these pamphleteers

Christie Blatchford and the Mystery of the Backhanded Homophobe

2011-12-13T18:23:00.011-05:00

It's always a struggle for me when I read something hideous, from a columnist that I despise, because my first reaction is to disseminate it. Why is that a problem? Well, we live in a society where people say the grossest things to get attention, because any kind of publicity or recognition is better than being obscure. Barbara and Jonathan Kay, Rosie DiManno, and Christie Blatchford are just a few names that come to mind when I think of shitty journalism. These people have great jobs, at media outlets with a broad audience, and are not held accountable for what they write -- not the quality of writing, the lack of research, or the reprehensible nature of their opinion. It seems best to quietly laugh at what they write and move on, not draw a lot of attention to it, and hope that they will soon retire. Once in awhile, though, a "journalist" writes something so absurd and contemptible that to let it fly under the radar would be criminal. Such is Christie Blatchford's latest "opinion": Toronto, City of Sissies.

Blatchford writes:

"The bull terrier and I were on a long forced march on the toney part of Yonge Street, in Rosedale.

There were a couple of boys, maybe 10 years old, maybe 12, walking ahead of me. Coming towards them was another small knot of boys about the same age.

The two groups met, and immediately began hugging each another, one at a time. The trustees and ding-dongs at the Toronto District School Board would have been ecstatic; I was mortified and appalled."

Apparently, Blatchford has never seen boys or men hug before -- especially "one at a time". After she barfed into her three thousand dollar COACH purse, she and her bull terrier went straight home to wash themselves of the faggy fag residue those boys had scattered. Then she went to her safe home, wrote something hateful for her safe job, and fell asleep on the downy chest of some brawny man who kisses with his fists just the way God intended? What the hell is this woman on?

The first thing I thought of when I read this article: this bitch is white. This bitch is SO white. Some of us come from cultures where hugging and kissing -- even amongst the MEN-- is common. Men and boys, hugging their relatives and their friends, without even thinking about the consequences! Amazing! These same men and boys work hard, are macho men, get into fights, stand up for themselves and others, and generally perpetuate other (often damaging) stereotypes of masculinity. So Christie Blatchford has her white panties in a knot that she saw white boys hugging one another? Rich, white boys in Rosedale? I'm sorry, Ms. Blatchford, TORONTO men need to be toughened up? Have you ever been outside of Rosedale? Besides the time spent in your car driving to and from the other affluent parts of Toronto? It is absolutely unacceptable and embarrassing that such a generalized and flippant statement could be made, and then paid for, about such a diverse city where there is SO much violence. I wonder if Christie Blatchford walks her bull terrier in North York at night? Or in ANY park? Is she glad when she reads stories about groups of young men swarming and mugging people? Or raping girls, taping it on their cell phones, then passing it out at school? Is that the kind of group behaviour that she would prefer to hugging? So that she can tuck herself in at the end of the day, safe in the knowledge that all is as it should be?

She writes:

"But holy smokes, I am wearying of the male as delicate creature. I am wearying of men who are so frequently in touch with their feminine side they, not to mention me, have lost sight of the masculine one. I’m just plain sick of hugs, giving and getting, from just about anyone, but particularly man-to-man hugs."

Who is sick of hugs?! What kind of demented lunatic is "sick" of hugs? If you don't like being hugged that's your own business, but you cannot take a stance against other people hugging. You especially can't say that you "particularly" hate man-to-man hugs. It's truly baffling that in this world there are people who would rather see people fight then hug. Does Blatchford have children? During holidays and family gatherings if her male relatives hug does she spit on them and leave the event?

The silly thing about Blatchford's article isn't even her aversion to hugging, it's that she tries to make her argument about bullying. She argues that bullying is best dealt with by people who witness the bullying occur, then attack the bully. To be perfectly honest, I think sometimes a bully needs to be beat down -- but bullying is a symptom of a much bigger problem that doesn't have one solution and it has absolutely nothing to do with hugging. By judging the boys on the street, by calling men and boys who hug sissies and "feys" who speak with too much "Sss", Blatchford is being a big fucking bully. Bullying isn't just regular behaviour, it's abusive behaviour that is usually prompted by some kind of difference - even if that difference is just being weaker than someone else. Proscribing and policing behaviour is bullying and the problem with bullying is that it isn't always about inflicting physical damage. How do you deal with a bully who just tries to force you to act a certain way, by degrading you and treating you with derision?

Not only is it extremely tacky to be taking a stance basically for bullying right now, but it's also transparent. What does a group of boys hugging one another have to do with Rob and Doug Ford? Seriously? It has nothing at all to do with politics, except that this conservative old lady is so obsessed with them that she thinks about them when she sees little boys on the street. How weird is that? Blatchford is so blindly pro-Ford that I'm surprised her disgusting articles about the Shafia trial haven't included some kind of tribute to them, in all of their "too big, too pink, too football-y" glory. It's as though she's just taken trending topics and thrown them into one article: The Ford Brothers, UFC, The Toronto School Board, and bullying. The desperation is so obvious and sad.

Blatchford finishes her 'article' by writing:

"I know men have feelings too. I just don’t need to know much more than that. On any list of The 25 Things Every Man And Boy Should Know How To Do, hugging is not one of them. Killing bugs is. Whacking bullies is. Kissing is. Farting on cue is. Making the sound of a train in a tunnel is. Shooting a puck is. Hugging is not.

Feel free to give this to your male children. You’re entirely welcome."

Men should know how to kill, kiss, fart, make the sound of a train, hit other men, and play hockey? What man is really as stereotypical as that? Women are the only ones who have the luxury of exploring emotions, or free to have any kind of personality and depth? Who actually thinks this describes the ideal man? The healthy man? Blatchford tries to pre-empt any attempt to label her a homophobe by saying that "like all women" and as a "downtowner" she loves the gays! She doesn't hate gays, she just hates seeing men display healthy amounts of physical affection towards one another and feels it is her mission to point out how wrong it is.

