Resistance is futile?

So France has finally crossed that line and on April 11 their reprehensible “burqa ban” comes into force. See JURIST roundup here.

CNN posted a story featuring this picture:

With a caption reading “A survey in 2010 found that more than four out of five French people backed a ban on wearing the burqa in public places.”

 

Uhm…

They do know that’s a woman’s BACK, right? I mean, note the carriage in front of her. She could easily be a hijabi…or, frankly, a nun.

The worst part is that “Violators wearing a face covering may be fined up to 150 euros and/or required to attend citizenship classes.”

Next step, re-education camps?

Amazing Daily Show Segment on Batman’s Muslim Ally

Not embeddable? But see here.

Kadah—failure to consider relevant evidence

Kadah v. Canada (MCI), 2010 FC 1223

Issued: December 3, 2010

Presiding: Justice O’Keefe

For the Applicant: Michael F. Battista

For the Minister: Amy King

This case was a judicial review of a finding that the Applicant, a homosexual Arab Israeli, was not a refugee on the basis that there was sufficient state protection in Israel.

There was no question of the Applicant’s credibility, or that he had faced violent persecution. However, the Board found that Israeli law enforcement would have been willing and able to protect him, and the fact that he was rebuffed the only time he sought help was not a good enough reason for him to have not continued to seek help.

Justice O’Keefe recognized the presumption of state protection, particularly in democratic countries, but also notes that “…democracy alone does not ensure adequate state protection and the Board must consider the quality of the institutions providing that protection (see Katwaru v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 2007 FC 612 at paragraph 21)” (para. 39).

While the Applicant’s single negative experience with he police was not sufficient to rebut the presumption of state protection, the Board had before it documentary evidence of similarly situated individuals who also were unable to access state protection. While the Board is presumed to have considered all evidence put before it, “where there is important material evidence that contradicts a factual finding of the Board, it must provide reasons why the contradictory evidence was not considered relevant or trustworthy” (para. 43). The Board stated that “‘there is no evidence to suggest that police are not responsive to or fail to investigate complaints by members of the Arab community’” (para. 45), when in fact there was “extensive documentary evidence before the Board regarding Israeli police violence and intolerance towards Arab Israelis and Palestinians” (para. 46). The Board also found that “‘there is no evidence of persecution in Israel based on sexual orientation and, in fact, there are specific laws prohibiting discrimination on such a basis’” (para. 47), which contradicted with the Board;s finding that the Applicant’s testimony of his experiences was credible, as well as documentary evidence of persecution (paras. 48-49).

JUDICIAL REVIEW GRANTED

Gurshomov–failure to consider relevant circumstances on deferral

Gurshomov v. Canada (MPSEP), 2010 FC 1212

Issued: December 1, 2010

Presiding: Justice Phelan

For the Applicant: Aviva Basman and Jennifer Egsgard, Refugee Law Office

For the Minister: Laden Shahrooz

The Applicant entered Canada with her husband and children in 2003. Their refugee claim was denied, and an H&C application was filed in May 2004 by the husband (para. 2). In 2008, the Applicant separated from her husband and filed and H&C in her own case. This H&C was denied in February 2009, concurrently with a PRRA denial. The Applicant understood that she had received a negative PRRA, but did not understand that the H&C was also denied (paras. 3-4).

Counsel and the Applicant checked the CIC case status website in April 2009 and it stated that there was an H&C pending. Since the husband’s H&C had been denied earlier that year, they took the status to mean that the Applicant’s H&C was still pending. Furthermore, they contacted CIC, and were told that the H&C was still pending and that progress required the payment of fees. As instructed, the fees were paid and further submissions were made on May 8, 2009, followed by additional submissions on May 28 and July 22, 2009 (paras. 5-6).

On July 24, 2009, the Applicant requested a deferral of removal on the basis of the “pending” H&C, which deferral was requested August 14, 2009 (para. 7).

Only on March 25, 2010 was the Applicant made aware of that the H&C had, in fact, been denied in February 2009—she was informed in the context of a removal itinerary (para. 8). She filed a third H&C and shortly thereafter requested another deferral, which was denied. The request was made in part on the risk to the Applicant and her children if returned to Israel where her abusive husband now lived. The Officer focussed on the ability of the children to adjust to the move, and did not address a custody order in favour of the Applicant nor the evidence that it would not be respected in Israel (paras. 9-12).

The Court noted the timeliness of filing and status of an H&C were relevant factors (para. 15). The Court stated that the Officer should have considered the circumstances of the late filing of the third H&C, as well as the fact that because of the miscommunication from CIC, the evidence on the personal risk to the Applicant, addressed only in the submissions which in fact post-dated the refusal, had not been considered (paras. 13-17). The Court held that this was an instance where the Officer failed to address relevant considerations (referring to Simoes) and where “special considerations” were also present (referring to Baron).

