I didn’t post it here. Why?

Because the story included a sentence that began:
The OHRC’s Jewish adjudicator, Michael Gottheil…

I immediately rebuked Catholic Insight via email…

Frankly, it would do the cause we all embrace more harm than good for me to expose that strange sentence to a wider audience. five feet of fury

The tone deafness of some people is astonishing and it is critical that they be taken to task, politely but firmly, by people who really do believe in free speech.

BC has fixed election dates, the next time the government faces the electorate is May 2009. I anticipate a complete defeat for Premier Campbell and his wrecking crew, combined with a swift repeal of the carbon tax. daily bayonet

I don’t think Campbell will lose the next election; but he might and if he does his loony embrace of green theology will be most of the reason.

I suspect that, as the planet cools and the science underpinning “global warming/climate change” unravels there will be a rush to the exits on the part of politicians who are discovering that climate hysteria was a mile wide and half an inch deep.

Now, not even M. Dion’s supporters really have a clue what he is prattling on about with his Green Shift and, if he has any wit, he will quietly shelve the program and run on some issue people actually care about.

“We’re involved in shadow boxing,” lawyer David Matas Thursday of B’nai Brith’s attempts to defend a complaint of discrimination. “It’s been 4 1/2 years and we don’t understand why this (complaint) hasn’t been dismissed as frivolous.” winnipeg free press via kitty

I seem to remember something about the trick of riding a tiger being getting off.

And I particularily like this:

Matas said the commission has recently told the B’nai Brith it’s turning over its file to an outside expert to determine if a hearing should be held on the complaint, adding that the commission refuses to identify the expert or provide B’nai Brith with a copy of the file.

Perfectly ‘rooish of them….Dave should just suck it up and realize that the HRC’s have become swords rather than shields. They need to be eliminated. Now.

The meeting was prompted by a series of ominous developments: continuing political turmoil in Pakistan, increasingly deadly attacks against Afghan and Western targets in Afghanistan and American complaints that the Pakistani military has been ineffective in stemming the flow of militants who launch attacks in Afghanistan from Pakistani havens. washington post via The Torch

I have long thought that if Pakistan is unwilling or unable to police the “Tribal Areas” on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border it is, effectively, no longer sovereign over those areas. And if that is the case there is no reason at all for the NATO and American forces not to adopt a radically more aggressive approach to attacks from those areas. Not to mention a very serious attempt to put paid to bin Laden and his henchmen who seem to be, to a degree, operating in the Tribal areas.

It looks as if the Americans may be swinging around to this view. It is, apparently, Obama’s take when he wants to sound bellicose.

In paragraph 33, you state that my republication of Rev. Boissoin’s words were “more likely” to generate a debate, than to promote “hatred”. Again, that’s a fabrication: Rev. Boissoin’s column generated an enormous debate, both in the pages of the Red Deer Advocate and elsewhere. The debate is still going on, six years later.

But putting aside this factual falsehood, you falsely imply that hate speech jurisprudence grants an exemption for publications that create a debate. You just made that up, as a fig leaf to cover up your double-standard against Rev. Boissoin. ezra levant

I nearly spat out my beer…Watching Ezra make fun of the CHRC is a blood sport. The create debate exception, nowhere found in the CHRA, is lovely. Whenever accused of hate speech one simply has to click the heels of one’s emerald shoes together three times and murmur “debate”. The Commission will back right off.

Cool. Who knew?

That promise is our greatest inheritance. It’s a promise I make to my daughters when I tuck them in at night, and a promise that you make to yours - a promise that has led immigrants to cross oceans and pioneers to travel west; a promise that led workers to picket lines, and women to reach for the ballot.

And it is that promise that forty five years ago today, brought Americans from every corner of this land to stand together on a Mall in Washington, before Lincoln’s Memorial, and hear a young preacher from Georgia speak of his dream.

The men and women who gathered there could’ve heard many things. They could’ve heard words of anger and discord. They could’ve been told to succumb to the fear and frustration of so many dreams deferred.

But what the people heard instead - people of every creed and color, from every walk of life - is that in America, our destiny is inextricably linked. That together, our dreams can be one.

“We cannot walk alone,” the preacher cried. “And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back.” Barack Obama via The Corner

Update: But not all agree:

And My Fellow Americans…

If we all work our hardest, we can make this the best yearbook ever! [Jonah Goldberg] NRO

The tort of mean rears its head.

Smart and classy.

I would not vote for Obama purely on his politics and his lack of experience. But his nomination is a huge step forward in the healing of America’s racial divide.

Martin Luther King, who made his “I have a Dream” speech 45 years ago today, has with Obama’s nomination had at least one of his dreams come true.

