Toronto Star: Terrorism suspect on hunger strike at Kingston jail
Ryerson Free Press: Secret trials in Canada
Toronto Star: Czech Roma to sue board for `biases,' lawyer says
Globe & Mail: Supreme Court rules on tainted evidence
Montreal Gazette: Refugees to Canada in Catch-22 situation: Advocate
Given the reliance on such sources (both as human sources and as the initiators of press reports used as "evidence" in court cases, I fins this pretty funny. My personal and professional experience with them has been, let's say, uneven. Over the last few weeks especially, I have more than once declared that I was moving abroad out of lack of faith in the government, and especially the intelligence sector.
This story is therefore both validating and infuriating:
Judge orders recall of CSIS witnesses in Harkat case (CBC.ca)
Jack: That's weird. Because when I'm about to murder someone I'm really careful not to talk to myself about it while I'm in the street.
Tosh: No, sure. I mean, that's lesson one.
(from 1x07, "Greeks Bearing Gifts")
Interesting item over at Whatever about the possibility that the Neanderthals died out because we ate them:
Technically It’s Not Cannibalism If They’re Not the Same Species
The comments are particularly tasty (ba-dum-dum)
I am particularly fond of the conclusion:
Even if it wasn’t cannibalism, I would still call it murder, since “murder” in my book (that book being a science fiction book) involves killing sentient creatures, whether they’re of the same intelligent species as you are or not. This is why one needs science fiction, incidentally: to model such legal conundrums. You’re welcome.
Which reminded me of a discussion (by which I mean argument) I once had with a post-colonial lit prof who insisted--INSISTED--that there was nothing wrong with cannibalism, that communion in Christian churches was cannibalism, and it was just another example of the intense and undeniable evil that is western society that we forced the South Pacific Islanders and other groups to stop being cannibals because of our own narrow-minded hang-ups.*
I of course pointed out that, while I agree that ritual cannibalism isn't particularly immoral (especially funerary cannibalism), it does cause prion disease and was probably a good idea to avoid it.
*Which was itself part of a longer argument over whether everything bad that has ever happened in or around a colonized society was entirely the fault of the colonizers, my point being that it's extremely racist to assume that any such society is so passive that they are incapable of screwing up without help.
Also, on the torture photo issue, I have to say that while I support transparency, I get that it may not be necessary to release everything, when you've released all the substantive/significant information, releasing more information which won't add to the information, but will add to the outrage, is unnecessary.
Once again I am off to work on a Sunday morning, albeit relatively late morning, and I left work relatively early yesterday. None of this prevents me from being utterly handbagged. Sarah needs a huge coffee, or frankly, to break into my stash of wake-ups.
Because yes, I do have a stash. In fact, the past weeks in trial would not have been as smooth without them. You see, one cannot have coffee in the courtroom, which I find pointlessly cruel. We have water, which we spill with some frequency. But no coffee. It is perhaps the one thing the Respondents and us can agree on. I’m tempted to ask the boss to ask the judge for an exception to be made.
What we do instead is leave our cups on the table in our conference room (a misnomer, since it seats about four, but I refuse to call it a “breakout room”. It then gets cold, unless you (like me) think to bring a travel mug.
Of course, as Wired reports, it's not as concerning as it sounds...
"Army Biolab's Missing Vials May Never Be Found (Which, Oddly, Isn't That Scary)" (Wired)
Canadian, British, U.S. vessels foil pirates in Gulf of Aden
A Canadian warship helped thwart a pirate attack as part of the NATO mission to keep vessels safely moving in the Gulf of Aden, officials said Sunday. (Full story @ CBC)
Ron Jeremy + Sci-Fi/Horror movie = WIN
http://oneeyedmonstermovie.com/
No seriously, that's the title. And again, NSFW
Ottawa cites international obligations in denying citizen's return home (Globe & Mail)
The government has unveiled new and unprecedented reasons barring the return of Canadian citizen Abousfian Abdelrazik, claiming every country he might fly over on the way home from Khartoum needed to give explicit permission.
This is flat out wrong. I only hope the Federal Court doesn't buy into this nonsense.
Is it just me, or does Lenora Crichlow of BBC's Being Human:
Bear an uncanny resemblance to Billie Piper, of Doctor Who and Belle du Jour fame?
So I was browsing the Society for Creative Anachronism's pages on historically accurate names, and got to thinking...what would I have gone by in days of yore?
Theoretically, I suppose I might have the same name, since my given name is Biblical and my surname is at least early modern (see here). This is how British my last name is: my ancestors immigrated to Scotland...from Ireland.
Other appropriately venerable family names are Katherine, Mary, Elizabeth, and Martha, any of which meet the SCA's circa 1600 cut-off.
"Laura", of which my middle name is a variant, is old enough that Petrarch was writing poetry to a Laura in the 1300s.
And apparently the Gaelic given name "Mòr" is equivalent to mine. Or Sorcha or Saoirse.