JUDICIAL REVIEW GRANTED

Huang–lack of procedural fairness in renewing a temporary residence/study permit

Huang v. Canada (MCI), 2010 FC 1217

Issued: December 2, 2010

Presiding: Justice Phelan

For the Applicant: Mario Bellissimo

For the Minister: Nicole Paduraru

The Applicant was a student from Taiwan who had been in Canada on temporary status since 1997 when he was 12 years old. The judicial review was of the denial of his most recent request for an extension of his temporary resident permit and study permit.

The Applicant had been under permit from 1997 until July 2005, when a request for extension was denied for the first time. Attempts to renew were made, one pursuant to a different quashing order, finally resulting in a renewal in May 2008 until October 2008. The Respondent asserted, but the evidence was not clear, that in May 2008 the Applicant was told that when that permit expired he would have to leave Canada and re-apply outside the country (paras. 2-4).

The Applicant was in fact granted another extension until August 2009, which was accompanied by a written warning that it was “expected” that he would leave Canada upon expiry, but making reference to re-application procedures both from inside and outside Canada. An extension request made before the expiry of that permit was denied, ostensibly because the Applicant had been told he must leave Canada twice and had not complied (paras. 5-6).

The Court found that the “reasons in this case are inadequate because of a) factual error, and b) non disclosure of a key rationale for the decision” (para. 13).

The Officer relied on the Applicant twice failing to comply with instructions to leave Canada, but the evidence did not establish the first caution, and the second “is of dubious nature” (paras. 14-16).

The Respondent Minister also sought to bolster the Officer’s reasons with an additional, and unsupportable rationale:

[18] Further, the “reasons” advanced by the Respondent were said to be contained in the FOSS notes. However, in reply to the Applicant’s affidavit in this matter, the Respondent filed an affidavit of the Officer which in part further explains the reasons for decision. This alone is improper but the Applicant was prepared to live with this procedural faux pas.

[19] The reason for the Applicant’s position is that the affidavit contains further reasons for the decision not previously disclosed. The most critical of which is the Officer’s assumption that the Applicant could leave Canada and reapply from another country – the U.S.

[20] Not only was this assumption or rationale not part of the “reasons”, it ignored the restriction on entry into the U.S. imposed on citizens of Taiwan, particularly those with no status in the outgoing country. This is not a simple case of swinging by Buffalo and dropping off one’s application. The Officer failed to consider that the Applicant would have to return to Taiwan and the consequences thereof.

The Court found that the precise nature of the breaches of procedural fairness did not need to be determined, since it was clear that there were such breaches (paras. 17 and 21).

The Applicant requested but was denied costs.

JUDICIAL REVIEW GRANTED

Kaur – failure to consider all evidence on H&C

Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 805

The applicant was a widow in her seventies who had moved to Canada to be with her children after the death of her husband. The decision under review was to not grant her permanent residence from within Canada on H&C grounds.

In his reasons, the Officer had stated: “I do not believe that this person would suffer an unusual, undue or unwarranted inconvenience if she had to file her application for permanent residence from abroad as is provided for by the Canadian Immigration Act. The difficulties she will face will flow directly from her wish to remain illegally without the proper documentation in Canada; it is as simple as that.” (para. 17, emphasis added)

Justice Bedard relied on Hinzman v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FCA 177 and found:

[18] The officer reached his conclusion on hardship on the basis of one consideration only: the hardship that she might suffer is the result of her own action. He did not address the question of whether the hardship would “have a disproportionate impact on the Applicant due to her personal circumstances”. I am of the view that the officer failed to address the Applicant’s personal circumstances which were central to her H&C application. The immigration officer has discretion as to the weight to be given to the personal circumstances raised by an applicant, but he cannot fail to have regard to the applicant’s personal circumstances.  

Furthermore, the Officer failed to provide adequate reasons.

Judge: Bedard

Date decided: August 5, 2010

Counsel: Andrea Snizynsky (for the applicant), Thi My Dung Tran (for the Minister)

Zemo – PRRA refusal errors on new evidence and no hearing

The applicant, a female former refugee claimant from Eritrea, made a pre-removal-risk-assessment application on the basis that she was a member of the Eritrean Liberation Front and a member of an unregistered church, and as such would be at risk if returned to Eritrea. Both grounds had previously been advanced and rejected. She also made a third, new argument, that she would be at risk as a returned refugee claimant.

