Saturday, July 05, 2008

In which the Federal Court surprises me...pleasantly!...with new US deserter decision

U.S. deserter could qualify as refugee: court (CBC)

Joshua Key is one of multiple US military deserters who have come to Canada. Several of them have unsuccessfully claimed refugee status.

I'm of two minds about these cases. On the one hand, I think we regularly deny/deport more deserving claimants. These people just don't rank extremely high on my righteous-indignationometre. On the other hand, the Refugee Board and the courts have refused to consider key legal issues in the cases, such as whether the war in Iraq is illegal and therefore being forced to participate in it would constitute persecution. Instead, these central issues have been brushed off as irrelevant and outside the jurisdiction of refugee law, which I find hypocritical. Under international law, participants in illegal military actions could be prosecuted for participation. Logic suggests that if we would prosecute someone for doing something, then we should not condone his government for forcing him to do that same thing.

Of course, logic and international law...even "law" and international law...are often at odds.

The gist of the ruling:

[Federal Court Justice Robert] Barnes said the board erred “by concluding that refugee protection for military deserters and evaders is only available where the conduct objected to amounts to a war crime, a crime against peace or a crime against humanity."

Citing a case from the U.S. Federal Court of Appeal, Barnes said officially condoned military misconduct could still support a refugee claim, even if it falls short of a war crime.

"The authorities indicate that military action which systematically degrades, abuses or humiliates either combatants or non-combatants is capable of supporting a refugee claim where that is the proven reason for refusing to serve," Barnes wrote.

Barnes said the board imposed a legal standard that was "too restrictive" on Key, who lives in Saskatchewan.

While I would not be surprised to see this appealed and superior courts to cop out, I am delighted to see this decision conforming with the internationally agreed-upon rules and standards we claim to live by in Canada.

Also via CBC, some of the others:

Also interesting: the House of Commons--yes, that's right, the organ of representative democracy in this country--passed a motion to allow the deserters to remain in Canada. However, it was a non-binding motion, and the government kiboshed it. See this? This is my shocked face.

Friday, July 04, 2008

I'd really appreciate it if you stopped using the term "abortionist"...how about "doctor"?

Par example:

Abortionist Henry Morgentaler's Order of Canada should be revoked to preserve the dignity of the now-tarnished award, an angry Calgary Roman Catholic Bishop Fred Henry said yesterday. ("Bishop wants honour stripped", Bill Kaufman, Sun Media)

ABORTIONIST DR. MORGENTALER SAYS HE'S HONOURED TO FINALLY RECEIVE THE ORDER OF CANADA... (front page headline, 24 Hours free daily, Sun Media)

"Order of Canada for abortionist" (headline, Peterborough Examiner)

NOT that it's technically incorrect. Dr. Henry Morgentaler, recent recipient of the Order of Canada, does perform abortions.

But that's not why he's being honoured, per se. It's not like he has the most abortions under his belt, so clearly he should get the award. It's because he fought for women's right to control their own reproductive health. Now, my stance on abortion has been seen by some (radical feminists) as conservative.[1] But I don't think you have to share Morgentaler's cause to admire his courage or integrity.

Also, doesn't "abortionist" sound like some horrifying religion where one actually worships abortions?

So let's try "doctor" shall we, or perhaps even "pro-choice activist" as opposed to a fully loaded term used to denigrate, rather than describe.

 

[1] I'm pro-choice, however I think that women in equal relationships have an ethical (not legal) duty to inform the father, and that a father who is willing to raise the child should have a chance to make a case for not aborting--a fairly heretical idea to some.

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

In which I have another reason the be peeved at the US "justice" system

Before I even get to the articles there are some problems.

First, clearly, the court could hear Arar's case if it was so inclined. I am willing to admit that there may be a microscopically small range of instances where a government may be justified in screwing someone over on the grounds of national security, but I am awfully tired of the "Aw shucks, there were nuthin' I could do" attitude when they do so. This is not only a criticism of the United States (although they are major offenders). The least you could do is to own the fact that your national security trumped an individual's fundamental rights. If you truly were justified in your actions, the analysis will show that the choice--and it is always a choice--was the correct one (or at least a reasonable one).

Second, "alleged" rendition victim? "Alleged"? Here are some sunglasses, Denver Post--your eyes must be light-sensitive from so many years living in that cave.

Now, here's my concern with the actual substance of the decision: "...Arar, as a foreigner who had not been formally admitted to the U.S., had no constitutional due process rights." (CBC) If you read "constitutional due process rights" to mean "dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's of procedural niceties", then yeah, like it or lump it, these have never been available to non-legal residents of any country. Traditionally, for political reasons, one would try not to mistreat the nationals of other states who were transiting through.

On the other hand, if you read "constitutional due process rights" to mean "not imprison someone, hide them from their own consulate, and then without warning ship them off to a hole in the desert to be tortured and mistreated for months" then generally speaking this is considered dirty pool regardless of the person's nationality.

That's why HUMAN Rights and CIVIL Rights are two different things.

Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Makeover makeover, makeover makeover, MAKEOVER!

I have done a wee little bit of juggling of my layout. You will now find the Caveat Lector, Tags, and Archive at the bottom of the page. Also, I have converted my clumsy link lists into snazzy new blogrolls, except where it's a more-or-less static page. Still toying around with some things though.

In other not-news, I've been looking at the possibility of grad school. Oh, the horror. It'll cost an arm and a leg, and I won't be making that kind of money right out of school. Also, since I'm articling at a small firm, I'm hardly guaranteed a position right out of articling. And as far as hanging up my own slate goes, well, I'd rather be punched in the face.

I figure I should use my articling year to bone up on any other areas of law I'm interested in. Landlord tenant for one, maybe wrongful dismissal, disability. It's not so much the money (although I do need health benefits) as the security, so I know I can start putting away money.

Ideally, if I could just be an RA or a GA or a Law Journal staffer for the rest of my life, that would work out nicely.

