Saturday, 31 January, 2009

The Misesian Case against Keynes

By Hans-Hermann Hoppe, via the Mises Institute:

I – Classical Economic Theory
It is my goal to reconstruct some basic truths regarding the process of economic development and the role played in it by employment, money, and interest. These truths neither originated with the Austrian school of economics nor are an integral part of only this tradition of economic thinking.
In fact, most of them were part and parcel of what is now called classical economics, and it was the recognition of their validity that uniquely distinguished the economist from the crank. Yet the Austrian school, in particular Ludwig von Mises and later Murray N. Rothbard, has given the clearest and most complete presentation of these truths (Mises [1949] 1966; Rothbard [1962] 1970). Moreover, that school has presented them their most rigorous defense by showing them to be ultimately deducible from basic, incontestable propositions (such as that man acts and knows what it means to act) so as to establish them as truths whose denial would not only be factually incorrect but, much more decisively, would amount to logical contradictions and absurdities.
[1]
I will first systematically reconstruct this Austrian theory of economic development. Then I will turn to the "new" theory of J.M. Keynes, which belongs, as he himself proudly acknowledged, to the tradition of "underworld" economics (like mercantilism) and of economic cranks like S. Gesell (Keynes 1936). I will show that Keynes's new economics, like that "underworld" tradition, is nothing but a tissue of logical falsehoods reached by means of obscure jargon, shifting definitions, and logical inconsistencies intended to establish a statist, anti-free-market economic system.

Read the rest here.

What's in a name?

Barack Hussein Obama

Today's Levant-Jaunt

Links Levantian:

LeDaro

Kinsella

Content Levantian:

Cat-astrophe!

Catscam, day five

Human rights commissions in the news

How Ignatieff’s war room handles a crisis

Ignatieff campaign's anti-Chinese slur receives massive media coverage

Anthem-banning principal a failed left-wing politician and radical activist

Salim Mansur's column

Privacy Commission Whitewashes Case Against CHRC

By John Pacheco, via SoCon or Bust:

The technological experts are not the ones who determine whether the CHRC was guilty of hacking into a private citizen’s account. They only tell you what is possible and what is not. Notice the report’s caveat identified above in red.
There is, in fact, PLENTY of evidence that SOMEONE at the CHRC - even if it was not the investigators or third parties associated with this case - knew very well that the connection used was going to breach someone’s privacy.
Did the Privacy Commission even ask what method the CHRC used to login to the Stormfront account? The CHRC has admitted using other ISPs and cloaking software in the past to avoid the CHRC’s IP address showing up on the log files of the discussion boards they spy on. What did the CHRC use when they logged into Stormfront on December 8, 2006? Why doesn’t the CHRC produced this evidence?
For the Privacy Commission to conclude that there is “no evidence” of using Mr. Hechme’s connection is absurd IF one is interested in the testimony given at the CHRT last year. During the March 25, 2008 hearing, Dean Steacy admitted to being logged on to the “Jadewarr” account at the same time that Hechme’s IP address showed up on Stormfront’s logs. And not only that, but he indirectly refers to the Bell representative’s testimony about Hechme’s account to help him place the date and time when he logged in to Stormfront discussion board! (And we even have
hard evidence from another case that indeed Steacy had logged in on December 8, 2006. See also Part A, Section 3C-5B of The Blogosphere Cross Examination ).

Read the whole post here. Good stuff.

Read more about this at:

Brandon Sun Online: Woman gives up quest for answers to alleged Internet hijacking

The Record.com: Woman gives up quest for answers to alleged Internet hijacking

Jay Currie: How to Not Investigate

Today's Mark Madness

Links Steynian:

Betsy's Page

I Was Just Thinking

The Other McCain

Kinsella

UK1884

Kenneth Hynek

Booman Tribune

Content Steynian:

In NRO's The Corner:

Rock'n'roll government

Billions and Billions Served!

Ten years ago: What Part Of "No" Doesn't A Governor Understand?

On culture: Young At Heart

On America: Up, Up, and Away

In the OC Register: Stimulated right into being another Europe

Mark's Song of the Week: Pick Yourself Up

Seasons Steynian: Holocaust Memorial Day

Mark's Request of the Week: Bad Things Come To Those Who Wait

On the Hugh Hewitt show: Mark Steyn on Obama's bad week with the stimulus bill and his appearance on al-Arabiya

Mark's Mailbox: Trillions from heaven, baby talk and Democratic eugenics

In Mark's blog:

Cat got his tongue

Pussy galore

Steyn testifies

Running the numbers

Plus many more links Steynian, Levantian, and Freespeechian, over at Free Canuckistan.

Today's Iranian Fun

The top pick: Iran marks Islamic revolution

Plus:

Netanyahu says Iran will not get hands on nukes

Iran urged to pursue Israeli war leaders

Iran police kill 10 drugs smugglers in east-report

Obama renews diplomatic dialogue

Israel may take Gaza war to Iran

Iran hails Turkish PM for Gaza walkout

Innocence Lost

Iran pays homage to revolutionary leader 30 years on

Top Iran official tells Obama to avoid Bush's rhetoric

Iran: Nasir al-Mulk Mosque

Iran: Obama wants to talk because the U.S. has failed

Pak-Iran friendly ties to grow further: President Zardari

Cyprus Authorities Holds Iran's Hamas Arms Ship in Limassol Port

Iran sets ban, fine on trade with Israel

Dear Ayatullah: Obama

Friday, 30 January, 2009

Lesbians caught in culture clash

By Stuart Laidlaw, via the Toronto Star:

Whether it's kirpans in a Montreal schoolyard, turbans on a Milton job site, polygamists in a B.C. town or lesbians in a Winnipeg doctor's waiting room, opposing cultural and religious rights are giving a rough ride to Canada's cherished multiculturalism.
"The groups are clashing like never before," says Robert Mundle, chaplain at Toronto's Rehabilitation Centre. Mundle, an expert on the ethics of religion in medicine, says Canada can expect to see many more faith-based confrontations.
The latest involves a lesbian couple in Winnipeg who complained to Manitoba's human rights commission and College of Physicians and Surgeons that family doctor Karmeila Elias refused to accept them as patients because of their sexual orientation.
"It was like a kick in the stomach," says Andrea Markowski, who recently moved to the city from the Northwest Territories with her spouse of 18 years, Ginette. "I have a really hard time understanding how her religion affects her ability to care for me as a human being."
Thor Hansell, lawyer for Egyptian-born Elias, denies she refused care, saying the doctor felt she had a responsibility to explain her "personal religious views" so the couple could decide for themselves whether to become her patient.
Canada's doctor shortage means such confrontations will occur more often, says Dr. Bill Pope, head of Manitoba's College of Physicians and Surgeons, as doctors recruited from abroad bring their cultural and religious beliefs with them.
"Often their basic knowledge is good, but it's all in the way in which you operationalize it for a culture that might be quite different."
That's why the college requires a four-week orientation course before foreign-trained doctors can practise in Manitoba. Pope made a special visit to the course this week, where 25 doctors from the Middle East and Asia were wrapping up.
"Needless to say, I spent some time with them to explain this issue to them. A lot of them were terrified," he says. "They will be beginning practice very soon."
This isn't the first time religion and medicine have clashed in Winnipeg. Last year, doctors at Grace Hospital resigned rather than accept a court order to keep a patient on life support after a brain injury.
The family of 84-year-old Samuel Golubchuk said removing life support would constitute a sin under their Orthodox Jewish beliefs because it would hasten his death. Golubchuk died before his case could be resolved in the courts.

Read the rest here.

Poor kids

They've learned a harsh lesson. NDP = not exactly damn trustworthy.

