Canada Day and Judicial Murder (Not connected)

Today is the traditional Canada Day when our neighbors celebrate their nation, and we’re damned glad they’re there. Even if their loopy PM wears Ramadan socks to a Gay Pride Parade. Not sure what you Canucks were thinking when you elected him, but it’s your country, eh.

But they are good neighbors and good friends, and General Eisenhower said they were the best troops under his command, and I’m certainly not going to argue with him. And, a few weeks ago they got a world record, which may stand for a long time. From The Daily Mail:

Canadian sniper has beat the record for the longest confirmed kill in military history by picking off an ISIS fighter from a staggering 11,319 feet.

The bullet was fired from a McMillan TAC-50 rifle set on a high-rise tower and took 10 seconds to travel the 2.14 miles towards the fighter, who was attacking Iraqi soldiers.

This smashed the last record set by a Briton Craig Harrison, who killed a Taliban soldier with a 338 Lapua Magnum rifle at a range of 8,120 feet(1.54 miles) in 2009.

A military source told The Globe and Mail the kill was verified by video, adding: ‘This is an incredible feat. It is a world record that might never be equalled.’

The third longest kill was by Canadian Corporal Rob Furlong, who shot down an Afghan insurgent from 7,972 feet(1.51 miles) in 2002 during Operation Anaconda.

And prior to that, Master Corporal Arron Perry hit a terrorist from 7579 feet. He was also Canadian and serving in the same operation.

The longest kill from a US sniper was done by sergeant Bryan Kremer, who hit an Iraqi insurgent at 7,546 feet(1.42 miles) with his Barrett M82A1 rifle in 2004.

McMillan no longer produces the Tac-50, now making the Tac-50 A1: 

If you are an American and have lots of money, you can buy that rifle, but you can’t buy the skill of that Canadian soldier, such men only fight for people like us. We, all of us in the west, have some problems in our leadership, but our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are the envy of the world. And they should be!

Like great societies before us, we may destroy ourselves, but it is moments like that achieved on the battlefield that define us, that tell our enemies just who they’re fighting, and keep them awake at night.

Mike’s Home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor, but he wrote about this at WOW Magazine.

Simply the best friends and neighbours, ever.

Then there is this, and it is one of the most disturbing stories I’ve read lately from The Right Scoop:

Europe sentences sick child TO DEATH rather than get treatment in the U.S.!

Here’s another face of socialized medicine that liberals don’t want you to see. A couple wanted to bring their sick child to the United States for a longshot treatment, but European authorities said, ‘NOPE, we’re just gonna pull the plug on the kid!’

From the Daily Mail:

The parents of terminally-ill baby Charlie Gard are ‘utterly distraught’ and facing fresh heartbreak after losing their final appeal in the European Court of Human Rights.

Chris Gard, 32, and Connie Yates, 31, wanted to take their 10-month-old son – who suffers from a rare genetic condition and has brain damage – to the US to undergo a therapy trial.

Doctors at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, where Charlie is being cared for, said they wanted him to be able to ‘die with dignity’.

But the couple, from Bedfont, west London, raised almost £1.4million so they could take their son to America but a series of courts ruled in favour of the British doctors.

How horrific is that? How is that “dignity” when the parents want to try to save him and they have the money?!

And yet the Europeans just love to brag about how great their health care is. 

It comes after specialists at Great Ormond Street said therapy in the US is experimental and will not help and added that life support should stop.

And after losing legal battles in the UK, Charlie’s parents were hoping judges in Strasbourg, France, would come to their aid.

But on Tuesday afternoon, the ECHR rejected a last-ditch plea and their ‘final’ decision means the baby’s life support machine will be switched off.

The ECHR announced the application to the court by the parents was ‘inadmissible’ and added that their decision was ‘final’.

Think about that for a while. This kid is brain damaged but we here in the US have a treatment that might allow him to live. It might fail, of course, but that is a risk the parents are willing to take, and they raised the money to make it happen. But a bunch of NHS doctors backed up by the British and European courts said “NO”. And so he will die. There’s more at the link, but as far as I’m concerned it’s simply one more person that the NHS is willfully murdering, and a fair indication of why Americans are so opposed to socialized medicine. Eugenics is never far behind.