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Extremely long time no blog/News Roundup

My apologies, as I've been caught up in the Bar Ads Course/Convocation whirlwind.

Let's peruse the news, shall we?

Plutonium spill in Boulder, Colorado has spread (via Boing Boing)
Generally I'm skeptical of anti-nuclear fear-mongering, but I have to say I'm glad I don't live in Boulder this week. Notably, the plutonium was from a lab and not a power station. Also notably, Wikipedia states that plutonium is less toxic than a lot of things, and is in fact on par with lead.

Law 'to change' on witness rules (via BBC News)
The UK Government is flipping right out over a House of Lords ruling that quashed a conviction obtained through the use of anonymous evidence (Law Lords ruling is here). This is a no-win situation, of course: it is a foundational principle of the rule of law that one should be able to face one's accusers, but this allows witnesses to be intimidated out of giving their testimony. Actually, this reminds me of what we covered last week in the LSUC Skills and Professional Responsibility course, namely, positional versus interest-based bargaining. Not, the position would be that anonymous witnesses contravene the accused's right to a fair trial, and therefore should never be allowed. However, the interest behind that position is (a) to ensure that the witness is cross examined, and (b) to ensure a proper cross-examination to the witness, to divulge any conflict of interest (e.g., the witness has a hate on for the accused). I would think that proper weighting of testimony and judicial scrutiny of the potential anonymous witness would compensate the defence for whatever prejudice the anonymous witness caused. But then, I haven't read the full decision yet...

Paying off a debt with a daughter (via BBC News)
Afghan farmers have been forced to sell their own children to ward off debt collection, since their traditional crop of poppies has become illegal (and the illegality enforced). While the international heroin trade is obviously of major concern, you'd think that it would occur to someone that morphine is still widely used in medical situations (and is, in fact, under-distributed in many countries) and that a properly regulated poppy crop is what Afghanistan really needs. Poppies are apparently the ideal crop for the terrain, climate, and labour structure. Instead, farmers are joining the Taliban for the wages, in order to feed their families. Awesome.

And in not-exactly-news news, an excellent post by John Scalzi: Where It Began.

Wednesday, June 04, 2008

In which I am in agreement with Kung Fu Monkey

John Rogers of Kung Fu Monkey has an excellent post on the myriad problems of supporting Clinton qua female candidate. Would it have been awesome to have a female president? Yeah, I guess so... (I am honestly not fashed by the lack of women world leaders--as long as the numbers continue to increase and not backslide, I can think of a dozen good reasons for it, like oh say, men can't have babies yet and they throw a wrench into ones career, or maybe the fact that world leaders are baby boomers and thus one of the first generations to take sexual equality seriously ... these thing do take time to work out, you know).

But Clinton went nuts. Yes, women in the public spotlight are held up to harsher standards (Belinda Stronach, anyone?) ... but Clinton went mental. Excuse me for being so terribly post-feminist here (some, I realize, would say naive) but honestly people, how much respect have women "earned" if we support, en masse, a lesser candidate just because she shares our chromosomes?

Friday, May 30, 2008

In which Islamophobia now applies to Rachel Ray

First, the headline: "US chain drops 'terror scarf' ad"

The BBC reports that Dunkin Donuts has dropped an online ad featuring Rachel Ray (pictured below, in an AP photo via BBC) because she is--wait for it--wearing a "terrorist scarf".

She was wearing a black-and-white checked scarf around her neck that resembled a traditional Arab keffiyeh.

This fashion choice incensed at least one prominent conservative blogger, who said it evoked extremist videos.

The blogger, Michelle Malkin, called the garment "a regular adornment of Muslim terrorists appearing in beheading and hostage-taking videos".

...

"Fashion statements may seem insignificant, but when they lead to the mainstreaming of violence - unintentionally or not - they matter," Ms Malkin has written.

Malkin's bald-faced lunacy can be read here: "Of donuts and dumb celebrities" and "The keffiyeh kerfuffle". She actually calls it--wait for it--"hate couture". Somebody typed the words "hate couture" and meant them seriously!

Wikipedia has a good article on the Keffiyeh--both as a symbol and, oh yeah, a traditional and practical accessory all over the Muslim world, and outside it too. (British soldiers wear it, clearly in support of terrorism.)

By this logic, the following items are now clearly supportive of terrorism:

  • Balaclavas
  • Arabic writing
  • Urdu writing
  • Olive green
  • White
  • Black
  • Khaki
  • Vests
  • Cargo pants
  • Jackets
  • Orange
  • Banners
  • Standard military camouflage (woodland version)
  • Turbans
  • Facial hair
  • Appearing on videotape

Nice job, Captain Crazypants. I feel much safer, now that I can identify my enemy. Of course, it appears that my enemy is just about everyone...

Thursday, May 29, 2008

In which I discover something fabulous, that's not studying for the bar exams

Okay so, newsflash, I love me some criminal procedurals. I also love me some sci-fi. And I have discovered a treasury of both!

Shadow Unit is an episodic series of stories, strongly reminiscent of Criminal Minds but with an oogedy-boogedy component. To quote the site:

The FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit hunts humanity's nightmares. But there are nightmares humanity doesn't dream are real.

The Behavioral Analysis Unit sends those cases down the hall.

Welcome to Shadow Unit.

AWESOME. I have read two episodes so far and je suis une admiratrice.

Monday, May 26, 2008

TORONTO STAR briefly confuses CHILDREN OF MEN with reality

In an editorial, New use for old schools, the Toronto Star makes this statement:

School boards across Ontario have been watching their enrolments fall for years as a result of rapidly declining fertility rates. That, in turn, has led to half-empty facilities and painful decisions about school closings.