The CPC is the best party to lead through a recession and, wait for it, Senate reform. Ah yes, the old Canadian chestnut the Senate. I love Senate reform. It puts my poli sci brain to work. Rep by pop but not too much. But, as an election issue it is a true snoozer.

Now, “best party to lead through a recession”. Big problem with that is that officially there is no Canada wide recession. Ontario wide, perhaps, but out West things are ticking along, the Rock is doing OK and much of the Maritimes is just fine thank you. Quebec is looking alright….so where is this recession the CPC will be so good navigating?

Second problem, why would the CPC be the preferred party in a recession? Do they have the Keynesian cred that Canadians will likely want to “smooth the business cycle”? Well, they certainly seem to like spending money and are more than willing to measure government spending using the bogus yardstick of % of GDP; but will Canadians, long told that the way out of a recession is for the government to spend money, actually believe that the CPC will cut the cheques? I don’t know but it is not an issue which is screams “elect us”.

Meanwhile, M. Dion looks as goofy as ever with the Kyoto albatross hanging limply ’round his neck and the Green Shift lunacy convincing even Torontonians that spending more for gas, food and heat may not be quite what they want to do even if the West will be paying most of the freight. (In the West we are already getting used to having been written off by the Grits.)

Dion’s best move, in my view, would be to quietly drop the Green Shift and make stump speeches about a glorious - if detail light - Liberal future. The trick being to have as his warm up act none other than Justin Trudeau. It is not as if Justin will have to spend a single day in his absolutely safe Montreal riding. And the man speaks coherently in both of Canada’s official languages. Having been a school teacher he can, no doubt, quiet unruly media - not that there will be any unruliness: the tongue bath awaiting Justin from the Canadian media will make the canonization of Obama by the American media look insincere.

M. Dion can look professorial, say several incoherent things and point at Justin. The crowd, and there will be crowds from one end of the country to the other, will love it.

I fear that Steve has no one in his caucus or running with quite the star power of a Trudeau. Ben Mulroney? Do we really want to go there?

Elections are strange things. They acquire their own dynamic, their own issues and, ultimately their own logic. At the moment there is nothing terrible to nail the CPC with. Neither is there any CPC accomplishment to particularly single out for praise. So the Liberals have the opportunity to run their own campaign on their own issues and, more importantly, on the intriguing possibility that they are really going to renew themselves.

It will be interesting.

What a bunch of losers, these people couldn’t carry the jockstrap of a ‘68 Chicago rioter….now, those were real anarchists, not like today’s creampuffs. comments at zombietime

At the very bottom there is Order for Costs in the amount of $100.00 payable to Richard Warman by the Northern Alliance and Jason Ouwendyk.

Ouwendyk filed a consumer proposal under the Bankruptcy Act and with that filing all actions against him were stayed. Ouwendyk’s creditors lined up and their claims were listed. Richard Warman claimed $12,550.00.

I am wondering if anyone reading this can explain how a matter which has not gone to trial can give rise to an alleged debt of over $12,000.00 without an actual Order of a Court. I may be missing something.

Warman provides a “Proof of Claim” form along with details of his claim including “Damages for Defamation” in the amount of $10,000.00. Which is odd as, generally, damages are awarded by a court at the end of a trial. Until the Court makes its decision and its order all that the “damages” are is an unproven claim.

It is difficult to imagine how the Trustee in this matter would have accepted such a proof of claim but, apparently, it was accepted and Warman is being given the same rights as the other creditors. He is certainly entitled to claim the $100.00 per the Order for Costs and that entitles him to be treated as a creditor. But how can he claim “damages” when no damages have been awarded by a Court?

All of which is more than a little curious.

Update: Interestingly, by s. 135 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act the trustee in this instance is entitled to accept the “Proof of claim” not withstanding the absence of an actual trial of the action. In effect the Warman claim can be seen as a contingent claim on Ouwendyk and accepted as such. Apparently that is exactly what has happened here.

I suspect the other creditors were a bit pissed but if the trustee accepts the claim they would have to challenge that acceptance and they, apparently, have not.

Smelly, why yes. Illegal, apparently not.

Update #2

The lawyer must discharge this duty by fair and honourable means, without illegality and in a manner that is consistent with the lawyer’s duty to treat the tribunal with candour, fairness, courtesy and respect and in a way that promotes the parties’ right to a fair hearing where justice can be done. Maintaining dignity, decorum, and courtesy in the courtroom is not an empty formality because, unless order is maintained, rights cannot be protected.

This rule applies to the lawyer as advocate, and therefore extends not only to court proceedings but also to appearances and proceedings before boards, administrative tribunals, arbitrators, mediators, and others who resolve disputes, regardless of their function or the informality of their procedures…..Canons, Law Society of Upper Canada