Covenant Zone correspondent goes undercover at MEC Buycott

And my, what an unruly crowd of Zionists that particular event seems to have gathered...

Vancouver's MEC "Buycott" to counter the angry scapegoaters who want Mountain Equipment Co-op to stop sourcing products from Israel was, from my vantage point, a success. I was only there for half an hour but saw many people stopping outside to sign the petition and have a chat with the organizers. Inside the store, there was a noticeable group of buycotters around the Israeli-made underwear and water bottles. I had a chat with Jonathan Narvey, at whose site earlier in the day I watched a video, reminding us of all the high-tech products serious Israel boycotters will give up if they aren't just self-righteous poseurs wanting easy ways to identify with (and hence further encourage the production of) putative victims of the only state in the Middle East that has yet readily adapted to the liberal values of the modern global marketplace. I was glad to discover that Israel is not just a land of computer programmers, chip makers, and fruit growers.

Much more here.

[ UPDATE: Jonathan Narvey in CZ's comments points us toward this, another very good run-down of the Buycott, replete with pictures and video.



Once again, you can check it all out here. ]

The awesomeness just keeps coming

Earlier I commented briefly on Nigel Farage's brilliant comments at the European Parliament, which came under fire and criticism from the EP president. Here, again, is what Nigel Farage said:




Anyway. The Brussels Journal has some very interesting commentary on his remarks, especially regarding Baroness Cathy Ashton:

Baroness Cathy Ashton never had any voters at all, as she has never ever stood for election. Ashton made a career in leftist non-governmental organizations and was appointed to the House of Lords as ‘Baroness Ashton of Upholland’ by the Labour government. “She has never had a proper job and has never been elected to anything in her whole life,” Farage said, “so I guess she really is the true representation of the modern-day political class in this European Union.” Farage demanded to know whether “as the treasurer of CND during a period of time when CND took very large donations and refused to reveal their source she took funds from organizations opposed to Western-style capitalism and democracy.”
“That question must be asked,” Farage told the Parliament. “Did she take money from enemies of the West? That question must be answered.” He was interrupted by Jerzy Buzek, the President of the European Parliament. “Turn your tone down,” Buzek, a Polish Christian-Democrat, said. “Certain expressions are not acceptable in this House.” After the meeting, Farage was called to Buzek’s office where he was told to “restrain his language and refrain from making improper comments in the Chamber or face disciplinary action.”

Read the rest here. H/t to Ghost of a Flea.

Rail cars full of chlorine in your backyard

Yeah, I think I can see why these people might be upset. The Olympics strike again, it seems. Bonus points to the municipal government for, you know, not doing much of anything at all.

Meanwhile, it looks as if Vancouver council is getting prepared to put through a package of amended bylaws to separate out and exempt political speech from Olympics-centred speech codes and bylaw enforcements. You'll forgive me if I'm not impressed.

[ UPDATE: Hey look, there's more: Geoff Meggs Assures Vancouver Residents Fridge Magnets Will be Safe During Olympics. ]

Hey, whaddaya know, I was wrong

At their biennial convention this last weekend, the BC NDP passed the motion calling for the next convention to have a secret ballot vote, which would decide whether or not the party would have a leadership convention.

That's great.

That's why we love him.

The magical, all-purpose suit. Only one color required.

Because I do other things too...

Here's the latest at Defend Geert Wilders: The Weekly Wilders Round-up for Nov. 30th.

[ UPDATE: Plus, at Heartless and Brainless: The sweet smell of honesty. ]

10 mistakes that you can make when you blog

Are you a blogger? Do you commit these ten grievous errors? I'm happy to say that I've avoided at least some of them ( to the best of my knowledge ).

Today's easy listening

By the way, for today's blogging I shall be listening to The Minutemen's Double Nickels on the Dime album. Classic stuff.

[UPDATE: Plus, don't forget to check out Bill Haley and His Comets playing 'Callin' All Comets'. Best played loudly. ]

[ UPDATE II: or try this version, which, in my opinion, is superior. ]

The day the critics went away

[ UPDATE: Welcome, Mark Steyn readers! ]

I always kind of enjoy reading literary or ideological critiques by people who have obviously failed to grasp the point of that which they're actually critiquing. Case in point:

I wonder how Steyn and his buddy Ezra Levant would react if the Human Rights Commission came after hate speech in an anti-Semitic article? Which brings up the question: have not Jewish people benefited from PC as much as their Middle Eastern brethren?

Sigh...

I would estimate, perhaps you would differ in your estimation, that about one quarter to one third of Levant and Steyn's arguments regarding HRCs and hate speech laws have touched on that very topic, with the same point: they're against hate speech laws; they're against people who use them; Jewish people who use them have been wrong, misguided, or deluded.

I wouldn't be so touchy about this if critics like the uninformed-one above weren't making hefty 'hate-monger' claims about the people they so mis-understand.

Kinsellawatch update

Whoops - missed this. Seems Warren's going to stick around for a while. Peter Donolo, you stupid, stupid, man.

Oh yeah - one more update

Before I get started on, you know, actual work today, I thought I'd share this with you. I thought it was hilarious:

H/t Binks.

The BC NDP have a biennial convention...

...and all we get is this lousy nothing. Seriously. Can anybody name anything special or particularly hope-inducing that has come out of this convention so far? Anybody at all? Bill Tieleman, a noted BC Dipper, certainly wasn't too impressed with Carole James' speech, although he doesn't think it'll threaten her leadership. Attorney general Mike de Jong, admittedly not an impartial commentator, had all sorts of unkind - albeit entertaining - things to say about it.

Speaking of leadership, t'would seem that resolutions which introduce more of a sense of leadership accountability at conventions, including leadership reviews, etc., are still being swept into the corner, despite good intentions on the part of certain participants.

The Victoria Times Colonist had an article on the Dippers' new direction: they're hoping to gear their strategy toward an election win. Well, bully for them. The Campbell administration has buggered up enough things to leave themselves ripe for the electoral plucking. But such was the case during the last election, and the NDP managed to royally muck that up, too. Which would bring us back to the question of leadership if the Dippers weren't so damned loyal to the leader who's steered them into a sort of lukewarm opposition territory for the past two election cycles. And this is not even mentioning any financial difficulties that the party might be experiencing.

Much more coverage of the biennial convention as it happens from BC back-room uber-reporter Sean Holman at Public Eye Online.

"Incrementalism doesn't just fail when you stop moving in the Right direction. It fails when people lose faith in the incrementalists."

And with this, Publius, over at the Shotgun Blog, exposes a fatal flaw in Stephen Harper's policies and actions - as far as the core supporters are concerned - of late:

The you-are-a-bunch-of-Free-Market-Nutbars speech back in March, also revealed Harper's tenuous grasp of market economics. Surely a chap with an MA in Economics, with a market minded bent, would have noted the pernicious influence of the Federal Reserve, the Community Reinvestment Act, Fannie and Freddie and all the other Disney like family of statist agencies, that distraught and distort the economic engine of the world. Nope. The Prime Minister of Canada gave an economic analysis that might have barely passed muster at your local Tim's.
Greed? Back in the old days there was no greed in Canada. No greed on Wall Street. No greed anywhere. Then it just kind of appeared out of nowhere, like an economic disease, sometime in the middle part of the current decade. Even as populist yarns goes, this one strains credulity. Stephen Harper channelling Brian Mulroney, or Mackenzie King, isn't really the galling bit. It's the pretence. The Stephen Harper who headed the National Citizens Coalition, is not the Stephen Harper who now governs Canada. Incrementalism doesn't just fail when you stop moving in the Right direction. It fails when people lose faith in the incrementalists.

Hear, hear. I am a firm believer in incrementalism, particularly when it comes to libertarian-type politics. And I am a supporter of Stephen Harper and the Tories, because I think as a whole there's something there to support.