The Officer rejected the evidence that the applicant was a member of an unregistered church, despite evidence submitted by the applicant:

[17] In the present circumstances and reading the decision as a whole, the Officer’s decision could only stand if the Applicant’s evidence of membership was not believed. There was more than sufficient evidence as to the risk to members of unregistered churches and there was sufficient evidence, if believed, to establish the Applicant’s membership in that type of church.

[18] Therefore, the Officer, having decided the issue on credibility, failed to consider whether a hearing should be held. The Applicant is not entitled per se to a hearing but the Minister is required to consider whether to have a hearing. In that respect there was an error of law because the Officer never turned her mind to that issue. …

The Officer also failed to properly consider the ground of being a returned refugee claimant, which was not raised before the RPD.

Judge: Phelan

Date decided: August 4, 2010

Counsel: Micheal Crane (applicant), Daniel Engel (Minister)

Diaz – refugee board fails in credibility analysis

Diaz v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 797

In a case of a family from Colombia, Justice Zinn found that the RPD’s decision on negative credibility could not stand. The principal applicant testified that she could not be sure if the agents of persecution were FARC or a drug cartel, but this was not relevant to an assessment of risk under s. 97 (para. 19). The Board could have found her testimony regarding the murder of her husband’s co-worker to be not relevant, since she was not sure of the perpetrator, but the Board was wrong to call this “embellishment” (para. 20). The Board also made several straightforward factual errors, which while not reviewable in and of themselves, “cast some doubt on the thoroughness and accuracy of the Board’s assessment in its totality” (para 21). The Board focussed on whether or not FARC was targeting the applicants, to the exclusion of a complete analysis of the case and the risks. The Board also erred in finding there was an IFA to Colombia. Finally, the Board relied on cases and on the argument that the applicants were exposed to generalized risk, but failed to make an explicit finding of generalized risk.

Judge: Justice Zinn

Date decided: August 4, 2010

Counsel: Jack Davis for Applicants, Ladan Shahrooz for Minister.

Gingrich abuses history on Cordoba House issue

As carefully explained at Got Medieval:

Professor Newt's Distorted History Lesson

Newt Gingrich’s claims about how the proposed Cordoba House (or “Ground Zero Mosque” as it is often erroneously called) is named after a massive symbol of Muslim imperialism is so very, very wrong.

(Not mentioned in the post, although raised in the comments, is that the Cordoba mosque is currently a symbol of Christian imperialism, having been catherdralized after the Reconquista.)

Ladies and Gentlemen, Stephen Fry

A brilliant, brilliant commentary on gender identity and the Will/Jack debate by the always engaging Mr. Fry:

There was a time when polari and Julian and Sandy and limp-wristed mincing and winking innuendo were all that came between a certain kind of gay man and his pride, his self-respect and his ability to hold his head high in a hostile world. Read Quentin Crisp’s The Naked Civil Servant or watch John Hurt’s glorious portrayal. It is not the only way for a gay man to be, no one is saying it should be, but it is a wholly proper and acceptable manner (not to mention an often loveable and witty one) and to see it traduced with superiority by the very people who should be supporting and endorsing it sickens me.

Read the whole thing here.

Judge geeks out—AWESOMELY—in Gaiman v. Mcfarlane

From the always fantastic Hijinks Ensue, a fragment of today’s excellent comic:

Go see the whole thing: Let your geek gavel fly

Good news, if true: Israel to cooperate with UN probe

From the Beeb: Israel to co-operate with UN probe into Gaza flotilla

Three cheers for a strong judiciary

I was all prepared to get huffy when this came up on my RSS feeder:

Judging the judges

Is the Supreme Court becoming a threat to parliament?

The article is not anti-judge, as I’d feared, but rather about a strong (activist?) judiciary being a necessary bulwark against a strong executive and a weak legislature. I, of course, always prefer a strong judiciary (assuming they are also competent and just) because I have a deep-seated antipathy for tyranny of the majority and in the face of the decline of the upper houses, the judiciary remains our only chamber of sober second thought. Granted the nobility of the House of Lords has always struck me as quaintly outdated, but I am a firm supporter of the Double-E senate: equal and effective, yes, but certainly not elected. Because an elected Senate, like an elected judiciary, would simply be another tool of the majority and could not be depended upon to protect the minority, responsible as they would be to their constituents.

