May 31st, 2008
You are currently browsing the articles from Jay Currie written on May 31st, 2008.
I had a thirty five year overdue beer with Terry Glavin a couple of nights ago. A good time was had by all as I admire his writing all the way down.
We banged away about old Vancouver socialism, sturgeon, Kevin Annett and the Vancouver Students’ Association but, at one point Glavin asked a rather good question: why are the righty blogs more interesting to read than the liberal or lefty blogs?
I made noises about just how damned intelligent we are - well, actually, no. But I did point out that it was OK for me to disagree with Kate or Kathy or Ezra. They don’t send me Christmas cards in any case so I miss nothing by supporting SSM or what have you. Glavin suggested that orthodoxy seemed to rule on the left. And he is absolutely right.
But, and here’s the rub, we have our own Society for the Supression of Vice and the Promotion of Virtue: The Blogging Tories. Now, mercifully about half the BT blogroll has not posted in the the last year but the BT in chief, Steve Taylor, for whom I have a lot of respect, has been dragging the party line far too long.
Now that Rob Nicolson has let slip the dogs of, well, a Parliamentary Committee, maybe it is time for Steve to grow a spine and start writing about free speech in Canada.
Elephant meet Steve - Steve, the big gray object over, more or less, in the corner is a Free Speech Elephant. Go nuts, tell us what you think of him. It’s safe to come out of the closet now.
Written by jay on May 31st, 2008 with 27 comments.
Read more articles on CPC and Canadian Politics and free speech.
Just a head’s-up: I’ll be live blogging the case of Mohamed Elmasry vs. Mark Steyn/Maclean’s before (sigh) the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, direct from kangaroo-courtroom 105 of the Robson Square Provincial Court building in Vancouver, starting sometime after 9:30 Pacific/12:30 Eastern Monday morning and going on for, I don’t know, days. Just hit refresh.
All the dense legalese, with twice the politically correct jargon! andrew coyne
I don’t know if work is going to let me get across the Strait - but Coyne should be droll on the lunacy before the BC Tribunal.
Coyne is the “A” Team. Between this and the putative Parliamentary Inquiry things are looking rather dim for the s. 13 mongers. Once Coyne gets dug in, MSM will have very little choice but to take an interest.
Meanwhile, the blogging Army of Davids will get to work. The poor staffers of the MPs on the Justice Committee are going to be so well briefed it will scare them.
The fact is that the free speech blogosphere has developed a fair degree of expertise as to the assorted corruptions of the CHRC and its investigators. We know the lies under oath and the witnesses who have never actually been called - think Stacey’s guide girl.
The “there were no rules to break” culture of the pseudo-Nazi hunters at the CHRC needs to be exposed for the fascist enterprise which it has degenerated into. The bloggers who have been following the cases in detail will give the staffers and the MPs all the material they need. The problem, of course, is that these folks will find it hard to believe that senior managers lied under oath or that investigators, without even a pale colour of right, flat out refused to answer questions on cross-examination. They need to be schooled.
While we are indeed winning, we have not won. The rule of law is not complicated; but an agency which can “redact” just because it feels like it will fight back hard. For free speech to win we have to build an air tight case, with examples, of the fundamental corruption of the CHRC. And, beyond that, we have to build the case that the statute itself leads to this corruption. This is not something that a bit of staff training (”No Dean, really, you do have to take notes and answer questions….No, really Dean, that’s the law.”) will fix.
This is a war which can be won but it will be won by a combination of MSM coverage, political pressure, ridicule and hard core fact-finding. The facts fit into an argument and that argument is that the nature of s. 13 virtually ensures that it is impossible to obtain justice before the CHRT or in an investigation by the CHRC.
If there is no possibility of justice, if innocence is not an option, it is the law rather than the accused which is at fault.
Which is what we must teach the good Members of the Justice Committee.
Written by jay on May 31st, 2008 with 21 comments.
Read more articles on Canadian Politics and free speech.
Combating malnutrition in the 140 million children who are undernourished reached the number one spot, after economist Sue Horton of Wilfrid Laurier University in Canada made her case to the expert panel.
Providing micronutrients for 80% of the 140 million children who lack essential vitamins in the form of vitamin A capsules and a course of zinc supplements would cost just $60 million per year, according to the analysis. More importantly, this action holds yearly benefits of more than $1 billion. copenhagen consensus
Or you could piss away several billion dollars on hare brained schemes to sequester CO2 so as to prevent the deaths of a few million forty years from now if the science is right - which is doubtful - or you could spend 60 million to save 140 million kids who are alive right now. Go read the whole set of recommendations.
Written by jay on May 31st, 2008 with 1 comment.
Read more articles on Uncategorized.
To put this another way, regardless of the ontological status of Christian truth-claims, we need Christianity - or something very like it - to protect us from the will to perfection. Our fallibility must be defended. ghost of a flea
Modesty and humility in the face of our imperfection is the beginning of wisdom.
Can a flea be wise…apparently.
Written by jay on May 31st, 2008 with 1 comment.
Read more articles on culture.
Ezra reports that the CPC has finally figured out that something may be rotten in Denmark.
I would like to inform you that my caucus colleague Mr. Rick Dykstra has tabled a motion that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights examine and make recommendations with respect to the CHRC, including its mandate, operations, and interpretation and application of provisions relating to section 13 of the CHRA, which addresses hate messages. I look forward to that review. Rob Nicholson
Go read the whole thing over at Ezras.
My take: we are winning. Not fast enough but this is a huge shift. It looks like the hundreds, likely thousands, of emails and letters to MPs of all Parties as well as Cabinet Ministers, have finally lead to a useful result.
Which is not to say we should stop. In fact, we need to keep pushing hard. The CHRC will attempt to nobble the Parliamentary Inquiry, paint the Members as neo-Nazi supporters, stonewall, redact as fast as they can and generally obstruct the business of Parliament. We need to keep researching, pushing, writing and generally raising a ruckus until s.13 is good and dead.
But we are winning and this is huge!
Written by jay on May 31st, 2008 with 1 comment.
Read more articles on Canadian Politics and free speech.