However, this does not change the fact that the core libertarian/libertarian conservative supporters are growing increasingly dissatisfied, with the stimulus spending, the bail-outs, the lack of discernible action on Section 13(1) and other over-reaches of our human-rights bureaucracies...

Stephen Harper is a smart politician. It may be entirely possible that he's trying to balance the demands of his core libertarian/libertarian conservative base against the demands of the opposition and the groups which he is trying to win over - rather successfully, I might add. While the Liberals were hemorrhaging, the Conservatives were picking up the slack in the female, Quebec, and urban Ontario votes.

And that's great. But it's time to throw something to the libertarian/libertarian conservative base, Mr. Harper. The social conservatives should be happy with, for instance, recently-proposed legislation dealing with child pornography. The libertarians/libertarian conservatives probably won't be so much. And a private member's bill rotting its way through senate repealing the gun registry just isn't quite enough to cancel out all the rest.

[UPDATE: Bill C-31 would be another good example of something that will undoubtedly appease some bit of Stephen Harper's core base, but not the libertarian corner of it. Where's our Bill C-31, huh? ]

[ UPDATE II: Truepeers in the comments points toward an excellent essay from Hayek: Principles or Expediency?


Also, added a link to the above update.]

Iran: Maryam and Marzieh free

Via Voice of the Martyrs:

On November 18, Maryam Rustampoor and Marzieh Amirizadeh were released from Evin Prison in Tehran after being held for 259 days, according to Elam Ministries.
Family members picked them up at the prison, and the women expressed heartfelt thanks to Christians around the world who prayed for them during their days in prison.
“Words are not enough to express our gratitude to the Lord and to his people who have prayed and worked for our release,” they said.
Maryam and Marzieh were released without bail, but charges against them have not been formally dropped, and they may still face a court hearing in the future.
They were arrested March 5 by Iranian security forces and labeled “anti-government activists.”

Read the rest here. H/t to Free Republic.

Binks is in the house

Steynian 399.

Nigel Farrage - awesome. Just awesome.

Balls. This guy has them:



H/t to Small Dead Animals.

[ UPDATE: By the way, check out the Europarl Youtube channel. Pretty cool stuff. ]

Heh.

Oh, that's just mean*:

he he, went over to the young greens and left them a comment.

guys,

CRU ****ED UP YOUR CRISIS!

ask Liz to explain.

useless of course, but gave me a giggle for today.

*

The HST...

...not dead yet, as it looks quite likely that the Bloq will support the move on a federal level. This, of course, takes some of the heat off the Liberals, although I think it teaches them a bad lesson: namely, that if you waffle and run around like a chicken with its head cut off for long enough, then an adult will step into the situation and handle it for you.

And I realize that I just equated the Bloq Quebecois with adult sensibilities. I'll stop talking now.

Meanwhile, on a related note from The Tyee: Weird and Wacky HST Debate in BC's Legislature.

Ezra Levant in Vancouver

Speaking of videos, here's some of Ezra Levant's recent speaking engagement in Vancouver. Not the full thing, but still...



Part two here.

By the way, Truepeers over at Covenant Zone has a nice run-down of the event here.

Marc Emery out on bail - interview

H/t to Kalim Kassam on Twitter:

Marc Emery out on bail Interview Part 1 of 3.mpg:



Potheads are fun, man. Part 2 here; I'm not sure where part 3 is.

The NDP - just a little too late

It seems that the federal NDP are urging the Liberals to, like them, be prepared to force an election over the HST.

Well, first off, they're just a little too late. Ever since Donolo got into town, the Liberals have seriously down-played their election bravado, which was a smart move, since they weren't ready to have an election anyway.

But second, one has to wonder if this delayed reaction is a deliberate move. The NDP helped keep the Tories afloat, using EI reform as an excuse, back when it actually looked like the Liberals were serious about their election threats. Now, when the Liberals have backed off, the NDP are all ready to go, election-wise, this time under the pretence of opposition to the Harmonised Sales Tax.

The Dippers can afford to be brave now. They don't have to worry about following through on their threats. And right now, they're poised to both score points against the Tories because of the HST, and to score points against the Liberals because:

"Ignatieff seems to be flip-flopping all over the place," Horwath said yesterday. "He needs to be clear and concise about where his party is going."

Smart move, Jackie boy.

[ UPDATE: by the way, the Liberals are a little busy with their own version of safe criticism for right now. ]

Canadian Amanda Lindhout freed in Somalia

Via CBC News:

Canadian reporter Amanda Lindhout has been freed, 15 months after she was snatched by gunmen in Somalia and held for ransom under "extremely oppressive" conditions that included torture and beatings.

CBC News confirmed Wednesday that the 28-year-old Alberta journalist and Australian photographer Nigel Brennan had been released and were safe in the Somalian capital of Mogadishu. A ransom was reportedly paid to secure their release.
Speaking from a hotel room hours after being freed, she told CTV she had "pretty dark moments" in the custody of her kidnappers, who she said were criminals posing as freedom fighters. After she was seized in August 2008, she said she was kept alone in rooms with no light and little food in houses throughout Somalia.

"My day was sitting on a corner on the floor in a room 24 hours a day for the last 15 months," she said.

"There were times that I was beaten, that I was tortured. It was an extremely, extremely difficult situation."

Her colleague told Reuters he was pistol-whipped and locked in chains during the ordeal. Brennan said the treatment worsened after he and Lindhout tried to escape 10 months ago.

"I'm just happy that I'm alive, happy I'm alive and looking forward to seeing my family and trying to pick up the threads of my life," he said.

Read the rest here.

Nice idea, bad application

Via the Toronto Sun, one learns of this:

OTTAWA - The federal government is cracking down on online child pornography with new legislation that imposes stiff fines or jail time for internet service providers that fail to report illicit material involving minors.
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson unveiled details of a bill today that legally requires ISPs to report tips about websites involving child porn and to safeguard evidence if they believe an offence has been committed.
"The creation and distribution of child pornography are appalling crimes in which children are brutally victimized over and over again," Nicholson said.
Proposed fines would range from $1,000 for a first offence to $10,000 and six months in jail for repeat offences for an individual. Corporations could be slapped with fines from $10,000 to $100,000.

H/t to Free Dominion. The unfortunate thing about this bill is actually two things. Not only does it, basically, ask ISPs to spy on their customers, but the bill is such that opposition to it opens one up to claims of supporting child pornography. Double whammy.

While critics have raised concerns about the intrusion of privacy, Nicholson said the major ISPs are "on board" with the legislation. OPP Comissioner Julian Fantino said there has been an "explosion" of sexual exploitation of children on the web. He said this bill would give police another tool to track those who commit the "vile" acts.

Of course the ISP's are on board. What, do they want to appear to support child pornography? And after all, this must be a very good opportunity for them: they get to look good, and have a chance to look in on their customers. Just imagine the advertising potential.

One last point: convenience for the authorities and the best course of action are not necessarily one and the same thing. This isn't the last time that I've seen Robbie Nicholson use the 'makes it easier' argument - which makes sense, since he's the Justice Minister. Still though, it would be nice if he could put together rather more convincing arguments.

[ UPDATE: this reminds me a little of Andy Burnham's efforts at ISP recruitment by the government in the UK. ( My rebuttal, at least in part, of his efforts here. ) ]

I hate it when I'm right

Well, this is less of a confirmation than something along the lines of a previous thought. But whatever. Close enough for an inaccurate hack like me ( right, Richard? ):

By law, a majority of Community British Columbia's board of directors must include developmentally disabled individuals or those with a significant connection such individuals. But the Campbell administration has introduced legislation to drop that requirement, prompting criticism from community living activists.

The previous thought, by the way, is this one: namely, that tackling homelessness is more than just throwing money and effort at the problem; a lack of consultation with the homeless will only lead to a dilution of the whole effort. Not that I have any particular idea of how to consult - but that doesn't mean that I'm not right. T'would seem the Campbell government disagrees.

