The Shotgun Blog
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
A note to readers and commenters:
Typepad, our blogging software, is going through a fairly major upgrade and you may find that on some posts your comments will not appear immediately.
You have two options: be patient and wait for your comment to appear or treat this post's comment thread as a free-for-all where you can talk about whatever you're not able to discuss elsewhere.
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Ric Dolphin Writes Again
Although loath to use another of those horrible words concocted by the geeks who, sadly, have inherited the world, there seems to be no avoiding it. I now have a "blog" which I shall endeavor to update at least every Monday and which you are
invited to visit at, ricdolphin.com
Be aware that, unlike when I wrote for Western Standard magazine, I am not being censored for language. I am also not specifically writing about politics, although the subject may be broached on occasion. Be assured, however, that I shall never use "blog" as a verb.
Posted by Ric Dolphin on July 9, 2008 in Aboriginal Issues, American History, Books, Canadian Conservative Politics, Canadian History, Canadian Politics, Canadian Provincial Politics, Crime, Current Affairs, Film, Humour, International Affairs, International Politics, Media, Military, Municipal Politics, Religion, Science, Television, Trade, Travel, Web/Tech, Weblogs, Western Standard, WS Radio, WStv | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Libertarians and Birth Rates
Libertarian blogger Megan McArdle puts forward an extremely sensible view about the role of families and inheritance in maintaining culture, in response to a characteristically smart post by fellow-libertarian Will Wilkinson.
Sunday, June 08, 2008
Campaign Motto of the Day
The right wing blogosphere has a new campaign motto for the upcoming US presidential election.
And Senator McCain's personal account of his POW time spent in Hanoi Hilton is going to make you respect him a lot more now.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Mark Steyn in Toronto
Mark Steyn gets out and about in Toronto to promote the new paperback of his US bestseller (and Canadian hate crime).
Saturday, April 12, 2008
"Time, place, and manner" restrictions
This may be a libertarian-oriented blog, but it doesn't follow that there should be no "time, place, and manner" restrictions imposed on posters. As has been noted by several regulars recently, too many people abuse their privileges to post on this blog, by clogging up discussion threads with lengthy, irrelevant, taunting, insulting, abusive, and hateful comments. Shouting down and intimidating others isn't an exercise of free speech; it is a negation of it.
In a libertarian space, the government doesn't get to make the call as to what is appropriate commentary, and what is abusive. The owners of the space have the right to make that call. That's not "censorship" any more than keeping creeps and bums out of your house is denying their mobility rights. If you can't respect the "time, place, and manner" restrictions the owner of the blog requests (and may impose), start your own blog and post away to your heart's content.
I agree with Max Yalden that we shouldn't have an "anything goes" free speech law. No reasonable person advances such a view. It's a caricature and a straw man. Where I differ from Yalden is in who should control the spaces in which speech takes place, and what principles should inform the "time, place, and manner" restrictions that do get imposed.
Thursday, April 03, 2008
On Europe, Islam, and a bunch of other things
While I wrote the post cited below as part of a debate in the Virginia blogosphere, I am curious as to what folks north of the 49th think of my argument:
As for "Islam," we need to remember just who our enemies are, here. They are far more specific than we are led to believe. We are fighting Wahhabists (Afghanistan and Iraq), Ba'athists (Iraq), and Khomeinists (Afghanistan and Iraq) - hence the initials in my term for this conflict (the WBK War). Contrary to conventional wisdom, Wahhabism is relatively young "sect" of Islam (about 200 years old), and most Muslims outside of it consider it heresy. Ditto for Khomeinism (named after the founder of the Iranian regime), the Shi'ite version of violent "faith" - which also roundly condemned by the Shia majority that are not part of it. Ba'athism's roots are not in Islam at all, but rather in Arab racism directly inspired by the Nazis.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
If there is one thing people seem to be good at in contemporary society, it's fake outrage. You know, the kind of outrage where you are really not mad, but you find it either politically or morally imperative to at least act outraged. Yeah, that.