Other surnames which could have been my lot:
Interestingly, my mother's mother, mother's father, and father's mother all also come from Britain for centuries back. I mean, British-from-the-dawn-of-time, with maybe a dusting of conquest Norman thrown in.
Good lord, small wonder I'm so terribly pale.
It's really nice to see the feet-on-the-ground American military portrayed as the righteous fountain of ass-kicking and protectors of freedom that we used to know and love.
Also, I enjoy that the "secret weapon" was a bigger, better, hotter gun. Hells yeah.
Check out http://sickcity.org/, which uses Twitter to track tweets about illness and categorizes them by city. Apparently Toronto is 7th sickest. Colour me not surprised.
On a related note, my not-shingles still haven’t decided what they are.
So, Annette Demers over at Slaw asks What Happened to the Arar Commission website?
Since I just happen to know, having had to look it up about 30 million times, I dropped her the link…and for posterity, and my future reference, here it is:
This comic (http://www.rockpapercynic.com) is both brilliant and CanCon:
So this is horrifying, although I suppose not really surprising:
globeandmail.com: CSIS asked Sudan to arrest Canadian, files reveal
Mr. Abdelrazik is a political refugee who became a Canadian citizen in 1995. In 2003 he was arrested by the Sudanese authorities on the advice of CSIS. In prison for 11 months, he was tortured, and was interrogated by CSIS agents as well as US intelligence operatives. Finally released—because even the Sudanese authorities, well known for their disregard of human rights, could not justify holding him. He was rearrested in October 2005, and held for a further 10 months. At least one of those arrests was at the request of the Canadian government.
Throughout, the Canadian government not only denied Mr. Abdelrazik his rights under international law, including consular protection, they actively obstructed his return to Canada by refusing to issue him emergency travel documents, even after promising to do so as soon as he had arranged a ticket to fly home. They have seized his assets and stated that anyone who gives him money to pay for the ticket is committing a crime and will be charged under terrorist legislation.
The RCMP investigated Mr. Abdelrazik and exonerated him in NOVEMBER 2007. He still can’t come home.
Think Maher Arar was a one-time mistake? Think again.
So the “25 random things about me” meme seems to be circulating again. I’ve decided to put a bit of negative spin on it, because hey, I’m in that kind of mood. I therefore present “25 things that make me mutter obscenities under my breath”:
Part II tomorrow…
Well no, not exactly. But I am blogging from my gorgeous tiny netbook. All 8.9” of it. Takes a little getting used to… nevertheless, I predict it will rock when taking notes at trials and hearings, and I can actually toss it in my purse…hell, I think I have pockets this would fit in.
Squee!
According to the BBC, the following are the top 100 books in the UK (at least, as of April 2003) and, like everyone else, I'm commenting on what I've read.
1. The Lord of the Rings, JRR Tolkien NO
2. Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen YES
3. His Dark Materials, Philip Pullman NO
4. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams YES
5. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, JK Rowling NO
6. To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee NO
7. Winnie the Pooh, AA Milne NO
8. Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell YES
9. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, CS Lewis YES
10. Jane Eyre, Charlotte Brontë YES
11. Catch-22, Joseph Heller NO
12. Wuthering Heights, Emily Brontë NO
13. Birdsong, Sebastian Faulks NO - nor have I ever heard of it...
14. Rebecca, Daphne du Maurier NO
15. The Catcher in the Rye, JD Salinger NO
16. The Wind in the Willows, Kenneth Grahame NO
17. Great Expectations, Charles Dickens YES
18. Little Women, Louisa May Alcott YES
19. Captain Corelli's Mandolin, Louis de Bernieres NO
20. War and Peace, Leo Tolstoy NO
21. Gone with the Wind, Margaret Mitchell NO
22. Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone, JK Rowling NO
23. Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets, JK Rowling NO
24. Harry Potter And The Prisoner Of Azkaban, JK Rowling NO
25. The Hobbit, JRR Tolkien NO
26. Tess Of The D'Urbervilles, Thomas Hardy NO
27. Middlemarch, George Eliot NO
28. A Prayer For Owen Meany, John Irving YES
29. The Grapes Of Wrath, John Steinbeck NO
30. Alice's Adventures In Wonderland, Lewis Carroll NO
31. The Story Of Tracy Beaker, Jacqueline Wilson NO
32. One Hundred Years Of Solitude, Gabriel García Márquez YES
33. The Pillars Of The Earth, Ken Follett NO
34. David Copperfield, Charles Dickens NO
35. Charlie And The Chocolate Factory, Roald Dahl YES
36. Treasure Island, Robert Louis Stevenson NO