She asks the readers to give her article to their male children, because she obviously thinks it is appropriate to shame children and ask them to act a certain way to make her feel more comfortable while walking her pure bred dog in the rich part of town. I think that people should probably give this article to their male children, to teach them what bigotry looks like, and to encourage them to hug if they want despite crazy people like Blatchford.

Why we need to remember and act on December 6th

2011-12-06T12:59:00.006-05:00

Today is the 22nd 'anniversary' of the Montreal Massacre, when a young man walked into an educational institution and murdered as many women as he could. Shooting 28 and killing 14, he started his rampage by separating the men and the women because he was "fighting feminism".

In his attempts to attack women and feminism and in a blatant act that would forever define what 'violence against women' could really mean, he took the following lives:

Geneviève Bergeron (born 1968), civil engineering student
Hélène Colgan (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Nathalie Croteau (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Barbara Daigneault (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Anne-Marie Edward (born 1968), chemical engineering student
Maud Haviernick (born 1960), materials engineering student
Maryse Laganière (born 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique's finance department
Maryse Leclair (born 1966), materials engineering student
Anne-Marie Lemay (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Sonia Pelletier (born 1961), mechanical engineering student
Michèle Richard (born 1968), materials engineering student
Annie St-Arneault (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Annie Turcotte (born 1969), materials engineering student
Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (born 1958), nursing student

One of the outcomes of his crime, which he committed with hunting knife and a semi-automatic rifle casually purchased, was a tightening of gun control laws in Canada. With several family members of the murdered women heavily involved, Bill C-68(The Firearms Act) was passed in 1995. The new Bill required the training of gun owners, screening firearm applicants, new rules which would restrict certain types of guns and ammunition, regulations around gun storage, and the requirement to register all firearms.

It seems like a small thing, to me, to have to register or safely store your guns. I bought bear spray for a camping trip up North once and I had to register to own it. If anyone were to ever check how many weapons or dangerous items I have registered to my name there would be two: that bear spray and some allergy medication I bought in the States. I think that's normal. If I bought a gun I'd be more than happy to register it, because it means that if I have to register my weapon so does that creepy guy who lives in my building who stands in the hallway at 4am silently. It means that the abusive partner of my co-worker will also have to register his gun. The gun registry has been one of the most controversial items on the Canadian political landscape since its inception and it seems that only a person who is completely secure in their safety could be opposed to it, could fight against it, which means being completely oblivious to the safety and concerns of others. If mere inconvenience, or "concerns about privacy", really seem like good enough reasons to oppose a Bill that was prompted by the brutal murder of 14 women then women's safety, children's safety, and public safety are less important to some people than their own comfort. To be blunt, it is selfish to deny a Bill that can save even one life.

But despite controversy and despite opposition the Gun Registry and the Firearms act remained and, despite arguments around the methodological soundness of data collection, has made a difference in the amount of gun related crime and death in Canada.

This year Canadians voted in a Conservative Majority and one of the first items on Prime Minister Stephen Harper's agenda was to initiate the repeal of Bill C-68, to not only "scrap" the registry and the requirement to register long-guns, but also to compel the destruction of ALL records pertaining to any information under the Firearms Act, which includes information about registered firearms, past and present.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews who sponsored the bill said that it was a proud moment for the Conservatives, stating that "waste is finally coming to an end in Ottawa."

All debate and controversy aside, the long gun registry should be last on the list of "waste" in Ottawa. Abusing public services, spending public money on personal trifles, there is so must waste in Ottawa that's just impossible to focus on one thing. Politicians pay for their expensive dinners with our tax dollars. They pay for their hand jobs at those expensive restaurants with our tax dollars! So why is it "waste" to spend our own money on something that some of us actually want? What this really means is that the Conservatives have finally won their long battle against having to spend any money on anything that benefits women or protects them. It's too expensive to have to register your guns? I have to pay for a new driver's license every few years, and a passport, and a health card. It's too expensive to maintain a database of registered weapons? Well, what about the RCMP surveillance of non-criminals? What about the collection of medical data, or of DNA samples of sex offenders? Registering children for school, collecting data on their grades? Voting? We maintain and expand databases all of the time so what is it exactly about this particular database that irks them so much?

Many opponents argue the the registry treats responsible citizens like criminals. But what doesn't? I have to register my car. When you get pulled over and provide your registration, the police are in their car doing a criminal check on you--sometimes for no apparent reason. And how about airport security? While study after study has suggested that airport security screening is doing a bad job at preventing terrorist acts, we still allow each ridiculous technological advance in security to be shoved down our throats. So do the people who believe that the long gun registry should be halted and the information destroyed also believe that No-Fly Lists should also be destroyed? That airport screening should be abolished? Because it's exactly the same sentiment. I don't appreciate having to remove my shoes and have my hair patted every time I fly somewhere but I suffer it because I have places to go, so I sacrifice a bit of my privacy and allow myself to be treated like a criminal.

Critics bring up the fact that "criminals" and gang members don't register their weapons, so the registry is useless. Sure, this is true. But the fact remains that women are also murdered by the "law abiding", they're murdered or abused by their family members and people they know. You may be surprised at how many 'respectable' and upstanding men are perpetrators of domestic violence, but it is a simple truth that abuse escalates and women are killed by their partners' registered guns.

That the Conservative government is demanding the destruction of all information pertaining to the registry is absurd. Really? You won't even let the police keep the information? Or keep it for the purposes of government research? Anybody who is worth anything knows that there is no such thing as useless information and that destroying information that has cost money and time is senseless and childish. It's a slap in the face to anyone whose ever been the victim of violence, or been robbed at gun point, or had a family member killed. There is always something productive to be made from any information, and it highlights the short sightedness and truly bratty nature of the Conservative Party that they would rather just toss that information in a big fire and dance around it, crowing about their "victory".