Kinsellawatch update

Ah - confirmation:

He did speak with several convention attendees, however. According to those who heard him, the two central themes of the Donolo rescue plan are:

1.) Postpone the next election. Donolo has reportedly sent war-room chief Warren Kinsella back to Toronto, and told the election-readiness team to stand down. Party insiders said the Donolo team wants at least a year to prepare for the next election.

I guess Warren will have to content himself with going back to photographing bathroom graffitti...

My latest for Heartless and Brainless

The sweet smell of honesty.

What does this remind me of?

I'm picturing some imagery to go along with this tidbit of news:

Frustrated by Premier Dalton McGuinty’s refusal to hold public hearings on the controversial 13 per cent HST, the 25-member Progressive Conservative caucus stormed out of the Legislature’s daily question period today shortly after it began.
“You have lost touch,” Conservative Leader Tim Hudak told McGuinty before the stunt took place, accusing the Liberals of being afraid of a public backlash over the tax. ”If Premier McGuinty is going to show that level of contempt for taxpayers by forcing through the largest sales tax grab in the history of this province without any kind of public hearings . . . we see no point in proceeding with question period today.”

Have you guessed what my imagery is, yet? Well, if you guessed 'little kid picks up ball, leaves game,' you're right. Come on down and receive your prize.

Women's Lib

Public Eye Online reveals a BC New Democrat's very, erm...interesting view of provincial politics:

Provincial New Democrat executive candidate Stephen Elliott-Buckley has included party leader Carole James's gender on a list of the "most popular explanations why we aren't in government right now." But Mr. Elliott-Buckley, who is running to be the New Democrats' vice-president at this weekend's convention, told Public Eye he personally doesn't think the fact Ms. James is a woman lost the party the election.

"I thought about not putting it on there, because it's not something I endorse or anything," he explained when asked about the list, which posted on his blog earlier this week. "But this was a list of explanations I've heard about people talking about why we're not in (government). And it's a really important one."

"Lots of people I talk with say we can't have a woman as our leader because B.C. isn't ready for a woman - which is an argument I hear a lot and there's some logic to it. But it's also a chicken and the egg thing. If you don't ever run candidates who aren't white men, you can never change the political culture."

Nevertheless, Mr. Elliott-Buckley - who supported a resolution at the party's last convention which saw ridings reserved for affirmative action candidates - said, "The fact that we didn't win I think is, in part, explained by lots of people in B.C. don't want a female premier and wouldn't vote for her. But I kind of think they wouldn't have voted NDP anyway.

Read the rest here.

Perhaps Mr. Elliott-Buckley is on to something. Perhaps BC just isn't ready for a female premier.

Or, more likely, BC-ers just aren't attracted to the leader of a dysfunctional party that can barely get its act together in the best of times, much less the worst. It's the NDP's own pathetic strategy and lackluster leadership which has kept the BC Libs in place for this long, not deep-seated misogyny amongst the votership.

All You Zombies

By Jim O'Quinn, via TheBurningPlatform.com:

The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them." But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.

Genesis 6

Everyone is familiar with the story of Noah. God was angry at the evil and wickedness of mankind. God instructed Noah to build an ark in order to save his family and two of each animal on earth from the coming flood. Noah could have ignored God’s warning and continued to live his life as before. By heeding God’s warning and building the ark, Noah was able to save himself, his family, and two of every animal from death and destruction. The warning signs regarding the current American Crisis have been discernible since the 1990’s. The un-sustainability of the government’s fiscal social guarantees, the inevitability of peak cheap oil, and the policing of a far flung empire with troops in 130 countries, were all known during the 1990’s. Americans had swelled their use of debt since 1980 and had not saved enough for their looming retirement years. The culture wars fractured the country. Just like a squirrel prepares for winter by collecting acorns and storing them in his nest, Americans had an opportunity to prepare for the coming winter. Instead we squandered the remaining days of autumn, ignoring our monetary problems, buying $45,000 SUVs, borrowing at 125% of the value of overpriced McMansions, initiating wars of choice, expanding our empire and enlarging our police state.

We had the power to influence history in a positive manner. Appropriate preparation could have lessened the impact of the long cold hard days ahead. Some winters are bitter and deadly. Others are mild and harmless. Since most Americans, including our leaders, think linearly they never see the turning of the seasons of history until it is too late. We are currently in the midst of a Fourth Turning, and most people have no clue. With winter approaching, it is always wise to get the heater checked, buy some firewood, make sure the snow plow has gas, store some food and water in case of a blizzard, buy some salt in case of ice, and tune up the car.

Read the rest here.

Binks is in the house

Steynian 398.

Awesome - apparently I'm newsworthy

[ UPDATE: Also, check out the Downtown Eastside Enquirer. ]

I just came across this story on the Blogger News Network: Canwest Media Empire Deletes Article by Teenage Blogger/Writer Criticizing Canadian Human Rights Commissions after Lawsuit Threatened:

Teenage blogger and newspaper writer, Walker Morrow, has become something of a balloon boy for older bloggers in Canada who have been crticizing erosion of free speech and other constitutional rights by Human Rights Commissions. They watched in disbelief as Canada’s media giant, Canwest, abandoned Morrow when legal action was threatened over his article, “Questionable Conduct of CHRC”. The article was published in The Cowichan Valley Citizen newspaper in British Columbia and on various sites in the Canwest chain. First it was up. Then it was down.
Morrow described on his blog, Blog of Walker, how readers lost sight of his article:

”I wasn’t aware of the article’s disappearance at first, but I got a couple of emails, from one of the posters at Free Dominion and from a blogger acquaintance of mine, who were asking what had happened to the original article. You see, it had been published in the print edition of the Citizen, on the Citizen website, and also on Canada.com, the website for the print section of the Can-West media empire, of which the Citizen is a part. The text of the article on Canada.com had disappeared, although the title remained, and at first I thought it might just be some weird glitch in the HTML of the page or something. So I pointed at least one of the concerned parties ( can’t remember right now if it was both ) toward the version on the Citizen website. But that, too, soon disappeared; all that remained was a small piece of text telling the web-page viewer that the article was no longer available. The article had been picked up by Global Calgary; that version disappeared as well. The only available version left was up on Free Dominion, where one poster had posted a copy of it. The Free Dominion copy remains about the only one available - although I think another web forum or two have picked it up; I would say Free Dominion remains the most credible.”

Morrow’s editor told him that legal action had been threatened by Richard Warman, an Ottawa lawyer who was apparently representing himself. Warman’s name is well known to bloggers monitoring the Human Rights Commission. Warman has initiated a number of complaints against groups and individuals, alleging violations of the Canadian Human Rights Act. He also launched a libel suit in 2008 against three Canadian bloggers, all outspoken critics of the CHRC - Ezra Levant, Kate McMillan and Kathy Shaidle — and the owners of Free Dominion, a conservative chat site.

Read the rest here. My thanks to the author, janefromvancouver, and a very big h/t to poster Narrow Back on Free Dominion.

Hey look - I'm in the Libertas Post

Here's an article that was run in the Libertas Post today, written by yours truly: Shooting down debate:

“They do not understand, these terrorists, the potential goodwill and economic benefits that come from these games, because they have a limited intellect and do not understand how the world truly operates.”
Those were the words of Burquitlam Liberal MLA Harry Bloy who made the comment recently in the BC legislature. But who was he referring to? Who are these “terrorists,” these people of “limited intellect”? Are they flag-burning, rock-throwing, hate-spewing fanatics of some sort?
Well, no. They're just people protesting the fact that BC is hosting the Winter Olympics.

Read it here. Many thanks to Gerry Nicholls for including me in his project.

He had a light side?

Wait - so we're just finding out that Mussolini had a dark side now?

Because I do other things too...

Here's the Weekly Wilders Round-Up, my latest at Defend Geert Wilders.

Why I'm no longer writing for the Cowichan Valley Citizen

[ UPDATE: Welcome Freedom Through Truth readers! Also, I've excised a fair amount of material from the original post. Call it a blogging hangover; in other words, it's not advisable to write lengthy posts at 1:00-2:00 in the morning when you're wired. Seriously, if I do it again, somebody poke me with a large stick.