People on the left within the blogosphere are in one of their characteristic anti-Kate McMillan fake tizzies. Predictably, Warren Kinsella and Jason Cherniak are fake outraged.
Now, I don't doubt that these people are mad. But they are not mad about what they portray. They are mad about something else, all together. They're really mad that Kate McMilllan exists at all. But that's another story.
What did Kate McMillan say? Well she said: "Nazis didn't carry out the holocaust. The german state did that".
She was making a philosophical point. That, without the powers of the state, the ability of the Nazis to carry out the holocaust would have been slim-to-none. Their ability to wage war against the rest of the world would have also been slim-to-none. But you see, you're not allowed to make philosophical points like this. Why? Well, because it's insensitive.
Now, I'm not sure if Kate McMillan is an anarcho-libertarian. . I could probably e-mail her and ask her, but it's not really material to the discussion. But here's how James Bow breaks down her logic over at Cherniak's:
All of this argument is turning on the suggestion that you can ascribe a moral value to a thing rather than a person, because that's what the State is: it is a tool, and in my opinion the responsibility for evil rests not with the tool, but the intentions of the people using or misusing the tool. Nothing we create is good or evil until we use it.
But let's take Kate's argument, as reiterated here, to its logical extension:
1. the Nazis were evil, but their evil could not have been implemented if they did not have the apparatus of the state to enact there evil.
2. therefore, the state apparatus is inherently dangerous to leave in place because it enables people to enact great evils.
3. ban the state apparatus, and thus block the Nazis' abilities to enact evil.
1. Murderers are evil, but their evil could not have been implemented if they did not have guns available to enact that evil.
2. therefore guns are inherently dangerous things to have around, because it enables people to enact great evils.
3. ban guns, and thus block the murderers' abilities to enact evil.
So, based on this analogy, I welcome Kate McMillan's support for stricter gun controls.
Now, James Bow has been very reasonable in the past. But his logic is not exactly on-game here.
This logic is at best, a hasty generalization, and at worst, a straw man. It consummates in a false anology. Given James seems to be honest fellow, it's more likely he has a very poor understanding libertarian ethics. So let's educate him.
This is the crux of his argument: if a person thinks something is bad and should be considered immoral, that all bad things should be considered immoral. Therefore if a person who thinks one thing is bad and immoral, and another bad thing is not immoral, that person is a hypocrite.
It's a circular argument, and a formal syllogistic fallacy in logic to make an argument like that. We might also call it begging the question. Another example of this type of logical error would be saying "Everyone thinks Andy is a good guy. Therefore, everything Andy does is a good thing". This one is more simple than James' argument. But it's actually the same logical error.
You see, libertarians believe that government is a generally bad thing. But they don't think everything bad should be banned—actually James, it's socialists and Warren Kinsella that think that.
Your gun analogy is particularly poor, because how could a libertarian simultaneously be against government intervention and for government intervention? It doesn't work. James, libertarians are not hypocrites for viewing one bad thing immoral and the other not. It's a philosophical position, of which has many adherents, and a system of ethics based on that philosophy.
From a libertarian position of ethics: it is unethical for the state to interfere in the matters of the person, if that person is not interfering with another person. Therefore, if a person owns a gun, but is not using it to interfere with the liberty of another person, gun ownership constitutes a legal practice. Libertarian ethics dictate this.
Also, libertarians don't generally believe that anything should be banned simply on it's potential to do harm. To this extent, they are also generally against: laws restricting recreational drug use, compulsory car seatbelt use, compulsory helmet use, etc.
To a libertarian, the fundamental precept of morality is that: the person is sovereign unto themselves, and free of external coercive force. From both government and other persons. If a government is directly exercising physical, coercive force against a person, who is not, directly exercising physical, coercive force against others, libertarian ethics would deem this: unethical, and therefore bad.
