetic (or not) so many times before on exactly this sort of thing. (Ah, the good old days ... the fun we would have had with this at Lex's. But I digress.)

"Whazzup now?", you ask.

Let me see ... how to explain this?

Oh, I don't know. What say we just cut right to the stupidity?

The dispute arose after Grade 12 student William Swinimer was suspended from his school in Chester Basin for continuing to wear a shirt with the slogan, ``Life is wasted without Jesus.''

He says on his Facebook site that he did it to stand up for the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution.

Pynch-Worthylake says Swinimer and his pastor have agreed to take part in the debate that will look at how to ensure students' rights are not violated, while protecting other students from criticism.

She says it's not clear what the school will do if Swinimer wears the shirt when he returns to classes Monday.

Pynch-Worthylake said the school tried working out a solution with Swinimer before suspending him.

However, the 19-year-old says the school’s disciplinary action infringes on his right to freedom of religious expression.

“I do a lot of witnessing in school,” he said. “People talk to me and they ask me about my religion and I tell them.”

That has got him sent to the principal’s office in the past, Swinimer said.

“They say that it’s hate speech and that it hurts people’s feelings, but I don’t hate anybody.”
However, Pynch-Worthylake said the t-shirt's wording offends some people at the school because it tells them their beliefs are wrong.

“So let's recap, shall we?

A 19-year-old teen likes to take wear his favourite blankie T-shirt to school. Which just happens to read "Life is Wasted Without Jesus".  Apparently this T shirt makes at least some of the staff and students very, very unhappy. So unhappy that he is repeatedly asked not to wear said shirt. And when he doesn't heed these requests, he is given in-school suspensions. Repeated in-school suspensions.  Until this last 5-day out-of-school suspension given last week.

At which time he is warned, in no uncertain terms, that if he wears the T-shirt to school again, he will could be suspended for the rest of the year. The kid is in Grade 12. Hence, a suspension for the rest of the year means he would fail to graduate this year.

Want to hear the school board's reasoning in this regard?

If it said My Life is Wasted Without Jesus, that would be fine” because it expresses a personal belief, she said.

But the T-shirt he wore went further by telling non-Christians their lives are wasted, she said.

The school has asked Swinimer to replace it with a shirt that communicates his Christian faith without violating others’ beliefs, but he has refused, Pynch-Worthylake said.

Uh huh.

So it's okay to wear a shirt that says "My Life is Wasted Without Jesus"  but because the kid's shirt dares to state that "Life is Wasted Without Jesus", that might make someone else feel bad. And that's not just a problem.

Nope. It's A. Problem.

This whole thing is ridiculous in my mind but what really got me going on the subject was a news story last week stating that the Board intended to consult with a "human rights expert" on this issue.  I can only assume that they found someone with half a clue about human rights law, which is the reason they now say the kid can wear the T-shirt to school.

Really? Without a rest-of-the-year suspension?

Sure. With a little bit of back-tracking, of course.

“For us, it never really was about the one shirt,” Pynch-Worthylake said Friday.

Right. Gotchya.

Now, I realize that this kid might well have some other issues (around proselytizing witnessing to his peers). And I can fully understand how that might cause some problems at the school. But I think the Board was pretty clear in just about every news story - they wanted the shirt gone, it was wearing the shirt that got him suspended and would result in a further, harsher suspension.

So tell me, about that human rights edumucation. Just what will it take to get this simple concept through people's heads?

Listen carefully, class, I do not want to have to say this again.

And, yes, there will be an exam.

1. Although there is a right not to discriminated against (on certain enumerated grounds), there is no right not to offended.
2. And, as I've said before "... rude and insensitive remarks do not constitute discrimination. They are simply rude and insensitive remarks. Period. Full stop."

I know, I know. My snarkinesss is showing, Just a wee bit. My apologies but it's been a bit of a long life.

But seriously, people, should you doubt what we face .... yes, I do realize it's the "media", but please, I do expect somewhat better in Canada. The CTV Atlantic News ran a poll* the other day asking what people thought about this issue. 

The three choices looked something like this.

