tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post1631396234213270813..comments2024-03-17T03:16:44.995-04:00Comments on BigCityLib Strikes Back: How Come The Only Serious Politician Hinting At Scrapping The CHRC Is A Liberal MP?bigcitylibhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05081538803991095825noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-1280271471423269242008-03-19T11:22:00.000-04:002008-03-19T11:22:00.000-04:00Who is the leading practitioner of 'libel chill' a...Who is the leading practitioner of 'libel chill' and suppression of free speech in Canada today? Is it Harper? Or is it Warman?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-24202688420678329182008-03-17T17:34:00.000-04:002008-03-17T17:34:00.000-04:00Anon 4:32Touchez.Anon 4:32<BR/><BR/>Touchez.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-19279890541715289552008-03-17T15:32:00.000-04:002008-03-17T15:32:00.000-04:00Free Speech was meant to be a privilege of the Lef...Free Speech was meant to be a privilege of the Left, not for everybody.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-68661175513682603822008-03-17T11:44:00.000-04:002008-03-17T11:44:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-55324537766146571722008-03-16T18:44:00.000-04:002008-03-16T18:44:00.000-04:00HRC's were grafted onto our legal tradition, and w...<I>HRC's were grafted onto our legal tradition, and without much success.</I><BR/><BR/>What evidence can you provide to support this assertion?<BR/><BR/><I>To this day, their legitimacy is in doubt.</I><BR/><BR/>What evidence can you provide to support this assertion?<BR/><BR/><I>HRC's, other then adjuticating low-level disputes, have never seriously advanced any human rights that had not already been advanced and legally entrenched before HRC's even came into existence.</I><BR/><BR/>This is almost an argument. How can you have meaningful human rights protection without a process by which people can seek justice? The HRC's are, as has been explained many times, a middle-ground between existing criminal law and tort law and are considerably more accessible to people than either of those routes are. Why would anyone have a problem with that?<BR/><BR/><I>They appeal to our vanity about individual rights and little more.</I><BR/><BR/>Speak for yourself. They appeal to my sense of justice. If you find that vain, too bad for you.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-10069433864300643662008-03-16T17:39:00.000-04:002008-03-16T17:39:00.000-04:00= ti-guy said: =="The problem, Paul S. is that you...= ti-guy said: =<BR/>="The problem, Paul S. is that you don't understand the difference between an assertion and an argument."=<BR/><BR/>Whatever. HRC's were grafted onto our legal tradition, and without much success. To this day, their legitimacy is in doubt.<BR/><BR/>HRC's, other then adjuticating low-level disputes, have never seriously advanced any human rights that had not already been advanced and legally entrenched before HRC's even came into existence. They appeal to our vanity about individual rights and little more.<BR/><BR/>- Paul SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-48006256943279025312008-03-16T12:33:00.000-04:002008-03-16T12:33:00.000-04:00The NDP's worth according to Ti-guy is reduced to ...<I>The NDP's worth according to Ti-guy is reduced to its current standing in the polls.</I><BR/><BR/>Not necessarily. What I meant is that I'm only interested in how the NDP is resonating with other Canadians and how NDP MP's are influencing significant events in Parliament.<BR/><BR/>I'm not an NDP partisan, and, although not hostile to the NDP, I will not vote NDP for the forseeable future (the past two years have convinced me of that...even if I have a soft spot for dessicated hippie holdovers and bourgeois, white-collar social democrats...whatever I think of them, they mostly come by their beliefs honestly). So I don't care what happens with the NDP until a significant event occurs.<BR/><BR/>Do you get that, or do I have to mime it out for you?<BR/><BR/>...or will just continue with your vulgar, filthy dishonesty and <I>cunty</I> personal attacks?Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-90133738259436224782008-03-16T11:21:00.000-04:002008-03-16T11:21:00.000-04:00"Ti-Guy said... When it comes the the NDP, wake me..."Ti-Guy said... <BR/>When it comes the the NDP, wake me up when there's a vote or a poll."<BR/><BR/>10:34 AM<BR/><BR/>(Comment by Ti-Guy on Friday March 7th,2008)<BR/><BR/>Ti-guy's snooty comment about NDP's standing in the polls. The NDP's worth according to Ti-guy is reduced to its current standing in the polls. Well, I guess you're nothing if not a Liberal. Principles and policies are just things to be bent in order to attain what Liberals salivate for: power. You truly are a Liberal hack, and spare us your fake sophistication, hack.