Libertarians are generally against governments even having the legal ability to initiate force against it's people, because the government is viewed as accountable to individuals, not to the majority. When the majority of people in a democracy, use their majority in government to initiate force against a minority, we call that: tyranny of the majority. In Libertarian ethics, this is unethical and bad.
Libertarian ethics also hold freedom of expression in the highest regard. Something like hate speech, does not qualify as physical, coercive force. Therefore, libertarians are against any laws limiting freedom of expression.
So libertarians generally prefer a government which is based around strong constitutional law with negative rights. Meaning, where all rights are assumed, except for those explicitly removed.
So when James Bow and others, find hypocrisy in this statement from Kate, it is only when viewed through the lens of their own ethics, using spurious logic. There is nothing hypocritical or illogical in her position insofar as it is a philosophical statement. Most libertarians and anarchists would actually agree with her sentiment. So, save the fake outrage.
Steve Janke calls for an Olympic Boycott
I thought the man behind Angry in the Great White North deserved a "shout-out".
Monday, March 24, 2008
White House web site's gaffe
The White House web page has made a gaffe and I captured a screen shot of that.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Featured on Reuters
This is mostly a shameless self-promotion of my recent post on the Iranian regime incursion in Latin America that has been featured by the Reuters news agency web site.
Monday, November 05, 2007
CRUSH, KILL, DESTROY
So, puny mortals... you think you're ready to get up on the porch and play with THE BIG DOG?
(crossposted at halls of macadamia)
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Back from a short trip to Europe and I've written a summarized conclusion of what I saw and heard there. There are great lessons in Europe for North America and we should not repeat their mistakes.
Europe is the sad example of letting "Liberals" running the place for far too long. Let's not follow their path...
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Warren Kinsella's basic food groups: grains, fruits, vegetables, meats, dairy, and laundry detergent?
By now, I'm sure most of you have noticed Warren Kinsella's attempt to smear Ontario Conservative Randy Hillier on his (Kinsella's) blog. Small Dead Animals does an efficient smackdown, and she's not alone. However, there is one aspect of this that has been missed.
Warren takes issue with Hiller for part of this sentence: "I will remove health inspectors who pour bleach on egg sandwiches at church socials." Taken to its logical conclusion, I can only assume that Warren wants to make sure every Ontarian's diet includes the proper daily amount of - laundry detergent.
I can see the ad now: Vote Liberal for your daily cup of tasty Clorox!
Perhaps someone should ask Dalton McGuinty if Dub-K is still drawing a check from the Ontario Liberal Party. If so, they're not getting their money's worth from him, as political adviser or nutritionist!
Monday, April 23, 2007
Poisoned food from Communist China enters human food chain
Kudos to Steve Janke for staying on top of this already huge yet still growing scandal, which is now looking like a deliberate move by food processors in Communist China to risk loss of life to make grain exports look more nutritious (and more valuable) than they really were.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
A place for everything and everything in its placeI have been trying to come to terms with a few things over the past few days. Ann Coulter's "faggot" remark at CPAC is one of them. I was there last year when she made the "raghead" comment, and I remember the outrage of everyone in the room, myself included. But how can I revile her for her cheap shots when I take so many of my own?
Yesterday, the arch-fiend Robert McClelland made a hard-core anti-semetic remark in the comments section of his Blahg:
When the State starts rounding up my Jewish neighbours, I’ll speak up.
Not me. People like Klownsella, Chernyuk and Smeagol the Jew have taught me it's not worth getting involved. When next they come for the Jews I doubt I'll even be able to muster up a "what a shame".
This caused both the left and right of the blogosphere to gasp in collective horror. Cherniak called for McClelland's head on a pike, and it was handed to him by the NDP. As disgusted as I was with Robert, I couldn't help but think of how last summer the Blogging Tories and the Conservative Party could have done the same to me. They didn't, but they could have. My views of Islam may be similar to what others are thinking, but most of them will never say it.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Word of the Tehran protest spreads . . .
. . . from the blogosphere to Fox News (ninth item).