Oh - and somebody has pointed out to me that in printing a retraction, the Citizen has limited Richard Warman to actual damages, which puts the onus of a proof of loss on his shoulders. That may very well be. However, I stand by my original statement: such is not the public perception. The public perception, if one has knowledge of my original article and the retraction in conjunction, puts a very black mark on my record.

Furthermore ( I know, this is a long update ), I have officially tendered my resignation from the Citizen as of today. ]

It is 1:00 in the morning now, so I guess that means that it is tomorrow, which means that my last post detailing the reasons for my material no longer appearing in the Citizen was written yesterday.

At any rate, I have been overwhelmed by the support. Thanks to everyone in the comments and in the blogosphere who's jumped on this so far.

But, I'm afraid, I didn't quite give all of the details in that last post - partly because it was getting too long, and partly because it takes time to step back and think about what to write next. Now that I'm on to a new post a few hours later, here is the rest of the story, or: why I'm no longer writing for the Cowichan Valley Citizen.

In the last post, I went through Richard Warman's threats against the Citizen, and their desire to publish a retraction and apology. But I never quite spelled out why, exactly, I wasn't writing for the paper any more.

Well, the truth is, I haven't quit yet. That doesn't mean that I want to continue writing for the Citizen - in fact, this post is probably about as effective a resignation as one could hope for. I just haven't gotten to an actual sit-down with the editor and publisher yet. When I do, I'll let y'all know.

However, the fact remains that my material has not appeared in the Citizen for some time. So, if I haven't resigned, why is that? Well, considering the Citizen's almost frank disregard for my own opinion or reputation, I think it's entirely possible that they have discontinued publishing my material in order to, in a way, appease Richard Warman by not flaunting my writing in front of his nose while the retraction process was ongoing. I don't know that, but then, I haven't been told otherwise either.

Almost from the get-go, since Richard Warman's threat against the Citizen was raised - or threats, plural, I should say - I was left with the impression from the editor and publisher that, somehow, I had committed a SNAFU. I had messed up - and now it was their mess to deal with.

They asked for my sources. I provided them. A lot of them. A helluva lot of them. Then I had my meeting with the editor and publisher. The publisher told me, in effect, that I shouldn't have said what I said - my natural inborn grace and patience didn't kick in soon enough to stop me from rather testily replying that I hadn't said anything that couldn't be backed up.

But whatever. They wanted to issue a clarification/apology, and now I was involved in that. Things went on. I supplied my reasoning again, and again, trying to resist the publication of a retraction and apology for words that were true, or at the very least, defensible by fair comment. I supplied more and more sources, forwarded to our lawyer, forwarded to their lawyer. They still wanted a retraction/apology, and finally, I believe after consultation with Richard Warman, the end product, what you see published, ended up being even harsher than the original...in Richard Warman's favor. In essence, they threw me and my words under a bus.

And you know what? I have my doubts that they even read my source material, or that they listened to my reasoning. Let me explain why:

Throughout the course of the retraction/apology process, as I more than once attempted to correct the wording of the clarification and apology, I came across the same recurring error in the title: 'Questionable Conduct of the CHRC'.

Now, when the article was first published, the Citizen provided its own headline. The headline wasn't my own. But it was my article, and I was familiar with the title assigned to it because, well, it was my article. And there was no 'the' in the title. The title was 'Questionable Conduct of CHRC'. No 'the'.

It's a small error, to be sure. But one easily remedied by actually reading the article in question. Hell, if you Googled the title it appeared, right there on Free Dominion, for all to see. And it was only when I corrected that small error in one of my revisions to the retraction/apology that the mistake was corrected, for I saw no 'the' in the final revision that the Citizen was preparing for publication.

Even more telling was the fact that Richard Warman had made the same mistake in one of his initial emailed complaints/threats. To my eyes, it is obvious that the Citizen's lawyer just copied from Richard Warman's own complaint and went from there - no research required. He was undoubtedly under instruction to just make the whole thing go away.

Also, one of the points addressed in the Citizen retraction is that:

In publishing the column it was not made clear that these statements referred to the CHRC and not Mr. Warman. Further, that the criminal investigation had concluded without charges being laid

But you know what? I never said that the criminal investigation hadn't been concluded, or that charges had been laid. In fact, I said exactly what the retraction said that I didn't say. Here's what I wrote:

an RCMP investigation into the matter dribbled off after the trail started leading into American territory.

And so again, the question is raised: did the Citizen's lawyer, or editor, or publisher, even bother to re-read the article that they were so willing to issue a retraction over? Or were they taking Richard Warman's complaints at face value, and running with them in an attempt to make the whole thing just go away? I'm tempted to think the latter.

Now, of course, it is not the Cowichan Valley Citizen's job to do my dirty work, or to fight my battles. My own, personal dislike of Richard Warman is not the Citizen's cross to bear. And one of the reasons that they wanted to issue a retraction and apology, was, undoubtedly, because it just simply looks good in court. If a judge looks at their efforts thus far, a retraction and apology looks good; it's in the Citizen's best interests to appear friendly, without malicious intent. And, due to a clause in the Apology Act, issuing a retraction and apology is by no means an admission of guilt in court; it's not admissable.

But here's the thing. Most people don't know about the Apology Act. They don't know about what's going on during any court case that might erupt between Richard Warman and the Cowichan Valley Citizen. What they do know is that the Citizen apologised for something that they published, which I wrote. What they do know is that the Citizen published the following words:

The column also referred to a "conflict of interest" and"corruption". It was not the intent of the Cowichan Valley Citizen that these statements be regarded as factual or refer to Richard Warman.

Now, how could any writer view this as an affirmation of what they wrote? The Citizen covered its own ass, and left me out in the cold. It's not their job to fight my ideological battles, but it jolly well is their job to back up their writers. If they don't, they don't deserve to have writers. The moment that retraction was published, the anger that I had been feeling for weeks on end, at the fact that after nearly two years of working for them, they still didn't trust me or my word, came to a head.

I had no problem with issuing a clarification, if one were needed - for the readers' sake if for nothing else. If I had mis-stated anything, or gotten any of my facts wrong, I would admit it. Not to mention that to sign my name to a clarification and apology would help me out down the line, too. Here's the full Citizen retraction/apology:

Retraction and Apology
The Citizen
Published: Friday, November 20, 2009

On October 9th, 2009 the Cowichan Valley Citizen published a column titled "Questionable conduct of CHRC". In this column, it was alleged that investigations were begun, not only by the RCMP, but by the Privacy Commissioner as well, and a Parliamentary Review of the CHRC's activities was conducted.

In publishing the column it was not made clear that these statements referred to the CHRC and not Mr. Warman. Further, that the criminal investigation had concluded without charges being laid and that the Privacy Commissioner determined that no breach of the Privacy Act occurred and that the privacy complaint was "not well-founded".

The column also referred to a "conflict of interest" and"corruption". It was not the intent of the Cowichan Valley Citizen that these statements be regarded as factual or refer to Richard Warman. The Cowichan Valley Citizen has no evidence that Richard Warman was in a conflict of interest, corrupt or subject to a criminal investigation or an investigation by the Privacy Commission.

The Cowichan Valley Citizen hereby wholly and unreservedly apologizes to Mr. Warman and regrets any embarrassment this column may have caused Mr. Warman.