Today the annual memorial in Ottawa was held for the 14 women who were murdered 22 years ago. No Conservative MPs were present, because none of them were invited. Prime Minister Harper released a statement about the deaths saying that "while the senseless events of that day will never fully be understood, we must continue to do our utmost to ensure such a tragedy never occurs again and to protect society's most vulnerable...our Government is making significant investments to end violence against women and girls in communities across the country and will continue to advocate for the fair and unbiased treatment of all citizens."

Prime Minister Harper has a daughter and he can make such a hypocritical, disingenuous statement that demeans the women who were murdered and all women who have faced violence before or since. As a father, a husband, and as the person Canadians have entrusted with their safety Stephen Harper should be ashamed of his actions and the callousness of his statement. He's spitting on the graves of our buried sisters and mothers, and he's scoffing at the real pain violence against women has caused in all of our lives -- including the lives of men.

Violence against women isn't just something someone made up and 22 years ago today these 14 lives were ended simply because they were women.

It would be nice if politicians could get over their ideological pettiness and just honour their commitments to those lost lives and lives that continue to be threatened and destroyed to this day.

Madonna orders TIFF volunteers not to look at her

2011-09-13T15:50:00.005-04:00

There was a story in the Globe and Mail today about Madonna's appearance at the Toronto International Film Festival this week. Apparently, she asked eight volunteers to turn and face the wall while she walked by them (which they all did, amazingly).

I get it. After years and years and years of being a glamorous icon it is very important that people not look directly at her face. If they did they'd see her deep, dark secret. She is actually the harpy from The Last Unicorn.

Surprise, Surprise: Money does grow on trees.

2011-09-09T13:55:00.000-04:00

The city is abuzz over the newest Ford Brother plan for the Port Lands, a heavily contaminated former Industrial area which has been the focus of a redevelopment plan for the past nine years. Doug and Rob Ford announced recently that they had a new plan, a better plan. It's an add Ferris wheel and stir formulation to attract tourists down to the waterfront with a Ferris Wheel, a Mega Mall, and a Monorail.

This globe and mail article sums it up quite nicely, so I'm not going to get too much into the details of the actual plan.

I truly do not understand about Ferris wheel/Monorail/Mega Mall schemes. Those who push these plans (almost ALWAYS business people or former business people turned politicians) claim that they are a great way to draw tourists to the waterfront--to remain "competitive".

Last year a Ferris wheel was proposed for the Seattle waterfront by a businessman who said it would help combat disruption during the construction of a viaduct. Revitalization, preservation of the waterfront via Ferris wheel seems to be the general consensus.

Fast forward one year and there is no Ferris wheel in Seattle. Plans shifted from waterfront to practically waterfront then to a plan for the 50th celebration of the Seattle Centre but were discontinued in April due to "liability issues." Even when planned for and in conjunction with an enormous institution like the Seattle Centre, the plan still couldn't get off the ground. A plan like a gigantic Ferris wheel needs to be planned and executed efficiently, not just thrown on the table. And that is why the Ferris wheel and Mega Mall at Port Lands will never materialize--a Mayor's term doesn't last forever, Ford's approval ratings are going down fast and hard, and he and his brother will never be able to get this project off the ground before they are sent packing.

If the brothers Ford weren't just in this to make a quick, seedy, buck they would have proposed these developments at the beginning of the summer and made a public(and legal) process of the bids for proposals and projects. Meeting behind closed doors is one thing for a "business man" like Rob Ford who "lives in the real world" but, guess what Mayor Ford, you're the Mayor now and politics is not the real world.

When Mayor Ford said “You don’t get jobs having 400 acres of parkland. Parks are beautiful. We have tons of parks, but unfortunately, that tree can’t employ anybody" he was simultaneously right and wrong.

Right: Parks are beautiful. We do have tons of parks.

Wrong: You don't get jobs from parkland. A tree can't employ anyone.

In fact, trees and parks employ people. A lot of people. I'm not sure if the Mayor knows this or not but here in Canada we have this thing called "National Parks" and "Provincial Parks." They are run by a sector of the government called "Parks Canada." Chances are, you've been to a Parks Canada Park. Go the the beach? Most likely it's in a Park. Go hiking? Probably in a Park as well. Parks Canada is celebrating its Centennial Year -- that's one hundred years. For one hundred years we, as a nation, have valued Parks and conservation of not only Park land but also of Marine areas. That doesn't just happen by accident, people are employed by Parks Canada --by TREES!

Parks Canada has more than four thousand employees across the country, and that doesn't include summer student positions. They employ these people to help support their mandate: "to preserve and present Canada's national heritage for current and future generations."

Amazing. People are employed by Parks. By trees, by lakes, by mountains and rivers. They aren't employed to tear shit up and build rides to encourage people to spend money, they are employed to ensure that future generations will be able to enjoy our natural resources in the same way that we are. For posterity.

You know what tourists and Canadians like? Parks. Ever been to Banff National Park in high season? Bruce Peninsula? It's silly with people. Each person is spending money to get into the Park and a lot of them are spending money to camp or boat.Many Parks have attractions like Gondolas, Ice Field Tours, Boat Tours, Horseback Riding, etc and people also pay good money for those.

I was in Banff just a few weeks ago and to even DRIVE to the town you have to pay to get into the Park.

Looking more locally, the Parks, Forestry and Recreation website for the city of Toronto states that "one of the greatest strengths of our city is our wonderful parks system. Big or small, these parks offer everything from play to quiet relaxation.Our parks let you absorb the peace, quiet and natural beauty of the outdoors without leaving the city."

Toronto has hundreds of Parks, many of which include unique features that require specialty care. Guildwood Park, for example, has a mature forest and historical sculptures. The Toronto Music Garden is home to beautifully manicured and designed gardens which were inspired by a Bach Cello Suite.