37. A Town Like Alice, Nevil Shute NO
38. Persuasion, Jane Austen NO
39. Dune, Frank Herbert NO
40. Emma, Jane Austen NO
41. Anne Of Green Gables, LM Montgomery YES
42. Watership Down, Richard Adams NO
43. The Great Gatsby, F Scott Fitzgerald NO
44. The Count Of Monte Cristo, Alexandre Dumas NO
45. Brideshead Revisited, Evelyn Waugh NO
46. Animal Farm, George Orwell NO
47. A Christmas Carol, Charles Dickens YES
48. Far From The Madding Crowd, Thomas Hardy NO
49. Goodnight Mister Tom, Michelle Magorian NO
50. The Shell Seekers, Rosamunde Pilcher NO
51. The Secret Garden, Frances Hodgson Burnett YES
52. Of Mice And Men, John Steinbeck YES
53. The Stand, Stephen King YES
54. Anna Karenina, Leo Tolstoy NO
55. A Suitable Boy, Vikram Seth NO
56. The BFG, Roald Dahl YES
57. Swallows And Amazons, Arthur Ransome NO
58. Black Beauty, Anna Sewell NO
59. Artemis Fowl, Eoin Colfer NO
60. Crime And Punishment, Fyodor Dostoyevsky NO
61. Noughts And Crosses, Malorie Blackman NO
62. Memoirs Of A Geisha, Arthur Golden YES
63. A Tale Of Two Cities, Charles Dickens NO
64. The Thorn Birds, Colleen McCollough NO
65. Mort, Terry Pratchett NO
66. The Magic Faraway Tree, Enid Blyton NO
67. The Magus, John Fowles NO
68. Good Omens, Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman NO
69. Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett NO
70. Lord Of The Flies, William Golding YES
71. Perfume, Patrick Süskind NO
72. The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, Robert Tressell NO
73. Night Watch, Terry Pratchett NO
74. Matilda, Roald Dahl YES
75. Bridget Jones's Diary, Helen Fielding YES
76. The Secret History, Donna Tartt NO
77. The Woman In White, Wilkie Collins NO
78. Ulysses, James Joyce NO
79. Bleak House, Charles Dickens NO
80. Double Act, Jacqueline Wilson NO
81. The Twits, Roald Dahl NO
82. I Capture The Castle, Dodie Smith NO
83. Holes, Louis Sachar NO
84. Gormenghast, Mervyn Peake NO
85. The God Of Small Things, Arundhati Roy YES
86. Vicky Angel, Jacqueline Wilson NO
87. Brave New World, Aldous Huxley NO
88. Cold Comfort Farm, Stella Gibbons NO
89. Magician, Raymond E Feist NO
90. On The Road, Jack Kerouac NO
91. The Godfather, Mario Puzo NO
92. The Clan Of The Cave Bear, Jean M Auel YES
93. The Colour Of Magic, Terry Pratchett NO
94. The Alchemist, Paulo Coelho NO
95. Katherine, Anya Seton NO
96. Kane And Abel, Jeffrey Archer NO
97. Love In The Time Of Cholera, Gabriel García Márquez NO
98. Girls In Love, Jacqueline Wilson NO
99. The Princess Diaries, Meg Cabot NO
100. Midnight's Children, Salman Rushdie NO
Notwithstanding the Respondent’s insistence on deference, the Applicant submits that the question to be asked is whether the immigration officer’s decision was reasonable. Given that the decision was clearly based on a deficient analysis which misapprehended the evidence and failed to seek clarification in the face of that misapprehension, it is submitted that the decision was unreasonable.
(Leaving WWRY, the iconic "Carry On Wayward Son" started to play in the emptying theatre)
Twentysomethings behind me: Hey, it's that song from Guitar Hero!
Me: (choke on laughter)
(A few minutes later, I am relating the tale to my classic-rock aficionado stepdad)
Me: They fail to appreciate the brilliance that is Kansas.
Him: Uhhhhm ... I don't know about tha-
Me: They FAIL to APPRECIATE the BRILLIANCE that is KANSAS!
Obviously, you can do a basic teatime at any Second Cup or Starbucks, anywhere in the city.
However, a few places do still offer proper teas.
Zoe's Lounge at the Fairmont Royal York has a few options, ranging from $27 to $49.
The Windsor Arms Tea Room also has a few options, for $18-$45.
The Park Hyatt has both packages and an a la carte menu.
The C5 at the ROM has a high tea on Wedgewood China!
The Old Mill has one, natch, for $18 to $20.
Although not an official High Tea, the Gallery Grill at Hart House offers a wide selection of teas and desserts.
Another a la carte option would be 7 West Cafe. Ditto Cafe Maroc.
Other places I want to try are:
Other placed I love are:
| Which American accent do you have? Neutral You're not Northern, Southern, or Western, you`re just plain -American-. Your national identity is more important than your local identity, because you don`t really have a local identity. You might be from the region in that map, which is defined by this kind of accent, but you could easily not be. Or maybe you just moved around a lot growing up.
|
| Click Here to Take This Quiz Brought to you by YouThink.com quizzes and personality tests. |
I also did this "Are you a Rebel or a Yankee?" test and came out about 70% Yankee, unsurprisingly. What was odd was the number of times I basically picked one answer out of multiple applicable ones. For instance:
What is your regular word for the thing you push around the supermarket?
- A (shopping) buggy.
- A (shopping) cart.
- A (shopping) trolley.
- A (shopping) basket.