Now, here's a revisede copy of one of the clarification/apologies that I would have been willing to sign my name to, including notes, which I submitted to our lawyer to submit to their lawyer. The boldened, underlined sections were the changes that I recommended:

CLARIFICATION and APOLOGY

On October 9th, 2009 the Cowichan Valley Citizen published an article* titled "Questionable conduct of CHRC". In this article it was alleged that investigations were begun by the RCMP and the Privacy Commissioner into a complaint that the CHRC had hacked into a private individual's internet account, and that a Parliamentary Review of the CHRC's activities was conducted**. In publishing the article it was not made clear that these investigations and the review were into the CHRC, and not Richard Warman. Further, it was not made clear enough** that the criminal investigation has not been concluded, with no charges having been laid and that the Privacy Commissioner has determined in reply to the hacking complaint that no breach of the Privacy Act occurred, and that the privacy complaint was "not well-founded". The Cowichan Valley Citizen and the author have no evidence that Richard Warman was subject to an RCMP or Privacy Commission investigation, or to a Parliamentary Review. The Cowichan Valley Citizen and Walker Morrow hereby wholly and unreservedly apologise to Mr. Warman and regret any embarrassment that this article may have caused Mr. Warman.

*It was my understanding that I was writing in a freelance capacity for the Citizen, not as a columnist, although I could be seen as a columnist. I'm not sure if this is an important distinction, but I thought it should be made for absolute clarity's sake.

**I actually did state that the criminal investigation had not been concluded in the article.

As you can see, those were very, very specific things which could have been misconstrued in my article. And if you read the article, you'll notice that in the clarification that I suggested, I wasn't actually refuting anything that I said in my article; I was just stating things to make sure that there were no misunderstandings.

And you know what? For all of Richard Warman's bluster about my getting things wrong, he still hasn't brought up one iota of proof to contravene the facts that I have mustered together again and again to prove what I said in that article. Sure, if I state something, the onus is on me to prove what I said, which I've done. But if Richard Warman wants a retraction published, which was one of his initial demands, the onus is then upon him to prove that what I said was wrong. And that the Citizen didn't push that issue, that it didn't tell Warman to take a hike when he couldn't prove what he was saying, that they, in essence, threw me and my own reputation under the bus...

It's inexcusable. A breach of trust was made. My trust. I may have been naive to assume that the Citizen had my best interests in mind, I'll grant you that. But what would you assume if you had worked for a publication on a bi-weekly basis for close to two years? Would you expect to have to just sit, stewing in your own defensive anger as your own publisher says that you shouldn't have written what you wrote, even though what you wrote was true - even after you had provided reams of articles, columns, blog posts, CHRTribunal hearing transcripts and CHRTribunal decisions to back up what you said?

I bear no ill will toward the editor, really. She was just doing her job - although I've caught whiffs of the same attitude from her. But together with the publisher, the two of them have put a major black mark on my own journalistic and writing career.

My newspaper caved in to Richard Warman, and all I got was this lousy headache

[UPDATE IX: Welcome, Beltway Blips readers! ]

[ UPDATE VIII: Welcome Strictly Right readers! ]

[UPDATE VII ( I know, I know, enough with the updates already ): welcome MooseandSquirrel.ca, Ghost of a Flea, and Kenneth Hynek readers! ]

[ UPDATE VI: Welcome, Freedom Through Truth, Halls of Macadamia, Scary Fundamentalist, Infidel Bloggers Alliance, Small Dead Animals, and, in a non-partisan spirit, even BigCityLib readers! ]

[ UPDATE V: Thanks to Dag for bringing this up in Jihad Watch's comments. I've been getting traffic from Jihad Watch since then. Also, the second instalment in this storyline is now available on the Blog of Walker, if you're so inclined. Meanwhile, welcome Theo Spark readers!]

[UPDATE IV: Welcome, Covenant Zone readers! By the way, on a very, very shallow note, do you think this will affect my standing in the Infidel Blogger Awards?]

[ UPDATE III: Welcome, Blazing Cat Fur, and Mark Steyn readers! Thanks also to Xanthippa on Twitter. ]

[ UPDATE II: Welcome, Free Dominion, Jesse Ferreras, and No Hippos! readers!]

[ UPDATE: Welcome, Jay Currie readers! Come in, make yourself at home. ]

Long(er)-time readers of this blog may recall that, for quite some time now, I've had a recurring role as an opinion writer for my local newspaper, the Cowichan Valley Citizen. When I remembered, or when I could, I would post links to my articles on this blog, and, occasionally, I would even semi-gloat over what I wrote.

But, it would seem that this is no more, for I haven't been posting links to my articles over the past few weeks. Why is that? Well, it's a long story.

It all started way back around Thanksgiving, when I wrote an article about the Canadian Human Rights Commission entitled 'Questionable Conduct of CHRC'. I wrote the article in the wake of the Anthanasios Hadjis decision in Warman v. Lemire, after the CHRC appealed the decision for a Judicial Review, and just before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights' first inquiry into Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

In other words, it was an exciting time. Or rather, it was if you had been following the CHRC saga for a while, as I had - I've been following it for, oh...probably close to a year and a half now? I've written multiple articles on the topic, with a whole lot more for this blog, and back in June I even started up a blog devoted specifically to the topic of Canada's HRCs: The Lynch Mob.

Anyway, this was the atmosphere in which I wrote the article 'Questionable Conduct of CHRC'. I talked about some of the background behind the Hadjis decision and the appeal, including Richard Warman's rather disgusting involvement in the whole process, and mentioned the Parliamentary inquiry, which I promised to write a follow-up article on, as the first inquiry was going to be held on the same day as my article was being published. I sent it in to the Citizen. The article was published...

And then it disappeared later that same day.

I wasn't aware of the article's disappearance at first, but I got a couple of emails, from one of the posters at Free Dominion and from a blogger acquaintance of mine, who were asking what had happened to the original article. You see, it had been published in the print edition of the Citizen, on the Citizen website, and also on Canada.com, the website for the print section of the Can-West media empire, of which the Citizen is a part. The text of the article on Canada.com had disappeared, although the title remained, and at first I thought it might just be some weird glitch in the HTML of the page or something. So I pointed at least one of the concerned parties ( can't remember right now if it was both ) toward the version on the Citizen website. But that, too, soon disappeared; all that remained was a small piece of text telling the web-page viewer that the article was no longer available. The article had been picked up by Global Calgary; that version disappeared as well. The only available version left was up on Free Dominion, where one poster had posted a copy of it. The Free Dominion copy remains about the only one available - although I think another webforum or two have picked it up; I would say Free Dominion remains the most credible.

Curious, I emailed the editor of the Citizen to see what was up - was it a tech glitch; was there something wrong with the article?

I sent that email on a...Friday, if I remember correctly. Of course, it being the Thanksgiving long weekend, I didn't get a reply until Teusday. I was doing some work at my local food bank at the time, but I used their computer to check my email during a lull and saw a message from the Citizen's editor.

In this email, I was informed that the Citizen had been the subject of a complaint by Richard Warman, who was asserting that the claims that I had made in my article were incorrect, and who was threatening legal action. The Citizen, and Can-West as a whole, had pulled the article until further notice.

Well, that shook me up a little. But alright. I could handle that. The Citizen got a lawyer involved, and a representative from Can-West, who, along with the publisher and editor, and myself ( and, since I am still technically a minor, one of my parents as legal guardian ) started to try and resolve the issue.

From the start, I assured the Citizen's editor that none of the claims that I had made about Richard Warman were false; I stood by my work. The Citizen, and their lawyer, asked for my sources. I provided them. In fact, I provided a lot of them, enlisting the help of a few family and friends to help me track them down ( the reason I didn't have them already, is because, since I've been following this for so long, I can quote a lot of it from memory, which makes research unnecessary ). I'll publish some of my source material over the next few days.

After this, myself, my legal guardian, the Citizen's editor and publisher, and the Can-West representative held a conference call to discuss the issue and see where things were. A little more information was fleshed out, but as far as I can remember, nothing too much new came to light - except for one little nugget of gold: apparently Richard Warman had seen the article up on Canada.com, and, since under the title it simply read 'Walker Morrow, the Citizen', he assumed that it was the Ottawa Citizen that had published the article, and threatened them first. In a later meeting, this was confirmed, and I learned that he was subsequently informed that he was threatening the wrong people, was put in contact with Can-West, which put him in contact with the Cowichan Valley Citizen, and then continued with his threat.