Now, I know "fertility rate" can technically refer to birth rate, rather than, say, actual fertility rate (i.e. the extent to which a population could have children if it chose to maximize, as opposed to the amount it chooses to have--which is maddening, by the way, I hate it when terms don't mean what they plainly mean). Nonetheless, I find its use in place of "birthrate" to connote an Apocalyptic decline of the species, which I'm sure was unintended in an article about use of public property.

Apparently "fecundity" has replaced "fertility"? Or did "fertile" slip into "fecund" and is now slipping back? According to Merriam Webster, they can both mean both productive or potentially productive. Maybe I'm just irrationally prejudiced against "fecund" because, well let's face it, it's sort of an ugly word.

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Quotable FIREFLY

Episode 1 & 2: "Serenity"

Shepherd Book, to trained courtesan Inara: "I brought you some supper but if you'd prefer a lecture, I've a few very catchy ones prepped...sin and hellfire... one has lepers."

 

Jayne: "Testing, testing. Captain, can you hear me?"
Mal: "I'm standing right here."
Jayne: "You're coming through good and loud."
Mal: " 'Cause I'm standing right here."

 

Episode 3: "The Train Job"

Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."

 

Mal: "And Kaylee, what the hell's goin' on in the engine room? Were there monkeys? Some terrifying space monkeys maybe got loose?"

 

Jayne: "Do you know what the chain of command is here? It's the chain I go get and beat you with to show you who's in command."

 

Episode 4: "Bushwhacked"

Harrow: "I know him. And I think he's a psychotic lowlife."

Mal: "And I think calling him that is an insult to the psychotic lowlife community."

 

Inara: "Thank you for the wine. It's very... fresh."

Mal: "To Kaylee, and her inter-engine fermentation system.”

 

Episode 5: "Our Mrs. Reynolds"

Book: "If you take sexual advantage of her, you're going to burn in a very special level of hell. A level they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theater."

 

Mal: "I would appreciate it if one person on this boat would not assume I'm an evil, lecherous hump."

Zoe: "No one's saying that, sir."

Wash: "Yeah, we're pretty much just giving each other significant glances and laughing incessantly."

 

Episode 6: "Jaynestown"

Book: "What are we up to, sweetheart?"

River: "Fixing your Bible."

Book: "I, um...(alarmed)...what?"

River: "Bible's broken. Contradictions, false logistics - doesn't make sense." (she's marked up the bible, crossed out passages)

Book: "No, no. You - you can't...

River: "So we'll integrate non-progressional evolution theory with God's creation of Eden. Eleven inherent metaphoric parallels already there. Eleven. Important number. Prime number. One goes into the house of eleven eleven times, but always comes out one. Noah's ark is a problem."

Book: "Really?"

River: "We'll have to call it early quantum state phenomenon. Only way to fit 5000 species of mammal on the same boat." (rips out page)

(later) River: "I tore these out of your symbol and they turned into paper, but I wanna put them back, so..."

 

[River is hiding after seeing Shepherd Book without his hair tied back]
River: "You see, the snow on the roof is too heavy, you see, the ceiling will cave in. His brains are in terrible danger."
Book: "River, please, why don't you come on out?"
River: "No! Can't. Too much hair."

Thursday, May 22, 2008

In which I try to argue tort law

Law Is Cool: “Dead fly in water bottle” case to be decided by Supreme Court tomorrow

Wait a tick, doesn’t fly in the face of the thin-skull rule? Either Mr. Mustapha was reasonable in his reaction, and the basic nervous shock doctrine applies, or he was unreasonable due to a pre-existing “obsessive” personality. The tortfeasor must take the victim as he finds him.

I’m looking at Vorvis v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia ([1989] 1 S.C.R. 1085) for this. Once some harm was foreseeable, the company should be liable for the whole thing.

I thing some harm is foreseeable from dead bugs in your water. Given that Culligan recruited Mr. Mustapha on the basis of the cleanliness of their water (”a representative of Culligan called on him and represented to him at length how pure and healthy Culligan water was, including how it would benefit pregnant women and children, and how much better it was for someone than city water.”) and that he had a contract with them for fifteen years … it just seems pretty reasonably foreseeable to me. But it’s not mentioned anywhere in any of the cases.

I hope the SCC will deal with it, since it’s implicated enough that it should be included in their discussion, and since it’d be nice to have some juicy POST-1980s case law on the subject. (crossposted)

Go read the rest of the comments too

Law Is Cool: Follow-up: SCC tosses “dead fly” appeal

I still think this analysis suffers GREATLY from a lack of discussion of the thin-skull rule, and here’s why: if the complainant was regular dude who reacted this way, then okay, unreasonable. But from what I can glean from the decision, he showed more than a few signs of OCD. His obsession with cleanliness was not only potentially pathological, but it was the vary trait to which Culligan marketed! Hence pre-existing condition, hence thin-skull application. I’m not saying it would have been successful, mind you, just that I’m disappointed it wasn’t argued.

Of course, the SCC seems to have been constrained by the lack of discussion in the lower courts, which implies to me that the issue wasn’t plead. Que sera, sera.

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

If I had a million dollars... (V)

I'd do this:

http://travelocity.generaltours.com/tour/?tid=237

Grand Capitals of the Middle East

Small Group Touring 14 days from $4,049

14-day small-group escorted tour through Damascus, Aleppo, Palmyra, Amman, Jerash & Petra from $3999

Our 14-day small-group escorted tour in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon through Damascus, Aleppo, Palmyra, Amman, Jerash and Petra starts at $4049 and includes 26 meals, sightseeing and all on-tour transportation.
Small Group Touring with General Tours World Traveler... Grand Capitals of the Middle East. Syria, so rich in antiquity, includes the perfectly preserved Crac des Chevaliers built by crusaders in the 12th century and Aleppo, oldest inhabited city in the world. In-depth sightseeing with a small company of travelers, an included excursion to Baalbeck and our unmatched level of service make this a unique experience. Depart any day with our privately-guided alternative and enjoy remarkable value to travel with your own private car, driver and guide. Maximum of 20 guests.