As for our senate, I’ve always felt it unfairly maligned. Sure it gets stacked be every sitting government, and granted it doesn’t do much in the way of making, as opposed to breaking laws, but it does important work in vetting legislation and studying it, so I don’t think it’s outlived its usefulness yet. On top of which, their decor is awesome:

Federal Court Key Quotes: Failure to Consider Evidence

Courtesy of Justice Russell in Champagne v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 1204

[26] Not having regard for the totality of the evidence is an error of law. See Toro v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1981] 1 F.C. 652, [1980] F.C.J. No. 192. A claim in which the basic facts have been misconstrued should be set aside. Indeed, the Court has held that misconstruing evidence that forms the basis of the claim is a fundamental error. See Adamjee v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship Immigration), [1997] F.C.J. No. 1815. Moreover, a failure to mention facts that are a basis for the claim also constitutes a reviewable error. Fainshtein v. Canada(Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1995] F.C.J. No. 941. The Applicants cite and rely on many cases in which a decision has been set aside based on a misapprehension of the facts. See, for example, Mbiya v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1998] F.C.J. No. 1001 and Thambirasa v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] F.C.J. No. 205.

Afanasyev - inadmissibility for espionage, no need for formal relief submissions

Afanasyev v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 737

Decision by de Montigny granting judicial review of inadmissibility under s. 34 (and refusal to grant Ministerial relief under s. 34(2)).

The Applicant served in the Soviet military from 1985 to 1987, and reported on radio transmissions; he was declared inadmissible under 34(a) and (f), namely:

engaging in an act of espionage or an act of subversion against a democratic government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada;

…or being a member of an organisation that did so.

Justice de Montigny found that the officer’s findings on what, exactly, the Applicant did were problematic on multiple fronts. First, the officer cited both the CSIS explanation of what the Applicant allegedly did and the Applicant’s description, without dealing with discrepancies between the two accounts. Furthermore, the decision was predicated on the officer’s understanding of “espionage”, but nowhere is that understanding explained. (paras. 32-34)

Justice de Montigny also found that the officer failed to consider Ministerial relief under s. 34(2) on the sole ground that there were not formal, separate submission on relief; there had clearly been a request for relief to be considered, and there was relevant evidence on the record (paras. 38-42)

Singh (Yadwinder) - requirement for a passport to be landed

Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 757

Decision of Justice de Montigny. The Applicant sought declatory relief and mandamus, where Citizenship and Immigration Canada had refused to confirm his status as a permanent resident because he did not personally have his passport available. He did not have his passport because it had been seized (the Applicant had a receipt) and appeared to have been lost. The Applicant faced the following catch-22: without a passport he could not regularize his status, and without regularized status he could not obtain a new Indian passport (paras. 5-6). When he did obtain a passport, his clearances had expired. When he received new clearances, a new inadmissibility issue arose. The Applicant successfully argued that he should have been landed in 1998, and that subsequent issues could not therefore bar his landing.

Sandhu - skilled worker - officer must seek clarification

Sandhu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 759

A decision of Justice Mandamin allowing judicial review on a refusal of a skilled worker application by Canadian High Commission, New Delhi.

On the on hand, "a Visa Officer is not obliged to notify applicants of inadequacies in their applications" (para. 25)

However:

[33] When a Visa Officer has a doubt which has no foundation in the facts and the Applicant puts her best foot forward by submitting a complete application; the Officer should seek clarification to either substantiate or eliminate the doubt. Without seeking clarification, the Officer was in no position to do either.

Hinzman -- FCA Decision on H&C for war resisters

CanLII - 2010 FCA 177 (CanLII):

Key Quotation:

[39] My conclusion should not be seen as altering the discretion of
officers making decisions on section 25 applications, nor as giving the
appellants a “right to a particular outcome or to the application of a
particular legal test” (Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration), 2002 SCC 1 (CanLII), 2002 SCC 1; [2002] 1 S.C.R. 3).

[40] However, the H&C Officer had the duty to look at all of the
appellants’ personal circumstances, including Mr. Hinzman’s beliefs and
motivations, before determining if there were sufficient reasons to make a
positive H&C decision (ibidem, Chapter 5, section 11.3). She did not. Had
the Applications Judge addressed the appellants’ ground of complaint, as stated
at paragraph 57 of his Reasons, I am convinced that he would have concluded as I
do and found that the H&C decision was significantly flawed and therefore
unreasonable.

[41] Consequently, I propose to allow the appeal and,
rendering the judgment that the Federal Court ought to have rendered, I would
set aside the decision of the Officer denying the appellants’ H&C
application and I would refer the application back for redetermination by a
different officer in accordance with these reasons.

David Mitchell on burqas

If Britain decides to ban the burqa I might just start wearing one | Comment is free | The Observer

I love this man.

The CNN/Twitter/Hezbollah Debacle

CNN, Twitter and Why Hiding Journalists’ Opinions Is (Still) a Bad Idea - Tuned In - TIME.com

James Poniewozik has a good piece on this on his blog at TIME. My favourite part, though he doesn't pick up on it, is that when he queried CNN about their reasoning they said (and actually Nasr herself said):

It was an error of judgment for Octavia Nasr to write such a simplistic tweet about the death of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah.

