TORONTO - A federal court has decided Mulroney-era Cabinet minister Sinclair Stevens was treated unfairly by a 1987 government commission that found he acted unethically, prompting his resignation. "The report of the Parker Commission is declared to be null and void and set aside for excess of jurisdiction and a failure of procedural fairness," [. . . . ]
This would be a nice Christmas present for Mr. Stevens -- except for the fact that he has spent years trying to clear his name. Interestingly, our ex Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney, was never completely vindicated though the Liberal government had to pay him money after a court case. It is time for that one to be finalized as well; did another more recent PM, Jean Chretien, not have much to do with that one, perhaps employing one of our security services in the effort?
Charest moves to block lawsuits against snowmobile operators
Charest's Liberal government tabled legislation that would prohibit legal action based on disturbance, noise and odour complaints linked to the use of off-road vehicles including snowmobiles.
The premier's initiative follows a landmark ruling earlier in December, in which a judge awarded millions of dollars in compensation to plaintiffs suing over excessive noise caused by the snowmobiles on a trail near their homes in the Laurentians. [. . . . ]
Snowmobile clubs were actively protesting their right to do as they please not too far from house or cottage, it seems. To think that Mr. Charest, a Red Tory, I believe, used to head a two-person Progressive Conservative caucus in Canada's Parliament; luckily, he no longer does. His instincts are not those of the grass roots of conservatism. He easily slipped into the leadership of the Liberal Party and then the Premiership in Quebec. Bombardier is a power in Quebec and Liberals know where their interests lie.
There are two related articles with links on that site; they are:
* Ruling could hurt snowmobile tourism
* Bombardier: The Snowmobile Legacy
Charges laid in alleged immigration extortion scheme
OTTAWA - An operations manager for the department of Citizenship and Immigration is among five people charged in an alleged scheme to extort money from members of Ottawa's Arab community.
The RCMP allege that the group was trying to secure money from people in exchange for securing their permanent residency status.
Diane Serre, 34, is charged with 13 counts of fraud upon the government, eight counts of breach of trust by a public officer, and one count of fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, and possession of property obtained by crime.
Also facing various charges are Issam Dakik, 44, Vivian Badaan-Dakik, 33, Roger Harper, 38, and Ali Naser, 43, all of Ottawa. Although these people aren't public servants, police allege they worked with Serre. [. . . . ]
Man admits to firebombing Montreal Jewish school -- where did Sleiman Elmerhebi learn to act on his hatred?
MONTREAL - A man in Montreal has pleaded guilty to arson in connection with a firebombing that gutted the library of a Jewish school in April.
Sleiman Elmerhebi, 19, made the move as part of a plea bargain, in return for a second charge of conspiracy being dropped.
A court hearing for Elmerhebi's mother, Rouba Elmerhebi Fahd, was postponed Thursday.
[. . . . ] Police tracked down Elmerhebi through evidence left at the school, including wooden matches, kerosene and four plastic fuel containers. [. . . . ]
This is troubling because Sleiman Elmerhebi, aged 19, was either born here or has lived here for a time. Whatever the length of his life in Canada, it has been insufficient to curb the expression of hatred of Jews. Did he learn it at home or mosque, from friends? What influences caused him to act?
Do you remember a time when a parent would have forced the child to turn himself in? Yet, his mother is facing charges too. She should have been the one to turn him in. Perhaps changing our youth culture starts with parents who make the first evidence of a crime, whether shoplifting or other lawbreaking often seen as relatively minor in youth, the occasion for a life lesson on the wages of crime -- in hope of curbing this tendency. The shame was usually enough.
My problem with increased immigration from Muslim societies is that there is no tradition of peaceful dissent in most. Unfortunately, we have seen a few cases where they have brought this to Canada--or possibly developed it here under the influence of inflammatory imams. The more who come here and who do not learn to talk out their issues--or perceived injustices--contribute to a security problem for the rest of us. This young man, obviously, is just the tip of an iceberg. Think of the infamous Khadr family-- after the father was killed in an Al Qaeda camp, now battening on Canadians for their crippled boy's medical care, having admitted to being an Al Qaeda family. Think of the University of Western Ontario's Mohammed Elmasry and his justification for killing Jews. Think of the words of an imam of a Vancouver mosque--posted here within the last two months. There have been other incidents -- and they make the rest of us uneasy.
People like this young man seem to seethe with hatred. They have not learned that they may hate all they wish; we cannot police their thoughts and feelings. However, our Western democratic tradition insists that we not act on our hatreds using violence. In this Judeo-Christian tradition, we have an alternate means of expressing our displeasure -- discussion, the vote, the courts, and peaceful protests. Even the idea of 'peaceful' protest is being perverted by people who bring their hatreds here, as we saw with Concordia. We may agree to disagree forever, but we may not act on our hatreds in a violent manner. This is something Islam does not teach, apparently; it is an authoritarian system and the imams are powerful. It is quite evident that the Muslim homelands do not allow Christian churches nor Jewish temples to exist alongside mosques, as do the varieties of religious expression existing in Canada. There are still churches left in some of the Islamic countries but, more and more, their existence is threatened or they are coming under attack.