The Toronto Islands, The Humber Bay Butterfly habitat, High Park, HTO Park, Riverdale Farms and Bluffers Park are a few examples and they don't just exist in a vacuum --people are employed to maintain, care for, and develop these spaces.

So Mayor Ford is just plain wrong. Who will the Ferris wheel employ, or the mall, when a year from now the plan gets scrapped?

This new waterfront plan will cost taxpayers over $200 million on top of throwing away nine years of work on the current development plan. I don't want my tax money going towards a mall, a mono rail, or a Ferris wheel. I want my tax dollars to go towards preserving the essential services that this City claims we cannot afford. I want unionized garbage collectors, pools for kids in the summer, affordable housing and daycare, and snow removal.

The promises Ford made during his election campaign have truly gone out the window, once and for all. A Ferris wheel is gravy. A Mega Mall is gravy. We live in a city that has actually told us it s a waste of money to have libraries. Our Mayor went out of his way to express his non-support for one of our hugest tourist attractions of the year: Pride. Now those same people who were shunning tourist dollars from Pride are now trying to push extravagant and passe rides and malls on us, for tourism?

It doesn't make sense from a fiscal perspective, it's not sustainable development, and it's a waste of money. The only good thing about this Ferris wheel debacle is that it is yet another instance of the Fords showing Toronto why they are n politics: to make money. Any public servant who pushes midway rides that will cost the taxpayers millions while trying to shut down libraries has an ulterior motive and my guess is that their motive is to line their pockets with gold, irregardless of whether or not it leaves this city in shambles.

This is why I love Twitter.

2011-08-02T17:08:00.008-04:00

Twitter is truly the best. I posted this Open Letter to Councillor Minnan-Wong and Councillor Holyday today and I also posted it on Twitter--or, rather, tweeted it. The letter decries the sexist and bullying behaviour of Councillor Minnan Wong, Councillor Holyday, Councillor Mammoliti, and Mayor Rob Ford during the Deputation of Toronto Women's City Alliance representative Jennifer Arango.

Not too long after it was sent off by the little blue bird we got some responses, specifically responses about the author. Apparently @Sattva01 thinks the author is a nutcase.

There isn't really any mention of the content of the letter, namely the completely sexist behaviour of some Toronto City Councillors, just a lot of talk about the author not being able to teach at York University-- which was once true.

Tasia Alexopoulos, the author of the letter, was indeed banned from teaching at York University. We've written about it and reproduced a talk Tasia gave at York University, with two tenured Professors, about her experience of being fired. You can read that HERE.

The case was also written about here, in Steel Bananas Art Collective Magazine, by the talented Devon Wong who is now off doing his Masters in English.

Tasia also spoke about her experience being fired at a York University Human Rights Centre Conference with colleague Hans Rollman where they workshopped on "Diversity vs. Normativity: Systematic Barriers to Classroom Dialogue and Inclusivity."

Tasia has an(under construction) profile on Academicfreedom.ca and glowing Teacher's Evaluations from the students she was allowed to instruct before being summarily fired, wrongly, by York University.

And finally, on April 1st, the ban on Tasia's teaching was lifted when her grievance against the University was settled after almost two years. You can read about that here on Activist Teacher.

So, to answer your question @Sattva01, Tasia Alexopoulos is truly a nutcase. Thank you for pointing that out to us.

An Open Letter to Councillor Minnan-Wong and Councillor Doug Holyday

2011-08-02T13:28:00.008-04:00

UPDATE: The TWCA has issued a letter demanding a public apology, which you can read HERE. As well, not mentioned in the letter below was Councillor Mammoliti who also interjected with a Point of Order, deeming Jennifer's point "disrespectful and irrelevant." You may recall Councillor Mammoliti from his recent brush with fame: creepily videotaping this year's Dyke March during Pride Week. I think we can all safely say that what is really disrespectful and irrelevant is Mammoliti himself. Mammoliti can be reached at his email: councillor_mammoliti@toronto.ca

An open letter sent to Toronto City Councillors Minnan-Wong and Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday regarding their completely unacceptable behaviour during the July 28th Special Executive Committee meeting about proposed Service cuts in the City. During her deputation as a representative for Toronto Women's City Alliance, Jennifer Arango was interrupted repeatedly by both Councillors, some of which was caught on tape:

http://www.globaltoronto.com/Video+City+council+meeting+night+July/5178580/story.html?releasePID=DwsKA1cvBwTta2LzagZKI72OaYcdH5C9

What's the point of "allowing" citizens to express their opinions if City Councillors are just going to treat them with disdain and try to shut them up? This kind of behaviour isn't acceptable and both of these men should be held accountable for being complete jerks to Jennifer.

You can email Holyday and Minnan-Wong as well: councillor_holyday@toronto.ca, councillor_minnan-wong@toronto.ca

The letter was also CC-ed to Mayor Rob Ford.

We can whine all we want that the city is going down the tubes, but this is a concrete example of a specific tube-- sexist behaviour like this has no place in our City Council and we all have a responsibility to stand up to it.

An Open Letter to Councillor Minnan-Wong and Councillor Holyday

It's "Be Nice to the TTC Driver" Day!

2011-07-08T10:22:00.007-04:00

On Monday there was some kind of spat on the Bathurst streetcar. According to the National Post (written by Kelly McParland) the "conflict" began when:

"passengers were kept waiting on a hot summer evening for a streetcar that didn’t arrive. Estimates of the wait vary — somewhere between half an hour and 40 minutes. It was rush hour and people wanted to get home. When the car finally arrived, the driver further aggravated the crowd by hopping off for a short break. A middle-aged woman said something and the driver said something back. “I don’t like your attitude and you are not getting into my car,” the woman (who now has a lawyer) says she was told.

She ignored the command and got on the car. The driver ordered her off. She refused. The crowd sided with her and the driver got his back up — one passenger claimed he was “out of his mind.” The driver called a supervisor,who.. tried to settle things down, insisting the woman leave the car."