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Echo Chamber moment
What Burkean Canuck found was enough to be the lead item today, but the item directly below it is also a must-read, and an outrage - if true.
Friday, October 20, 2006
Time for you to meet Fenris
I've been guilty of hiding him from you:
In the vanguard of activism are the people, animals, and Plant-Canadians that re-educate our Youth into politically correct members of a caring, feeling, and tax-giving society. One need look no further than the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education to find a role model of our Perfect Future Society, filled with happy Global Village People, singing and dancing around the dried dung fire after a vegetarian feast of bran mush, tree bark, and beetles. But this Utopian Paradise is under attack by budget cutbacks, masterminded by angry white males, bent on an agenda of war crimes, third hand cigarette smoke, heteronormativist racism, and inadequate vegetarian buffets.
Monday, October 02, 2006
Most Annoying Canadian 2006
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
More Communist support for Hezbollah et al
This time from the Communist media.
Also, check out the sixth item for the latest on Huseyin Celil, and the ninth item for Steve Janke's excellent commentary on Communist China's press crackdown.
Update: The Daily Standard piece to which I link can be accessed by copy-pasting the URL, but clicking the link seems to be hit-or-miss.
Monday, August 21, 2006
The 2996 Project
Via Atheist Jew, I have signed on to participate in an online tribute to victims of 9-11. I will be writing about Barbara A. Shaw, a 57-year-old woman from New Jersey. Any other bloggers reading this should consider helping out. The fifth anniversary is less than a month away, and not every victim has been assigned to a blog...yet.
For more information, or to join, check it out here.
Cross-posted at Wonkitties.
Monday, August 14, 2006
I am SO Not Putting This Guy on My Blogroll
The Iranian president has started a blog. You can find it here. Click on the appropriate flag for the language of your choice. (He is desperately in need of an editor for his English version.)
As demonstrated on 60 Minutes last night, he's certainly a wordy fellow. But he plans to correct this in future:
The blog was 2,000 words long in English and dated Friday. At the end of the blog, Ahmadinejad wrote: "From now onwards, I will try to make it shorter and simpler."
I'm almost tempted to tag him for that "Five Strange Things," chain thingy that was going around the blogosphere a few months back. Wonder how he'd answer.
1) I think the Holocaust didn't happen.
2) I'm crazy.
3) I believe in dressing "casual" for a 60 Minutes interview. (In Iran we call this "Casual Sundays Before an Audience of Infidels.")
4) I sent a rambling, seemingly endless letter to George Bush a while back, and expected him to answer.
5) While I don't care about my wardrobe, or my facial hair, I do believe in getting my teeth whitened. (Seriously -- did anyone else notice his teeth last night? They were like something from a Crest commercial. - ed.)
6) Okay, I know it's only five, but that's not enough for me. Did I mention about the Holocaust?
Whatever. I just hope he never sends in a link when I'm hosting Carnival of the Cats.
And may I say, he'd better watch what he posts. Bloggers in Iran are having a rough go of it these days.
(Update: I just checked His Nuttiness' blog, and it appears to have disappeared...for now. Maybe it's overloaded with visitors?)
Cross-posted at Wonkitties.
Friday, August 11, 2006
Calgary meet and greet
Looks like a few Calgary bloggers are getting together Saturday afternoon for a bit of a get together. Information here. I'll be around with my son and some of my younger brothers. Look to see you there. Info for the other side of the street.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
RightGirl, that's enough
I don't like doing this, but I feel I have no choice but to call out RightGirl. This has simply gone too far.
I have no choice but to ask her: how much does she really know Islam, as she so arrogantly claims to do? How many Muslims does she actually know?
Does she know any from the Sufi tradition, a Muslim tradition that is more than a millenium old? A tradition that patently rejects injecting its faith violently into the political realm? A tradition eight centuries older than the nutty Wahabbism she (rightly) fears? A tradition ten centuries older than the dangerous Khomeinism she (also rightly) fears?