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-64034750813812634422008-03-16T10:40:00.000-04:002008-03-16T10:40:00.000-04:00I've noticed that both Ti-guy and BCL are invetera...<I>I've noticed that both Ti-guy and BCL are inveterate poll-watchers.</I><BR/><BR/>Nothing makes me happier than to see them <I>lie</I> like this. BCL (and a lot of bloggers) are poll watchers, but I'm not. I keep a rough estimate of poll results from an aggregate of surveys done over time in the back of my mind, but otherwise, I don't care that much for them at all, at all, at all. The major function of most polls these days is to set the <I>boundaries</I> of acceptable thought and opinion, and in that respect they constitute an <I>assault</I> on freedom of thought and expression.<BR/><BR/>I do pay attention to marketing surveys, since the results of those are more revealing and the surveying done is much more honest and sophisticated.<BR/><BR/>You know that if you had to back up that assertion, you'd fail.<BR/><BR/>Now, let us have no more of your vulgar, filthy dishonesty.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-65685860898461066212008-03-16T08:53:00.000-04:002008-03-16T08:53:00.000-04:00Part of the problem with HRC's is that they have n...<I>Part of the problem with HRC's is that they have never become an integral part of the legal fabric in Canada.</I><BR/><BR/>The problem, Paul S. is that you don't understand the difference between an assertion and an argument.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-25794446646337838182008-03-16T03:25:00.000-04:002008-03-16T03:25:00.000-04:00Part of the problem with HRC's is that they have n...Part of the problem with HRC's is that they have never become an integral part of the legal fabric in Canada. <BR/><BR/>As an entity, they tend to be too interventionist and do not subscribe to enough of our established legal practises to merit wider acceptance from the Canadian public.<BR/><BR/>HRC's appeal to our vanity but have accomplished little of significance during their existence.<BR/><BR/>- Paul SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-22810322516039665642008-03-15T21:57:00.000-04:002008-03-15T21:57:00.000-04:00Anon 10:35You have a point. I've noticed that bot...Anon 10:35<BR/><BR/>You have a point. I've noticed that both Ti-guy and BCL are inveterate poll-watchers. Like the jaded politicos that they are, a particular policy is right and good if the poll say so. Meaningful ideas and principles, not so much. Oh, once and while they'll talk the talk, but that's about as far as it goes. Ti-guy's a vulgar shameless hypocrite of the first order.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-51874895764506012392008-03-15T21:35:00.000-04:002008-03-15T21:35:00.000-04:00"With a vacuum at the top, Liberal policy is now a..."With a vacuum at the top, Liberal policy is now a free for all." <BR/>I have to disagree with you Zapero. <BR/>The vacuum is not just limited to the top if the Liberal party, the rot is wholesale. Read the comments of supporters BCL and Ti-guy, it doesn't get any more empty than that. Name-calling and denigration of those that disagree is the sum total of their politics.<BR/>I think the Socialists are wrong on so many fronts. However, I actually respect the NDPs conviction in their beliefs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-32114788385554167702008-03-15T21:19:00.000-04:002008-03-15T21:19:00.000-04:00With a vacuum at the top, Liberal policy is now a ...With a vacuum at the top, Liberal policy is now a free for all. <BR/><BR/>Some of the new ideas will be refreshing, some less so.<BR/><BR/>Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-33500822316311413572008-03-15T20:26:00.000-04:002008-03-15T20:26:00.000-04:00one good Liberal . . the rest have Steffi disease ...one good Liberal . . the rest have Steffi disease and are cowards & wimps.<BR/><BR/>Maybe Dr Martin can inject some credibility into the Liberal Caucus.<BR/><BR/>Anything would help.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-82357860868009442352008-03-15T18:28:00.000-04:002008-03-15T18:28:00.000-04:00In arguing that his arguments about Islam in Europ...<I>In arguing that his arguments about Islam in Europe are valid arguments that shouldnt be actionable under law.</I><BR/><BR/>That's the first time I'm seeing you make that argument.<BR/><BR/>In any case, I just don't care that <I>that's</I> what you think. And as for the merits of Hitchens's own Eurabia arguments, I've never read them. I thought only Steyn was making that case seriously. Europe has a lot of problems with integration and economic justice for newcomers and I think it's going to take time to work it out. Canada has 400 years of dealing with these issues.