It goes on to say that all of the passengers agreed with the woman and that one of them started videotaping the situation, the supervisor grabbed the camera, a passenger tackled them, the police were called, blah blah blah blah.

The bullshitty thing about this article is that it makes it sound like the passengers were kept waiting on purpose in deadly heat. It also makes it sound like the driver is responsible for the lateness of the street car, that he purposefully aggravated the situation by taking his break, and that he was not justified in asking the woman to not board the street car. Finally, this article is ALL based on hearsay from "witnesses" and the woman who started the whole thing by being kind of a bitch.

Ooooh, it was "hot" out. People wanted to "get home." We live in TORONTO. It's not that goddamned hot here, we have crapp TTC, I'm guessing it was rush hour(so people should expect delays- this is the biggest city in the country and you are ALL going home from work at the same time), and it's summer time in the city so chill out.

I hate late TTC as much as the next person. When I lived at Christie and Dupont and took the Dupont bus to Spadina station, it was late every single day. Every. Single. Day. I also commute to York frequently and I don't even need to explain that.

It's incredibly frustrating on some days, some days you're not so cranky so it doesn't bother you as much, and some days you are proactive and plan for it or you just walk. Bring a book, listen to your ipod, do some squats. If you want transit that is always on time, move to Germany.

That being said, I have never, EVER taken out my own frustration on a TTC driver. As someone who has worked in retail, in the service industry, and as a Teaching Assistant I understand that people's frustration often lands on the first person they come into contact with.

Had a bad day? Waited forever for a table? Your coffee isn't as hot as it should be? Well, I guess you asking me if I'm "retarded" is fine! Sure, go right ahead and snap your fingers at me from across a crowded restaurant, then leave me a fifty cent tip.

Or, don't. How about for five seconds you stop, take a deep breath, and recognize how entitled and rude your behaviour is and how disgusting it is to take out your problems out on somebody who is doing their job and who has nothing to do with your crankiness. How about this little thing called "respect"? Or "basic, human dignity"?

It SUCKS having to wait 40 minutes for a street car. It blows beyond belief. But guess what also sucks? Driving in heavy traffic, in a vehicle STUCK ON TRACKS. Streetcars are literally stuck on tracks, people. That means you can't pass or take detours, you are at the mercy of traffic. This "clash" happened on the Bathurst Streetcar. Uhhh... the Bathurst streetcar is a mess. It doesn't have a dedicated lane, the traffic moves slower than molasses, and here are a billion traffic lights. Any time I have ever taken the Bathurst streetcar I've been late. It's not the driver's fault, it's that there isn't proper transit infrastructure that prioritizes their movement through traffic.

Street car and bus drivers don't just say to themselves "I know what will be awesome, making my passengers wait 40 minutes for me!" No. They understand that every minute they are late, somebody is waiting to screech at them for it and be rude to them. Some people spit on them, or hit them.

A TTC employee is assaulted in some way or another almost every day, that's why there's a zero tolerance on the TTC for behaviour that is in any way abusive. They have to be able to set boundaries and ground rules on the vehicles they drive, because it's the only way they can feel safe doing their job and also the only way the TTC can actually stay safe. The driver is the authority on the bus, and when you have an authority figure that noone respects? CHAOS!

You know who else boundaries protect? Passengers! I can't even count how many times I've been on the TTC and watched the driver kick someone off for doing something dangerous or threatening people. And every, single time that's happened I've breathed a sigh of relief that I didn't have to be the one dealing with that person and now I can enjoy the rest of my ride home without some crazy man screaming in my ear that he's going to kill me.

According to the Toronto Star's "coverage" of this particular news item, the woman in question "recalls" just politely asking the driver why he was late. Oh really? I have this sneaking suspicion that asking the driver a polite question doesn't get you tossed from the street car. The Star and the NatPo have also very selectively chosen their witnesses. According to our own sources, there were just as many people yelling at the woman to get off the streetcar and allow it to move as there were "defending her" and taking a stand against the evil driver.

I tend to believe that people were yelling at her to get off the street car. The majority of rush hour riders really do just want to get home, and they don't need any more stress than they've experienced during the day. I've never been in a situation where other passengers were like "hell yeah I'll wait here all day for this lady's right to be rude to the driver!" No. Generally, other passengers are uncomfortable with rude people and will eventually start yelling at the person to disembark.

In any case, it doesn't matter what she said because it's the drivers right to kick her off. It's like being at the airport-- they can bar you from getting on the plane for a lot of different reasons, and most of us think that's probably for the best. Like, I'm more comfortable if that super drunk dude who keeps staring at the children DOESN'T get on the plane. Or, in a bar--if you're being unruly they can toss you out, and most of us other patrons generally think this is also for the best because it helps us enjoy our evening and makes us feel safer. So, why is the TTC any different? Because the Toronto Star and National Post love to attack Unionized workers? Because they'll do anything to turn a little thing into a big news story that they don't actually have to do any real reporting on?

I just feel like TTC workers get a really shitty deal. All of this over a short break?? For all we know, this driver really had to pee. Maybe he hadn't had his break yet, and maybe he was stuck in traffic a really long time. Would we prefer that he pee in a jar whilst driving? If a driver peed in a jar, heaven knows someone would complain. They just can't win. Maybe the driver is diabetic and needed to eat something really quickly. Maybe he had a kidney stone. Maybe he has a urinary tract infection. Maybe he had diarrhea. There are a lot of really great reasons why it is mandatory that we get breaks during our work day. We don't expect Admin Assistants to sit at their desk all day without peeing or eating, so why should we expect the same of our TTC drivers? Sure, they aren't perfect but neither are you and neither am I and we are still entitled to breaks at work.

So how about this: next time the street car is late and your driver hops off to do whatever it is that he is legally entitled to do, just smile. Say hi. Ask if it's been a busy day. Lots of traffic today? It is actually amazing how much that kind of behaviour can alter the atmosphere on the TTC. Being rude to anyone while they are at work ruins their day. It ruins my day, it ruins your day, and it ruins the TTC driver's day as well.