Does she now any Uighurs - Muslims from occupied East Turkestan, a civilization two millenia old that adopted Sufi Islam in the ninth century? Has she even heard of Uighurs or East Turkestan? Or did she fall for the Communist lies about "Xinjiang"?
I have (correction: I have heard of the Uighurs - the original was a bit vague, sorry). I've had the privilege of working with them to help form voices for their people: the East Turkestan Government in Exile, and the East Turkestan National Freedom Center (I'm Vice President of the latter, so feel free to consider me biased on this subject - I admit it freely). I have watched them stand up for Abdul Rahman and other Christians in Afghanistan, categorically reject violence of any kind, and call to account the rabble-rousers who would spill blood over the Jyllands-Posten cartoons.
For all of their efforts, their reward is to be either ignored or lumped in with the very terrorists they have scorned, courtesy of bloggers like RightGirl who should know better.
If she had presented her views as "Wahabbism must be stopped" or "Khomeinism must be stopped" or even "radical Islam" must be stopped, this wouldn't be an argument, and I wouldn't be posting this. Sure, RightGirl would still be facing some vituperative criticism, but none of it would be justified.
While I cannot peer into RG's Inbox, I'm all but certain much of it is still unjustified; I'm guessing she has received a bunch of jihad apologias, threats, and other nonsense. Sadly, she and they seem to agree on Islam; that only those who kill for it are true Muslims.
I know different, and what's more, I know many, many Muslims who know different, too. What's more, and what has me so upset, is that - contrary to popular belief - they are shouting it from the cyber-rooftops, but no one is hearing them.
I hope RG sees this and reasses. I pray she recognizes Islam is far more complex than she realized. I hope she becomes more aware of just who the enemy is (the Wahabbists, the Ba'athists, the Khomeinists, and their mutual sponsor: the Chinese Communist Party) and targets her talents accordingly.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Right and Left come together for Taiwan
As one would expect from my presence here, yours truly is a right-wing fellow when it comes to politics. That said, one of the things that had surprised and reassured me over the years is how much support there is for anti-CCP policies from the North American left.
Things like this from Daily Kos (arguably the leading lefty blog in the United States) no longer surprise, but they're nice to see all the same (twelfth item).
Monday, June 12, 2006
The terrorist next door
I’ve been scouring the net for Muslim’s in Canada writing blogs because I simply want to see what they have to say and think as I have a lot of doubts with everything I’ve been hearing in the news. We are all Canadian’s and this wall needs to come down:
There is a disturbing problem with the title of this entry; it is true! Yes, it really is. Last Friday my entire neighborhood found out that among us lived a man who seems to have had every intention to kill massive amounts of Canadians for no reason.
A year ago, Toronto city councillor & TTC Chairman Howard Moscoe said that Toronto is safe from terror because “terrorists would have to find us on a map first!” He couldn’t have been more wrong. It appears that they don’t even have to consult a map because they already live here. And while they live with us, enjoy the freedoms we do, gain the benefits of Canada’s various social programs exactly like every other Canadian; they want to kill us! As to why, this is what I’m going to try to answer here.
Visit The Thinking Blog.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
I don't mean to brag (Oh yes I do)
The BBC "broke" a story on the latest example of corruption in Communist China (last item); what makes this more surprising is that it's in the computer sector (where one would expect the cadres would make sure such things did not happen).
So why did I put "broke" in quotes? Because the BBC was almost two months behind the Epoch Times - and (ahem!) yours truly (last item).
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
I've been remiss to not post about this sooner, and I'm thankful to the Sandmonkey for sending me a reminder. Egyptian blogger Alaa Abdel Fatah has been arresting for...well, basically for peacefully exercising free speech. Notice I did not say, "exercising his right to free speech," because sadly, in Egypt, he does not have that. One has to stop thinking like a spoiled, lucky Canadian in these situations, and realize the guts people like Alaa have. Sandmonkey explains the case better than I can here.