New type of funny

By Jim Slotek, via the Edmonton Sun:

For most of the past five years that Corner Gas has been on the air, Brent Butt says, "I've been that guy on the plane, typing away on his laptop."
Usually it was a script for an upcoming show, written somewhere in the air between his Vancouver home, meetings with "suits" in Toronto and location shoots in Roleau, Saskatchewan.
Sometimes it would be material for one of the sporadic standup dates he continues to fit into his life. "And people would be on the plane saying, 'What are ya writin'?
"Or they'd come up to me and say, 'You should do a show about my brother-in-law. That guy is an a------!' "
Despite the fact that new episodes of Corner Gas are continuing to air until the show's series finale this spring, the gang from fictional Dog River, Saskatchewan said their real goodbyes last September when they shot the last episode.
Since then, the laptop has stayed hot. "It was a case of not much downtime because CTV said to me, 'If you have an idea for another show we'd be interested.' So we immediately went into development on that."
The pilot has since been shot for the show Hiccups, in which his wife Nancy Robertson (Corner Gas' Wanda) plays Millie Upton, a children's author with anger issues. "That's the general premise, she's got anger issues, and she impulsively decides to get help from a life coach -- so impulsively that she picks a guy with no experience. It's kind of like the blind leading the blind. I just write and produce, though I do a quasi-Hitchcockian cameo in the pilot."

Read the rest here.

Amendments sought

Via the Edmonton Sun:

A private foundation wants the Alberta Human Rights Commission to stop dealing with complaints based on statements or publications that may expose people to hatred.
The recommendation is part of a new report on the commission by the Calgary-based Sheldon Chumir Foundation. The report calls on the province to give the commission the power to file its own discrimination complaints and suggests it should report to the entire legislature instead of the government.
Read it here.

Today's Levant-Jaunt

Links Levantian:

Freedom Bloggers

The Jack of Hearts

Canucki Jihad

Right Side News

Content Levantian:

In Ezra's blog:

Ignatieff campaign's anti-Chinese slur receives massive media coverage

Anthem-banning principal a failed left-wing politician and radical activist

Salim Mansur's column

Calgary court bans Syed Soharwardy, Nagah Hage, from Jewish mall

Why we're in Afghanistan

Is Ignatieff going wobbly on Israel?

Justice Department launches internal review of section 13

More on the CHRC's being cleared on privacy breach

The coverage is still coming out. By Joseph Brean, via the National Post: Human rights body cleared of privacy breach:


The federal Privacy Commissioner is blaming an accidental "mismatch" of IP addresses for the long-running controversy over whether a Canadian Human Rights Commission hate speech investigator hacked into a civilian's computer in order to disguise his presence on a white supremacist message board.
In dismissing a complaint by Ottawa resident Nellie Hechme on Thursday, the Privacy Commission said it could not explain why a Bell Canada representative identified her last year at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal as the owner of an Internet account that was used to access stormfront.org under the pseudonym Jadewarr.
Jadewarr was a pseudonym used by CHRC investigators to conceal their identities on Web sites under investigation for hate messages. Because Ms. Hechme lived near the CHRC offices, and had a laptop with a wireless Internet connection, speculation soon grew that her account had been hacked. This theory was nurtured by the tribunal's respondent, Marc Lemire, who had subpoenaed the information in the hopes of undermining the credibility of CHRC investigators.
Under privacy law, IP addresses -- the unique numerical tags assigned to computers on the Internet -- are considered personal information, so their surreptitious use by a government agency would violate the Privacy Act, according to Privacy Commission spokeswoman Valerie Lawton.
But the Privacy Commission's investigation found no evidence that the CHRC violated the law.
"The investigation found no evidence that the CHRC ever collected any personal information about the complainant or in fact that the CHRC had any knowledge about the complainant prior to the allegations made in the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal public hearing," the Privacy Commission said in a statement.
"Technological experts have indicated that, most likely, but without certainty, the association of the complainant's IP address to the CHRC was simply a mismatch on the part of a third party, which could have occurred in a variety of ways not involving the CHRC."
Read the rest here.

And via the Canadian Press: Woman gives up quest for answers to alleged Internet hijacking:

TORONTO — A woman whose name was dragged into a human rights hearing at which federal investigators admitted to planting messages on a white supremacist website said Friday she may never know why her Internet account was identified as a source of the postings.
Nelly Hechme said she had encountered "too many roadblocks" in trying to get answers about the apparent hijacking of her wireless connection.
"I am not one to fight hard; I merely wanted some answers and maybe a little justice but that doesn't seem to be the case," Hechme said from Ottawa.
"I feel like I'm basically being told to just accept it."
Hechme was stunned last spring when her name was brought up at a long-running hate case against Toronto resident Marc Lemire.
Evidence by Bell Canada before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal indicated that Hechme's Internet account had been used by a "Jadewarr" to post hate messages during an investigation into far-right websites.
An investigator for the Canadian Human Rights Commission admitted to using the pseudonym "Jadewarr" but said the rights agency had no connection to Hechme, who lived near the commission's offices.
On Thursday, the federal privacy commissioner dropped Hechme's complaint, saying it found no evidence her privacy rights were breached.
It found no evidence the agency hijacked her Internet connection and also suggested a simple "mismatch" could have been behind the naming of her secured wireless Internet account at the hearing.
Lemire was critical of the privacy commissioner's investigation and said he was dismayed by the result.
Read the rest here.

Today's Iranian Fun

The top pick: Saatchi Shows Veiled Women Made of Foil, Iran Sex-Worker Dolls

Plus:

Balance of Opinion: A president's first TV interview

Cyprus stops Iranian arms ship to Syria-report

Egypt attacks Iran and allies in Arab world

First Iran Talks of Obama’s Presidency Set for Feb. 4 (Update1)

Revealed: Recent U.S.-Iran nuclear talks involved key officials

Germany urges Iran to engage with US

Iran cleric to Obama: Don't repeat Bush's warnings

Lebanese PM hits back at Hezbollah on missing Iranian diplomats

Obama repeats Bush policy toward Iran

Obama, The Muslim World And Iran

Officials: Venezuela-Iran Terror Network Growing in Latin America

Report: Perry talked to Iranian official

US refuses to rule out Iran attack

U.S. charting course for direct talks with Iran

Writings Offer Look at Administration Debate on Iran

Today's Mark Madness

Links Steynian:

Pundit and Pundette

BigCityLib

State Policy Blog

Examiner.com

Hugh Hewitt on Townhall

UK1884

threedonia.com

Right Side News

Ron Radosh

Content Steynian:

Ten years ago: What Part Of "No" Doesn't A Senator Understand?

On the Hugh Hewitt show: Mark Steyn on Obama's bad week with the stimulus bill and his appearance on al-Arabiya

On culture: Young At Heart

On America: The Audacity Of Dull

In the OC Register: Stimulated right into being another Europe, and Obama raises heart rates, lowers expectations

Mark's Song of the Week: Pick Yourself Up

Seasons Steynian: Holocaust Memorial Day

Mark's Request of the Week: Bad Things Come To Those Who Wait

In NRO's The Corner:

Billions and Billions Served!

Good news!

In Mark's blog:

Cat got his tongue

Steyn Testifies

Pussy Galore

Plus many more links Steynian, Levantian, and Freespeechian, over at Free Canuckistan.

Thursday, 29 January, 2009

Tonight's easy listening

Tonight, I'm going to start things off with Sugar Rush, and Making A Cross, From The Desert Sessions. Plus, a cover of Gnarls Barley's Crazy, by The Kooks.

And speaking of Crazy, here's an anti Bush/Cheney remix, which, while I don't agree with it, I have to admit is brilliantly done.