Damascus, Hama, Aleppo, Palmyra, Baalbeck, Amman, Jerash, Ajlun, Petra, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon

General Tours World Traveler Small Group Touring
  • For lovers of antiquity and culture... Syria, Jordan and Lebanon offer an unbelievable array of riches.
  • Decades of experience helping Americans discover the Middle East assures you a level of personal service and attentive guiding that can’t be matched.
  • Combine the finest deluxe and luxury hotels with great dining adventures every evening as you explore the grand cities and sites of the Middle East.
  • 7 UNESCO World Heritage Sites

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Seriously? You're trying to demonize Romeo Dallaire? ... Seriously?

Full disclosure: I consider Dallaire a secular saint, which is to say I have a massive crush on him, and am in law school largely because of him and what happened to him in Rwanda, and I believe him to be an example of what makes Canada great.

So I'm am obviously put-off by the Conservative freak-out over his remarks that, by ignoring our obligations to Omar Khadr, we are sinking to the level of the terrorists we claim to be fighting.

Tory continues to attack Dallaire over Khadr (Toronto Star)

Dallaire says he didn't mean Canada is equal to al-Qaida (Canada.com)

Dallaire blasts Ottawa, U.S. over handling of Khadr case (Toronto Star)

'Child soldier' Khadr needs protection, Dallaire says (Globe and Mail)

BTC: My heavens, Romeo Dallaire said what? (Maclean's)

Okay, let's...once again...look at what was actually said, shall we? Except we don't know because we won't have access to transcripts for months and the minutes say nothing...so let's piece it together from the media.

DALLAIRE:

“The minute you start playing with human rights, with conventions, with civil liberties, in order to say that you're doing it to protect yourself and you are going against those rights and conventions, you are no better than the guy who doesn't believe in them at all.”

KENNEY:

“Is it your testimony that al-Qaeda strapping up a 14-year-old girl with Down's Syndrome and sending her into a pet market to be remotely detonated is the moral equivalent to Canada's not making extraordinary political efforts for a transfer of Omar Khadr to this country?” he asked. “Is that your position?” (He's referring here to a report that this happened which was disproved...a while ago.)

DALLAIRE:

“If you want a black and white, and I'm only too prepared to give it to you, Absolutely,” he said. “You're either with the law or not with the law. You're either guilty or you're not.”

"You are not allowed to go against (international) conventions and if you do, you're going down the same road as those who absolutely don't believe (in the law)."

Dallaire never said "Canada = al-Qaeda"! Kenney said it, and Dallaire said basically "In this context, yeah," and then qualified what he said.

And guess what, sportsfans. I concur wholeheartedly. Canada has totally lost the moral high ground on this one -- not just lost, but pursued a burnt-earth policy, and for no apparent reason, either. The UK, official second banana of the Coalition, was good enough to retrieve its citizens and (eventually) legally resident non-citizens from Guantanamo. Note how they weren't punished for daring to counter the US.

My (nauseated) suspicion is that we don't want Khadr home because he's "not nice"; he fails to live up to the Canadian ideal of warm fluffiness. Gosh, he very well may have hurt someone!

What's sickening is our ability, as a nation, to turn our backs on someone because he makes us uncomfortable, and yet to feel little or no cognitive dissonance with the fact that by doing so we're thumbing our noses at our supposed commitment to the rule of law, human rights, and oh yes, basic human decency.

Newsflash: Omar Khadr was raised by a pro-Bin Laden family, in and around al-Qaeda and its supporters. He was brainwashed from birth. Then at 14, right around the time humans begin latching on to anything that might give them a sense of identity, he was thrust into working for militant in Afghanistan by his own father. He may have thrown a grenade that killed an American soldier. He was seriously wounded, almost executed, and shot in the back. Various reports suggest he was denied medical treatment as punishment, and that he was interrogated using illegal techniques. He was, at this point, 15.

There is no ambiguity about the fact that Khadr was a child soldier and should have been treated as such, The fact that his "trial" is only proceeding now, when he is 21, is not his fault and I fail to see a single reason for the continued flaunting of international and domestic law that the US and Canada are indulging in here. Bottom line: Dallaire was right.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

In which whackadoo Islamaphobia is even more prevalent than I thought

From Joe.My.God.: Project Dumbway

 NYC-based fashion designer Doron Braunschtein has launched a line of "Jews Against Obama" shirts. From his press release:

“I am a true anti-Obama New York Jew. The word on the street is that New York Jews will vote for McCain anyhow. The majority of the Jews - at least the ones that are proud of their religion and practice it - like me, don’t want to see Obama- a man who’s middle name is Hussein, and his family from his Kenyan father’s side is Muslim, as the leader of this great country. More than that, after Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright, honored Louis Farrakhan- definitely one of the most racist and anti-Semitic people alive - Obama lost us Jews totally. That made me start this political movement in the first place.”

According to Braunschtein, the shirts are doing "brisk business."
(Via - JMG reader Christian)

So...wait, what? In a Christian-majority country, they oppose Obama because he's descended from Muslims, but also because he's not actually a Muslim, but the wrong kind of Christian? This argument is so devoid of logic that it makes my head hurt.

Also, those t-shirts are hideous, Mickey-Mouse amateur-hour monstrosities. If you're going to be crazy, the least you could do is be aesthetically pleasing.

Monday, May 12, 2008

In which I titter over Savage Love...as usual

Reading the latest Savage Love column; this one is chock-a-block full of awesome quotes. Observe:

Think of this column as a sex-ed gangbang I’ve arranged just for you but, um, don’t describe it to your parents that way.

The AIDS virus isn’t fire and gay men aren’t twigs: it doesn’t matter how vigorously you rub us against each other, we’re not going to suddenly burst into HIV.

I’d like to add to this list [of ways to minimize the risk of HIV infection]: Don’t sleep with total sleazefags, don’t be a total sleazefag yourself and don’t allow anyone to pressure you into doing anything you don’t want to do.