One paragraph struck me, though:
Currently, there are about 48 detained,
6 of them are bloggers, and 3 of them are women. The best known is
Alaa, which makes him the posterboy of this campaign - but getting them
out is equally as important. Egypt
has fewer than 830 bloggers all in all, 60 of whom are political and
less than 30 are politically active. Now 6 of those are in jail - 20%
of all politically active Egyptian bloggers - and amongst them one of Egypt's most highly profiled one.
Remember, these men and women are allies to any of us who care about freedom in general, and to any of us who want the Muslim world to find a better way than fascism and violence. It is not a stretch to say this matter is part of the broader current war.
I called 411 and got two addresses for the Egyptian Embassy in Ottawa:
454 Laurier Avenue East,
Ottawa, ON K1N 6R3
207-85 Range Road,
Ottawa, ON K1N 8J6
Call them both. Bombard them both. Spread the word.
Cross-posted at Wonkitties.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Organs, Cadavers, Communists, and a Canadian blogger
The folks at the "Bodies" exhibit are so incensed that some have dared to question whose organs and other parts the Communists sent to them that the director is resorting to the use the courts to silence them.
One can only wonder if such threats extend across the pond and into the blogosphere (ninth and tenth items).
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Old media discusses new media
The Financial Times has panel -- Tom Glocer, chief executive of Reuters, Trevor Butterworth, a regular contributor to the FT Magazine, and Roger Parry of Clear Channel -- discussing the media in the age of blogging and do-it-yourself news. Glocer, especially, makes some interesting points. What comes through very clearly is that they are all very defensive about the blogging phenomenon. It is sort of surprising that for all the talk/coverage of blogs over the past few years, MSM journalists and executives still don't get it. Yes, few blogs provide daily, original content. Less of it, still, is actually reporting. Blogs, though, are like "publications" or "programming" in that there are different kinds. There are citizen journalists who do original reporting, there are some who provide analysis or commentary, others who link stories to provide the bigger picture, some who hold the MSM media accountable and others who provide clever or snide comments on the news. To treat them as all the same is to look at your free local weekly paper and think it does the same job as the New York Times or People.
I don't think blogs will replace papers -- often they supplement the reading of newspaper readers. And most good blogs require the coverage of news that newspaper provide. Blogs can also drive a particular news story or angle. But there is a challenge to the newspaper industry that both Glocer (directly) and Butterwroth (indirectly) point out: the newspaper is becoming a less effecient way to deliver advertising. Glocer:
"... the newspaper is a much less good advertising medium than the digital media. You can only serve up flat banner ads rather than target and personalise ads and follow through to purchase. We already see this with Google ads and the move of classified advertising online. So my belief is that newspapers will survive, but not grow."
Butterworth disagrees (to a point) with Glocer's comment but alludes to the same problem: "I think newspapers have more to fear from their shareholders demanding 20 percent profit margins than from bloggers. " It won't be readership that does in newspapers but the lack of advertising revenue. Yes, there are still readers that advertisers can reach through the large dailies but there are more innovative things being done with online advertising. Butterworth is right that there is still a large gap between what the paper's can get for ads and what a website can and it will be some time until that gap narrows but narrow it will.
The whole panel discussion is worth reading. There is a lot to get angry with because, as I noted earlier, the participants are defending their turf. Who can blame them? Sure, MSM types have an inflated sense of importance but so do bloggers. Parry says that, "A problem with user reported news is that it may be self promoting, libellous or just inaccurate. A news filter as you suggest can overcome much of this but real, hard news is often dug out by determined journalists paid to delve into matters others would prefer did not see the light of day." Ah, yes, that old line of argument that newspapers and broadcasters have editors and producers to ensure the mistakes get caught. Just ask Dan Rather and Howell Raines about that -- I think they are experts at always getting the facts right or having editors catch what shouldn't be published.