Nunavut Minister is Stripped by Big Sister of his Cabinet Post for Telling the Truth

By Barbara Kay, via the National Post's Full Comment:

Louis Tapardjuk, until a few days ago Justice minister of Nunavut, has just been relocated to a very high-end dog house. His new kennelmates are all male public figures, such as Larry Summers, former president of Harvard University, who dared to utter certain statements that, although true and, to any objective observer, in no way hurtful to anyone, set the tumbrils in motion that would soon carry them off to the political guillotine.
What did Mr Tapardjuk say that cost him his portfolio? Why, Mr Tapardchuk had the temerity to suggest that domestic violence is sometimes initiated by women. He casually remarked in an e-mail - not even meant for anyone's eyes but his senior staff - that women who start domestic disputes should share the blame where violence is involved: "Often the man is charged [with domestic violence] even though the conflict may have been initiated by the female partner."
Aiiiieeee! Heresy! Poor Mr Tapardchuk apparently forgot or may even be ignorant of the fact that no public figure is allowed to suggest that women are ever, ever the initiators of domestic violence. Women are always, always the victims. Of course this credo, that domestic violence is a one-way-street wherein all violence against women is unprovoked, and all violence against men self-defensive, is a complete myth, a myth that has been busted over and over again, most credibly - one would imagine - by our own Statistics Canada, whose findings in their official reports on domestic violence dovetail with all other peer-reviewed studies: Domestic violence is about one-quarter male-initiated, one quarter female-initiated and half reciprocal.

Read the rest here.

Job Protection For Gays Must Be A Right - Report

By Jeremy Klazus, via SEE Magazine:

Amidst renewed pressure on the Alberta government to add the words “sexual orientation” to its human rights law, Culture and Community Spirit Minister Lindsay Blackett isn’t committing to making the long-awaited change, but says he wants to restore Albertans’ faith in the province’s human rights commission and make it more accessible.
“It’s not just a problem endemic to Alberta,” says Blackett, whose ministry includes the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission. “It’s one that’s right around the country. People have lost faith in [human rights commissions].” Blackett’s department has been reviewing the commission for about nine months and is looking at improvements. “In 1972, when Alberta established its first human rights commission, we were leaders in the country,” he says. “We can be that again.”
A new report from the Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership says Alberta’s human rights commission is suffering from “low profile and poor reputation” because of weak support from the provincial government. The report recommends a slate of changes to reinvigorate the commission, including spelling out “sexual orientation” as a prohibited ground of discrimination in Alberta’s Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act. The change “is long overdue and will put an end to one of the more shameful phases of Alberta’s human rights history,” the report says.

Read the rest here.

Report calls for changes to Alberta Human Rights Commission

Via Troy Media:

CALGARY, AB, January 29, 2009/ Troy Media/ -- The Alberta Human Rights Commission is badly damaged and in need of repair, according to a new report released today by the Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership.
The report, Toward Equal Opportunity for all Albertans: Recommendations for Improvement of the Alberta Human Rights Commission, points out that the Commission needs renewed political commitment and support if Alberta is to adequately protect human rights.
“Not everyone living in Alberta has a fair chance at achieving the good life the province has to offer,” the report states. “Discrimination prevents many people from living with full dignity and from getting ahead in very tangible ways.”
Submitted to the Alberta Government in September 2008, the report is the culmination of the Sheldon Chumir Foundation’s three-year Human Rights Project.
The report argues that the Commission suffers from a public relations consultant’s worst-case scenario: the combination of low profile and poor reputation. This is the direct result of provincial neglect and years of inadequate support, a situation which must be reversed, says the report.
“Alberta could lead in the struggle against discrimination,” according to the report, “if the issues facing our human rights protection system are addressed with the seriousness and determination they deserve.”
Read the rest here.

So....no determination at all then?

H/t to Blazing Cat Fur.

Support for human rights? There's no better investment

By Janet Keeping, via the Calgary Herald:

The Alberta human rights commission is suffering from political neglect. While notice of its death may be--as Mark Twain said of his own obituary-- premature, the patient is on life support. It is time for an injection of political commitment to bring it back to life.
Compared to the basket cases of the world, such as Darfur or Somalia, things look good. But measured on a more rigorous scale, there is tons of room for improvement.
The legal protection of human rights wasn't always taken lightly in Alberta. The province was a leader, for example, in women's political rights.
In 1916, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta were the first Canadian jurisdictions to extend the vote to women. In 1918, two women were elected to the Alberta legislature--the first females elected to public office in the British Empire. In 1929, five Alberta women initiated the court case that established women as "persons" under Canadian constitutional law, who could therefore be appointed to the Senate.
When Alberta's first antidiscrimination statute was adopted in 1972, it was, many believe, the best law of its kind in the country.
But any such momentum was long ago lost. Neglect by the provincial government has left the human rights commission languishing in the basement of the bureaucracy.
To protect their independence, some Canadian jurisdictions have their human rights commissions report directly to the legislature. Others have the minister of justice, always a particularly prestigious cabinet post, oversee the work of their commissions.
Alberta marches to the tune of a different drummer, though. Until March 2008, the commission reported to the most junior cabinet minister through the Department of Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture. Since then, it reports to the minister of culture and community spirit.
The result has been demoralization, low profile (many Albertans don't even know the commission exists) and failure to address a host of problems begging for attention.
It doesn't have to be this way.
Albertans are leaders on many fronts, but not in human development, which cannot be maximized without strong measures against discrimination. Albertans could lead here, too, if the issues facing the human rights commission were addressed with seriousness.
Constructive engagement with those issues would include a careful review of reforms that have been made in other parts of Canada and a willingness to adopt measures that could be useful in Alberta.
Read the rest here.

Probe finds no evidence that rights agency hijacked woman's Internet connection

Via the Canadian Press:
TORONTO — The federal privacy commissioner has dismissed an Ottawa woman's complaint that the Canadian Human Rights Commission violated her rights, saying it found no evidence the agency hijacked her Internet connection during a probe of white supremacist websites.
In a decision released Thursday, the commissioner said there were no grounds to uphold Nelly Hechme's privacy complaint.
"We looked at it very carefully (and) we found no evidence that they ever accessed the individual's Internet connection during the course of their investigation," Valerie Lawton, a spokeswoman for privacy commissioner said from Ottawa.
"We also found no evidence that the (rights) commission had any knowledge of the individual before the allegations came up at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearing."
Hechme, who lived near the rights commission's office, complained to the privacy commissioner last year after a Bell Canada security official publicly identified her Internet connection as one used to post hate messages on a website.
The startling revelation came during long-running hate hearings before the tribunal involving Toronto resident Mark Lemire.
During the hearings, Dean Steacy, an investigator for the rights commission, admitted using the pseudonym "Jadewarr" to post messages on white supremacist websites.
Following a subpoena, Bell Canada revealed that a "Jadewarr" post in a chat room had originated from an Internet address belonging to Hechme, who expressed dismay at the notion her wireless connection had been used.
The decision by the privacy commissioner still leaves unanswered how Hechme's Internet account became snared in the rights-commission's investigation.
Read the rest here.

Well, there you have it. That still doesn't mean that Dean Steacy didn't post on a white supremacist website with intent to entrap unsuspecting people with his comments though. That's indisputable. All this means is that the CHRC wasn't illegal in its actions. Instead, it'll have to settle for corrupt and underhanded. Quite a step down, but I'm sure they'll get used to it.

You can read more about this at Marketwire, and Blazing Cat Fur, and you can read the Privacy Commission's case summary here.

Pajamas Media to face a Muslim lawsuit?

Read about the possibility here.

Today's Mark Madness

Links Steynian:

Centurean2's Weblog

Rue Saint Michael

Molly's Mesmerising Mind

Content Steynian:

Ten years ago: The Case That Wouldn't Die

On culture: Young At Heart

Mark's Request of the Week: Bad Things Come To Those Who Wait

In NRO's The Corner:

Nuclear Checkout

More Partisan Pettiness

The Nation as Company Town

On the world: Re: Britain To Follow The Netherlands?

Ave atque vale: Angela Morley

In the OC Register: Obama raises heart rates, lowers expectations

Mark's Song of the Week: Pick Yourself Up

Seasons Steynian: Holocaust Memorial Day

In Mark's blog:

Pussy galore

Steyn testifies

Plus, more links Steynian, Levantian, and Freespeechian, over at Free Canuckistan.

B’nai Brith v. RadicalPress.com: Zionism’s Battle for Control of Canada’s Mind

Read it here, via Ingoc man.