Sleazefag is so my Phrase of the Day.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

*Bad* ICTR ... no cookie for you!

Opinio Juris serves up this piece of ridiculous-pie: "ICTR 'Disowns' Human Rights Watch".

Apparently, although HRW is an NGO on which "the UN Court has relied on for the last 14 years for expert testimony", "the prosecutor accused HRW of lack of credibility and having confused the collection of information on the violations of human rights in general and international criminal proceedings". To which I can only respond: come again?

This is ICTR's response to HRW's arguments against sending the remaining accused persons to stand trial in Kigali, which would allow ICTR to close up shop. Kevin Jon Heller, author of the OJ post, has written on the unlikelihood of fair trials for the accused under the Rwandan justice system (Heller, Kevin Jon, "What Happens to the Acquitted?" . Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 21, 2008 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1005772) and HRW has documented the problem as well.

Now, call me crazy, but isn't this part of the justification for international ad hoc tribunals anyway? And wasn't everyone (justifiably) up in arms when the Iraqis tried Hussein in sketchy circumstances? On a human level, I can't really blame the Rwandan system for being willing to play a little fast an loose with the rights of the accused, given the horrific nature of the crimes. But the fact that we may empathize doesn't mean we agree.

Also, I am sooo tired of human rights NGO's being relied upon when it suits a courts purposes, and then discarded the second they disagree. I have seen this many times in the refugee system: Amnesty or HRW suggests a country is safe, back you go! But if they suggest otherwise, and a "neutral" source (99.9% of the time, US State Department reports) disagree or are less emphatic, then obviously the NGO, as a partisan organization (who goal is, apparently, to invent or exaggerate human rights abuses, as if that were necessary, to allow fake refugees to make claims) cannot be believed.

Keep an eye on this, folks.

Friday, May 09, 2008

That's so funny I can't believe I heard it

So I'm listening to Mad Dog and Billie (shut up SHUT UP I love me some Top 40) when I heard the following amusing exchange:

Billie was talking about things she can no longer say because now her mother says them, and, by example, mentioned that her mother just sent her an e-mail which opens "Hollah" (hoh-lah) and now she can't use "Hollah" (as in, Hollaback Girl) anymore. I--and about a million other Torontonians--automatically realize that her mother said "Hola" (oh-la), as in "Hello" in Spanish.

When someone calls in to correct them, they still don't get it at first, and say her mother must have been learning Spanish on tape...this still doesn't make sense...

Oooh, and they just read my e-mail on the radio! Woo!

Anyway, it's probably true that most people would see "Hollah," reading an e-mail. I'm so used to hola because ever since we developed our obsession with Mexico, we use it all the time...also *cough* just got back from Spain.

Thursday, May 08, 2008

News that makes you nod sagely

Joe.My.God. recaps the story of Mildred Loving, the aptly named "black woman whose fight against Virginia's ban on interracial marriage led to the Supreme Court overturning all such laws nationwide" Clickity-click.

And Slate has an interesting article on "What should Israel do with its thousands of Christian and Muslim African refugees?"...because what that country needs is another demographic problem that implicated international human rights. Click.

Buenos Días, mis lectores

For those who are interested, and because otherwise I will forget stuff, here is our itinerary copied right off the website (http://www.insightvacations.com). Pictures to follow, of course!

DAY 1 – THU – DEPART CANADA
Overnight flight to Madrid.

DAY 2 – FRI – MADRID AT LEISURE
Welcome to Madrid! On arrival at Madrid Airport there are complimentary transfers to your tour hotel. The afternoon is at leisure – relax and settle in. In the evening, join your fellow passengers and Tour Director for a Welcome Drink.
Hotel: Melia Galgos.

DAY 3 – SAT – MADRID – BARCELONA
Follow the wide arid plains of Castille. After passing Guadalajara, follow the Jalón River Valley, dotted with Mudejar Towers which are survivors of the bygone era of Moorish domination in Spain. Continue eastwards, passing Zaragoza in the province of Aragón, before encountering a different culture and language in Catalunya. Your home for the next two nights is the dynamic city of Barcelona. Tonight, visit all of Spain in one park at the ‘Pueblo Español’, before your Dine-Around evening, where you can choose from a selection of restaurants. Before returning to your hotel, drive past the Olympic Games site and enjoy glittering views over the harbour.
Hotel: Melia.

DAY 4 – SUN – BARCELONA SIGHTSEEING

MONTSERRAT & THE BLACK MADONNA
We drive towards the sacred mountain of Catalonia. Ascending this staggering rock formation, we enjoy the spectacular panoramic views, before arriving at the "Basilica Real" to see the mystical Black Madonna.

ARTISTS
Visit Gaudi's Guell Park. On entering Guell Park, one has the impression of entering an enchanted world where Gaudi designed mushroom-like houses, undulating benches and a mosaic dragon on a flight of stairs.

BARCELONA SIGHTSEEING
Visit the Gothic quarter on a guided tour and see the ancient cathedral, and see the famous Ramblas, with its open-air markets and cafes. In contrast to the old part of town, drive along the broad, elegant avenues of the Eixample district to admire Gaudi’s extraordinary unfinished creation, the Sagrada Familia church, about which opinions are so strongly divided.

DAY 5 – MON – BARCELONA – VALENCIA
Follow the Costa Dorada south, stopping in Peñìscola to view the white-walled cottages clustered around the sea-lapped castle used in the film El Cid. Continue past the famous orange groves to Valencia, your home for the night. An orientation tour with your Tour Director shows you the City Gates of Serranos and Cuarte, the Gothic Generalidad Palace, El Miguelete Cathedral with its octagonal bell tower, and the ultra modern Centre of Arts and Sciences.
Hotel: Husa Reina Victoria.