<BR/><BR/>I read in the paper today about the so-called Toronto-17 terrorist cell, the case against which seems to be falling apart. I'm wondering how much the fall-out from that has cost us in terms of community relations (particularly with regard to cooperation with law enforcement agencies) and will cost us with possible civil suits in the future.<BR/><BR/>I also wonder if the hysteria about these "terrorists" did not permit people to consider them a threat equivalent to the neo-nazis sitting in their basements, as we're supposed to believe?<BR/><BR/>And until I see the RCMP sniffing around Delisle, Saskatchewan or the East Kootenays with evidence that proves they're all in their basements or only playing paintball in the woods, why should I believe that anyway?Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-48337965435202126682008-03-15T18:02:00.000-04:002008-03-15T18:02:00.000-04:00Ti-Guy Well, to be clear, this complaint isn't aga...Ti-Guy <BR/><BR/>Well, to be clear, this complaint isn't against Steyn, it's against MacLean's...<BR/><BR/>That doesn't really affect my argument. Im just as bothered by the prospect of HRC complaints against Dawkins, et. al's publishers as I am about complaints against them personally.<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure they do. Hitchens makes his case against all forms of irrational thought; Dawkins is concerned mostly about the assault on science.<BR/><BR/>Hitchens most definitely does make arguments that the rise of Islam in Europe is a dangerous trend. Read the article I cited if you dont believe me. ALL of them talk of the evil of theocracy, including Islamic theocracy. <BR/><BR/>I know Hitchens (not sure about Dawkins, since he lives in Britain) rails against freedom of expression restrictions, but he doesn't live in Canada, so I frankly I couldn't care less what he thinks on that issue.<BR/><BR/>You are confounding arguments. Im not arguing in favour of Hitchens' arguments in favour of free speech. In arguing that his arguments about Islam in Europe are valid arguments that shouldnt be actionable under law.<BR/><BR/>Others, I'm sure, have different things to say as well, but as a liberal Canadian, I am concerned about making distinctions between what is truly criminal and what is just expression *and* be concerned about what constitutes healthy productive public discourse in a diverse society that protects freedom of religion and freedom of expression for everybody, equally.<BR/><BR/>I want a healthy public discourse too and I think the idea that the majority can--through law--effectively deem certain opinions "invalid" and use what is in effect quasi-criminal law to punish expression of those opinions is most contrary to promoting health discourse. Its often said that racism adds nothing to discourse and I would be inclined to agree. But frankly I dont see the advocacy of theocracy or other authoritarian ideologies adding anything either. Should we go after these opinions too?KChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932623568330893522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-79670977214699332882008-03-15T18:01:00.000-04:002008-03-15T18:01:00.000-04:00Suppose the government had to cough up the cash ev...<I>Suppose the government had to cough up the cash every time some public body ordered a building to be refitted for wheelchair access.</I><BR/><BR/>I haven't heard <I>that</I> complaint since the 80's.<BR/><BR/>How much farther back in time is society going, anyway? I'd just like to know...Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-34528184083258834932008-03-15T17:56:00.001-04:002008-03-15T17:56:00.001-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.KChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932623568330893522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-19548289998052508212008-03-15T17:56:00.000-04:002008-03-15T17:56:00.000-04:00In regards to you initial concerns that a Liberal ...In regards to you initial concerns that a Liberal MP would advance legislation to limit the CHRC and that he believes that more has to be done to limit the mandate of the CHRC and its provincial counterparts:<BR/>I was actively involved in the effort to ensure equal marriage rights for lesbian and gay Canadians and I can assure you that there are many Liberal MPs who have a desire to see a limit on human rights legislation and implementation (particularly for LGBT people and women). I volunteered with EGALE in the early 80s and again during the marriage debate and I never understood how the party that claims ownership of the charter could have so many who don't believe it applies to all Canadians. <BR/>Then I realized that like so many other important progressive issues and programs (national child care anyone? the environment? homecare?) there is always lots of rhetoric but when it comes to action - not so progressive.