At any rate, things continued on for a little while after the conference call - the article still wasn't put back up. Then, a rather strange development: the article was back up, but under the 'Cowichan Valley Citizen' instead of simply 'The Citizen' this time. And then...the article was gone again. How strange.

The next day, I had a meeting with the editor and publisher, with one of my parents present as legal guardian. At this meeting it was revealed that for some reason, perhaps because the article had somehow gotten included in one que or another, it had been posted briefly again. This prompted another complaint from Richard Warman, after which the article was taken down again.

But that was a sideline. The main event at this meeting was, simply put: where do we go from here? The editor and publisher wanted to issue a retraction and apology to address some of the issues that Richard Warman had raised. It was also revealed that Richard Warman had upped the ante: he was threatening to sue for monetary damages now, and that it seemed as if he was acting as his own legal counsel.

Here's the kicker: the editor and publisher had no real way of knowing if their clarification/apology would actually appease Richard Warman. Furthermore, I would have to sign my name to an agreement if they were to include my name in the clarification/apology. They showed me a copy of what they wanted to print:

As soon as I saw it, I was reluctant to sign my name to it. My parent suggested that any further decisions be left off until we ourselves had had a lawyer take a look at the clarification/apology.

Now, at the time, we had been consulting a little bit with a lawyer at a firm that is very friendly to our family. But after the meeting, we learned that this lawyer handled complaints for Can-West in the same capacity as the Citizen's lawyer did, and so for him to continue to give us advice would be a conflict of interest. My parent checked around, and the list of lawyers who have expertise in the particular field of media law who aren't employed by Can-West is actually pretty small. In fact, there was only one such local lawyer versed enough in the subject for us to consult with, whom we subsequently contacted.

Together, we sat down and looked at the clarification/apology, and my options. I was reluctant to sign my name to the clarification/apology, partly as a matter of pride and not wanting to give Richard Warman the satisfaction, and partly because I didn't think that the clarification was, well, actually clarifying the matter ( I'll post my parsing of the clarification later tonight ). Meanwhile, we put our lawyer on the case of trying to get ahold of the communications that Richard Warman had originally sent to the Citizen regarding my article, and which established the nature of his complaints ( because if the clarification/apology wasn't addressing those issues, there was no point in publishing it ).

From there, the next few weeks progressed rather slowly. I went back and forth with our lawyer, who was in contact with the Citizen's lawyer, and actually got my hands on Warman's threats regarding my article. It wasn't pretty; there were a helluva lot of demands. At the same time, I was putting together a refutation of the clarification/apology as it was, and put together a version which I would actually be willing to sign my name to.

Finally, to make a long story short, I received another version of the clarification/apology, this one even more strongly worded - against my article - than the version which I posted above. Again, I sent in a very pared-down version which I would be willing to sign my name to.

This version was rejected. The Citizen went ahead with its own version and excised my name from it. They published the clarification yesterday. It reads as follows:

Retraction and Apology

On October 9th, 2009 the Cowichan Valley Citizen published a column titled "Questionable conduct of CHRC". In this column, it was alleged that investigations were begun, not only by the RCMP, but by the Privacy Commissioner as well, and a Parliamentary Review of the CHRC's activities was conducted.

In publishing the column it was not made clear that these statements referred to the CHRC and not Mr. Warman. Further, that the criminal investigation had concluded without charges being laid and that the Privacy Commissioner determined that no breach of the Privacy Act occurred and that the privacy complaint was "not well-founded".

The column also referred to a "conflict of interest" and"corruption". It was not the intent of the Cowichan Valley Citizen that these statements be regarded as factual or refer to Richard Warman. The Cowichan Valley Citizen has no evidence that Richard Warman was in a conflict of interest, corrupt or subject to a criminal investigation or an investigation by the Privacy Commission.

The Cowichan Valley Citizen hereby wholly and unreservedly apologizes to Mr. Warman and regrets any embarrassment this column may have caused Mr. Warman.

Needless to say, I'm pretty pissed. However, as this post is getting rather long, I will write my thoughts in another post tonight or tomorrow, as well as the reasoning behind my upcoming resignation from the Citizen. Stay tuned...

Wanna do some reading?

Check out the University of Calgary Political Papers archive - there's some nifty old Reform Party documents, especially, which caught my eye, although unfortunately I don't really have time to go through them right now.

Not that I regret my past words, but now that I see the consequences...

...I'm thinking twice about them. I've been hard on the BC Liberals on this blog. No harder, probably less, than I've been to the BC Dippers or the Green Party, but still: hard. And to this day I stand by my criticisms of the BC Liberal Party: it needs new leadership, fresh blood, a fresh campaign, and a massive down-sizing in the arrogance department.

Particularly when it comes to the proposed Harmonised Sales Tax coming out next year thanks to the Campbell Liberals. I wasn't opposed to the idea of the tax - at least in certain, specific areas - but the way in which the tax was announced, and in which debate over it, the outrage over a tax which the Campbell Liberals promised us we wouldn't have to deal with, was dismissed... It was unacceptable. The sheer arrogance of it rankled to a point where resentment started to fester.

And so I was hard on the Campbell Liberals then and on a host of other issues since then, as well. Lately, it's been the Olympics.

But regardless, one danger of criticising the BC Liberals, especially if you support the party in its essence, if not its current administration, is that you run the risk of destabilizing their hold on things just long enough to give the NDP a foothold.

And that appears to be what has happened:

VICTORIA — British Columbia’s New Democratic Party is maintaining a double-digit lead over the governing B.C. Liberals, a new poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion shows.
Conducted on Nov. 10 and Nov. 11, the poll found 47 per cent of respondents support the NDP, compared to 33 per cent who said they prefer the Liberals. Of the remaining people, 10 per cent backed the Greens, and seven per cent gave their support to the BC Conservatives.
The 14-point lead by the NDP is the same margin Angus Reid found in early September, showing that public dismay with government over controversial issues like the Harmonized Sales Tax has yet to subside.

I don't have such a large view of my own significance as to think that I alone have influenced public opinion to any great degree. But throughout all of my criticisms, I knew that this was a danger that I, and all other Lib critics were facing. It's one thing for an NDP man like Bill Tieleman, or someone like Van Der Zalm, to criticise the administration: they're opposed to it anyway; they have the most to gain.

But someone like me? I've got nothing to gain from criticising the administration. Not that this fact means that I'm going to stop anytime soon. Honesty and principles would demand no less.

Reaching across the aisle

I thought this exchange was hilarious:

Blake Richards (CPC): “I wanted to put on the record an op-ed piece from the Castlegar News, from Mr. Atamanenko’s riding, and just share that with the committee and share that with farmers across this country.”

Alex Atamanenko (NDP): “You’re full of crap…I’ve had it with you and I’ve had it with that crap and the gun registry here has nothing to do with agriculture. I have three rifles. They’re registered. Nothing happens to me. Any farmer can go out and have a gun…”

Randy Hoback (CPC): “You come and talk to my farmers that way, Alex”

Alex Atamanenko (NDP): “Yeah, I’ll go and talk to them. I’ll go and talk to them.”

Randy Hoback (CPC): “They’ll kick you out of the hall. You start representing your true farmers the way they should..”

Alex Atamanenko (NDP): “You go to hell.”

House of Commons Agriculture Committee, Nov. 19, 2009

Audio here, if you're interested.

My latest for Heartless and Brainless

Here we are. I've posted a couple of things up on the Heartless and Brainless blog, although whether for your, their, or my own edification and enjoyment, I don't know.

Anyway, first off: ACORN the new media?; in which I talk about ACORN, media scapegoats, and Doug Hoffman.

Also: While I'm at it: something for McGill alumni, in which I talk about, well, McGill alumni. What else?

Uh oh

This doesn't look good:

Former staff member sues over public reports

A former employee of the provincial auditor-general is alleging professional misconduct by members of the auditor-general's staff in connection with public reports issued from 2005 to 2007, which she claims involved manipulation and misrepresentation of findings.