Blogger can't sue over comment, rules High Court

Via The Register:

A man who was criticised in the comments section of his own blog cannot sue for defamation because he did not delete the comment when he discovered it, the High Court has said. The Court said that the man consented to the comment's publication.
Christopher Carrie is the author of a self-published book in which he claims to have been sexually abused by the son of writer JRR Tolkien, Father John Tolkien. John Tolkien, who was a priest, died in 2003.
Carrie set up a blog on 5th February 2007 and published a post under a pseudonym on 6th February, promoting his website and his book, which could be downloaded from there for free.
The court heard that JRR Tolkien's great grandson Royd Tolkien had posted a comment on the site claiming that Carrie was a fraudster who had tried to defraud the Catholic Church and the Tolkien family and had admitted to lying about sexual abuse to extract money from the church.
Carrie denied the claims via his pseudonym on the site, and sued Tolkien, claiming that the remarks were defamatory.
Carrie did not remove the remarks, though, even though the Court heard that he had seen them four-and-a-half hours after they were posted. The remarks are still online.
Tolkien argued that this meant that Carrie consented to the publication of the comments, and the High Court agreed. Mr Justice Eady granted summary judgment in favour of Tolkien.
"No explanation was offered for [Carrie] having taken no steps to delete it until his witness statement of 18 November 2008 was served," said the ruling. "The explanation given, however, of putting the words 'in context' does not in any way detract from the validity of a defence of authorisation or acquiescence. The fact remains that he could have removed it at any time over the last 22 months."
Read the rest here.

Today's Iranian Fun

The top pick: Iranian leader demands US apology

Plus:

Dennis Ross as Iran Envoy?

Correction: EU-Iran-Opposition story

How to Begin with Iran

Iran holds key to Mideast peace

Iran sets conditions for improved ties with U.S.

Iran turns to UN over EU approval of MKO

Iran's President to Seek Second Term, Adviser Says

Netanyahu: Iran nukes trumps global economy

Netanyahu: Iran nukes trumps global economy

State prepares letter to Iran?

New White House WMD Czar Wants Immediate Talks with Iran, to 'Manage' North Korea Until it Collapses

Obama team drafting letter to heal Iran rift: report

Obama and The Muslim World

Revealed: the letter Obama team hope will heal Iran rift

Stimulus to Senate...Netanyahu: Iran nukes more pressing than...

Talking to Iran...

Al Jazeera, but not for the wrong reasons

By Mark Mercer, via The Journal, a student newspaper for St. Mary's, Halifax, university:

We in Canada should be able to watch Al Jazeera, a news network based in Qatar, on our televisions in our living rooms, or says Joan Baxter (“Why Can’t Canadians Watch Al Jazeera,” Chronicle Herald, 14 January 2009; http://thechronicleherald.ca/Columnists/1100628.html). Baxter is right—of course we should be able to watch Al Jazeera. But the reasons why are nothing like those Baxter gives. Our quarrel should not be with any decision that the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission has made. It should, rather, be with the power the CRTC has to make such decisions. We cannot watch Al Jazeera on our televisions because the CRTC requires companies that would distribute it to monitor it for abusive content and to delete anything that crosses one line or another. Understandably, no distribution company will devote to this task the resources required, especially not when, despite its good-faith efforts, the company might still receive a complaint and, thereby, incur the wrath of the CRTC. Thus, the CRTC in effect prohibits companies from offering Al Jazeera to their subscribers.
Read the rest here.

Today's Levant-Jaunt

Links Levantian:

The Truth Will Set You Free

Bowie's Blog

Content Levantian:

In Ezra's blog:

Anthem-banning principal a failed left-wing politician and radical activist

Salim Mansur's column

Calgary court bans Syed Soharwardy, Nagah Hage, from Jewish mall

Why we're in Afghanistan

Is Ignatieff going wobbly on Israel?

Justice Department launches internal review of section 13

Wednesday, 28 January, 2009

Fired pregnant woman receives $26,000 compensation

Via CBC news:
The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has awarded an Abbotsford woman more than $26,000 in compensation after she lost her job in April 2006, while she was pregnant.
Hailey de Lisser will receive $21,000 for lost wages and maternity benefits, and $5,000 for injury to her dignity and feelings.
De Lisser had been working part-time since August 2005 at Traveland Leisure Vehicles Ltd. in Langley, a company that describes itself as one of Canada's largest RV dealers. Her twin sister, Heather Ouimet, was employed there full-time since July 2003.
De Lisser was supposed to fill her sister's full-time position when Ouimet became pregnant in 2006.
"And then I found out I was also pregnant, and slowly my position was just dissolved and I was let go," de Lisser told CBC News Tuesday.
"So you go from having an income to having no income, and having a second child is scary."
She said the company sacked her in April 2006 and hired someone who could cover her sister's job for the entire maternity-leave period.
De Lisser filed a complaint with the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, which ruled in a decision released Monday that she was inappropriately fired and should be compensated.
The tribunal ruled Traveland placed de Lisser in a vulnerable position and made it difficult for her to find another job because she was pregnant.

Read it here.

Ok, while I recognize that it's kind of a scummy thing to do, to lay someone off while they're pregnant, at the same time, I can't help but feel that as a private organization, they should be allowed to set their own policy. The BC Human Rights Tribunal shouldn't be able to dictate who a particular business can hire. And to force somebody to keep on a pregnant worker - just because she can't get another job due to her circumstances...I'm sorry, but how is that the problem of that particular business?

If the business had refused to hire somebody because of that person's sexual preference, or their race or gender, then you might have a case. But pregnancy isn't a matter of permanent circumstances - in other words, you don't refuse to hire pregnant-Americans in favor of caucasian-Americans.

Like I said, it's harsh, and my sympathy goes out to Mrs. De Lisser, but at the same time, the BCHRT doesn't have any business meddling in the affairs of a privately-owned business like that, over a decision of hiring policy.

Cool

By Ryan Paul, via Ars Technica:

Open Web standards have evolved considerably over the years and browser compatibility is better than ever, but one important area where standards are just starting to catch up is support for streaming video. Proprietary browser plugins are used extensively across the web to play video from popular sites. This creates serious lock-in risk and gives proprietary software vendors like Adobe a lot of control over the medium.
Although alternatives such as Microsoft's Silverlight are beginning to change the game and force Adobe to open up, there still isn't a viable, vendor-neutral, standards-based alternative that can shift the balance of power over to end-users and tear down some of the walls that limit how video content is experienced on the Web. Mozilla and the Wikimedia Foundation have launched an initiative to help improve the quality of open, standards-based video technology.
Mozilla has given the Wikimedia Foundation a $100,000 grant intended to fund development of the Ogg container format and the Theora and Vorbis media codecs. These open media codecs are thought to be unencumbered by software patents, which means that they can be freely implemented and used without having to pay royalties or licensing fees to patent holders. This differentiates Ogg Theora from many other formats that are widely used today.
Read the whole thing here.

BC Court finds in favor of disgruntled Lutheran ex-members

Read about it here, via Nova Scotia Scott.

Stupid Guinness World Records...

That's just not fair. I tell ya, the next time an eleven year old Mexican kills six bulls in a bullfight, and the Guiness World Records won't document the event, heads are gonna roll.

Discrimination at Grotto

By Heather McInnis, via The Omega student newspaper:



Forms of discrimination are seen every day, and many acts of discrimination go unnoticed. The age discrimination that is occurring at The Blue Grotto, a pub and live music venue in downtown Kamloops, will not go unnoticed for much longer.
“From a human rights perspective, I don’t think this practice is fair,” said Paul Roberge, TRU harassment prevention advisor.
The Blue Grotto has an age restriction of 21. This means that 19- and 20-year-olds, who are of the legal drinking age in British Columbia, are not allowed into the pub to enjoy live music or a couple of drinks.
The Blue Grotto is currently the only pub in Kamloops with an age restriction higher than the legal drinking age in the province, 19.
The pub does let the 19- and 20-year-old age group in during some mid-week shows, however, it is an act that may be seen as benefiting the pub during its slower nights. The Blue Grotto declined comment.
Dino Bernardo, owner of The Commodore said he doesn’t think the age restriction is a maturity thing and that in his experience 19- and 20-year-olds are not any more “rowdy” than the 21-and-over group.
Bernardo said he believes the age restriction is there simply because “when you’re 35 to 50 you don’t really want to be hanging out with [19 year olds],” and that the 35 to 50 age group is the demographic that The Blue Grotto is marketing to.
“It seems to be working for their business… [The Blue Grotto] is trying to serve a niche market,” Bernardo said. Ron Durling, the communications co-ordinator for the B.C. Human Rights Commission said that the Grotto is “being discriminatory, there’s no doubt about it.”
Durling also suggested that making a human rights claim would be the next appropriate step to take to get a legal response on the issue.