DAY 6 – TUE – VALENCIA – GRANADA
Leave for the Costa Blanca, passing through the stately waving palm tree forests of Elche and past the lemon groves in Murcia. Drive through the superb scenery of the Sierra Nevada with magnificent mountain views on all sides, and cross the Mora Pass to reach glorious Granada. Here, over looking the town, awaits one of the most remarkable fortresses ever built, the Alhambra. Explore this exquisite palace; a fantasy of stone cut lace, arabesque gardens and fountains, built as a citadel by the Moors in the 13th century. Also visit the exotic water gardens of the Generalife, the Royal summer residence.
Hotel: Saray.

DAY 7 – WED – GRANADA – SEVILLE
A beautiful drive through gleaming white villages and brilliant fields of golden sunflowers leads to Seville exquisite capital of Andalucìa, and one of the most charming cities in Spain. You’ll stay in this ‘city of Carmen’ for the next two nights, so settle into your hotel.
Hotel: Melia Lebreros.

DAY 8 – THU – SEVILLE SIGHTSEEING
Seville has a distinctive character and presence which a local guide will unfold. Visit the massive cathedral, burial place of Christopher Columbus and enriched with the spoils of the New World. Pass the slender Giralda Tower, once the minaret of the Great Mosque, see the Alcazar and tour the fashionable Santa Cruz Quarter with its flower decked wrought iron balconies. This afternoon is at leisure. Tonight, enjoy dinner at your hotel. 

DAY 9 – FRI – SEVILLE – MADRID
Set off early along the Guadalquivir valley, past villages and towns studded with Moorish towers and fortresses, stopping in the perfectly preserved Moorish city of Cordoba. See the famous 2000-year-old bridge before a guided visit to the magnificent Mezquita, an 8th century mosque with a Christian church built inside it. Cross the Sierra Morena mountains and the plains of La Mancha, following in the steps of Don Quixote, on your way back to Madrid.
Hotel: NH Eurobuilding.

DAY 10 – SAT – MADRID SIGHTSEEING

Visit the Prado Museum to admire the world famous paintings of Velázquez and Goya. Take time out to relax at a café or shop in the boutiques of Serrano. In the evening, consider joining a farewell dinner in the heart of town, complete with wine and music.

TOLEDO EXCURSION
A specialist guide takes us to the unique city of Toledo, Spain's capital during the golden era, and where El Greco lived and worked. We visit the fine Gothic cathedral, admire the old city views along the Tagus gorge and later visit a specialist Damascene workshop.

DAY 11 – SUN – RETURN TO CANADA
The tour ends with transfers to Madrid Airport.

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

VACATION ALERT

Allrighty then, darling readers...

I'll be away till early May. Till then, please do check out some of the more awesome stuff I read daily (or so). I'll update my blogroll/linkroll later when IE and Blogger aren't both being difficult.

Blawgs:

http://soloinontario.blogspot.com

http://lawiscool.com

http://www.opiniojuris.org

http://www.thecourt.ca

Blogs:

http://wilwheaton.typepad.com

http://scalzi.com/whatever

http://joemygod.blogspot.com

Humour

http://www.overheardintheoffice.com

Monday, April 21, 2008

Massive Casting Fail

The 2007 movie Rendition was clearly about Maher Arar.

They did do too bad a job casting the Maher Arar replacement, as you can see.

arar_maher031124

REAL MAHER ARAR

 

metwally

FAKE HOLLYWOOD MAHER ARAR (Omar Metwally)

 

However, attempts to cast a counterpart for Arar's wife (Ph.D., federal NDP candidate, observant Muslim) pictured here:

mazigh-monia-cp-655326

Ended in...well, this:

R-01717
Rendition
,  
November 22, 2006
Photo by Sam Emerson/newline.wireimage.com

To license this image (12571057), contact NewLine:
U.S. +1-212-686-8900 / U.K. +44-207-868-8940 / Australia +61-2-8262-9222 / Japan: +81-3-5464-7020
+1 212-686-8901 (fax)
info@wireimage.com (e-mail)
NewLine.wireimage.com (web site)

No. No no no no no.

I would have recommended Anne Hathaway,

anne hathaway

...in a hijab, thankyouverymuch.

Catherine Keener would also work.

CatherineKeener

Excellent news if true: Hamas "prepared to accept Israel"

Of course, slightly ironic...given that Israel, you know, exists. One reason I can be more critical of Israel than some of the Palestinian groups is that Israel always seems in touch with reality--law maybe not always so much, but reality, yes. Contrariwise, advocating or asserting that Israel doesn't exist is just so totally crazy I cross the people who do so off my "capable of rational argument" list.

ANYHOO: Carter: Hamas will accept Israel (BBC News)

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Quotable: Justice Brandeis

If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means—to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal—would bring terrible retribution.

------------------------------------------------

Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperilled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously.

Justice LOUIS D. BRANDEIS, dissenting, Olmstead et al. v. United States, 277 U.S. 485 (1928).

 

Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.

LOUIS D. BRANDEIS, “What Publicity Can Do,” Other People’s Money, chapter 5, p. 92 (1932). First published in Harper’s Weekly, December 20, 1913.

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Quotable: Ambrose Bierce

Appeal. In law, to put the dice into the box for another throw.

Ambrose Bierce (1842–1914), U.S. author. The Devil’s Dictionary (1881-1906).

Quotable: Raymond Chandler

The law isn’t justice. It’s a very imperfect mechanism. If you press exactly the right buttons and are also lucky, justice may show up in the answer. A mechanism is all the law was ever intended to be.

Raymond Chandler (1888–1959), U.S. author. Sewell Endicott, in The Long Goodbye, ch. 8 (1953).

Quotable: Billie Holiday

You can be up to your boobies in white satin, with gardenias in your hair and no sugar cane for miles, but you can still be working on a plantation.

From Lady Sings the Blues (1956), Holiday's autobiography; co-authored with William Dufty.

Provisional Holiday Calendar for York?