Such a simplistic tweet? It was a tweet, for God's sake. 140 characters.

Anyway, that's leaving aside the whole problem of firing a journalist for expressing respect for a single newly-deceased leader of Hezbollah. The sooner the world accepts that both Hamas and Hezbollah are political entities that provide social services and back elected members of governments, the sooner they will have the momentum needed to end their violent activities. They, or perhaps more specifically the moderates within those parties, need an incentive to demilitarize. Having vapours every time they are mentioned in a non-terrorist capacity does not facilitate their rehabilitation.

Federal Court - Zaatreh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court - Zaatreh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court - Golbom v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court - Golbom v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court - Osegueda Garcia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court - Osegueda Garcia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court - Aguinaldo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court - Aguinaldo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

July 2, 2010 - Parmar - positive JR on excessive demand, social services

Federal Court - Parmar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Excellent news: Rangzieb Ahmed allowed to appeal

JURIST - Paper Chase: UK court allows appeal of terrorism charges based on torture claims

Afghan women imprisoned for "moral crimes"

"Enter the cells of the Badam Bagh prison in Kabul, Afghanistan, and what culprits will you find locked up inside? A 16-year old recipient of an unplanned marriage proposal, a pregnant wife irrationally accused of adultery, and a veiled old woman who just displayed a "bad attitude.""

"Bad attitudes" land Afghan women in jail | FP Passport

Amazing Church Sign Win

Church Sign Win - FAIL Blog: Epic Fail Funny Pictures and Funny Videos of Owned, Pwned and Fail Moments

Old but scary news--turning your cell into a bug is not sci-fi

FBI taps cell phone mic as eavesdropping tool - CNET News

Law School Study

Oh Marshall, coiner of my favourite phrase...

Hat-tip to Law Is Cool

Good collection of video and links on aid convoy attack from Boing Boing

The "flotilla video": Israeli troops storm boat with aid supplies bound for Gaza Strip - Boing Boing

I have the ears of a person half my age (well, 2-3 years younger)

Created by Oatmeal

BBC News - Deaths as Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship

BBC News - Deaths as Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship

Financial Times pulls striking Amnesty International ad

Financial Times chickens out, refuses to run Amnesty's anti-Shell Oil ad - Boing Boing

Worry

see more

Babies are not Mogwais

If there is one thing more annoying than the enormous strollers that seem to have become the norm, especially on the TTC, it is the huge clear vinyl tarps bunched up around them, adding to their already Hummer-analagous footprint. All of these infant-land-yachts have awnings anyway, so the oxygen tent\Hazmat containment system is NOT necessary. Babies don't melt if they get a little rain on them, people, and they are not mogwais.

DUH-duh, DUH-duh, DUH-duh

Most apocalyptic photo ever

From Astronomy Photo of the Day

It is just possible this shirt was designed for me

Kawaii Not: the webcomic for cute gone bad!

Dear Iceland: My feminism includes pasties

I was directed to this article by a friend on facebook: Iceland: the world's most feminist country |Life and style |The Guardian

And my first thought was: wait, what?*

Did the whole sex-positive movement skip Iceland? What about the personal liberties, the government has no place in our bedroom movement? Granted, sex-workers do seem to be the world's primary target for exploitation, but I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that we had figured out a while ago that criminalizing sex work is not the way to go, because (a) some people like it and it's really none of our business, and (b) it makes a kabillion times more sense to regulate the industry so no one is getting exploited any more (or at least as few as possible as little as possible, since no government system is perfect).

Maybe I'm biased by my respect for Canadian sex columnist Sasha, a long-time advocate of sex-positivism and sex-workers rights, but this seems like a giant mistake to me, both in terms of principle and practical effect. And yet, the media appears to think this is entirely a plus in the empowerment of women column. While I obviously support the attempt to get the government behind efforts to end the exploitation of women, I vehemently oppose the state putting limits on sexual behaviours that do not hurt anyone else. Harm principle, anyone?

I smell disaster...

More news coverage indexed here: Iceland Bans Strip Clubs; What If The U.S. Did The Same?

* As an aside, I have long toyed with the idea of creating a Twitter feed or mini blog called "Wait, What?" that just includes links to randomness which elicit that reaction from me.

Frankly bizarre NP comment: Obama is "ruining America"

Oh National Post...you never fail to bring the crazy.

George Jonas: [Obama is] Ruining America — coolly, calmly and collectedly - Full Comment

Elevation

People who take elevators to OR ESPECIALLY FROM the 2nd floor during the busiest time of the day need to learn to use the stairs.