If you have to vent your frustration then call your City Councillor or, better yet, call the Mayor. Tell them that the TTC infrastructure is not conducive to fast and efficient transit in this city. Tell them that you are frustrated with the thought of another fare increase when service is no better than it was last year, or the year before. You're waiting 40 minutes , it's making you cranky and frustrated -- so pick up your cell phone that you're texting angrily on and call the Office of the TTC Chair. Put your frustration to good use, instead of just being the prick who ruined somebody's day for no good reason.

Oh, I know, let's just make bikes illegal. Problem solved! How the Toronto Star is making a tabloid out of a tragedy.

2011-07-07T10:00:00.010-04:00

Yesterday, like I do most days, I was riding west on the Harbord bike lane. I usually enjoy the Harbord bike lane because it's a pretty wide street in general, it doesn't have too many potholes, and the lane is actually separated from the parking lane. That, and the fact that I live off of Harbord means I traverse this stretch frequently-- I'm a regular.
The other nice thing about Harbord is there are a lot of traffic lights. I LOVE lights. Stop signs are alright, but there is no guarantee a car won't roll through a stop sign or that they'll recognize your right of way in a four way stop sign situation. A light is a light and that shit means STOP.Being a rather tiny individual, and having been struck by a very large car that rolled through a stop sign once, I'm nervous about intersections and always err on the side of extreme caution.
Yesterday it was like all hell had broken loose on Harbord street. Cars were making fast, dangerous turns in front of cyclists or pulling through the bike lanes to park in front of us -- the cyclist behind me even started screaming "oh my god!! it's every driver!" like we were in a very bad horror movie or something.

So I'm riding west and I come up to the Manning intersection. Cars are usually pretty decent here because 1) it's a light and 2) there's a school at this intersection. On this particular day, however, the black Jeep Cherokee(plate number: AXSP 325) waiting at the red light wasn't havin' it. School, pedestrians, and bikes be damned! I make a habit of annoyingly ringing my bell at pretty much every intersection and when I ride by parked cars, and this lady's window was rolled down. The light is green for me, I'm ringing my bell like a crazy person, she's looking straight at me, and she decides to turn right on the red when it is completely unsafe to do so -- nearly hitting me, had I not hit my brakes so hard that I'm pretty sure one of them is now loose.
I really don't get drivers that do this. If you hit me, you will be late for whatever appointment you're rushing to. You may also kill me or maim me. She SAW me there, she saw the line up cyclists behind me, she saw the busy traffic, and she still chose to almost hit me so she could turn right on a red light. It makes absolutely no sense. It makes no sense that this happens ALL OF THE TIME when you're riding a bike (or walking).
A few weeks ago I was riding behind someone who got dinged with a cab door on College street-- a cab door that was opened into a bike lane without consideration of the shitload of bikes in that lane. The door knocked him off his bike and onto the pavement. Here's the thing about cyclists who get hit by cars -- because( if we aren't killed) we have a lot of adrenaline rushing through our bodies, we often don't realize how badly we've been hurt. It's also sometimes embarrassing so we say "it's alright, it's alright, I'm not hurt, it's fine" and ride away. But it's not alright and at the best least the incident should be reported in some way or another. I can't even imagine what the numbers would look like if every single car on bike accident was reported to the police.
These are just some of the reasons that it bothers me when newspapers decide to make us cyclists seem like monsters who get away with murder. Sure, some of us are monsters, but that's just because we're humans and more than half the population of humans are actually monsters.
In the Star today the article "Cyclist fractures pedestrian's skull, gets $400 fine" discusses an accident that occurred yesterday at Huron and Dundas where a cyclist hit a pedestrian, leading to very serious injuries. The article uses the accident to "question...the strength of the province's traffic laws" because the man who hit the pedestrian was charged with careless driving but faces no criminal charges or jail time.
With a charge of careless driving the fact that serious injury or death is a result is not usually relevant, so whether or not the pedestrian actually dies doesn't affect the charge. The charge is affected by the degree to which the cyclist strayed from normal or reasonable driving. If the pedestrian does pass away, which would be incredibly sad, then that can be dealt with in Civil courts.
The Star is using this case to ask whether or not the Highway Traffic Act sufficiently punishes Careless drivers, especially in cases which result in death.
The annoying thing about this article is that it seems to be suggesting that there aren't steep enough penalties for cyclists as "drivers" and also it seems to be putting accidents with cyclists in the same league as accidents involving drivers. They cite cases of drivers killing people and getting away with fines, or lesser charges, as being part of a larger problem and as running in the same vein as the accident yesterday.
To talk about serious motor vehicle accidents that resulted in death and got away with a slap on the wrist, then toss in an accident involving a bike, is to suggest that 1) The frequency of such accidents is relatively similar in cases of bikes and cases of cars and 2) That the risk or severity of such collisions is comparable.
I'm sorry, but neither of those are true. I'm sure that if we looked at the stats, reported incidences of bikes hitting pedestrians would be much less than cars hitting bikes and pedestrians(or, other cars). And a cyclist hitting a pedestrian compared to a car hitting a pedestrian is just not the same. I've hit a pedestrian on my bike. When I lived in Saskatoon I was riding my bike and a drunk guy walked out in front of me, I hit him, I got knocked off my bike and he didn't even fall down. Had I been driving a car, going the same speed, HE would have been the one who was knocked down and maybe even killed. Obviously, every accident is different but in every single case a car does more damage than a bike.
Let's use my own accident as an example. I was hit by a Hummer. Not even a huge one, I think it was an H3--so the littler version. This guy rolled through a stop sign and hit me at a low speed but it still knocked me onto the ground, broke my bike, broke his own license plate in half on me, and scared the shit out of me.
The curb weight of a standard H3 is 4,700-4,900lbs (2,100 - 2,200kg). The width of the H3 is 74.7 inches which is about 6 feet. I weight 115 lbs soaking wet, and 5'3 at best, and had a small bike. I didn't call the police. I didn't report the accident because I didn't think I was hurt. It was my very first accident and I had no clue how to deal with it. Turns out I was hurt and I probably should have had myself checked out that night, but I didn't feel it until the next day and bruiseswere still blooming a few days later. The dude ended up paying for the damage to my bike (after failing to return any of my calls for a week, and me threatening to call the police).
The point here is that if I rolled through the stop sign on my bike and hit a pedestrian in the same way the Hummer hit me, the result would have been completely different. Also, I almost get hit by a car pretty much every day I get on my bike.