Further to the last post, may I present:

2008-2009 All Holidays Calendar (version one)

Running from June 1 2008 to May 31 2009, this includes approximate sunset times, as well as all the more important (i.e. to be taken-off) holidays I could find.

www.interfaithcalendar.org is a kick-ass resource for this, btw

Of course, some of the dates are also approximate, but it's interesting how some of the holidays seem to align. I wonder if this would be feasible...

And please let me know about any errors!

Friday, April 18, 2008

In which I ask, "Why not indeed, Israel?"

“We call ourselves a Jewish, democratic state. But the less Jewish we are the easier it will be for others to say, ‘Why not just be a democratic state for Jews and Arabs to live in together?’ ”

The quote is from an article in the NY Times about the secular/religious divide in Israel, and how even secular Israelis support the public imposition of religious laws in order to bolster the state's collective religious identity.

I can't wrap my head around how being "a democratic state for Jews and Arabs to live in together" is bad, let alone a nightmarish worst-case scenario. I am such a devoted little classical liberal.

On the other hand, things like this baffle me just as much: the Ontario Human Rights Commission is investigating whether York's practice of closing for the High Holy Days is discriminatory (see the Excalibur article). From what I can tell, Jewish students are the largest religious minority group at York:

But a recent report prepared by York professor Thomas Klassen paints a highly diverse picture of the 51,000-student campus, with Jewish students estimated to represent about 5.8 per cent of students, Muslim students about 4.8 per cent, Catholic students 34.9 per cent, Protestant 22.1 per cent, other Christian 7.3 per cent, Hindu 3.6 per cent, Buddhist 2.1 per cent and Sikh 2 per cent. (Toronto Star)

All that tells me is that maybe we should have more days off for the major Muslim holidays. I hesitate to say Hindu because different sects celebrate different holidays to differing degrees...which I guess is true of Muslims as well...hmm...

I'm developing a suspicion that take off Christian and Jewish holidays only because they're the easiest to schedule...

Thursday, April 10, 2008

In which I Learn from Television

Well...somewhat. Watching the episode "Sophia Lopez", I was once again reminded of an aspiration I have had for about five years now: to start a foundation which helps fund sex reassignment surgery (SRS).

Through my work (well, one of my works) I have met quite a few transsexuals, pre- and post-op. The medical treatment they require used to be funded by the Ontario government, but no longer ("Ontario Isolated and Alone in Refusing to Fund Sex Reassignment Surgery"). Some other provinces do fund it, as do some states.

The thing with SR is that it's incredibly expensive. According to Lynn Conway's very detailed information site (NOTE: NSFW medical photos) the current cost is US $30-40k. What Conway notes (and which I have seen with my own eyes) is that the success of MTF SR is inversely proportionate to the age at which it is begun. Now, the good news is that increasing openness about transsexualism is making it easier for people to self-identify at a younger age, and access the information they need to make decisions about what, if any, procedures they wish to undertake to allow their external identity to better match their identity.

The solution is that some trans patients seeking affordable treatment go abroad. It's huge in Thailand, as this 2001 New York Times articles explains. Surgery abroad costs a tenth what is might here. Even including airfare, it's conceivably affordable. Eastern Europe is also a popular destination in my experience.

So anyway, I think this is a niche that needs to be filled. Like Shriners, you know?

This may have ceased to make sense...

Operation Stay Awake

Current tactic: Nip/Tuck episodes and protein shakes. MASSIVE FAIL.

Wednesday, April 09, 2008

That's SO Meta! I get namedropped on famouser blawg

Blawg http://lawiscool.com/ is also covering the Rabbi Elior Chen story, and they mentioned me in their analysis. Woot!

Mind you, the title, "Wounder of Rivers Seeks Refuge in Canada" gave my a brief scare when I took it to mean he was claiming refugee status.

To which I say: please don't. Oh please. For the sake of all the non-dodgy refugee claimants out there, please don't claim refugee status, to which you are clearly not entitled.

Allow me to quote the relevant legislation:

96. A Convention refugee is a person who by reason of a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion,

(a) is outside each of their countries of nationality and is unable or, by reason of that fear, is unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of each of those countries, or

(b) not having a country of nationality, is outside their country of former habitual residence and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to return to that country.

97. (1) A person in need of protection is a person in Canada whose removal to their country or countries of nationality or, if they do not have a country of nationality, their country of former habitual residence, would subject them personally

(a) to a danger, believed on substantial grounds to exist, of torture within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention Against Torture; or

(b) to a risk to their life or to a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment if

(i) the person is unable or, because of that risk, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of that country,

(ii) the risk would be faced by the person in every part of that country and is not faced generally by other individuals in or from that country,

(iii) the risk is not inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions, unless imposed in disregard of accepted international standards, and

(iv) the risk is not caused by the inability of that country to provide adequate health or medical care.

(2) A person in Canada who is a member of a class of persons prescribed by the regulations as being in need of protection is also a person in need of protection.

Chen is none of those things.

Let's deal with s. 97 first. Israel tortures, as the Public Committee Against Torture has documented. But these cases all appear to be in the context of the conflict with the Palestinian Territories--it appears that "regular" criminals are treated in line with international regulations. According to the US Dept. of State:

The law provides detainees the right to conditions that do not harm their health or dignity. Conditions in IPS facilities for common criminals and security prisoners generally met international standards. (Conditions in four facilities for detainees are covered in the annex). The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) had access to IPS and IDF facilities. Overcrowding remained a significant problem. Regulations require at least 48 square feet of living space per person, but the Prisons Authority reported on October 16 that the average space per prisoner was 31 square feet. In a March report the Israel Bar Association (IBA) noted that despite regulations specifying a limit of four prisoners per cell, some contained up to 10 prisoners. On February 18, the High Court ruled that authorities were obligated to provide a bed for every inmate and, according to ACRI, as of August, all prisoners in IPS facilities had a bed.

Israeli citizen prisoners 17 years and younger were separated from adult prisoners.