Read the rest here.

Well, isn't Ron's answer convenient? Sure, what the hell. File a complaint. It'll feed Ron's family for a couple of weeks.

Seriously, like, how did it become a human right to enter a private premises and demand service? Stores can set whatever policies they want - it's not like we, the customers get a say in the matter. The only input we have is our business.

A little farther down in the article, I saw something that almost made my eyes bleed:


Paul Roberge, harassment prevention advisor for the university, said that discrimination is occurring everywhere on a daily basis.
“It is difficult to fight every day for fairness,” he said. “Human rights in Canada evolve when individuals and groups challenge current practices that they believe violate their rights.”
The B.C. Human Rights Code states that discrimination may be happening when “a rule, condition, policy or practice that is the same for everyone has an unfair effect on a person because of their age.”

So does that mean that a three-year-old can walk into a bar and order a beer? You know, with the weight of the BC Human Rights code at his back? Oh wait - so the BC Human Rights Code only allows people over the age of nineteen to order a beer, you know, 'cause of the whole 'legal age' thing. Damn, that seems a bit exclusionary. I guess when the The Grotto does it, then it's a hate crime. But if the government does it, then it's business as usual.

F**k, is this what you get at college these days? No wonder kids with Masters in Philosophy can only get a job as a barrista at Starbucks.

More on the complaint before the Manitoba HRC by lesbians against Muslim doctor

I've already talked about this a little bit, but there's been some coverage of the whole....issue.

The Globe and Mail had a good article - Doctor's alleged refusal to treat lesbians sparks rights complaint, by Patrick White:


WINNIPEG -- Andrea Markowski says she sensed the doctor's unease from the first waiting-room handshake.
She thought she'd been upfront about her background when she asked for a meet and greet with Dr. Karmeila Elias at Winnipeg's Lakewood Medical Centre.
It was pretty simple. She and her same-sex partner Ginette had just arrived from Yellowknife. They were looking for a good family doctor. Dr. Elias was accepting new patients. In a country where finding a GP can take months of agony, the match appeared to be a no-brainer.
But judging by the confused look Ms. Markowski she says she saw on Dr. Elias's face, nobody had mentioned their sexual orientation ahead of time.
"When I introduced myself and introduced Ginette as my partner, it took [the doctor] a little while to put it together. When she did, she looked really uncomfortable."
It was the beginning of an alleged incident that has prompted a human-rights complaint and raised thorny questions about how the Canadian medical system acculturates foreign-trained doctors.
There are an estimated 7,000 international medical graduates, or IMGs, in Canada. Most go through some form of cultural sensitivity training before earning a Canadian licence, but if Ms. Markowski's experience is in any way accurate, the primer falls short.
She says her encounter with Dr. Elias - who trained in Egypt and moved to Canada five years ago - turned for the worse when the trio retreated to an office.
"We started running through my medical history and [the doctor] could not look at me. She was flustered. She couldn't focus. I knew something was up, so I asked her, 'Is our sexual orientation an issue for you in terms of your ability to treat us?'"
Ms. Markowski alleges Dr. Elias soon confirmed her suspicions.
"She said, first thing, that it was against her religion, and second, that she had no experience caring for lesbian or gay patients."
After a terse discussion during which Ms. Markowski says she told the physician she needed "to be educated and get some help because her response was ill-informed," the couple left.
Offended by what they perceived as a blatant example of discrimination, the couple of 18 years say they lodged complaints with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba and the Manitoba Human Rights Commission.
Article 7 of the College's Code of Conduct specifies that no patient shall be discriminated against on grounds of sexual orientation or any other Charter right.
After Ms. Markowski sent a copy of the complaint to the clinic, they quickly received an apology.
But that hasn't ended their efforts. "If we don't do something about this, someone else is going to get hurt," Ms. Markowski said. "The standards on this are very clear. Doctors must treat everyone who walks through the door."
Calls to Dr. Elias were referred to a lawyer yesterday, who questioned whether his client actually refused the couple as patients.
"Dr. Elias felt she should disclose to them her personal religious views," said Thor Hansell. "That was for the purpose of allowing them to make a decision of whether or not that might be relevant to them wanting her to become their doctor or not. That was perceived as a refusal to treat. I think that was unfortunate because that was not the intention."

Read the rest here.

Other coverage:

sitfu.com: "Human Rights" - A Higher Form of Discrimination

And from the National Post, by Jen Skerrit: Doctor did not discriminate against lesbians:clinic:
WINNIPEG -- The director of a Winnipeg clinic defended a family physician accused of discrimination against a lesbian couple yesterday, saying the doctor did not refuse to treat the women.
Dr. Terry Gwozdecki, medical director of Lakewood Medic-al Centre, e-mailed a statement to the Winnipeg Free Press yesterday, saying Dr. Kamelia Elias "at no time refused to accept these women into her practice."
Andrea and Ginette Markowski -- a same-sex couple of 18 years -- filed a complaint with the Manitoba Human Rights Commission and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba this week, claiming Dr. Elias refused to take them as patients, saying she doesn't know how to treat lesbians.
Dr. Gwozdecki said Dr. Elias interviewed the couple, took their medical history and had already initiated the doctor-patient relationship when one of the women asked Dr. Elias if she had a problem with their same-sex relationship. Dr. Gwozdecki said Dr. Elias was upfront with her religious beliefs -- which are opposed to homosexuality --and disclosed she had not treated lesbian patients. He said no physician at Lakewood Medical Center has ever discriminated based on race, sexual orientation or religious beliefs.
"Please understand that her inexperience stems not from unwillingness to treat these patients, but solely due to lack of exposure to them in her practices in Cairo, Egypt and Steinbach, Manitoba," he wrote.
On Monday, Dr. Elias told the Free Press she has no experience treating lesbians and gays, and suggested they sometimes have "sexual problems" and "get a lot of diseases and infections." Dr. Elias practised medicine in Egypt before spending four years in Steinbach.
Andrea Markowski said she is not surprised the clinic is standing behind its physician, but maintains Dr. Elias was clearly uncomfortable with same-sex relationships during their meeting. Andrea Markowski
Read the rest here.

From the Toronto Sun:

Doc turns away lesbians
WINNIPEG -- A Manitoba lesbian couple say a family doctor refused to accept them as patients because of their sexual orientation.
Andrea Markowski says she and her partner were stunned when a foreign-trained doctor told them treating lesbians violated her religious beliefs.
The couple have lodged a complaint with the human rights commission and the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Read it here.

What an interesting story, huh? Personally, I don't get the concept of demanding a specific service be performed by a specific person. It's like a sense of entitlement, and personally, I feel that it comes in the medical field as a result of a more socialized medical program in Canada. In a capitalist system, if someone is uncomfortable with performing a service for you, you go to the next person. In a socialized sytem, if someone is uncomfortable with performing a service for you, then you can make their life miserable for it.

That's progress.