Blergh

Why is it that cough syrup tastes so incredibly heinous? Is it because they assume something that tastes like hell is less likely to become a street drug?

Or maybe it's the alcohol, menthol, D&C Red 33, FD&C Red 40, monoammonium glycyrrhizinate (which is some sort of licorice extract?), polyethylene glycol, sodium benzoate, sodium carboxymethyl-cellulose, sodium citrate, sodium cyclamate (gross!), sorbitol, or sucralose. Or the horrifying fake cherry flavor (although the Straight Dope claims there's a reason for that).

Oh, and BTW, the alcohol? I was not aware it was in there. I am allergic to alcohol (or at least as allergic as people get). And when I say alcohol allergy, I go straight from "Oh look, 0.05% fake wine" to alcohol poisoning.

Hard-hit Iraq city sees rise in birth defects

As reported by the Beeb here: BBC News - Disturbing story of Fallujah's birth defects

And more stories here: Google News

Now, it's possible--and this is certainly what's being hinted about--that there was some sort of bio-weapon used that is causing this. But I wouldn't be surprised if the regular weapons used by all sides don't have teratogenic properties.

The Definition

If war is diplomacy by other means, than an entirely puposive definition of terrorism can't work. If terrorism is just the use of violence to acheive a political end or send a message, then isn't all warfare terrorism? Would we prefer killing for the sole atavistic joy of bloodlust satisfied?

Similarly, tactics common to assymmetric warfare cannot make it terrorism. Guerilla warfare, even suicide bombings, are not per se terrorist, unless you're content to paint every national resistance movement ever with the same brush.

Therefore, it can only be the intentional targetting of non-combatants that makes a terrorist act.

My life in SCRABBLE

After a rather successful game of SCRABBLE on my iPod Nano on the bus home, I decided to check my stats.

Best word: 48 points…

JIHAD

*le huge sigh*

The problem of “privilege”

NB: I’ll say it throughout this post, but let me be perfectly clear: I am totally down with the concept of “privilege”, I just think the phrase is inexact, and that bothers me.

I was having a discussion last night with some friends/colleagues (frilleagues?) about—well, all sorts of sociological and philosophical things, and at one point, the conversation turned to “privilege”. We were the three of us similarly privileged, being well-educated females of similar economic standing (although one was a woman of colour and the other two, very much including myself, were the kind of hilariously culture-less blinding pale that may be unique to Canada).

I bring this up only to contextualize my standard negative reaction to the term “privilege”. Note that it is the term and not the concept that I find viscerally aggravating. I absolutely agree with the idea that we tend to internalize the dominance of the dominant group, especially as a member of that group, which brings with it assumptions of innocence, value, and correctness, etc etc.

My problem with the term is that it implies a number of things that I don’t think are necessarily true. It also fails to take into account elements of the underlying concept like its essential fluidity, and that there are types that are earned as well as types that are inherent or congenital.

Using myself as an example, I understand that I have been spared obstacles because I am white, because I speak the dominant language, and because I am in other ways a match with the “average” Canadian. I do not suffer any physical abnormalities or outwardly apparent physical or sensory difficulties which would mark me out as the “other” to members of the majority or the elite in my society, keeping in mind the context in which I live and work.

I have never experienced my sex or gender as in any way detracting from my experiences of life, although that may be a function of my age and lack of current interest in children. I know many other women have a different experience altogether.

At the same time, I have a number of objective social and physical characteristics which mean I have faced obstacles and barriers not experienced by my peers. I consider elements of my life, namely my education and my financial position, to have been things which I worked extremely, even desperately hard for.

Which causes a problem. On the one hand, I know that I would have faced more barriers if I came from a difference background (health, race, socio-economic, etc etc). On the other hand, I got where I am by the sweat of my brow; there was no silver spoon, and nothing was ever handed to me.

I think this is the root of my discomfort with the term “privilege”. It implies an advantage which implicitly detracts from my own efforts and struggles. So while I recognize that I fit into the concept of privilege, I find the term very troublesome indeed. Perhaps it is too late to develop another term, and in any event I have no idea what it would be. Socio-normative? Pretty sure that’s already taken. Plerumque-normative? From the Latin meaning for the most part, generally, commonly, mostly? Not-un-privileged? Homo-normative is too redundant, and xenophobic is too strong…so I will have to leave the nomenclature to the linguists.

Diplomatic problem surprisingly full of win

Pakistani ambassador rejected because his name is NSFW in Arabic | FP Passport

Another entry in my "weird/awesome traditional and customary law" collection

CBC News - Nova Scotia - Surfing etiquette's up in court

Asleep at the wheel?

