governance

When human beings gather in groups such as the Environmental Health Associations in various provinces, they adopt ideas that violate people within and outside the group. Such violations are nearly always disguised as statements of concern that invisibilize the people who are being violated. The most seriously affected are betrayed by people with disposable time and income. The dead are betrayed by the living. By subjecting themselves to a reverse onus, by eclipsing their own history, the "cult of environmental medicine" does the same to all persons with sensitivities. Adults pave their way forward over the graves of children they are helping to kill.

Abusers and agencies of remedy will try to blame YOU personally for the fact that negligence continues. It's called an "ad hominem" defense. Dr. Michael C. Labossiere describes it this way: "An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting)."

In 1990, as Health and Welfare Canada began addressing attitudes about sensitivities in the federal realm, Dr. Bruce Halliday, MP, invited testimony before the Parliamentary human rights committee. The minutes are attached.