The Star seems to be suggesting that because cyclists can't be charged with Dangerous driving that they can get away with murder, but this just isn't the case. Cyclists can still be charged under the Criminal code so it seems to me that there is certainly recourse for dangerous cycling or unfortunate accidents... so what is the Toronto Star talking about?

The content of their article actually mainly focuses on Careless driving charges in cases with vehicles that resulted in death, so why toss the bike in there at all? It doesn't make sense and it's bad evidence based writing. Why not actually research how many cyclist on pedestrian accidents there are in Toronto per year? Why not interview some of those people? Why not write about the cyclist/bike without talking about it in relation to cars? What about the fact that sometimes it feels safer to cycle the wrong way on a one way street because there is less traffic and because we are a city with shitty cycling infrastructure?

And also, how about DON'T use a tragedy like this accident just to get readers, you know? That's exactly why this story is in the paper today, because there was ONE bad cyclist on pedestrian accident so far this year so they have to jump on it. It's sad enough when accidents like this happen without putting this unnecessary spin on it. Newspapers have an obligation to not be complete and total sensationalist garbage, because then they become SunTV.

The fact is the Toronto Star just didn't do its job on this story and that's just plain ridiculous. At the end of their "article" they put statistics on how many tickets are given to cyclists each year, with a note that tickets also include equipment infractions. That is NOT relevant here, at all. Why does it matter if 2'000 bikes get ticketed in a year if you don't have a breakdown of what those tickets are for? 1'500 of them could be for not riding with lights at night for all we know. you can get a ticket for not having a bell, riding on the sidewalk (even briefly), if you don't stop your bike when an emergency vehicle goes by, and for not riding in the bike lane. I've seen bikes ticketed for parking too long somewhere, or somewhere that has a no parking sign. Stats on bike ticketing in an article about a cyclists seriously injuring someone is a scare tactic, plain and simple.

If every cyclist who is dinged, knocked over, or actually hit reported it to the police and if we had accurate statistics on that I think people would be shocked. I'm shocked every time I venture out and some moron in their car decides that my life isn't worth the two second wait for the green light.

The Toronto Star could have had a real story here, but they chose to just jerk off to the war on cyclists yet again instead of doing any real research or writing anything that might affect positive change in this city.

"Graffiti is one of the few tools you have if you have almost nothing. "

2011-06-29T10:37:00.020-04:00

I walk by the Christie Pits park sign pretty much every day, at least once. If you haven't noticed it before, it's on the North-West corner of the park. It's rather nice.

The first time I noticed that someone had vandalized the sign to say "Fake Bits Park" I laughed.

I thought it was funny because I assumed some kid did it and what kid decides to use the word 'bits'? Hilarious. That was months and months and months ago. This graffiti popped up long before Rob Ford became Mayor and started to bum rush "vandalism" and graffiti in Toronto.

Before Rob Ford's very first City Council address, I thought the sign was hilarious for awhile then (like all things that you see every single day in the city), I got sick of it. But I wasn't about to scrub that shit off myself so I just ignored it. I spend a lot of time in Christie Pits Park and a bit of graffiti on the sign doesn't really affect my enjoyment of it so, you know, whatever.

According to the new Graffiti Management Plan 2011, which the City adopted awhile ago, Mayor Ford's first inaugural address "targeted the need to clean up Toronto's streets and neighborhoods and reduce the amount of graffiti across the city." Ford wanted part of his legacy to be the cleaning up of our streets. Not the actual dirt on our streets, the cigarette butts, not the rats, the prolific pigeon that seems to shit on EVERYTHING, or the dog poop on the sidewalks. No, his legacy would be the eradication of evil graffiti. Because graffiti scares the Mayor. It really, really scares him.

Apparently the "presence of graffiti vandalism suggests disorder and lawlessness, generates the perception of increased crime, fear of gang activity, and diminishes buildings and streets." (I don't exactly know what "diminishes buildings and streets" means.. diminish the value? maybe that's a mistake..) . The Mayor doesn't want people thinking that Toronto is some kind of wild, criminal urban jungle. When he sees graffiti he sees the Los Angeles of BladeRunner or, worse, the parallel Universe from the Super Mario Brothers movie. He sees crime because he thinks people who tag are criminals, and he sees gang activity because he thinks criminals are all in gangs.

A lot of Mayors and City officials try to take on vandalism, and a lot of city residents report vandalism, and that will never change. The problem with what happened in Toronto(and what continues to happen), is that the attempt to clean up the streets became a 'shoot first, ask questions later' kind of thing. Mayor Ford sent out the armies of the City full force, handing out citations left and right, and assigning more fines than they have in a very long time.

In 2010 the city received 2,215 complaints about graffiti. After increasing enforcement, 4,338 notices have been issued--and the year isn't even close to being over yet.

He's a man of action! True to his word!

No, actually, he's an idiot. People ("criminals") never get busted tagging. You know who got fucked by Ford's war? Business owners. Property owners. According to the by law, once you are served with a notice to remove graffiti from your property, you have 72 hours to comply or received a fine/be billed for City removal.