• It's okay. Everyone has the right to wear whatever they want to school. It's free speech.
• Religious messages are okay in school as long as they don't discriminate against another religion.
• No religious messages at all should be allowed at school.

Anybody see a problem with these choices?

The closest one that worked for me, personally, was No. 2. But that implied stated that a religious message could "discriminate" against another religion. And, frankly, I can't see how that could work. At any rate, it certainly didn't apply in this case.

Oh well, it's nice to see that at least some people in our Province are imbued with the least common sense of all. Which, by the way, would include a national atheists’ organization, the Atlantic Jewish Council, the Islamic Association of Nova Scotia and a provincial opposition leader.

Heh.

* For anyone truly worried about the state of "free speech" in Nova Scotia, you should be happy to know that close to 75% of the respondents to that CTV poll picked either No. 1 or 2, above. And the majority picked No. 1.

Now That's An Apology

Frenemies

Wow, check this out - a man who was upset that a Tennessee couple unfriended his adult daughter has been charged with killing the couple.

Now I know there's got to be more to the story than this but ... I'm thinking you might want to think twice before you click that Confirm button, if you know what I mean.

Science Gone Mad

UPDATE: Pogue made some good points in a comment and finding it a little unwieldy to include all the links in a comment, I decided to go the update route.

So first, Pogue's comment:

OK, not having seen what the original research proposal was it's difficult to say what funding was specifically approved for. As I read the article, the form of H5N1 they worked with is not contagious to humans, so I don't know how it was made "more deadly" other than for headline effect. I doubt that the proposal was to make it an airborne pathogen. In my circles that is referred to as "weaponizing a virus" and I'm not surprised that there is discussion about classifying it. The technique is the issue, not the specific result. When we get into a "government shouldn't have funded that research" argument be careful what you wish for - almost any research may have some potentially dangerous applications, so we shouldn't support stem cell or HIV related research, right?

First, let me say, that for me, personally, the issue of who financed the research is much less of an issue than that scientists intentionally set out to do this. [See my previous comment re: just because you can do something doesn't mean you should actually do it.]  Although, I must say, seeing who the backer was does make me stop and shake my head more than a little bit.

Moving on, I think I see where/why you got the idea that this specific strain of H5N1 is not "contagious to humans". Unfortunately, the quote was a little misleading.

The researchers, led by Albert Osterhaus of the Erasmus Medical Centre in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin, mutated the H5N1 strain of avain flu, which could not be transmitted between humans, to an "airborne" strain that can be transmitted in coughs and sneezes between laboratory ferrets, the best animal model of human flu.

What they were (rather badly) trying to say was that (prior to the present research) this strain of the virus was not transmittable between humans - from coughs or sneezes. However, although it's ability to infect humans was limited (transmission required direct contract with either infected poultry or contaminated surfaces) it has proven to be deadly when it does. In fact, you might recall back in 1997, when it spread through live-poultry markets in Hong Kong to humans, killing 6 of 18 infected people. So far, on average, it's killed roughly 60% of the humans it has infected. You can find a list of the confirmed human cases and mortality ratehere.

So as far as I am concerned both the technique and the result are the problem. I don't know whether they started out with the intention of "weaponizing the virus" (frankly, I have no idea what they might have been thinking at that point) but that certainly does appear to be the result.

I must admit I can't quite follow your comment about not supporting stem cell or HIV research because almost any research can have potentially dangerous applications. From what I know about stem cell research, the only down side is that some individuals have used aborted fetuses to harvest infant stem cells. Putting aside the fact that adult stem cells are suppose to work just as well (if not better, in most cases), I see that as a problem with how people choose to use new scientific knowledge as opposed to a problem with the research itself. And, quite frankly, I can't quite get my head around what you might be thinking about with HIV research.


Could somebody please explain this to me?

But, please, speak real slowly ... because you're going to have to work really hard to make me understand, let alone accept, this one.

A new report out Tuesday claims Dutch scientists have created a highly contagious, airborne form of the bird flu, which could potentially be capable of killing millions.

Unlike the normal H5N1 strain of avian influenza - which was only contagious through close personal contact with an infected person - this form can be spread by merely coughing or sneezing.