The point that both MSM and bloggers need to understand is that both produce a lot of good stuff and both produce a lot of crap. The good stuff will survive because there will always be a market for quality journalism, whether it is news or opinion. The bad stuff might survive but at least there is good blogging and journalism being done to counter their errors. Before blogs the bad journalists had a free ride because few of their fellow journalists would point out their bias/mistakes/ommissions etc... But in an age of blogs, such mistakes will be pointed out, laughed at, mocked and, one hopes, discredited. That's good for journalism -- new and old.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Hugo Chavez threatens bloggers
All you left-wing anti-American, Marxist romantics out to save the world while wistfully dreaming of an uncapitalist utopia will probably skip over this bit of news. Doesn’t fit the symbolic agenda. The Venezuelan dictator and general everyday communist prick, Hugo Chavez is threatening blogs:
Venezuela’s dictator has issued his first threat against bloggers. The threat his supporters ran in Ultimas Noticias today identifies them as ‘The Anglo-Venezuelan Connection’, presumably because they write in English. Miguel’s blog has been named in this threat. He says they should probably have a tough time shutting him down, given that the blog itself is hosted in the U.S., but that doesn’t halt our worries for him. Dictators everywhere have been moving against bloggers. There is nothing in the brutal Chavez regime that has shown itself to be in any way particularly benevolent or tolerant. This bears watching with great concern
Monday, February 06, 2006
Lileks buys an old map of North America. For the land north of the 49th parallel it reads "Dominion of Canada". Sigh.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Is it just me, or has the Captain's Quarters blog been blocked to everyone who subscribes to Telus internet service? Or maybe to everyone in Canada? I get a "cannot find server" message when I try to go there. Did Big Sister discover that the Captain was going to provide coverage of Eastern Canadian election results before the polls closed out West?
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
A lawyer should take care not to weaken or destroy public confidence in legal institutions or authorities by irresponsible allegations.
Taken from The Law Society of Upper Canada's Regulations for Professional Conduct, section 4.06 (1) - Something Warren Kinsella might want to keep in mind while accusing a Judge of "flagrant bias" and setting up the Gomery Commission as some sort of class warfare:
judicial institutions will not function effectively unless they command the respect of the public, and, because of changes in human affairs and imperfections in human institutions, constant efforts must be made to improve the administration of justice and thereby maintain public respect for it.
Criticizing Tribunals - Although proceedings and decisions of courts and tribunals are properly subject to scrutiny and criticism by all members of the public, including lawyers, judges and members of tribunals are often prohibited by law or custom from defending themselves. Their inability to do so imposes special responsibilities upon lawyers. First, a lawyer should avoid criticism that is petty, intemperate, or unsupported by a bona fide belief in its real merit, bearing in mind that in the eyes of the public, professional knowledge lends weight to the lawyer's judgments or criticism.
There's plenty more that applies. I wouldn't be surprised if he's already been gently reminded before; he's long since given up the derisions on Gomery's name, or putting his title of Justice in quotes. All I'm asking is that he not fight this by attacking the other lawyers' and the Judge's credibility, because the last thing Canada needs is to become cynical about our Judges as well as our politicians.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
More on blogs and the gag law
Darren Barefoot noted on Gerry Nicholl's post on the issue of blogs and the gag law that in the last provincial election in BC, Elections BC determined that blogs were advertising. See more about that here and here.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Nicholls on blogs & gag law
Apropos of my post yesterday on blogs and the gag law in which I expressed concern that Elections Canada might try to apply the gag law to bloggers, NCC vice president Gerry Nicholls says (at his new blog) this: "Of course, if the Internet does become an effective tool, watch for politicians to quickly move to regulate and control it too." To reiterate: the law may technically not provide for such regulation but that doesn't mean the government won't try. And if they can't, expect them to try to change the law. Remember we no longer have rule of law but the rule of the Libranos. Anything that challenges that rule must be crushed.
Friday, October 14, 2005
The Great Canadian Blog Survey
Monday, September 12, 2005
Live blogging Roberts confirmation hearing
"Democrats are sending around a screen grab of a C-SPAN wide shot that shows, very clearly, a crossword puzzle on the table in front of Sen. Coburn from Oklahoma. We say: it's a long hearing. Leave the guy alone."