A shopping cart or a buggy (though never a shopping buggy), rarely a trolley, and a basket is something altogether different.
What do you pack for travel?
- A suitcase.
- A bag.
- A valise.
- My spouse packs for me.
Well, I pack a suitcase if I'm packing a suitcase, and a bag if I'm taking a bag (generally smaller, for shorter trips).
Do you generally . . .
- mow the lawn?
- cut the grass?
- mow the grass?
- cut the lawn?
Any and or all of the above. I can't even tell you which is more common.
My requirements are simple:
- I need to speak on the phone
- I need to read and write e-mails
- I need to send and receive text messages
- I need to have voicemail
Ideally, I would also have:
- the ability to, very occasionally, browse the web
- the ability to read and write RTF and PDF documents
What's stopping me? Well, for one thing, I can't for the life of me find a plan that does what it says it does. Example: half the plans that say "data" don't include data. Half the phones are sold out.
That's it. I'm going to have to go... *sigh* ...into a store.
Access it HERE
Infamous prosecutor Ken Starr has filed a legal brief -- on behalf of the "Yes on 8" campaign -- to nullify the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California between May and November of 2008.
It's time to put a face to Ken Starr's shameful legal proceedings. To put a face to the 18,000 couples facing forcible divorce. To put a face to marriage equality. Because, gay or straight, YOU are the face of the Marriage Equality Movement.
My favourite is the one with the sign saying "If 1 John 4:16 then Mark 10:9. Q.E.D."
All the loving and long lasting couples and all their supporters make an eloquent plea against forcible divorce, which is a concept so self-indulgently sadistic that I wonder how Ken Starr or his backers can sleep at night.
Hat tip to Joe.My.God.
So y'all, I intended to use this post to introduce The Non-Adventures of Wonderella (which I am clearly still doing) but sadly there are no buttons or banners or suchlike with which to give a preview. So um, go look for yourself?
In a perfect world (perfectly lazy world, I suppose) I would not nothing but read and watch TV, and knit and cross-stitch. I have the heavily romanticized idea that this is what it would be like to be a nun.
I don't mind work, but the whole existential, making-something-of-myself deal is harshing my cross-stitch buzz.
Here's my favourites. Bring it, mall muzak!
"Merry Christmas Baby" - Bruce Springsteen & The E Street Band
"I Saw Three Ships" - Sting
"Christmas Song" - Dave Matthews, Tim Reynolds
"Please Come Home For Christmas" - Jon Bon Jovi
"Christmas All Over Again" - Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers
"Christmas Day" - Dido
"Song for a Winter's Night" - Sarah McLachlan
"Santa Claus is Coming to Town" - The Pointer Sisters
"Ave Maria" - Pavarotti
"Happy Xmas (War Is Over)" - John And Yoko
"Mele Kalikimaka" - The Andrews Sisters, Bing Crosby, Vic Schoen
"Silver Bells" - Stevie Wonder
"Santa Baby" - Madonna
"All I Want for Christmas Is You" - Mariah Carey
"Blue Christmas" - Elvis Presley
"Feliz Navidad" - José Feliciano
"It's Beginning To Look A Lot Like Christmas" - Johnny Mathis
"(There's No Place Like) Home for the Holidays" - Perry Como
"Last Christmas" - Wham!
"Silent Night, Holy Night" - Mahalia Jackson
"Peace on Earth/Little Drummer Boy" - David Bowie and Bing Crosby
"Rockin' Around the Christmas Tree" - Brenda Lee
"River" - Robert Downey Jr. or Sarah McLachlan
"What Christmas Means to Me" - Stevie Wonder
"Chanukah Song" - Adam Sandler
"Hey Santa" - Bowser & Blue
"Merry Fucking Christmas" - South Park
"The Christmas Song (Chestnuts Roasting) - Nat King Cole
"Walkin' Round in Women's Underware" - Bob Rivers
"Winter Wonderland" - Eurythmics or Dolly Parton
"Huron Carol"
"Baby, It's Cold Outside"
"Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas"
"I'll Be Home for Christmas"
"It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year"
"What Child Is This?"
"Mary's Boy Child"
Care of How I Met Your Mother:
LAWYERED!
For example:
Barney: [To Ted] Do you have some puritanical hang up on prostitution? Dude, it’s the world’s oldest profession.
Marshall: Do you really think that’s true?
Barney: Oh yeah, I bet even Cro-Magnons used to give cave hookers an extra fish for putting out.
Marshall: Ah ha, so the oldest profession would be fishermen. Kaboom! You’ve been lawyered!
...or...
Barney: That’s adorable Ted. You’re such a hayseed. The companionship business is the growth industry of the 21st century. You do realize that 1 out of every 8 adult women in America is a prostitute.
Marshall: Dude you just made that up.
Barney: Withdrawn.
Marshall: Lawyered!
NDP considers legal action after Tories listen in and tape private meeting
"The NDP says it may pursue criminal charges after the Conservatives covertly listened in, taped and distributed audio of a closed-door NDP strategy session."