The lab-created bird flu strain was engineered by a team of scientists led by Ron Fouchier of Rotterdam's Erasmus Medical Centre. The researchers said the mutation only required a few variations to the original strain.

But wait ... it gets better!

The research was funded by ... wait for it ... the United States National Institutes of Idiocracy Health.  And ... and for the piece de resistance... officials of that same government have begged requested researchers not to release information concerning the virus to the scientific community.

Because ... you know ... if they did, well, maybe, just maybe, some terrorist group might get ahold of it. And you know, kill us all. The theory of unforeseen consequences always being at play and all.

But, hey, don't take my word for it.

The decision was made after the US government warned releasing the details could be kill millions of people if it was used as a weapon of biological warfare.

Of course, freedom of speech and scientific integrity being the laudable constructs they are, the idiots scientists involved have expressed concern "about withholding potentially important public-health information from responsible influenza researchers".

As to the justification for that concern - apparently, "many scientists within the influenza community have a bona fide need to know the details of this research in order to protect the public, especially if they currently are working with related strains of the virus".

Right, that.

And yet it seems rather self-obvious that there would be a lot less need to know and a lot less to protect the public from if this particular virus hadn't been so painstakingly created in the first place.

I mean just because you can do something ... does that always mean you should?

Just for giggles, I note that the scientific community isn't all that impressed with the request to have the research information withheld; first, because they note that, perhaps,the government ought not to have authorized the research if they did not know how to deal with it and, secondly, it's all a little too late considering that several details had already been shared with hundreds of researchers and governments in open meetings.

So, has everybody had their flu shot for this year?

WTF??!!

Ever have one of those moments when your life is chugging along like normal and all of a sudden you see, hear or read something that makes you go ... WTF?!  Did I just see/hear/read that right?!

Well, it happened to me as I flipped through today's paper and, quite frankly, I didn't don't know what to make of it.

So let's play a little game and see if anyone else sees anything [glaringly] wrong with this picture?

FURUDAL, Sweden — Mike Danton played the hero in his opening game of the Swedish league.

The former NHL player, who served five years behind bars for a failed murder-for-hire plot, rushed to the aid of IFK Ore teammate Marcus Bengtsson, who was convulsing on the ice after a hard hit in Sunday's season-opener.  

~  ~  ~

According to Danton's blog, Bengtsson took a late hit with about 14 minutes left in the game against Soderhamn/Ljusne. He lay on the ice suffering convulsions for six or seven minutes.

``As his eyes continued to roll into the back of his head, his mouth finally opened a bit,'' wrote Danton, who is captain of the Swedish team. ``It was at that time that I jammed my fingers into his mouth and clawed his tongue.''

Anybody? Anybody at all?

Now don't get me wrong, I've been rather impressed with this guy for a while now. I'm not a big hockey person by any stretch of the imagination but I followed with interest the story of this former NHL player after he was released from prison for conspiracy to commit murder following an attempted murder-for-hire plot.

What grabbed my attention was that following his imprisonment, he returned to Canada and enrolled at Saint Mary's University in Halifax. Where, yes, he played hockey. But where he also committed himself to his studies, working towards a degree in psychology and maintaining an A average.

So back to today's story ... can anyone tell me what caused my jaw to fall to the floor?

Let's try this ... does anyone know any basic first aid? You know, like the kind Danton says he picked up learned in prison?

First aid for seizures is pretty basic and straight-forward.  It's not like you need any specialized skill to help in such a situation.

1.Stay calm

2.Prevent injury
During the seizure, you can exercise your common sense by insuring there is nothing within reach that could harm the person if she struck it.

3.Pay attention to the length of the seizure

4.Make the person as comfortable as possible

5.Keep onlookers away

6.Do not hold the person down
If the person having a seizure thrashes around there is no need for you to restrain them. Remember to consider your safety as well

7.Do not put anything in the person's mouth

Contrary to popular belief, a person having a seizure is incapable of swallowing their tongue so you can breathe easy in the knowledge that you do not have to stick your fingers into the mouth of someone in this condition.