You're damaging your brain with practical skills

By Jim Mullen, via the Jewish World Review:

Dad is typing away furiously at the computer, sweat glistening off his forehead.
He is trying to make a Web page for his business.
His 13-year-old son is across the room playing one of those horrible video games filled with mindless violence, bazooka-toting Barbarellas in hot pants, unshaven macho men blowing up anyone who pokes their head around a corner.
Everyone knows that this kid will grow up to be a violent, know-nothing sociopath who will be a drain on society for years to come.
Everyone knows that video games are gradually sucking out his once-malleable brain and replacing it with oatmeal.
As any pundit will tell you, the kid should be outside playing basketball or football with his friends; he should be outdoors breathing the fresh air, that his parents are letting him squander his best years in front of a video screen. They are raising another wastrel.
Dad stops typing and yells across the room to Billy, "What do you call those things that hold websites?"
Things that hold websites? Does he mean a bookmark? Does he mean an ISP? Does he mean a web host?
"Server?" Billy guessed, not lifting his eyes from his IQ-draining game, which was wrecking his life.
I wonder how many professional basketball players and football players would have known the answer? Yet the pundits think that being the high school football hero is a wonderful achievement. It's common pundit knowledge.
Except for the gambling, the divorces, the steroid abuse and the building of wildly expensive stadiums with public money, sports build character.
Read the rest here.

United Nations forbids defaming religion, specifically Islam

By Nat Hentoff, via the Jewish World Review:

On Inauguration Day, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, in a New York Times ad ("An Invitation to a New Partnership"), told "Dear President OBAMA" that Muslims "have compelling strategic and moral reasons to cooperate and peacefully co-exist with the United States in particular, and with the West in general."
Many Muslims here and elsewhere want that partnership; but some, jihadists in the name of Islam, disagree violently. In its address to our new president, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (which has permanent status at the United Nations) made no mention of its own strategic skills that resulted, on Dec. 18, in the passage by the U.N. General Assembly of a nonbinding resolution (with strong advice to its members) that condemns "defamation of religion," especially Islam.
In a 83-to-53 vote, with 42 abstentions, the U.N. General Assembly urges nations to provide "adequate protections" in their laws or constitutions against "acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general."
Only Islam and Muslims are specifically named in this resolution against religious defamation sponsored by Uganda — on behalf of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference — with co-sponsors Belarus and Venezuela. In the opposition were the United States, a majority of European countries, Japan, India and a number of other nations.
Those voting in favor say they do not want to limit free speech but do intend to stop such expressions as the 2005 Danish cartoons disrespecting the Prophet Muhammad that ignited violent protests by Muslims around the world.
Among the opponents, including myself, of this U.N. move to have its members legislate, with penalties — against such very broadly designated "religious defamation" — is Floyd Abrams, this country's leading protector of the First Amendment in the Supreme Court and in his writings. In his Dec. 9, lecture on Global Communications Issues at the United Nations itself in New York, he cited a recent study by the European Center for Law and Justice finding "that laws based on the concept of 'defamation of religion' actually help to create a climate of violence."
Read the rest here.

The Saudi-isation of Pakistan

By Pervez Hoodbhoy, via Newsline:

The common belief in Pakistan is that Islamic radicalism is a problem only in FATA, and that madrassas are the only institutions serving as jihad factories. This is a serious misconception. Extremism is breeding at a ferocious rate in public and private schools within Pakistan’s towns and cities. Left unchallenged, this education will produce a generation incapable of co-existing with anyone except strictly their own kind. The mindset it creates may eventually lead to Pakistan’s demise as a nation state.
For 20 years or more, a few of us have been desperately sending out SOS messages, warning of terrible times to come. In fact, I am surprised at how rapidly these dire predictions have come true.
A full-scale war is being fought in FATA, Swat and other “wild” areas of Pakistan, resulting in thousands of deaths. It is only a matter of time before this fighting shifts to Peshawar and Islamabad (which has already been a witness to the Lal Masjid episode) and engulfs Lahore and Karachi as well. The suicide bomber and the masked abductor have crippled Pakistan’s urban life and shattered its national economy.
Soldiers, policemen, factory and hospital workers, mourners at funerals and ordinary people praying in mosques have all been reduced to globs of flesh and fragments of bones. But, perhaps paradoxically, in spite of the fact that the dead bodies and shattered lives are almost all Muslim ones, few Pakistanis speak out against these atrocities. Nor do they approve of the army operation against the cruel perpetrators of these acts because they believe that they are Islamic warriors fighting for Islam and against American occupation. Political leaders like Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan have no words of solace for those who have suffered at the hands of Islamic extremists. Their tears are reserved exclusively for the victims of Predator drones, even if they are those who committed grave crimes against their own people. Terrorism, by definition, is an act only the Americans can commit.
What explains Pakistan’s collective masochism? To understand this, one needs to study the drastic social and cultural transformations that have rendered this country so completely different from what it was in earlier times
Read the rest here.

Today's Levant-Jaunt

Links Levantian:

Islamist Watch

Content Levantian:

In Ezra's blog:

Salim Mansur's column

Calgary court bans Syed Soharwardy, Nagah Hage, from Jewish mall

Why we're in Afghanistan

Is Ignatieff going wobbly on Israel?

Justice Department launches internal review of section 13

Holland's national suicide note

Today's Iranian fun

The top pick: Iran: A conservative site was filtered

Plus:

Egypt attacks Iran and allies in Arab world

Gates' Iran Comments Undermine A President's Plans -- Again

Iran anticipates "practical," "fundamental" changes in U.S. policy

Iran Nukes: Nuclear Weapons Material This Year

US envoy predicts 'direct diplomacy' with Iran

Lawyer Says Canadian Spy Suspect Fled Saddam's Regime

Iran tells U.S. to show change in policy not tactics

'Iran talks an opportunity for Israel'

Obama reaches out to Arab world

Study Warns of Iranian Nuclear Threat but Downplays Russia Military Capabilities



Iranian leader demands US apology

Iranian opposition group cheers EU legalization

Iran rebels resist leaving Iraq, fear for future

Iran wants 'profound changes' in US policy

More on the complaint against the Christian Heritage Party being dismissed

No Apologies: Breaking news - Hate crime charges against Christian Heritage Party dismissed

Canada Free Press: Human Rights Commission ‘Dismisses’ hate charges against CHP Canada!

Stand Your Ground: "Human Rights" Complaint Against CHP Dismissed

Today's Mark Madness

Links Steynian:

Crunchy Con

A Dime a Dozen Political Blog

Islamist Watch

Content Steynian:

Mark's Request of the Week: Bad Things Come To Those Who Wait

In NRO's The Corner:

Nuclear checkout

More Partisan Pettiness

The Nation as Company Town

Ten years ago: The Case That Wouldn't Die

On culture: Young At Heart

On the world: "They Did It Themselves..."

On the Hugh Hewitt show: Mark Steyn on Day Three of the Obama administration, and he's not impressed

Ave atque vale: Angela Morley

In the OC Register: Obama raises heart rates, lowers expectations

Mark's Song of the Week: Pick Yourself Up

Seasons Steynian: Holocaust Memorial Day

In Mark's blog: Steyn testifies :

On Monday February 9th I'll be at Queen's Park in Toronto to appear before the Ontario parliament's Standing Committee on Government Agencies as part of their review of the Ontario "Human Rights" Tribunal. I'm not sure whether it's open to the public - it might be Standing Committee room only - but I'll be there at 2pm followed at 2:30pm by Terry Downey of the Ontario Federation of Labour, which supported Mohamed Elmasry and the Canadian Islamic Congress in their suits against Maclean's for "flagrant Islamophobia".
Other "stakeholders" will also be appearing, including at 3:30pm a mystery guest "to be confirmed". Elmo himself? Or maybe OHRC Chief Commissar Barbara Hall? Who knows? But, given the sweeping new powers with which Ontario's "human rights" regime has been endowed, it is heartening to see legislators subject it to some degree of scrutiny. I look forward to answering the members' questions.
And: Pussy galore

Plus, more links Steynian, Levantian, and Freespeechian over at Free Canuckistan.