This is the website of a family friend who is participating in a live liver donation to another family friend:
And here is a breakdown of religious attitudes to donation.
And here are some FAQs from the Trillium Gift of Life website (which is here: http://www.giftoflife.on.ca)
Your decision to donate could save a life. There is a chronic shortage of organs and tissue in Ontario and the need for organs and tissue continues to outweigh their availability. More than 1,700 Ontarians are waiting for a life-saving organ transplant and many others are waiting for a tissue transplant.
The first and foremost concern for healthcare professionals caring for critically ill patients is to do everything possible to save lives. The possibility of donation is only considered when all lifesaving efforts have failed. The health care professional teams responsible for supporting donation are separate and independent from the health care professional teams responsible for transplantation.
Living organ donation may be an option for a healthy adult who has a family member or close friend in need of a kidney, liver, lung or small bowel transplant. With living donation, a kidney or portion of the liver, lung or small bowel is removed from the donor and transplanted into the patient in need of a new organ.
Deceased organ donation can take place when someone has been declared brain dead, a doctor has determined the organs can be used for transplant, and loved ones opt to artificially maintain vital organs by ventilator to keep them suitable for transplant. This type of donation is referred to as donation after neurological determination of death.
Another option for donation is organ donation after cardiac death (DCD). DCD offers families the option of donation in cases where neurological criteria for death have not been met, and the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment has been made. A DCD patient has no hope of survival or meaningful functional status, but does not meet brain death criteria. In Europe and the United States, DCD has been an option for families for over thirty years. In Ontario, the option of organ donation after cardiac death will be piloted in select hospitals over the next year.
Tissue donation can take place in most cases when someone has died, as long as the tissue is determined suitable for transplant by a doctor. With tissue donation, there is no need for blood flow to be maintained by artificial ventilation after death.
Hat-tip to Facebook, care of KB
Join Us in Calling Toronto Life on their Misrepresentation of Aqsa Parvez’s Murder
The December 2008 edition of Toronto Life features the story of Aqsa Parvez, a young Muslim girl who was killed in her home in Mississauga last winter (http://www.torontolife.com/features/girl-interrupted/).
While featuring Aqsa’s story is recognition of a young woman’s life cut tragically short, the Toronto Life article perpetuates common stereotypes about Muslim and immigrant communities, diverting attention from the urgent issue of violence against women across Canada.
On Tuesday November 11th, join us in a “Don’t’ Believe the Hype” Campaign! We are asking you to raise your voice on the important issue of violence against women, racism, and Islamophobia.
Once you do that, call up five of your friends and get them to do the same. You can reach Ms. Fulford at 416-364-3333 ext 3063, editor@torontolife.com or letters@torontolife.com
WHEN? Between 9am – 9pm on Tuesday November 11th (If that doesn't work for you, anytime is better than never!)
WHY? Violence against women, racism, and Islamophobia are issues that affect all of us in diverse and important ways. Join us in voicing your concerns and helping to call attention to misrepresentations that are all too common in our media
WHAT TO EXPECT? This number 416-364-3333 ext 3063 will take you directly to Sarah Fulford’s office, where her assistant will either pick up, or you will be put through to her assistant's voicemail. You can leave a personal message or voicemail recording for her assistant to pass on to Ms. Fulford.
WHAT TO SAY? Identify who you are and where you are from. State that you are leaving a message for the Sarah Fulford, Editor In Chief and express your dismay with the article on Aqsa Parvez. Bonus Points: Talk about a personal experience that proves to you why addressing this issue is so important and urgent.
Here are a couple of talking points about the article that may help. Feel free to use them directly or make up your own:
1) Aqsa’s murder must be looked at through the larger context of violence against women in Canada. The problem is not limited to any one community or religious faith.
2) The article calls Aqsa’s murder “Toronto’s first honour killing”. Approximately 25 women a year are murdered in incidents of domestic violence. The use of the term "honour killing" is an attempt to sensationalize the situation by invoking common stereotypes about the prevalence of "honour killings" among South Asian Muslim families, thereby suggesting that domestic violence is not occurring at alarming rates across Canada. Instead, we should be working to end violence against all women.
3) The article associates Muslim religiousity with a tendency towards violence. In other words, the more religious a Muslim is, the more likely s/he is to engage in this type of violence. This is false and based on Islamophobic stereotyping.
4) The question, “Has multiculturalism gone too far?” suggests that Muslims and immigrants are threats to Canadian society, rather than contributing members to Canadian society. The idea that “our” tolerance or respect for cultural diversity has let “them” continue their oppressive and dangerous behaviours is not only based on racist and Islamophobic stereotyping of diverse Muslim and immigrant communities, but also ignores the ongoing racism that exists in Canada despite our public commitment to multiculturalism.
5) The focus should be on violence against women, not hijab. The article sets up a false dichotomy between Muslim women who wear the hijab as oppressed and Muslim women who do not wear the hijab as liberated. Furthermore, it reinforces the idea that all young girls want the same things, completely ignoring the diversity and richness of Muslim women's voices and lived experiences.