Government funding of differences, as opposed to funding programs to acculturate--or is it assimilate--our immigrants not of the Western Judeo-Christian background must be re-assessed.
Along with this, we should be searching for where this young man learned his extreme hatred, aside from his home or his friends; my guess would be that the preaching of the imams would be a good place to start looking.
The fight for the soul of Canada's justice system -- TERROR V. TORTURE: Even the judges hate the security certificate process
Because at stake in security certificate hearings are two absolutes: The nation's collective right to be secure from terrorism and an individual's right to be free from torture. Indeed, these cases will demand that judges answer a searing question: When does the threat of a terrorist act on Canadian soil outweigh the repugnant possibility of sending a man to be tortured in his homeland?
Defenders of the security certificate process, however, contend it is an immigration safeguard that ensures Canada will never become a haven for terrorists.
When you link to the full article, you might want to search these words: Mohamed Harkat, Abu Zubayda, the Muslim World League, Mansour Ahani, the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), Algeria, Iran, Special Immigration Appeals Committee Canada's Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC), CSIS, the RCMP and Bill C-36.
Justice James Hugessen took the podium at a Montreal conference and dispensed with his usual disclaimer about speaking only for himself.
He was, Judge Hugessen said, representing his colleagues on the bench of the Federal Court as he turned his remarks to special provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act -- provisions that require judges to hear government evidence against foreign nationals accused of terrorism in the absence of both detainees and their lawyers.
The extraordinary measures are part of the security certificate process, and using it, the government deports people whom the Canadian Security Intelligence Service deems terrorists.
"I can tell you, because we talked about it, we hate it," Judge Hugessen declared in language blunt for a politician, never mind a judge.
"We hate hearing only one part. We hate having to decide what, if any, sensitive material can or should be conveyed to the other party....
"We greatly miss, in short, our security blanket which is the adversary system that we were all brought up with and that, as I said at the outset, is for most of us the real warranty that the outcome of what we do is going to be just and fair."
He suggested the system is unnecessarily secretive and would, unlike any other court proceeding, allow evidence to be permanently sealed from public scrutiny. [. . . . ]
Ottawa Citizen: week long series
The review of Bill C-36, the Anti-Terrorism Act, was launched Thursday and The Citizen is using the occasion to examine changes to the country's national security apparatus since 9/11 -- and their impact on Canadians. The act -- among the most sweeping and complex laws ever passed -- fundamentally altered the balance between the rights of the individual and the need to secure the state. In this week-long series, The Citizen will examine: . . . .
I have found it very difficult to feel any sympathy for a group of people claiming to be peaceful whose extremist adherents behead prisoners and tape the proceedings, among other barbarities. In view of the fact that most Muslims have been silent about the atrocities of Islamists claiming to be Muslims acting in the service of Allah, and until I see the average Muslim denouncing the barbarity, I can't get too concerned about the future of those seen as terrorists by our security agencies -- the ones tasked with our safety in Canada. I know, I should but . . . if it is my head or a potential terrorist's, there is nothing to choose from, from my perspective. For this reason, this article is worth reading for all who feel this way, me included. Then, it is a good idea to look at the link to an article on The Case for Rage and Retribution below.
For once, let's have no "grief counselors" standing by with banal consolations, as if the purpose, in the midst of all this, were merely to make everyone feel better as quickly as possible. We shouldn't feel better.
For once, let's have no fatuous rhetoric about "healing." Healing is inappropriate now, and dangerous. There will be time later for the tears of sorrow.
A day cannot live in infamy without the nourishment of rage. Let's have rage.
What's needed is a unified, unifying, Pearl Harbor sort of purple American fury - a ruthless indignation that doesn't leak away in a week or two [. . . . ]
David Coursey isn't happy with the results he's been getting at Google and would like the company to spend less time adding more content (ie. library books) and more time making the results better.
I wish that along with the libraries announcement that Google had demonstrated some great strides it had made in improving search results...My Google searches today are significantly less useful than the searches I made just a year ago. [. . . . ]
Please do not confuse the Liberal cabinet and its Trudeauesque autocracy with Westminster parliamentary practice. This bunch have everything in common with the careerists at the United Nations and other pretenders to the higher elevations of humanity. Petty bureaucratism and officious dismissiveness disguise a disregard for the essentials of consensual democracy. It seems that the longer the Liberals feed off the entrails of the Trudeau era, the more they resemble the administration of his supposed earliest nemesis, one Maurice Duplessis.