The ICRC regularly monitored IPS facilities as well as interrogation facilities and the two IDF Provisional Detention Centers.

So that's that for s. 97.

In terms of persecution (s. 96) I suppose Chen might claim on religious grounds or particular social group. It really doesn't matter, since as a fugitive from justice, he can't be said to be suffering persecution anyway. Breaking a law of general application is a non-starter:

A person who is punished for having violated an ordinary law of general application, is punished for the offence he has committed, not for the political opinions that may have induced him to commit it. … [A] person who has violated the laws of his country of origin by evading ordinary military service, and who merely fears prosecution and punishment for that offence in accordance with those laws, cannot be said to fear persecution for his political opinions even if he was prompted to commit that offence by his political beliefs. [Musial v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1982] 1 F.C. 290 (C.A.) at 294]

Now, there are some exceptions, for instance if the law is persecutory in intent or effect, or if the punishment is disproportionate [see e.g. Cheung v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] 2 F.C. 314 (C.A.); Zolfagharkhani v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] 3 F.C. 540 (C.A.)]. But as far as I know, no such considerations apply to a Jewish Israeli facing prosecution for heinous child abuse.

That said? Abusing the refugee system would be a smart strategic move on Chen's part. Buy him time, give him a platform, etc. etc. Canada is generally too quick to reject claimants and to bar people from accessing the system all together, but this is one case where I could sympathize with a discretionary punt back to his country of origin.

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

Oxymoron Alert: The Torturing Rabbi

S-dub brought up the following story in international criminal law:

Rabbi, wanted in child abuses, hiding in Canada: Israel to seek extradition for radical, so-called spiritual mentor of a group involved in systematic torture of children

A radical rabbi once linked to a plot to fire a missile at Jerusalem's Temple Mount, is hiding in Canada, Israeli police said yesterday, announcing that he is wanted for his alleged role in a series of ghastly abuses of his followers' children.

Hilariously, and I mean that in a dark and cynical way, since the torture of children is never funny ha-ha, is this:

A friend quoted in Haaretz yesterday said Mr. Chen and Mr. Fisher believed that "only in very exceptional cases does Canada extradite."

Um, no. That'd be a big no. We only deport to death penalty in exceptional cases, since Burns & Raffay (United States v. Burns, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 283, 2001 SCC 7).

Friday, March 28, 2008

I ♥ (heart) things, Part II

6. Dinosaur Comics - I don't know why, but my love for this comic grows with each comic.

7. Go Fug Yourself - I'm sure I would appreciate this blog more if I knew anything about celebrity culture...regardless, the snark is 24k.

8. The Dresden Files series by Jim Butcher - I was a fan of the short-lived tv series, and I actually picked up the books after. Detective fiction + humour + magic = highly readable.

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Excuse me while I nerd out

io9, Gawker Media's rawther fabulous SF blog, offered up this treat recently: "Best Space Battle Smack Talk". It is, as the young folk say nowadays, made of win.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

I ♥ (heart) things, Part I

  1. The Daily Show
  2. The Colbert Report
  3. Hamburger Helper
  4. LibraryThing
  5. my TTC Metropass

Suddenly wishing I was a voting American

I am posting this, in its entirety, because I think it's brilliant, and because these types of documents can become hard to find.

"We the people, in order to form a more perfect union."

Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America's improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.

The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.

Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution - a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.

And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part - through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.
This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign - to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together - unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction - towards a better future for our children and our grandchildren.

This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.

I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton's Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I've gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world's poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners - an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.
It's a story that hasn't made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts - that out of many, we are truly one.

Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.

This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either "too black" or "not black enough." We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.
And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.

On one end of the spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.
I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems - two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.
Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way
But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God's work here on Earth - by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.

In my first book, Dreams From My Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity:

"People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend's voice up into the rafters....And in that single note - hope! - I heard something else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion's den, Ezekiel's field of dry bones. Those stories - of survival, and freedom, and hope - became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into future generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories that we didn't need to feel shame about...memories that all people might study and cherish - and with which we could start to rebuild."

That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety - the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.
Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America - to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through - a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.

Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, "The past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even past." We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven't fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today's black and white students.

Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments - meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today's urban and rural communities.
A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.

This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What's remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn't make it - those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations - those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings.

And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright's sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.

In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.
Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.
This is where we are right now. It's a racial stalemate we've been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy - particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.

But I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice if we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.

For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances - for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives - by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.

Ironically, this quintessentially American - and yes, conservative - notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright's sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen - is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope - the audacity to hope - for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds - by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world's great religions demand - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother's keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister's keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.

For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle - as we did in the OJ trial - or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we'll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.
That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, "Not this time." This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can't learn; that those kids who don't look like us are somebody else's problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time.

This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don't have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.

This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn't look like you might take your job; it's that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.

This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should've been authorized and never should've been waged, and we want to talk about how we'll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.

I would not be running for President if I didn't believe with all my heart that this is what the vast majority of Americans want for this country. This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation - the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.

There is one story in particularly that I'd like to leave you with today - a story I told when I had the great honor of speaking on Dr. King's birthday at his home church, Ebenezer Baptist, in Atlanta.

There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organized for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.

And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that's when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.
She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.

She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.

Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother's problems were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn't. She sought out allies in her fight against injustice.

Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they're supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who's been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he's there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, "I am here because of Ashley."

"I'm here because of Ashley." By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.

But it is where we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hundred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins.

-- from http://www.barackobama.com/2008/03/18/remarks_of_senator_barack_obam_53.php

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

I can hear "teen repellent"

You can hear the frequency of the mosquito teen repellent - but probably not for much longer!

The highest pitched ultrasonic mosquito ringtone that I can hear is 17.7kHz
Find out which ultrasonic ringtones you can hear!
...barely. I can feel it, more like. I can "feel" higher too, but it's...unpleasant.