Saturday, September 10, 2005
Great Canadian Blog Survey
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Canadian Journalism Foundation Panel Discussion
Join the Canadian Journalism Foundation on Tuesday Sept. 20 for a panel discussion on a new, unconventional force in the land. "Blogging" (the term comes from "blog," short for weblog) is beginning to set the agenda for our conventional media. This event is free of charge and open to the public. Seating is limited so if you plan to attend please email email@example.com or visit our website www.cjf-fjc.ca/programs.htm to register online.Andrew Coyne and Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarters are on the panel.
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Blog For Relief
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Ordinarily, I wouldn't post a status report on my own site (smalldeadanimals.com) here, but I've been told the local radio station is receiving calls from people wondering what's happened to it, (complete with Librano conspiracy theories).
There was major network disruption over the US last night, and this has resulted in connection problems. Hosting Matters hosts a lot of blog sites (including Instapundit) and there may be other blogs experiencing problems. They're working on things, apparently.
Blogs are the opposition in Egypt
AFP reports that in the bogus Egyptian elections, opposition to President Hosni Mubarek is coming from blogs. AFP reports:
"In a country where most major newspapers are state-owned or affiliated to a party, the Internet is offering an unprecedented freedom and platform for an increasingly bold opposition to the regime.
... Accustomed to an autocratic regime that has severely restricted freedom of expression in the past, many Egyptians in the street are still keeping a lid on their exasperation, but bloggers are now letting off steam on the Internet."
Most of the country's estimated 300 bloggers are anonymous, it being too dangerous to reveal their true identities. One blogger explains his reason for blogging: "so that future generations cannot accuse us of having remained silent when there was a need to speak out." Many bloggers surely understand that they will not succeed in defeating Mubarek but their goal is much more modest -- simply providing information or another point of view. In countries that are not democratic simply providing the truth or a perspective that is different from the official line is a revolutionary and heroic act of subversion.
Sunday, August 28, 2005
With Katrina expected to hit New Orleans as a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane, The Truth Laid Bear has set up a Katrina blogging ecosystem for those who want to follow the latest news. Though, I doubt there'll be much from anyone directly in her path.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Chickenhawks: Crunching The Numbers
A Jawa Report survey comparing military service in the "left" and "right" blogosphere.
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
The Internet Turns Ten
Patrick Ruffini, blogger since 1997;
As someone who's been online in one form or another since 1990, it's getting harder to remember the days before the Net as a second skin. I remember debating the first Iraq war in Prodigy's message boards, helping establish online communities in 1993, picking up a 600-page tome in mid-1994 on this text-based ether of Telnet and Gopher protocols known as "the Internet." By the time I got my 3 ½" floppy with NCSA Mosaic from the local ISP in January of '95, I was hooked. This interoperable, endlessly adaptable world was not only useful – and addictive – but it would revolutionize the way we interacted with information. I knew the Internet wasn't just another gadget or fad when I simply wouldn't get tired of it. Ever since, I've only had that reaction to a big system only once – with the advent of political blogging in 2001.
Monday, August 01, 2005
Most annoying Canadians
Aaron Braaten has a list of the 40 most annoying Canadians. While it is unfortunate to see David Frum and Stockwell make the list and it would have been nice to see Rick Mercer, Scott Brison, Justin Trudeau and Celine Dion a little closer to the top (bottom?), overall it is quite amusing and I found myself nodding in agreement. Consider numbers 7 & 11:
11. Lefty-WASPS with Dreads. Sons and daughters of establishment types who find the NDP too conservative and insist on free everything. Stop drinking your bong water.
7. Naomi Klein. If I ever want to consume a worldview that has been prepackaged for me to communicate with Lefty-Wasps with Dreads or the Spare Change guy, I’ll drop 30 bucks on one of her books from Canada’s most monopolistic bookseller, Chapters. Especially if it were printed on hemp paper by a synarchist collective of book printers.