8.Do not give the person water, pills, or food until fully alert

9.If the seizure continues for longer than five minutes, call 911

10.Be sensitive and supportive, and ask others to do the same

Anybody? Anybody at all?

How about the FACT that you are NEVER suppose to put anything (including your hand) in a person's mouth during a seizure?

Not only is such a move dangerous to the idiot person trying to "help" (picure somebody in the midst of a seizure suddenly chomping down on your hand and not letting go - that's right, I said Not. Letting. Go.), but it can actually harm the individual who is seizing - jaw and face muscles often tighten during a seizure and if this happens when something is in their mouth, they may break and either choke on or swallow the object or, if you're lucky, maybe they will only break their teeth.

Come on, people, the only thing you accomplish by sticking anything in a person's mouth during a seizure is to obstruct airflow, which is potentially life threatening. 

Sound like a plan, Stan Mike?

Now I know it seems like no TV producer out there in La La Land can get this straight, but still ... Really?

It's too bad, really. Dalton could have actually been helpful and useful had he turned Bengtsson on his side (as other players did later), to prevent saliva from blocking his airway and help him breathe more easily. Trust me, Mike, if the guy was having trouble breathing, it wasn't because of his tongue.

And he could have helped people with epilepsy in general by explaining to the media after the fact exactly why he HADN'T tried to put his hand in the poor man's mouth!

So tell me, please, what kind of first aid course, supposedly certifying you in "first aid response" teaches a person to "jam their fingers" into the mouth of a person convulsing and "claw their tongue"?

And how, exactly, is it possible for this story to get international coverage without anybody picking up on the fact that it was only by virtue of simple dumb luck that our "hero" didn't seriously hurt himself or the other player?

So, yeah, as I was saying ... WTF??!!

Thought of the Day

Eternity's a terrible thought.
I mean, where's it all going to end?

~ Tom Stoppard

It's Baaack...

It seems almost anti-climatic to even comment on Bin Laden's capture (everybody who's anybody having already done so and a good many jokes having crossed the airways at his expense).  But, besides the almost guttural feeling of satisfaction that filled me when I realized the words I was reading were not a hoax, two things struck me about the event.

The first was that the Global War on Terror appears to have made a reappearance (for how long, who knows?) with Bin Landen's death.  I mean wasn't it known as the Overseas Contingency Operation for quite a while now?  And yet, right there, on the American TV news, just last night, they stood at 'Ground Zero' and talked about the GWOT. Who'd have thunk it?

The second thing that struck me (again watching American news on TV) was that after Bin Laden's body was taken to the USS Carl Vinson, it was washed and wrapped in a white sheet (as is the Muslin custom) before being thrown overboard. After all, Muslim tradition requires the dead to be buried within 24 hours.

The burial at sea largely followed widely accepted interpretations of Islamic law taking care not to anger the mainstream Muslim community, said Ebrahim Moosa, a professor of Islamic studies at Duke University in North Carolina.

Defense officials said the administration reached out to one other country to take the body for burial, but the country refused. Brennan said appealing to other countries would have exceeded the time frame Islamic custom requires, of burial within 24 hours of death.

And yet apparently some still weren't satisfied.

But some Islamic scholars and clerics were divided Monday over whether the sea burial was appropriate or an insult to Muslims. Several said bin Laden should have been buried on land in a simple grave. The body was washed in accordance with Islamic custom, placed in a white sheet, then put inside a weighted bag.

With only a small group of witnesses, a military officer read prepared religious remarks, which were translated into Arabic by a "native speaker," the official said. The body was placed on a board, tipped up and then "eased into the sea" from the carrier's lowest deck, the official said.

So here's what I don't get - if you've invested as much blood and treasure as the US has to track this guy down and then double tap him in the head, why on earth would you bother to cater to Muslim sensibilities? 

I don't  know, for me it's kind of a WTF moment ... at best, Bin Laden was a criminal the leader of a terrorist group bent on destroying "the West", at worst, he was ... words I choose not to use on my blog but you get the point, I'm sure.  You've just "invaded" his "home" and shot him in the face ... and now, you're concerned that his customs and traditions be followed?  Lest someome be offended?