CBC News - Toronto - TTC to investigate 'sleeping' fare collector

Okay, I'll start off with full disclosure: as someone with a sleeping disorder, it antagonizes me when people jump all over "laziness" as an explanation.

But that aside: the dude fell asleep.

He does a job which, like most service jobs, is probably super busy for a few minutes every shift, and brain-meltingly boring for the rest of the time. It's not an easy job, in the sense that he has to deal with people who are surly or confused (though I admit the actual "collecting" is probably not difficult). He probably works underground, where the air quality is awful. He can't get up and walk around when he gets sleepy. He can't start knocking back coffee at an obscene rate, because there's no coffee, and even if there was he has to consider not going to the washroom.

So, he nodded off.

No one was in danger. I'm sure he would have jerked awake, totally embarrassed, the minute someone approached the window or pressed the designated waiting area alarm. It was a mistake, an accident, an error, but it was hardly morally blameworthy and I don't think he deserved to be lambasted in the press or made the focus of such derision for it.

And as for Jason Wieler, the guy who snapped the photo? He posted it with some glib comment about how his tax dollars are being spent, and now claims he didn't want to get the employee in trouble. Well, guess what, Mr. Wieler: you did. And by the way, money has nothing to do with nodding off at your post, so your crack was meaningless. TTC collectors earn about $55k--not bad, but hardly the cause of the public transit crisis.

What Wieler should have done--what I hope to God most people would do--was to tap on the glass, not so much to see if the guy was alright (although that would be a concern) but to save a fellow wage-slave serious embarrassment. The same way you would tell a woman if her skirt was tucked into her pantyhose, or a man that he was trailing three feet of toilet paper, or a fellow passenger that the train was at the last stop.

This poor collector has become a scapegoat for the general public's anger at the TTC--which should be anger at the federal government's failure to properly fund the TTC. The collector made a small mistake of the kind which any of us could make at any time, and I think we need to let it go.

If you're a journalist, should you just let people die?

Rather obviously not, I would say. I think as a reporter you have a moral duty to make getting the story out your first priority, and a sort of "prime directive" not to influence the story. However, if you can help without doing that, I think you have a secondary moral duty to try. This is even more obvious in the case of a doctor, who has sworn an oath to care for people, should do so.

Why Sanjay Gupta did the right thing | FP Passport

Today in obvious news

CBC News - Ottawa - Harkat didn’t hide fake passport: lawyer

The fact the refugees use false passports because if they didn't, we'd prevent them from GETTING TO CANADA is one more in a long line of stuff we should not still have to litigate.

Dear Tim Hortons: Really?

Joe.My.God. reports that Tim Hortons is sponsoring an anti-gay-rights event held by the so-called “National Organization on Marriage” in Rhode Island: Tim Hortons Sponsors NOM Event.

Now, Timmy Ho’s doesn’t strike me as being the world’s most progressive organization—I don’t see them sponsoring Pride events any time in the near future—but appending their corporate name to something this far in the other direction strikes me as both unethical and unwise.

Feel free to contact them to note your distaste.

Toronto Parks and Rec = Photoshop Disaster

So I headed over to the Toronto Parks and Rec site to see when my strike-affected yoga might recommence, and I was greeted by this monstrosity:

Immediate reaction: check blogs to ensure this horrorshow has been recorded for posterity. And indeed it has, over at Photoshop Disasters, which even managed to acquire the original photo. City of Toronto: Token Brilliance

And oh man, they cite a National Post article. All I can assume is that somewhere, a man with a goatee and a pitchfork is putting in an order for ice skates, because I am in agreement with NP on this one…this was insane. Was the original family, delightfully non-WASPish, somehow not diverse enough?

News Roundup

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

Big step forward: “Gay sex decriminalised in India”

C/O the BBC: “Gay sex decriminalised in India”

Re-donculous: Police go mental on Father's Day photoshoot

Dallas - Unfair Park - How a Heartwarming, Kick-Ass Father's Day Photo Shoot Ended Up Face Down in Handcuffs on the Addison Airport Tarmac

Anonymous sources

BoingBoingGadgets has a story on the anonymous sourcing of info on Steve Job's health, which features this hilarious graphic: 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.

How to help with hashtags

From BoingBoing:

Cyberwar guide for Iran elections

Is CSIS untrustworthy?

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)

Best TORCHWOOD quote?

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")

What law owes to science fiction

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.

TDS best argument against DADT ever

Clip from May 14

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.

In a perfect world, I’d be liveblogging my bus ride

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.

US military misplaces vials of bioagent, world shrugs

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)

My first thought was: "We still have warships?"