May Charlie rest in peace and give his parents what comfort He can.

Excuse me while I go vomit through my tears.

[And an Update:] Daniel Payne wrote in The Federalist on the Roman Catholic Church’s statement on this matter. He was not impressed, nor was I. It was a waffle, contrived to let the secular authorities do as they want, disregarding the rights of Charlie and his family, something the Church professes to care about. And it always has. Part of the original attraction of Christianity back when it was known as The Way was that it didn’t kill unwanted infants. It is an outstanding article, do read it, for me, the money quote is this:

John Paul II was well aware of the ways in which governments can steal the legitimate authority of parents and families: in “Familiaris Consortio” he affirmed that “the church openly and strongly defends the rights of the family against the intolerable usurpations of society and the state.” One would imagine that one such “intolerable usurpation” would be a government denying two parents the right to try to save their baby boy’s life. And one would imagine that an institution entitled “the Pontifical Academy for Life” would recognize that.


About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

19 Responses to Canada Day and Judicial Murder (Not connected)

  1. Indeed ya don’t want to mess with the Canadian snipers, professional and efficient to say the least! But sadly, Canada is NOT the place to go for your medical!

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      Yep, and yep! 🙂


  2. And being raised Irish Roman Catholic in Dublin myself, as a lad in the 1950’s (left it basically in the 1970’s), sadly I have watched the RCC go to blazes in biblical and moral theology! And one thing is most certain, there is NO Papal Infallibility! Again, my personal two-cents at least.

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      It surely has its problems, as many churches do. But this was rather egregious, to my mind, at least.


      • I really hate to have to be negative with today’s pope and papacy, but it is quite obvious that RCC has gone radically off track in so many areas! And this is sort of doubly sad, for at least in their long history they have had many great Christians, both popes and so-called laity. But Liberalism and even situation ethics have gone off the scale especially since the 21st century in this Church! Again my opinion at least, and I am NOT alone here. The movement since postmodernity has NOT been good, in the effect of the so-called modern Church, simple. And Vatican II started off rather well in desire, but did NOT end up well, at least fully and in the culture and the visible church!

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          I agree with all, and yes, I hate knocking Rome, and yet they lost the thread in the last few years, and need to get back on track. When they have it together they do us all a great deal of good.


        • Yes, I somewhat agree, Catholicism has had its place in the visible church, but the Roman Papacy has quite simply hated much biblical reform! I could be wrong, but I sense “Roman” Catholicism has seen its day to some real degree? And it is more however, the sexual revolution, now with gay unions & marriage just about everywhere, is a real sign of apostasy, in both culture and in the visible church. We all know that within the papacy that great elephant in the room of the Roman gay lobby is alive and well! But, it quite exits in the whole of the western culture especially now, and has basically become accepted. Yes, we are seeing an almost complete cultural and ethical change today! One in which – in my opinion – we will simply not survive, at least as our past Western & Judeo-Christian Culture!

          Liked by 1 person

        • Btw, I have a strong sense and value of the Judeo-Christian moral and biblical ethics! Perhaps this is one of the reasons I/we have moved to Utah? I do value the Mormon Judeo-Christian Ethics, Family, etc. But, I see the attack on classic Judeo-Christian sexual ethics even here! And having more than one wife, “ain’t” really part of this either! 😉 That is just an Old Testament practical hold-over. But none the less, it is today a “sexual” issue also! WE can never separate from our sexual self, but it MUST be placed within GOD’s domain! Make no mistake, sexual sin is real with GOD! But today sex outside of God is rampant! (See, Heb. 13: 4 / Rev. 22: 14-15)

          *I will stop, I know this subject is NOT popular! In my life as a Anglican, priest-presbyter rector, chaplain, etc. I have seen sexual questions and problems almost daily!

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Well, it is a bit off-topic 😉 But I mostly agree so rant on if you want!


        • That’s the point in the West, moral ethics really do run together! And I am hardly one to “Rant” (i.e. in the extravagant). I am always a Pastor! But we in the West have become dull to God’s Word, and certainly His moral edge! The NT verses I quoted simply bare that out. If my Irish family were alive today, they might rant some for sure! 😉 But then they help make the freedom for the last 70 years!

          Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          That they would. My dad was a New Dealer, I hate to think what he would say about today’s successors to that heritage. I’m quite sure it wouldn’t be for snowflake ears. 🙂

          I know, you don’t, just a short form for arguing persuasively in this case. 😉


        • O could my Irish family, especially the men rant! My two uncles that fought in the American Army, and became Rangers, could burn over certain issues also. As I have said, they were NOT given their promised American citizenship when they first came back to New York at wars end. So they left and went back to Ireland, cussing all the way! Neither ever returned to America. Both joined the American Army National Guard about 1938? when they came from Ireland to New York. And when the war started for America they were Buck Sgt’s. One had become a Staff Sgt,, the other had two stripes under, by the end of the war! And both were given the Purple Heart, and one was wounded twice. When they asked to reenlist, they were told fine, as buck sgt’s! They said no thanks!

          Liked by 1 person

  3. the unit says:

    Eugenics eh? Talk about history and changing perceptions! As a kid (history) reading about the big, powerful dog, Buck, I thought it was just about individualism and strength to encounter adversity. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      I prefer Buck myself! 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  4. My parents were of the generation who didn’t have the NHS and talk all of the time of suffering whilst being unable to pay a doctor’s bill. They constantly talk about ‘The Tories’ who are going to break it all up.
    I see it from an entirely different perspective – ive seen it change from a service that was designed to look after the sick to one that’s become bloated and And dominated by political left groupthink. We have to pay for abortion – a friend of mine works at a hospital and one theatre ward is dedicated to this task – as well as paying for fertility treatments. The latter is given to same sex couples all the time on the tax payers purse. I know people who’ve had nose and boob jobs on the public purse and who’ve boasted about how they persuaded doctors to give it to them as they claimed they were depressed.
    The Tories have put tins of money into it, as have Labour, its budget is never cut yet there is atrocious reports of old people being left to die without water. I know so many people who’ve been let down from the system, one of whom has suffered wilful negligence and the doctor was kept on.
    GPs are predominantly women as the service is being run on ‘diversity’ agendas. These women all have children, then go part time as they want the best of both worlds. We pay for that as it’s been acknowledged by female MPs that we have to train twice as many doctors as a result.

    When my parents think of what they used to suffer they compare it to what used to be. But medical practises are a lot better and cheaper now, so they are comparing chalk and cheese.
    I now live in France, as do they. We all recognise that the system here is far better. You pay your health insurance because anything none life threatening is paid for by you. Life threatening conditions are paid by the state, but you have to pay enormous contributions through welfare and this means your money still goes to abortion which is provided fee by the state.

    Healthcare as a ‘right’ is a nonsense. You’re basically paying someone to have power over your life.

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      Yep, and I’m a bit careful about throwing stone here. Ours is a mess. Our old system, which my dad lived with, was routine stuff you paid out of pocket (wasn’t very expensive, either) then you had insurance for catastrophic things, with a reasonably high deductible, if one were wise. That wasn’t overly expensive either, after all most people don’t have catastrophic claims often. Abortion didn’t enter into it, it was out of pocket, not least because it was illegal. But insurance has been an employment benefit her since the wage controls in WW II, and benefit got expanded to attract employees, and soon we had the equivalent of insurance to pay for an oil change in our cars. O care with its mandated coverage made insurance impractical for many more, sometimes more than one’s income before tax, and while there are subsidies, it’s a terrible deal for the consumers. What works best, I think, is out of pocket for routine, insurance for what one considers necessary, and the old mandate – that we have had as long as anyone can remember, that a hospital treat everyone no matter the ability to pay. Yes, that increases the cost to everyone else, but it is the right thing to do. Part of my antipathy for the NHS specifically, is that it become nearly a religion, coupled with the fact, that a friend of mine, twice was very lucky to have a family member with political influence, or she would not have been properly treated. I don’t pretend to have an answer for the UK, but whatever the question was, the NHS is the wrong answer.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: Charlie Gard: an Update | nebraskaenergyobserver

  6. Pingback: Charlie Gard: The Saga Continues | nebraskaenergyobserver

  7. Pingback: Slaughtering the Innocent | nebraskaenergyobserver

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.