On Tuesday, November 11, 2008 at 10:30 AM at YWCA located at 80 Woodlawn Avenue East, Main Lounge. Panelists include representatives of: Muslim Young Women, Metropolitan Action Committee on Violence against Women and Children, Urban Alliance on Race Relations. For more information contact
michelle@urbanalliance.ca
416-703-6607 x 3
It is a grassroots zine that is open to all 13-35 year old young women who self-identify as Muslim. This issue’s theme is self-defense and resistance. It is a creative avenue for us to express ourselves, share our own experiences, and connect with others. Submissions deadline is December 1, 2008. aqsazine@gmail.com Blog: aqsazine.blogspot.com
This month's issue of Toronto Life is dedicated to immigration issues. Obviously, this is something that caught my eye, and I was excited to see what the magazine had to offer on the subject.
"Minority Report" is the name of the feature, and it covers a number of immigration-related issues, including an article on the growth of unusual tropical diseases in Toronto due to the immigrant population ("Sickness and the City") and a profile of the rapper K'naan ("The Prince of Little Mogadishu").
But what I read first--and what prompts me to raise my head up out of the fog of articling to post this--is the first article I read, "Girl, Interrupted" by Mary Rogan. The article is about Aqsa Parvez, a Grade-11 student in Mississauga who was killed by her father in December 2007. Her murder seems to have been due to her rebellion against her family, including her refusal to wear hijab.
Now, full disclosure: I am firmly W.A.S.P. in background, so this is definitely an outsider's perspective. But personally, I found the article disturbing, deeply so, in that gets-under-your-skin-and-bothers-you-but-you're-not-immediately-sure-why way. At the end of the day, my conclusions are that the article both legitimizes the Islamophobia that makes the hijab such a hot-button issue, and supports the patriarchal authoritarianism that is the source of so much genuine harm in many faith- or culturally-based communities, of whatever type.
A Letter to the Editor (excellent letter),
So many letter writers have explained how this land is made up of immigrants. May be we should turn to our history books and point out to people why today's Canadian is not willing to accept the new kind of immigrant any longer.
Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to Canada, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in Halifax and be documented. Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new Canadian households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home. They had waved good bye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture.
Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labour laws to protect them. All they had were the skills, craftsmanship and desire they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.
Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. Canadians fought along side men whose parents had come straight over from Germany , Italy, France, Japan , Czechoslovakia , Russia, Sweden, Poland and so many other places. None of these first generation Canadians ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Canadians fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. They were defending the Freedom as one people. When we liberated France, no-one in those villages was looking for the Ukrainian-Canadian or the German-Canadian or the Irish-Canadian.
The people of France saw only Canadians.
And we carried one flag that represented our country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country's flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be a Canadian. They stirred the melting pot into one red and white bowl.
And here we are in 2008 with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes a Canadian passport and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country. I'm sorry, that's not what being a Canadian is all about. Canadians have been very open-hearted and open- minded regarding immigrants, whether they were fleeing poverty, dictatorship, persecution, or whatever else makes us think of those aforementioned immigrants who truly did ADOPT our country, and our flag and our morals and our customs. And left their wars, hatred, and divisions behind. I believe that the immigrants who landed in Canada in the early 1900s deserve better than that for the toil, hard work and sacrifice those legally searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags, fighting foreign battles on our soil, making Canadians change to suit their religions and cultures, and wanting to change our countries fabric by claiming discrimination when we do not give in to their demands.
Its about time we get real and stand up for our forefathers rights, we are CANADIAN Lest we forget it!!! I am a Native of this Country & proud of it!
NO MORE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
NO MORE not saying CHRISTMAS in stores and our schools, Seasonal Holiday be dammed!!!
I Want my Canada of birth BACK !!!
P. S. -- Please KEEP THIS LETTER MOVING!!
Hope this letter is read by millions of people all across Canada!!
Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to Canada, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in Halifax and be documented.
Immigration in Canada had a peak in the early 1900s, but it's nothing compared to the rates now.
As for the language thing, I would like to respond with this xkcd:
It's a constant flaw in anti-immigration (and frankly, pro-immigration) debates to cast the yesteryear of immigration as some sort of paradise of perfect integration and people giving up their national identities to buy in to some great ideology of Canada.
THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED, PEOPLE. The Anglophones and the Francophones have never gotten along together. The English, Irish, and Scottish have never gotten along. The Catholics and Protestants haven't. The various types of Protestants haven't. See, e.g.: http://www.hopesite.ca/remember/history/racism_canada_1.html.
Corrections minister apologizes to inmate jailed too long
Kyle Dufresne, 19, who's from the Joseph Bighead First Nation, was sentenced to serve a month and a half in jail for breaching his probation.
Instead, Dufresne spent an extra 4½ months in jail in Meadow Lake, Prince Albert and Regina.
Nice.
I have to admit, while I appreciate the sentiment, I don't do this. So far, my top ringtones (in order of listener appreciation) are:
The last two are obviously job related.