Happy Birthday, José Marti, Cuban Poet and Revolutionary

By Sarah Amandolare, via Finding Dulcinea:

For most of his life, José Marti moved from place to place, collecting the experiences and knowledge that would influence his work as a writer, revolutionary and educator. He was passionate in every undertaking, whether organizing the Cuban independence movement, fiercely objecting dictatorships and government abuses in Mexico and Guatemala, or studying philosophy and law. His devotion to Cuba’s freedom and his own free spirit resulted in a lifetime of intriguing achievements.
writePost("features", "", "Happy Birthday, José Marti, Cuban Poet and Revolutionary", "For most of his life, José Marti moved from place to place, collecting the experiences and knowledge that would influence his work as a writer, revolutionary and educator. He was passionate in every undertaking, whether organizing the Cuban independence movement, fiercely objecting dictatorships and government abuses in Mexico and Guatemala, or studying philosophy and law. His devotion to Cuba’s freedom and his own free spirit resulted in a lifetime of intriguing achievements.

Born in Havana, Cuba, on Jan. 28, 1853,
José Marti had his first foray into political activism at age 15, helping to set up an anti-colonial newspaper that led to his arrest within a year. Spanish authorities convicted Marti of anti-government activity, and handed him a six-year sentence of “hard labor in a quarry,” reports The My Hero Project. He served just three years, however, before being deported to Spain. There, Marti entered the University of Zaragoza to study law.
Read the rest here.

Gene Roddenberry, wife to spend eternity in space

Via CTV:

LOS ANGELES -- The creator of "Star Trek" and his wife will spend eternity together in space.
Celestis Inc., a company that specializes in "memorial spaceflights," said Monday that it will ship the remains of Gene Roddenberry and Majel Barrett Roddenberry into space next year.
The couple's cremated remains will be sealed into specially made capsules designed to withstand the rigors of space travel. A rocket-launched spacecraft will carry the capsules, along with digitized tributes from fans. The Roddenberrys' remains -- and the spacecraft -- will travel ever deeper into space and will not return to earth, company spokeswoman Susan Schonfeld said.
After Gene Roddenberry died in 1991, his wife commissioned Celestis to launch a part of his remains into space in 1997. She died Dec. 18, 2008.
Read the rest here.

Covenant Zone: Anarco-Tyranny, (5): Do not go gentle....

Covenant Zone: Anarco-Tyranny, (5): Do not go gentle....

Tuesday, 27 January, 2009

Manitoba lesbian couple says doctor refused them because of sexual orientation

Via The Canadian Press:

WINNIPEG — A Manitoba lesbian couple rejected by a family doctor from Egypt for religious reasons says Canada must better educate foreign-trained physicians.
Andrea Markowski said she and her partner Ginette were stunned when the Winnipeg doctor told them during a "meet-and-greet" appointment she was uncomfortable accepting them as patients and had never treated "people like you" before.
The doctor said she only treated "husbands and wives," said Markowski, who is legally married to her partner of 18 years.
"It was like a kick in the stomach," said Markowski, who just moved to the city from the Northwest Territories. "It was definitely a traumatic and unexpected experience ... She is a doctor who is paid with public funds.
"I have a really hard time understanding how her religion affects her ability to care for me as a human being."
The couple have lodged a complaint with the province's human rights commission and the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons.
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms ensures no one can be denied health care on the grounds of sexual orientation, Markowski pointed out. The bodies regulating doctors in Canada must therefore take more responsibility to ensure foreign-trained physicians are ready to practise here, she added.
"We've stumbled upon a pretty serious problem and we want to make sure that it gets fixed. In some ways you feel a bit like a prisoner. There are so few doctors, it's hard to see one, but they still are accountable to provide good service," Markowski said.
"The College of Physicians and Surgeons in Manitoba and other places in Canada has to broaden the way that it assesses the skills - particularly of foreign doctors who may be coming from places where beliefs and norms are quite different - to make sure that they really are able to practise the physical, mental and emotional care of patients."
Dr. Kamelia Elias did not return phone calls seeking comment. But she told the Winnipeg Free Press that she has no experience treating gays and lesbians who have "sexual problems" and "a lot of diseases and infections."
"I said it's better to find someone who has experience and will take this type of patients," she told the newspaper.
Gay-rights organizations are calling for better programs specifically aimed at nipping prejudice in the bud.
The registrar of Manitoba's physicians college said foreign-trained doctors do undergo an orientation before they can practise in the province. Bill Pope said doctors coming from other countries suffer from culture shock when they come to Canada. Some of them have never done a pelvic exam on a woman or put on a plastic cast, he said.
"How much of a change do you think it would be if you or I were put down somewhere in a Muslim Arabic country or Uzbekistan? It would be a shock," Pope said. "We would hope that we would be forewarned about areas where we could potentially create problems without our knowing it."
The province's college has recently extended its orientation for foreign-trained doctors from one week to a month, he said. There is also some discussion of holding a session with the Manitoba Human Rights Commission so doctors get a briefing of the expectations of them under the charter.
The head of Canada's gay-rights organization said transgendered people are sometimes denied health care. But Helen Kennedy with EGALE said this is the first instance she's heard of involving a lesbian.
As the number of foreign-trained doctors in Canada increases, it's incumbent upon colleges and the country's Immigration Department to ensure they accept gay, lesbian and transgendered patients, she said.
"This is really sad. It really shows a bigger problem with people who are medically trained coming to Canada from other cultures. There is nothing in place to assist them to make the adjustment and to get the training that they need when they come here."
Still others say all doctors would benefit from a better understanding of gay and lesbian health issues.
"All physicians need to get more training on this," said Gens Hellquist, executive director of the Canadian Rainbow Health Coalition. "What little they get tends to be focused on HIV and AIDS, which is only one of the range of health issues."
Read it here.

Also, read about it at No Apologies: Lesbian “human rights” complaint against Manitoba doctor

And via the Winnipeg Free Press: Lesbians a mystery to city MD, by Jen Skerritt:

A same-sex couple has filed a human rights complaint against a south Winnipeg doctor, claiming she refused to take them as patients and told them she doesn't know how to treat lesbians.
Andrea and Ginette Markowski, who recently moved to Winnipeg from Yellowknife, were stunned last week when a family doctor at Lakewood Medical Centre suggested the couple look for another physician since homosexuality violates her religious beliefs.
The legally married couple also claim the doctor said she has no experience treating lesbians.
Andrea Markowski said she and her partner of 18 years made an appointment with Dr. Kamelia Elias after they heard she was accepting new patients. She said Elias started to take the couple's medical history and asked how long the women had been together -- at which point, the doctor told them she's never treated lesbians before.
Markowski said she asked Elias whether treating a same-sex couple was a problem for her, and alleges Elias said yes.
Elias told the Free Press she has no experience treating lesbians and gays who sometimes have "sexual problems" and other diseases. Elias practised medicine in Egypt before spending four years in Steinbach and said she's never treated gays or lesbians in her two decades as a physician.
"They get a lot of diseases and infections," Elias said during a phone interview. "I didn't refuse to treat them, I said it's better to find someone who has experience and will take this type of patients. There (are) some doctors who can treat them."
Shelly Smith, executive director of Rainbow Resource Centre, said lesbians actually have lower rates of sexually transmitted infections, which are more commonly transmitted by men. However, she said gynecological health is still important for women in same-sex relationships and that rates of breast cancer tend to be higher among lesbians since they may not bear children.
The couple has filed a complaint with the Manitoba Human Rights Commission and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba.
"We were so shocked," Andrea said. "It's kind of ironic. We came to the big city to get discriminated against."
Manitoba doctors can accept or refuse a patient based on their current patient load, but can't discriminate based on race, gender, sexual orientation or anything else enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Read the rest here.


Ok, let's get this straight. So a physician, one among many, wasn't comfortable with having these two women as patients, and this ruffled their feathers enough that they went to the Manitoba Human Rights Commission? Wouldn't they rather go to a doctor who would be comfortable treating them? Who could administer to their needs more properly? Wouldn't that be better not only for the doctor, but for the patients as well? And is this doctor the only one in that little 'burg known as Winnipeg?