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)

This is a real thing, and everyone must know of it (NSFW, but awesome)

Ron Jeremy + Sci-Fi/Horror movie = WIN

http://oneeyedmonstermovie.com/

No seriously, that's the title. And again, NSFW

Abdelrazik disaster continues

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.

Me like caffeine

... and animated GIFs.

Best Daily Show Bit Ever

Watch it.

Lookalikes

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?

Name game

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:

• Bryant (from my father's name, Brian)
• Ní Bhriain (like "O'Brian", but with the feminine prefix and Gaelic spelling)
• Dalton (a male family name)
• Clarke (for the occupation association, Clarke = clerk = any job to do with writing = literate person)

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.

Reflections on watching the TRANSFORMERS movie

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.

If I Had A Million Dollars (VI)

DO WANT a condo in this building:

MLS®: C1550362

In the Annex!

SickCity, the social network for hypochondriacs

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.

Arar Commission Website

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:

http://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/206/301/pco-bcp/commissions/maher_arar/07-09-13/www.ararcommission.ca/default.htm

Anthropomorphism is scary stuff

This comic (http://www.rockpapercynic.com) is both brilliant and CanCon:

CSIS: Disregarding International Law Since (at least) 2003

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.

25 Random Bits of Misanthropy, Part I

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”:

1. Small, shrill children, especially on the TTC
   People always laugh when I say I transferred out of teachers college ‘cause I realized I hate kids … it’s not a joke. If I’m engaging with the kid I’m fine, but if they’re in the background it’s worse than nails on a chalkboard.
2. People who stop at the very top/bottom of stairs and stand there
   I’m looking at you, 1Ls.
3. The total lack of stability on TTC vehicles
   I can only assume a perfect storm of bad roads, lousy shocks, and freakishly reckless driving, but it’s unusual for me to be on a bus these days and not think I’m going to be thrown to the ground.
4. People who lie to obscure the fact that they’re not doing their job
   Pretty much anytime I hear “But I told you to do that” or “I never told you that” I assume the speaker is lying
5. Medication where the side effect is as bad as the condition
   What the hell, people. I only want to be able to breathe through my nose, is that so much to ask?
6. Legal questions that no one understands, but no one ever resolves, like certiorari versus declaratory relief
   Thank you, authors of four different books on administrative law, for those fascinating chapters on how no one knows what which remedy is for
7. People who go out of their way to screw with an immigration application because the applicant won a court case
   I don’t know who these people are, but it says something about the world we live in when a court decision in your favour will probably lead to even more problems for you
8. Updates that freak out my computer
   What is the point of that, Microsoft?!?! How hard is it for you to patch my security without making my IE schizophrenic?
9. Technological improvements that aren’t backwards compatible
   Yay high-speed internet, boo my wireless network rejecting high-speed internet
10. USB ports at the back of a CPU
    I spend an inordinate amount of time at my office on my knees inhaling dustbunnies, reading the ports like braille
11. My office window
    It’s stuck open and has been all winter.
12. Coffee going cold immediately
    The pot seems hot, and it’s not like I use milk ice cubes, but I can barely through it back before it’s frigid, and I need the warmth (see #11)
13. My desk blotter calendar
    Mocking me with its January-ness. Because my desk hasn’t been totally clear since January, so I haven’t ripped off the old months

Part II tomorrow…

Blogging from Lilliput

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!

BBC Top 100 Reads...yeah, I'm a joiner

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

Further to my tea post...

...which is here: http://thinkingoutloudblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/high-tea-in-toronto.html

It was pointed out to me by commenter melanie that I had my Fairmont's mixed up. The Toronto Fairmont is the Fairmont Royal York, at which afternoon tea is served in the EPIC restaurant at the following times: Sunday to Friday, 2:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Saturday, 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. More info here.

Unquestionably the best two sentences I have ever written

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.

LAWYERED!

Ignorant whippersnappers

(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!

What do you call a place of worship that has been converted into another religion's place of worship? Chursque? Mursquegog?

The Hagia Sophia is a prime example, but it's not the only one.

There's this lovely example in Cyprus, called the Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque:

And of course, the Mezquita in Cordoba:

High Tea in Toronto

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:

• Caffe163

Other placed I love are:

• Casa Acoreana

Canajun English

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.

All I want for Post-Christmas/Boxing Week/New Years is an e-mail/cellphone plan

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.

Awesome Courage Campaign Photo Petition

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.

Best comment on PoMo EVAR

Recommendation FAIL

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?

Get thee to a nunnery?

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.

Christmas All Over Again

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"

Phrase of the YEAR

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!

Exciting times, people: coalition gov't for the win?

@CBC: Liberals, NDP, Bloc sign deal on proposed coalition