But here's a hint for those still in law school: if you have a sufficiently clever/interesting ringtone, you may avoid getting into trouble when your phone rings in class.
CBC Reports: Conservative lead widens, poll suggests
What the hell, people? Is everyone suddenly swayed by those noxious sweater-vest ads? Are we seriously considering voting in a party and leader that has spent the last two terms blithely trampling on the environment and human rights? Are we still going to have our Bush even after the US has gotten rid of theirs? Harper is literally the most hypocritical politician I have ever been exposed to, and no one else seems to mind? Gaah.
So, it's been a month since I started articling (insert shocked expletive here) and while I love it, it's cut into my other activities. Like eating, and sleeping, and oh yes, blogging. Yesterday I had an unscheduled, migraine-induced 24-hour sleep-a-thon.
But it's not all bad news. I really do enjoy it, except when I'm verging on hysterical screaming fits at the next person who asks me to do something. I've attended hearings, visited prison, written first drafts of important documents, and filed things in court. I'm doing important work, and I'm learning, and I like the people I work with.
But I will try to get on here more often, and Law Is Cool too. Promise.
And the wherewithal to spend it all on novelty items...
I'm looking for a fun mug(s) for the office.
Is there such a thing as palliative care for cats?
I ask because it seems the shelters and Humane Society are always full of older cats. And I would have no problem adopting them, except I wouldn't be able to afford big vet bills. But surely living out the last four or five years with a loving owner and being put down when it got sick is a better fate than living in a cage and being put down NOW because no one adopts it?
Pets: they're all furry cuteness and ethical dilemmas.
This one has been there for a few days. What is wrong with people? I can understand being wary of adopting dogs who are behaviourally difficult (by breed or individual temperament) so while I feel bad about it, I get why all the Staffordshires and bulldog mixes and whatall rarely get adopted. But these are young, small dogs. City dogs. APARTMENT dogs, even. It boggles the mind.
SHAYSHAY - ID#A126354
I am an unaltered female, gold and silver Yorkshire Terrier mix.
I am estimated to be about 1 year and 1 month old.
I am currently available for adoption.
This information is less than 1 hour old.
For more information about this animal, visit:
Toronto Humane Society
Ask for information about animal ID number: A126354
How is this dog still not adopted? In fact, how was she there long enough to make it up on the website?
TEDDY - ID#A124873
I am an unaltered female, brown English Cocker Spaniel.
I am estimated to be about 8 months old.
I am currently available for adoption.
This information is less than 1 hour old.
For more information about this animal, visit:
Toronto Humane Society
Ask for information about animal ID number: A124873
I heard something thunderish at 4am today, and then again shortly thereafter. I scoured to local news sites, but saw nothing, and given the weather, thought maybe weird thunder? But in fact: Massive fire at Toronto propane depot forces thousands to flee (CBC News)
If the condo I'm cat-sitting at didn't face east, I'd probably have figured it out. Still, freaky.
(Via International Law Reporter)
José Ernesto Medellín (the subject of International Court of Justice Cases) is scheduled to be executed today at 6pm in Texas. In the flurry of briefs surrounding Medellín petition for writ of certiorari, the state of Texas made the following concession:
[S]ome defendants currently incarcerated in Texas and subject to Avena may not have received "review and reconsideration" of their claims of prejudice under the Vienna Convention on the merits. Accordingly, and as an act of comity, if any such individual should seek review in a future federal habeas proceeding, the State of Texas will not only not refrain from objecting, but will join the defense in asking the reviewing court to address the claim of prejudice on the merits, as courts have done for Medellín.
While their willingness to abide by international law and presidential recommendation is a positive change, the bargaining strategy they seem to be employing here is perplexing. "We promise we won't illegally execute anyone else, if you just let us execute this guy."
For more information:
"There's something strange and disarming about looking at a homicide scene in the daylight of Miami. It makes the most grotesque killings look staged, like you're in a new and daring section of Disney World: Dahmerland!" -- S01E01 "Dexter"
"Needless to say I have some unusual habits, yet all these socially acceptable people can't wait to pick up hammers and smash their food to bits. Normal people are so hostile."-- S01E01 "Dexter"
"The only real question I have is why in a building full of cops, all supposedly with a keen insight to the human soul, is Doakes the only one who gets the creeps from me?" -- S01E01 "Dexter"
"The problem with eating and driving, which I love to do, is not being able to employ the 10-2 hand position on the wheel. It's a matter of public safety. But there's always a sacrifice." -- S01E01 "Dexter"
"I can kill a man, dismember his body, and be home in time for Letterman. But knowing what to say when my girlfriend's feeling insecure ... I'm totally lost" -- S01E02 "Crocodile"
“Her husband’s a crack head and her boyfriend's a serial killer ... it’s kind of hard not to take that personally.” -- Season 1
Deb: The Bay Harbor Butcher is one of our own.
Lundy: We keep this to ourselves for now. Just the three of us.
Angel: Well I'm gonna go tell it to a bottle of scotch.