The claims by Kathryn Day are contained in two B.C. Supreme Court actions, a lawsuit against the government launched in February this year in Kamloops and a petition filed in October in Vancouver.

Day, a chartered accountant, joined the auditor-general's staff in 2003 and went on medical leave in 2007.

In her suit, Day is seeking damages as "a result of the harassment and or negligent or intentional infliction of mental suffering while employed between the months April, 2005 and February 2007."

She claims the harassment was the result of her objections to a report issued by the auditor-general titled Province of British Columbia Audit Committees: Doing the Right Things -- Report 4 -- December, 2006.

Day claims the report was issued despite her repeated and persistent objections to its content and to her being named as an author.

I might be surprised if it wasn't BC.

H/t Public Eye Reads.

So does that mean that Carole James can breathe easy?

Background here.

Making things difficult

From The Hook:

Many critics fear the 2010 Games will smother free speech. But a rapid proliferation of cell-phone cameras and open-source websites could make potential restrictions hard to enforce, a UBC journalism professor said Thursday evening.
“We’ve had this weird thing happen where the eyes of big brother are sort of turned around,” Daniel W. Burnett told a forum on the 2010 Games and civil liberties.

Heh. That's what we're here for.

Warren Kinsella's gone

It's all over, folks. Warren Kinsella isn't leading the Liberal war-room anymore. And I don't know whether to be happy or sad. From Warren's blog:

Over the course of that year-and-a-week, I've spent a lot of time working with some amazing, amazing people on Michael's leadership campaign and, very soon thereafter, the Liberal election readiness team. It was, and is, a kick-ass team. But the Fall 2009 election that we'd been getting ready for wasn't to be. Sigh. It's now looking like it'll be next Spring, or next Fall, or maybe even the Spring after that (though I doubt it).My focus, and this wee website's, will therefore turn more to municipal and provincial politics - and punk rock, and hockey rink philosophy, and the law, and bad puns, and clumsy alliterations, and the other stuff I like.I'll continue to knock around the Reformatories, of course, as they never seem to stop providing material - here and here, just in this week alone - but not 24/7, as I've been doing since I signed on to Iggy's team.

Read it here.

Ezra Levant, of course, is all over this, and with a rather gloomy prediction:

When Ignatieff hired Kinsella, the Liberals were essentially tied with the Conservatives. On the day Donolo fired Kinsella, the Liberals are 15% behind. I call it the Kinsella Effect; Donolo calls it time to end amateur hour, and bring in some grown-ups.
Though I'm a Conservative booster, I've got to be candid: I predict that with Kinsella gone, Ignatieff will begin to close that 15-point gap.

I can't help but agree. Warren Kinsella's antics have been one of the longest-running series of gaffes to plague the Liberal Party since Iggy got into the game. Now what are we going to make fun of?

[ UPDATE: More speculation at the House of Currie. ]

[ UPDATE II: Yet more at the House of Burning Fuzz. ]

Colby Cosh's new home

Macleans, apparently.

[ UPDATE: More info at ColbyCosh.com, as well as a CV update. ]

A very Keith Martin update

You remember Keith Martin, right? He's the MP - Liberal - for Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, who raised a private member's motion against Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act. He was one of the first politicians in Canada to take a stand on the issue.

Well, that was a long time ago, and so I was a little curious about the status of that particular PMM ( by the way, you should see a button for it on my sidebar to the right ). So I sent a message to Keith Martin on Facebook and asked him about it. Here's what I wrote:

Hi Keith,

I know this is kind of a dumb question, but I was just wondering: what is the status of the Private Member's Motion - M-446 - that you had raised? Did it ever see the light of day, or is it still buried amongst the other PMMs?

Either way, kudos to you for raising it, and for your principled stand for freedom of speech in Canada.

Cheers!

-Walker

And...was it yesterday? The days blur together sometimes...I got an answer from - presumably - someone in his office:

Walker, the motion itself has not come up for a vote, but there has been a lot of progress on the file. Thanks to the motion and the resulting media attention, Section 13 of the HR Act has been reviewd by a HOC committee and even the head of the HRC has said that it is flawed.

Thanks for your kind words - I'll pass your note along to Keith
-Jeff

So, some rainy day, M-446 might just be the next bit of HRC-related excitement.

Sad that it's come to this

Chantal Hebert had a good article for the Toronto Star on the brand spankin' new Citizenship guide. She had a lot of good to say about it, but one line that struck me was this one:

The booklet warns that "barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, `honour killings,' female genital mutilation, or other gender-based violence" are punishable crimes in this country. In the more innocent Canada of 1995, such an admonition would have been unthinkable.

How bad have things become over the course of the past fifteen years that we now have to warn new citizens that genital mutilation and spousal abuse are off the table?

Warren Kinsella flies into a predictable rage

Warren's all up in a tizzy. Why? Well, apparently he doesn't like the Ignatieff Libs' non-anti-semitism being called into question by the CPC. Fair enough, I suppose, but rather odd considering that back before the Ignatieff days Warren was saying much the same thing.

Even odder that he can remember enough to quote from one of his books, but not enough to quote from his own blog on a subject that seems very near and dear to his heart. Ah well. That's why we have Alberta Aardvark, to give the occasional reminder. Thanks to Jay Currie for bringing this to my attention.

Meanwhile, Ezra Levant does that thing that he does so well: Is Michael Ignatieff an anti-Semite? Shorter answer: no, but he's still said some off-key things about Israel - don't take my word for it though; read the post yourself.

By the way, if Warren and co. think the CPC mail-out was bad, wait until they get a load of this...

Oh - while I'm on this topic, I came across this article today in the Tyee, from Murray Dobbin: Criticizing Israel Isn't Antisemitism. I coughed a little bit through the description of Jason Kenney's apparent excesses regarding George Galloway and the Canadian Arab Federation, but I think the article's still worth a read.

[ UPDATE: More from Blazing Cat Fur. ]

The Olympics and homeless, continued

From Public Eye Online:

A confidential government document obtained by Public Eye states BC Housing will use "Extreme Weather response protocols" to deal with the "higher number of homeless persons requiring assistance" during Vancouver's 2010 Winter Olympic Games.
Those protocols open up around 600 temporary shelter spaces in Metro Vancouver.
But they will also allow police to use a soon-to-be granted power that will let them forcibly take homeless people to a shelter.
In an interview with Public Eye, Pivot Legal Society lawyer Laura Track said, "If the plan is to use the extreme weather protocol to open up more beds during the Olympics, the corollary is that during the Olympics the police will have the ability to use force to take people off the streets."
But Housing and Social Minister Rich Coleman said the government won't be abusing those protocols, stressing they'll only be used if the conditions triggering them actually exist.
"If there's no extreme weather during the Olympics, no protocol gets activated," he promised.

Read the rest here.

Yes, well we all know how good the Campbell Libs have been about keeping their promises, now don't we?

On a related note, Monte Paulsen recently had an excellent article up at The Tyee: Welcome to the 'Burbs, Meet the New Homeless.

An eggo shortage?

From CTV.ca:

Leggo my Eggo! No, seriously, there's a shortage

[...]

Kellogg Co. says there will be a nationwide shortage of its popular Eggo frozen waffles until next summer because of interruptions in production at two of the four plants that make them.

The company's Atlanta plant was shut down for an undisclosed period by a September storm that dumped historic amounts of rain in the area.

Meanwhile, several production lines at its largest bakery in Rossville, Tenn. are closed indefinitely for repairs.

Company spokeswoman Kris Charles says it will take until the middle of 2010 before shelves around the country are stocked at pre-shutdown levels.

Already customers are noticing near-empty Eggo shelves on the freezer aisle at many grocery stores. They are lamenting the shortage on blogs, Twitter and Facebook.

And I'm afraid that's just the beginning. I'm picturing like, 28 Days Later-type anarchy due to the shortage. It could be that the Eggo in our systems has been what is keeping us calm all this time.