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05575872342327134732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-79235954017989617112008-03-15T17:40:00.000-04:002008-03-15T17:40:00.000-04:00"Whatever you think of section 13, HRCs have done ..."Whatever you think of section 13, HRCs have done fine work on the behalf of the injured and disabled."<BR/><BR/>They've done the occasional dumb thing on behalf the disabled. The BC decision to allow the mobility-impaired to bring all-terrain vehicles into fragile, hiker-only wilderness areas is an example. <BR/><BR/>The biggest problems with HRCs is that they (1) tend to fall into a blatant advocacy role for GPPs (groups under progressive patronage) and (2) tend steadily to expand their mandates, through expansive definitions of "human rights". <BR/><BR/>A third problem is a general problem of over-regulation: government bodies make decisions that impose considerable compliance costs on society (mainly companies), but rarely take responsibility for those costs.<BR/><BR/>Suppose the government had to cough up the cash every time some public body ordered a building to be refitted for wheelchair access. They'd be less cavalier spending public money than in coercing private interests to spend private money. And yet, if the cause is good, they should be able to justified the taxes increases required to fund it, right?<BR/><BR/>intellectual pariah<BR/><BR/>I'm not for abolishing the HRCs, but they should face a hard-nosed review. Getting them out of the speech-regulation business would be enough, frankly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-85277265215168116332008-03-15T17:02:00.000-04:002008-03-15T17:02:00.000-04:00Steyn runs afoul the law with his articles then mo...<I>Steyn runs afoul the law with his articles then more articulate versions of the same argument surely runs afoul the same law.</I><BR/><BR/>Well, to be clear, this complaint isn't against Steyn, it's against <I>MacLean's</I>...and what is <I>"against the law"</I> in civil cases can only be determined when cases like this are heard.<BR/><BR/><I>And what do you make of the fact that several of the world's most well known exponents of anti-theism agree with those "rightwing hysterics"?</I><BR/><BR/>I'm not sure they do. Hitchens makes his case against all forms of irrational thought; Dawkins is concerned mostly about the assault on science.<BR/><BR/>I know Hitchens (not sure about Dawkins, since he lives in Britain) rails against freedom of expression restrictions, but he doesn't live in Canada, so I frankly I couldn't care less what he thinks on that issue.<BR/><BR/>Others, I'm sure, have different things to say as well, but as a liberal Canadian, I am concerned about making distinctions between what is truly criminal and what is just expression *and* be concerned about what constitutes healthy productive public discourse in a diverse society that protects freedom of religion and freedom of expression for everybody, equally.Ti-Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06620550471437012866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-31601215344214931722008-03-15T16:51:00.000-04:002008-03-15T16:51:00.000-04:00I really don't see anything controversial in that ...I really don't see anything controversial in that statement. Are you denying the fact that Islam is growing in Europe while white Christians and western secularists are aging?KChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932623568330893522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-73352757773479151842008-03-15T16:47:00.000-04:002008-03-15T16:47:00.000-04:00KC,You're joking, right?"The West is growing old a...KC,<BR/><BR/>You're joking, right?<BR/><BR/>"The West is growing old and enfeebled, and lacks the will to rebuff those who would supplant it."<BR/><BR/>By the West he means Europe and NA minus the U.S. (they're not growing old and enfeebled), and by "those" he means Muslims. I'll leave you to work out what "supplant" means. But we're not in the realm of poetry here where everything is open to interpretation. For you to pretend otherwise speaks to your innate conservatism, where you are willing to twist meanings to make one of your own come across as less revolting than he actually is.bigcitylibhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05081538803991095825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23292180.post-17172404318018749672008-03-15T16:40:00.000-04:002008-03-15T16:40:00.000-04:00BCL - I read the Future belongs to Islam and he ne...BCL - I read the Future belongs to Islam and he never says those things that you accuse him of. He only gives what he sees as the facts--which in at least a few cases are wrong. For instance the conclusion that there is a coordinated effort to "islamicize" Europe is nowhere to be found in the article. Nor does he anywhere the suggestion that Europeans should 'distrust'. His critics are putting words in his mouth.KChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932623568330893522noreply@blogger.com