-- Season 2
From the minds who brought you "This Land is Your Land" in 2004:
And another treat:
Passover goes Hip Hop in JibJab's illin'est music video! Just because you don't recognize Jesus as your personal savior doesn't mean you don't recognize phat rhyme when you hear it. L'chaim, G-money!
To my huge honour and delight, I have been invited to join the crew at Law Is Cool. I'll still be posting here, but I'll be crossposting anything law-related there as well. If you don't already, I encourage you to read it. And I'm not just saying that out of shameless self-promotion, either. 
In June 2008, the New York Times published this article: "Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech" by Adam Liptak. In the article (which caused a big todo in Canada, since we were mentioned! In the New York Times! Above the fold!), Liptak takes exception to the BC Human Rights Tribunal hearing of a complaint against Maclean's.
My fellow blawgers at Law Is Cool have been more on top of this than I, and have posted some background info. I have been reticent to comment because I'm of two minds on the issue. Not the case, so much, because I think Stein is an Islamophobe and basically a jerk, and I have long despaired of Maclean's practicing fair and balanced journalism, but the issue of hate speech versus censorship is one I find very troubling.
To quote Liptak, "In the United States, that debate has been settled. Under the First Amendment, newspapers and magazines can say what they like about minorities and religions — even false, provocative or hateful things — without legal consequence."
Indeed, the threshold for making speech illegal is that it provokes imminent violence. "Mere advocacy of violence, terrorism or the overthrow of the government is not enough; the words must be meant to and be likely to produce violence or lawlessness right away."
Liptak also quotes Jason Gratl, a lawyer for the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Association of Journalists:
“Canadians do not have a cast-iron stomach for offensive speech,” Mr. Gratl said in a telephone interview. “We don’t subscribe to a marketplace of ideas. Americans as a whole are more tough-minded and more prepared for verbal combat.”
Nearly a month after the Liptak article, this particularly disturbing article comes into my RSS feeder: "Telling Doctors What To Think: South Dakota's unbelievable new abortion law", by Emily Bazelon.
Once again, South Dakota anti-choice lobbyists are working to overturn Roe v. Wade by passing a law to seriously limit abortions. Their attempts to outlaw it entirely having failed, they have a new strategy, and it works like this:
Q. How do we convince doctors to tell patients that abortion is murder?
A. Pass a law forcing them to say that abortion is ending the life of a person!
Q. But Roe v. Wade ruled that a fetus is not a "person", so how can we circumvent that?
A. Use the phrase "human being" instead!
Q. What if someone argues that "human being" and "person" mean the same thing?
A. Define it in the legislation! That makes it true!
The truly appalling thing is that the 8th Circuit Court of Appeal ruled that forcing doctors to say:
that "the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being," and that they have "an existing relationship with that unborn human being" that is constitutionally protected. (What does the constitutionally protected part mean? Who knows.)
is not a violation of the right to free speech.
What South Dakota (and, apparently, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeal) fails to realize is that Tautology is a rhetorical and logical failure, not a legal doctrine to be followed. The narrow-mindedness is underlined by this choice quote:
"The bottom line is if the state Legislature orders a professional to tell the truth, that's not a violation of the First Amendment," said South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long, who is defending the law in court.
Apparently, South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long is unaware that "the truth" is an objective fact, not (a) what he personally believes, nor (b) what the legislatures drafts in the definitions sections of a statute. The appeal to authority is another logical fallacy which runs rampant all over this case.
Doesn't this seem to run counter to Adam Liptak's (and other's) panegyric to the Great American First Amendment? Sure, in America you can say hateful, distasteful, horrible things until your dying breath, and there you are protected by the Constitution. But woe betide doctors who would prefer not to lie to their patients, when the South Dakota legislature has decreed that "abortion is murder" is an Absolute Truth...even when everyone knows it's not.
From MSNBC/WaPo, via Opinio Juris:
The chief prosecutor of the Internationals Criminal Court will seek an arrest warrant Monday for Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, charging him with genocide and crimes against humanity in the orchestration of a campaign of violence that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the nation's Darfur region during the past five years...
...
The violence in Darfur began in February 2003 when two rebel groups attacked Sudan's Islamic government, claiming a pattern of bias against the region's black African tribes. Khartoum organized a local Arab militia, known as the Janjaweed, and conducted a brutal counterinsurgency campaign that has left more than 300,000 people dead and has driven more than 2 million more from their homes. The Bush administration accused the government of genocide.
I guess people are going to have to stop accusing Luis Moreno-Ocampo of pussy-footing around. Of course, there's always a chance the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber won't issue the warrant, but I doubt the prosecutor would go forward on such a contentious issue without a rock-solid case.
There are concerns that this move by the ICC will jeopardize the UN and African Union peacekeepers already in the area, but since the government appears actively hostile to them anyway, I'd say it's not a big enough risk to change anybody's mind in the Hague.
The Beeb offers this overview of the Darfur situation: Q&A: Sudan's Darfur conflict.
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.
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.
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.
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.
