<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hissy Fit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/</link>
	<description>One Damn Thing Leads to Another</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 05:05:14 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ted</title>
		<link>http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-958</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 22:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-958</guid>
		<description>There is a lot of discussion here about what constitutes libel/defamation and what are the available defences. For the benefit and interest of all, I've posted a brief primer of Canadian libel law over at &lt;a href="http://canadiancerberus.blogspot.com/2006/02/bloggers-and-defamation-law-short.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Cerberus&lt;/a&gt;.

Ted
&lt;a href="canadiancerberus.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow"&gt;Cerberus&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a lot of discussion here about what constitutes libel/defamation and what are the available defences. For the benefit and interest of all, I&#8217;ve posted a brief primer of Canadian libel law over at <a href="http://canadiancerberus.blogspot.com/2006/02/bloggers-and-defamation-law-short.html" rel="nofollow">Cerberus</a>.</p>
<p>Ted<br />
<a href="canadiancerberus.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">Cerberus</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr.Dawg</title>
		<link>http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-790</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr.Dawg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:51:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-790</guid>
		<description>Well, I guess the brat is getting what he wanted--lots of attention. He's like a little kid, pouting one moment, throwing angry tantrums the next, just to get noticed. 

So, dammit, we're playing his game. I had no idea, by the way, that he's been sending out such a spray of writs. Somebody wake me up when he actually wins one of these "libel" actions in court.

Here's a near-miss--Stockwell Day must be breathing easier now:

"For a few days, [Stockwell Day] also declared that I was 'obsessed' with homosexual sex, and I had lawyers lined up across to (sic) the country offering to represent me for free in a big, fat defamation action. Those words quickly slipped into Internet ether, however, when Mr. Day’s acolytes perhaps realized that he can ill-afford yet another libel lawsuit."

http://www.warrenkinsella.com/words_politics_ts.htm

Interesting that Warzie seems to think that the suggestion that one might be gay is libellous or defamatory. But if he sincerely believes this, here in the twenty-first century though we be, then what are we to make of this, n-word and all?

"Did you get that? I've got a 'tin ear for punk's Dadaist paradoxes'?

"Guilty as charged, fucker. I do, I do, I do. And the problem with nancy-boys like you is, to put a fine point on it, you don't."

http://www.warrenkinsella.com/musings_august05.htm (scroll down to August 27th)

In any case, experience tells me that libel writs have a habit of vanishing without a trace. I have personally been libelled, to the point that our counsel at the time advised that I had a good case for proceeding--and then he talked time and price. Even though I had a creepy columnist by the balls, I had, regrettably, to let the matter drop.And that was when there was a genuinely arguable case.  I don't know what Warzie's lawyers are telling him, but vexatious actions are not exactly welcomed in our clogged courtrooms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I guess the brat is getting what he wanted&#8211;lots of attention. He&#8217;s like a little kid, pouting one moment, throwing angry tantrums the next, just to get noticed. </p>
<p>So, dammit, we&#8217;re playing his game. I had no idea, by the way, that he&#8217;s been sending out such a spray of writs. Somebody wake me up when he actually wins one of these &#8220;libel&#8221; actions in court.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a near-miss&#8211;Stockwell Day must be breathing easier now:</p>
<p>&#8220;For a few days, [Stockwell Day] also declared that I was &#8216;obsessed&#8217; with homosexual sex, and I had lawyers lined up across to (sic) the country offering to represent me for free in a big, fat defamation action. Those words quickly slipped into Internet ether, however, when Mr. Day’s acolytes perhaps realized that he can ill-afford yet another libel lawsuit.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.warrenkinsella.com/words_politics_ts.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.warrenkinsella.com/words_politics_ts.htm</a></p>
<p>Interesting that Warzie seems to think that the suggestion that one might be gay is libellous or defamatory. But if he sincerely believes this, here in the twenty-first century though we be, then what are we to make of this, n-word and all?</p>
<p>&#8220;Did you get that? I&#8217;ve got a &#8216;tin ear for punk&#8217;s Dadaist paradoxes&#8217;?</p>
<p>&#8220;Guilty as charged, fucker. I do, I do, I do. And the problem with nancy-boys like you is, to put a fine point on it, you don&#8217;t.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.warrenkinsella.com/musings_august05.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.warrenkinsella.com/musings_august05.htm</a> (scroll down to August 27th)</p>
<p>In any case, experience tells me that libel writs have a habit of vanishing without a trace. I have personally been libelled, to the point that our counsel at the time advised that I had a good case for proceeding&#8211;and then he talked time and price. Even though I had a creepy columnist by the balls, I had, regrettably, to let the matter drop.And that was when there was a genuinely arguable case.  I don&#8217;t know what Warzie&#8217;s lawyers are telling him, but vexatious actions are not exactly welcomed in our clogged courtrooms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-780</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2006 06:01:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-780</guid>
		<description>Jeez, it's not like Kinsella's been accused of 'foisting' bad music upon the public.

Hehhhh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeez, it&#8217;s not like Kinsella&#8217;s been accused of &#8216;foisting&#8217; bad music upon the public.</p>
<p>Hehhhh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don</title>
		<link>http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-769</link>
		<dc:creator>Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:32:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/hissy-fit/#comment-769</guid>
		<description>Did you see the thing at Joan Tintor's site too?

http://joantintor.blogspot.com/2006/01/kinsella-responds.html

That makes 6 bloggers in the 'Warren Kinsella threatened to sue me!' Club</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did you see the thing at Joan Tintor&#8217;s site too?</p>
<p><a href="http://joantintor.blogspot.com/2006/01/kinsella-responds.html" rel="nofollow">http://joantintor.blogspot.com/2006/01/kinsella-responds.html</a></p>
<p>That makes 6 bloggers in the &#8216;Warren Kinsella threatened to sue me!&#8217; Club</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