A tempest in a fat joke

The War on Twitter rages on, it seems, as Charlie 'Draconian' Angus defends his call for a Twitter black-out during committee meetings:

Kady O’Malley calls me draconian. The National Post says I’m a luddite. It’s all over my comments that MP twitter posts lie between the banal and the inane. Have no fear national media — your ability to read what Carolyn Bennett eats for breakfast will not be shut down. I only wish I could have gotten this national uproar over the crisis being faced by children in Attawapiskat who are sleeping in tents tonight.

Geez, and to think that this all started with one lousy fat joke. I miss the good ol' days when we were talking about communion wafers.

Voting has begun

The voting has begun for the Infidel Blogger Awards, so head on over and cast your ballot. And hey, if you feel like it, throw a vote or two my way, huh?

I ain't no charity case, but...

Dear readers,

There's one question that faces most, if not all bloggers when they first get started: am I doing this for cash, or for the love of what I'm doing?

Now, blogging simply won't work if you're doing it for money. That's just a fact. If you're going to set up the readership, the sponsorships and the ads and the buttons and whathaveyou, at some point you're going to actually have to put together content. And unless you're special somehow, you're going to have to actually enjoy blogging in order to be able to commit to it for that much. And so, the love comes first and hopefully the cash comes second, if that's the route that you want to go.

When I was first getting started blogging ( listen to me, I sound like I'm some kind of old hat at this; I've only been blogging for a couple of years - but I blog hard ), I decided that I wasn't going to try and sell adspace, use Google Ads, or any of that jazz. No disrespect to the bloggers who decide to go that route, but I just figure that there are enough ads out there already. And quite frankly, I don't want to ruin what this blog is for, which is something unique, and tied in to me. This blog is my adspace. It's where I get to vent and talk about all the daily crap that I can't talk about anywhere else. And, hopefully, all that ventin' and talkin' is edifying to someone out there - or at the least, entertaining. But even if it weren't, I'd probably still be doing it ( although admittedly, probably less ).

And so I am not, nor will I ever sell advertising, on this blog or any other that I run. However, tonight I did put together what I hope will be a happy medium:

If you look to the right, you should see, amongst all the other lists and buttons and whatnot, a PayPal button. My tip-jar, if you will. Now, I'm not begging for cash or anything. Frankly there are better things for you to spend your money on.

But you know what? I've spent a lot of time on this site. I'm approaching four thousand posts over the past two years - well, a little over; the BoW turned 2 last October. Four thousand posts. Now, not all of these posts have been verbose, witty bits of prose, granted. In fact, a lot of them are just quick updates, or re-posts and mentions of pictures and videos and other peoples' articles. And when I look at some of the first posts that I put up on this site ( which are still available if you want a laugh ), it's almost damned painful to read them. But that's still a lot of time, day after day, week after week, month after month, and now, year after year. I've put effort into this blog, and energy. When I haven't felt like it, I've blogged, and when I should have been doing other things, I did this instead.

I'm not saying all of this to say that I deserve your money. There are plenty of bloggers who have worked just as hard, if not harder, than I have who deserve your funds more.

But what I am saying is that, if you feel like it, and you want to chip a few bucks my way, it'd be much appreciated. Writers don't make a lot of money, and I'm no exception. Every dollar helps. But more than money, it'd be a sign that those near-four thousand posts over the past two years haven't gone totally un-noticed.

The Blog of Walker is free, and always will be, and I promise you, the reader, that you'll never see one ad on this site. But, if you feel like showing a token of appreciation, I'd just like to draw your attention to the PayPal button on the right.

Cheers,

Walker

Holy Science, Batman!

So it looks like the Church of Scientology is going to be investigated by Australian authorities over claims from several former Scientologists regarding torture, embezzlement, and forcing members to have abortions. The Times Online has the story:

Nick Xenophon, an independent senator, presented letters to the Australian Parliament from seven former Scientologists which he said showed that the secretive church was a front for physical violence, intimidation and blackmail.

“I am deeply concerned about this organisation and the devastating impact it can have on its followers,” he told the Australian Senate in Canberra. He called for a Senate inquiry.

The State Crime Command of New South Wales police yesterday confirmed that Mr Xenophon had handed over the letters for investigation. Fed- eral police have also been contacted.

Kevin Rudd, the Prime Minister,said that many Australians had “real concerns” about Scientology. “I share some of those concerns,” he added. “We would like to proceed in a cautious and methodical way in examining those matters and then we’ll decide what, if further, parliamentary action is necessary.”

Aaron Saxton, a member of the church in Australia and the US between 1989 and 1996, said in one of the letters that he had participated in the “forced confinement and torture” of others. Other letters described how individuals were pressured to hand over large sums of money to the church, leaving them in poverty.

Carmel Underwood, a former executive director of the Sydney branch of the church, wrote that Scientology executives covered up a case of child molestation and pressured pregnant staff to abort their babies so they could keep working for the church. “There are many who are still suffering and being abused financially, physically and mentally,” she wrote.

Kevin Mackey, 46, a farmer, wrote that the church sought cash donations from members for the “crimes” of drinking alcohol or watching pornography.

“Scientology is not a religious organisation — it is a criminal organisation that hides behind its so-called religious beliefs,” Mr Xenophon said. “The letters received by me contain extensive allegations of crimes and abuses that are truly shocking.

“These victims of Scientology claim it is an abusive, manipulative, violent and criminal organisation, and that criminality is condoned at the highest levels.”

The Church of Scientology has dismissed the allegations as “an outrageous abuse of parliamentary privilege” but said that it will co-operate with police. “Senator Xenophon is obviously being pressured by disgruntled former members who use hate speech and distorted accounts of their experiences in the church,” it said. “They are about as reliable as former spouses are when talking about their ex-partner.”

Read the rest here. Absolutely charming. Why, all of a sudden, do I have the Thomas Dolby song 'She Blinded Me With Science' in my head?

No fat jokes!

Those who are, well, in the bubble, I guess, may be aware of Dean del Mont's displeasure at another MP's fat jokes at his expense on Twitter.

Big deal, you're probably saying. Well, yes. It's pretty stupid. So why am I talking about it? Well, mainly because I wanted to highlight this awesome post title from Red Tory: None Shall Call Him FAT!

Heh.

Well, let's provide an answer for the Globe, shall we?

Via Blazing Cat Fur:

The Globe asks: Help us select the decade's Nation Builder

I nominated Omar Khadr & Family. Hell they're no worse than some of the previous recipients like Maher Arar. Or you could nominate Mark Steyn or Ezra Levant...hmmm.

Feel like putting your voting hat on?

Serial killer watch

I believe this could be referred to as a precipitating event...

Er...about the carbonite-preserved body in my den...

Or, how Scott Feschuk plans to break it to his wife that his new desk is Han Solo's frozen body.

Bushed

Well, folks. I don't mind telling you that I'm bushed. I had a very long day, and I still have stuff to do tonight. So there won't be a huge amount of posting on the Blog of Walker today, unfortunately. Some updates to the Mob, though, which you might want to check out. Fortunately, there isn't a huge amount to post on, so it's not like I'm getting back-logged.

I've also been in contact with Gerry Nichols over at the Libertas Post over publishing an article of mine. So that looks like a go - I'll post whenever the article comes out.

Cheers.

Irony squared

Seriously, isn't it just so precious when criticism of China's censorship is itself censored? That's like, something on an epic scale.

What does the United Nations consider tolerant? Well, tolerance apparently means not criticizing censorship, even in the most mild terms, and even in forums devoted to debate. That’s apparently why in the course of the U.N.’s Internet Governance Forum in Egypt, U.N. goons forced panelists to remove a poster that contained an unflattering reference to China’s censorship policies.

Hey, at least they can consider themselves lucky that they weren't in Cuba.

For a further example of the 'China effect' on little things like decency and liberalism, look no further than Barack Obama's own recent, ahem, ventures.