But because these two women wanted to be treated by one doctor - one specific doctor - and were told that said doctor would not be comfortable with seeing them as patients, this was grounds for a lengthy bureaucratic process, which will do...how much damage to this physician's career and reputation?

I would love to have the amount of ego to assume that I could do the same - with anybody who didn't want me to bring a backpack into a store because I'm f**king sixteen years old and I fit the profile. Fortunately, I have other things to worry about in life.

Although I would raise the question that perhaps this is an inevitable result of a more socialized health system. If doctors are bound by strict rules that they have to treat everybody, regardless of the doctor's own comfort levels, then that's a problem for the doctor, and the patients as well. And I might add that in a private practice, if someone refuses you service, you go to the next quack whose office you can find in the phonebook.

I sympathise with these two women to an extent. To be told that a doctor cannot in good conscience treat you because you're gay must smart. Even though that 'good conscience' was quite possibly a result of the doctor's inexperience with lesbian patients. But in the end, what harm has been caused? And what good can come about because of this complaint?

Air Canada ordered to pay deaf-blind man for discrimination

Via the Vancouver Sun:



The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has ordered Air Canada to pay $10,000 to Eddie Morten -- a Vancouver man who is deaf and with limited vision in just one eye -- on the basis the company discriminated against him by demanding he fly with an attendant.
"We have concluded that Mr. Morten has established a prima facie case of discrimination against Air Canada. Air Canada has not met its obligation . . . to accommodate him to the point of undue hardship," the tribunal ruled in a decision released Monday.
In August of 2004, Morten called a travel agent to book a flight from Vancouver to San Francisco and informed the travel agent of his condition.
An Air Canada reservations clerk, hearing that Morten was deaf-blind, said he could not travel alone and would need someone to accompany him. Air Canada offered the attendant a reduced fare. The airline allows deaf people and blind people to travel unaccompanied because they are considered self-reliant and able to act on their own in an emergency.

Read it here.

Via The Earth Times:


OTTAWA, ONTARIO -- 01/27/09 -- The Canadian Human Rights Commission applauds today's Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision involving Mr. Eddy Morten and Air Canada as a welcome news for Deaf and Blind persons.
In a decision issued yesterday, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal upheld Mr. Morten's complaint alleging that Air Canada had discriminated against him on the basis of his disability, contrary to s. 5 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, by requiring him to travel with an attendant. Mr. Morten, who is Deaf-Blind, convincingly testified that he was well able to fly independently and did not require an attendant.
"This decision is important in reaffirming the cornerstone principle of human rights legislation that all individuals should be given the same opportunities and chances in society," said the Commission's Senior Counsel, Philippe Dufresne. "It sends a clear message that persons with disabilities have a right to equality, respect and dignity, and a right to make for themselves the lives they are able and wish to have."
The Canadian Human Rights Commission fully participated in the hearings. The Commission argued that Air Canada came to the conclusion that Mr. Morten required an attendant without assessing his individual circumstances.
The Tribunal reiterated the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court that an individual assessment is necessary when dealing with a disability rather than arriving at a blanket conclusion. In doing so, the Tribunal agreed with the Commission that individual circumstances must be taken into account. The Tribunal's decision is a victory not only for Mr. Morten but also for all Deaf-Blind people in Canada.
The Tribunal ordered Air Canada to work with the Commission to develop a new policy which does not discriminate against Deaf-Blind persons.
The Commission is committed to pursuing its efforts to promote and advance accessibility and human rights for people with disabilities.
This news release is available in both official languages on the Commission's website at
www.chrc-ccdp.ca

Read it here.

Also: read about it via The Canadian Press: Human rights tribunal finds Air Canada discriminated against disabled passenger

To be completely honest, I agree with this in one sense, but I disagree in another. First of all, I agree that any 'aid' being given by an attendant needs to be forced on people only when it is clear that they are either not willing to act rationally, or are unable to act rationally, about a disability or an impairment that they might have, which could potentially cause harm to themselves, to others, or maybe even when it could seriously hold up the 'production line'.

But at the same time, a fine seems excessive, and once more, you have to wonder - does somebody forcing an attendant upon you constitute a hate crime? I don't think so. Yes, it may be somewhat condescending, and annoying, but guess what? People can be condescending and annoying. And if you go to court every time someone tries to force their help on you, then you're going to have a hard time getting along with anybody in a meaningful way - not to mention the fact that people may eventually become less willing to help the disabled or impaired people around them. Why risk a lawsuit? It seems to me it would have been wiser to simply tolerate the excessive attendance, write a note of complaint afterward, and maybe get in touch with your local lobby group. But to bring in a government commission which is supposedly tasked with combating 'hatred' on the matter of an attendant on an airplane giving you service that you don't want - come on...don't be ridiculous.

Justice Department review of Section 13 - confirmed

Ezra Levant has confirmed the rumors. Cool beans:

The good news is that the issue is still very much alive on Parliament Hill, and not just at the caucus level. Some skeptics had interpreted the Prime Minister's recent interview in Maclean's magazine as closing the door to reform of section 13, given his statement that he had "no plans" to reform it -- though in the same interview he denounced human rights commissions as "egregious", "abusive" and "out of balance". My interpretation of those remarks (which I wrote about here) was literal: that he had no plans at the moment, but that he wasn't ruling out getting such plans. And, given his distractions of late -- a global economic crisis, and an attempted Parliamentary putsch -- it seemed fair that the man focus on other priorities.So I'm pleased with this news out of Justice -- it confirms that the momentum is still on our side, and that the PM's cautious way of speaking need not be interpreted in the most negative way possible.There is another advantage to an internal review -- it is immune to the procedural shenanigans that have befuddled the Justice Committee. Like all other Parliamentary committees, the governing Conservatives have only a minority of seats on it. The problem wasn't that the Justice Committee members from other parties were hostile to reforming section 13; it's that the committee was so dysfunctional in general -- it had become a proxy battleground for disagreements between the government and opposition that, frankly, the opposition didn't want to turn into confidence matters in the House of Commons proper.So, though Conservative Justice Committee member Rick Dykstra had indeed proposed his own review to that committee last fall, the committee never actually got around to dealing with it -- it was the victim of bickering that ground the committee to a halt.An internal departmental review will avoid that problem.But: an internal departmental review will only draw upon opinions within government. There are a diversity of views in the government, and the review seems to be drawing on different branches and different departments altogether. But that is not a full spectrum of opinion, including critical opinion by the people who have been abused by section 13. Frankly, it's not much more independent than the CHRC's token review undertaken by their hand-picked consultant, the well-paid Professor Richard Moon. Then again, Moon surprised everyone -- the CHRC most of all -- by calling for the repeal of section 13.Perhaps there are critical voices within the bureaucracy. But it is a shame that there are not public hearings, as would happen with the Justice Committee, where outside experts and members of the public could participate. The CHRC's many victims will not be heard.Another concern -- my biggest, actually -- is that the CHRC will mislead any Justice Department review, an no-one will be there to catch them. The CHRC has shown themselves untroubled by withholding key information, by breaching their own legal requirements as set out under their statute, and by breaching other laws, such as national privacy laws and access to information laws. They don't even have an internal ethics code. How do they feel about honesty over there? Put it this way: they hired a corrupt ex-cop, drummed out of her police force as bad news.In other words, besides the inherent bias in an internal review towards keeping section 13 (a bias one might expect from bureaucrats and lawyers who work for the government) there is a worry that the CHRC will misrepresent key facts about its conduct, and those misrepresentations will happen in private, and won't be detected by the reviewers.

Geez - that's bad economy

" Parts of the United Kingdom have become so heavily dependent on government spending that the private sector is generating less than a third of the regional economy, a new analysis has found. "

Cripes.

Today's Levant-Jaunt

Links Levantian:

Freedom Bloggers

Vlad Tepes

Content Levantian:

In Ezra's blog:

Calgary court bans Syed Soharwardy, Nagah Hage, from Jewish mall

Why we're in Afghanistan

Is Ignatieff going wobbly on Israel?

Justice Department launches internal review of section 13

Holland's national suicide note