Nope, no disconnect there.  None at all. 

I mean, if you capture and kill a nefarious criminal, a serial killer, who happens to be white, who shares my culture and (in name at least) my religious beliefs, I really can't see myself getting all that worked up about how his body is disposed of.  In fact, I might just have a few suggestions of my own ...

Does anyone still think this dude is actually going to anyone's version of heaven?  And, if they still do, given everything he's known to have done, why should we care what they think?  Wouldn't they have to be just as crazy evil as he was?

And if we're that concerned about offending people of that ilk, then why even bother to hunt Bin Laden down and kill him in the first place?  Don't you think those kind of people might just find those acts alone rather offensive?

* As an aside, I note there are a fair bit of conspiracy theories floating around out there about Bin Laden's death (or lack thereof).  That kind of surprised me until I stopped to think about it - which is when I realized it shouldn't surprise me at all.

I really tend not to a conspiracy theory sort of person in any way, shape or form but I must say some of their arguments do make a certain amount of sense.  I'm not suggesting for one monent that I'm on side with them, just that they're interesting.  Worthy of their own blog post, perhaps.  Not that I'm suggesting for one moment that they will actually get one, just that they might be worthy of one.  And such is life. Or death. Some days, we're not quite sure which.

Happy Easter Everyone

All right.  I've been giving this a lot of thought.  

You know how some people appear to be offended by Christmas meaning we're not allowed to celebrate or wish others a Merry Christmas anymore?  How we had to start calling it something else?

So I was thinking, what if some people are offended by Easter too?

I mean, really.  Think about it. I don't know about you but I really don't want to hurt anybody's feelings. Because that just wouldn't be right.

So here's the plan.

We will no longer call the Easter Bunny the Easter Bunny. 

That might just be offensive to some.  Nope, from hereinafter he shall be known as the Furry Long Floppy-Eeared Burrowing Rodent Who Appears Once a Year Bearing Chocolate Treats.

And whatever you do, please don't with anyone Happy Easter!

It's Happy Totally Non-Religious Colourful Candy  Festival Holiday.

To you and yours.

*  Borrowed (and shamelessly mutilated) from the Magic 94.9 Morning Show.

Did You Have Something To Say?

No? I didn't, like, think so.

Me, neither, ya know?

Peace of Mind

I threw a great quote up on the side bar today.

Nothing is more conducive to peace of mind than not having any opinions at all.

If Mr. Lichtenberg is, indeed, correct, I would appear to be totally at peace lately. 

If only ...

An Oldie But A Goodie ...

What can I say? I always have enjoyed that one...

Breaking News - New Federal Gov't Program Now Available

Here at Free Falling, we pride ourselves on bringing our readers the latest breaking news and information on issues which may be of interest to them.  In that spirit, enjoy.

Due to the current financial situation caused by the slowdown in the economy, The Govt. of Canada has decided to implement a scheme to put workers of 50 years of age and above on early retirement, thus creating jobs and reducing unemployment.

This scheme will be known as RAPE (Retire Aged People Early). Persons selected to be RAPED can apply to the Govt. to be considered for the SHAFT program (Special Help After Forced Termination).

Persons who have been RAPED and SHAFTED will be reviewed under the SCREW program (System Covering Retired-Early Workers).

A person may be RAPED once, SHAFTED twice and SCREWED as many times as the Govt. deems appropriate.

Persons who have been RAPED could get AIDS (Additional Income for Dependants & Spouse) or HERPES (Half Earnings for Retired Personnel Early Severance).

Obviously persons who have AIDS or HERPES will not be SHAFTED or SCREWED any further by the Govt.

Persons who are not RAPED and are staying on will receive as much SHIT (Special High Intensity Training) as possible. The Govt. has always prided itself on the amount of SHIT they give our citizens.

Should you feel that you do not receive enough SHIT, please bring this to the attention of your local MP, who has been trained to give you all the SHIT you can handle.

Sincerely,

The Committee for Economic Value of Individual Lives (E.V.I.L.)

PS - - Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas and oil, as well as current market conditions, the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off.

H/T to Tera