The Queen West BIA(business improvement areas) has a contract with a Graffiti removal company that costs $36,000 a year--but the contract only covers the fronts of buildings and won't go higher than ten feet. Anything in the alleys or higher than ten feet is up to the property owner to clean up. Rob Sysak, the President of Queen W BIA told Council yesterday that the initial quote for a Queen W. alley clean up was $50'000 to start, and would run an additional $50'000 to keep it free of graffiti annually. That's a pretty steep price to pay for business owners(or property owners) who might not care about the graffiti or who might see it as something other than vandalism. Not everyone wants to see grey washed alleys and walls, but if you don't comply with your notice then you'll be billed irregardless.

I live in KoreaTown and the Korea Town BIA has put a lot of work into the neighborhood, including commissioning little murals on all of the cement planters along the street. How much money can businesses reasonably be expected to put into their neighborhoods? What happens when BIA's are continually undertaking beautification projects but are still being punished because someone tags their storefront? When Rob Ford declared his war on vandalism and talked about how much he respects taxpayers, did he consider the fact that making taxpayers pay extra for something they have no control over is kind of a dick move?

Going on a graffiti removal rampage because of your own personal conviction is one thing, but it's become obvious that the people Ford is apparently fighting for are the ones paying for his rampage. If business owners and property owners can be fined for not removing tags, does the same thing apply when they refuse to clean up pigeon shit? Or, when they don't install pigeon deterrents? For example: The Free Times Cafe has a serious problem with pigeons roosting above their sign. That sign is directly above their "patio", which means people who are sitting on the patio often get pooped on, have pigeons land on their chairs and tables, or have feathers fall into their food. So the owner of that property could get fined for not cleaning a tag from their cement wall, but not for allowing vermin to take over their food service area? My landlord has to power wash spray paint, but can get away with leaving an inch of bird crap on our windowsills? That's just wacky logic!

Other people get fucked by this graffiti garbage: Artists. Like it or not, a lot of people consider graffiti to be art. A lot of people who do graffiti are considered artists. Some of them don't even do it anonymously. So when the Mayor writes a blank cheque for graffiti removal, some people get a bit overzealous and start removing things they shouldn't-- like murals, that the city may or may not have paid for, without notifying anyone. The war on vandalism becomes an excuse to attack art that some people might not like, or art with messages that some people don't agree with.

Case in point, the train underpass on Dupont west of Landsdowne:

Artist Joel Richardson was paid to paint a mural on North wall of the underpass and he proceeded to paint one on the South wall as well. Two for One! You'd think that in a city of penny pinchers this would be appreciated. Not so. The mural on the South wall was grey washed in late May--but why? According to Elyse Parker, a director in the city's transportation services department, a resident complained about the mural because of its political nature. Parker told the Toronto Star that "there was some discussion that the mural referred to Stephen Harper" and the city "would not endorse any kind of mural with political messaging." That, along with the fact that the South wall mural was not commissioned by the city meant that they could just paint over it without notifying the community or the artist, or even the City Councillor(who did not support the removal of the mural, after the fact).

What? The city won't endorse any art with political messaging? Never mind the fact that the man in the mural wasn't modelled on Stephen Harper, even the hint that it might him spurs such a reactionary course of action? Since when are we not allowed to make political commentary about the Prime Minister? In a healthy city, a healthy society, there are a lot of opinions and they are all voiced and aired in public. Good art is critical. Quelling critical opinion is not a sign of a healthy democracy and erasing dissent really shouldn't be tolerated because there's a word for a system that disallows critique: it's called fascism.

Obviously, people weren't crazy about this new vandalism regime and people started complaining a lot which is why they adopted the new Graffiti Management Plan 2011 last month. Not a whole lot is different, except now they throw around "private-public" a lot and talk about how youths should be encouraged to graffiti only in specified areas and only city-approved graffiti art should remain. The main shift is that the new policy clearly defines that exceptions can be made for "street art", that there is a difference between murals and vandalism.
At the meeting in question, some pretty hilarious stuff happened:

One city councillor (de Baeremaeker) suggested that people don't take the Scarborough LRT because of unsightly graffiti. He also said that the mayor's graffiti program "may rival or surpass Mel Lastman's mooses" in encouraging public art(And no, this Councillor is not 75 years old).

Councillor Nunziata asked to be corrected if she was wrong, but wasn't most graffiti "gang related"?

The Crime Prevention Association of Toronto told Council that graffiti-ed areas are safe for "shooting up, committing prostitution" and that the first sign of a burgeoning vandal is a child doodling at school, that they must teach kids it is unacceptable to doodle. TO DOODLE.

The Plan requests that the Chief of Police prioritize the delivery of the new anti-graffiti education program throughout Toronto's schools.

The mooses? Doodling? Gangs? Who are these people running our city? They want to prioritize the delivery of anti-graffiti education programs in Toronto's schools? What about prioritizing actual education?!

These are exactly the problems with making a priority out of graffiti. How can the city justify attacking something that they obviously don't understand? How can the city be the one deciding what stays on the walls when some of them think the epitome of public art are those goddamned, hideous Moose? This war focuses on the wrong areas, it makes a big deal out of little problems, it criminalizes something that is barely criminal, it takes our focus off of actual issues, it's a waste of money, and it's all just for show. It's the worst of band-aid solutions.

To be fair, I think there are a few positive things that have come out of this whole mess: 1) it creates dialogue about city space and 2) it motivates people to react with more art. The above picture is of a wall re-"vandalized" after it was power washed by Ford himself during a photo-op.

The sign I walk by every day is a city sign, in a city park, and yet the city hasn't cleaned it. So what's this all about then**, if they aren't going to deal with the things that are right in front of their eyes? Mayor Ford, what's up with the graffiti war?

**to be fair, I tweeted about the sign in Christie Pits Park and my City Councillor--Mike Layton--tweeted back that it's been brought to the attention of Parks staff. However, that was about a month ago and as of this morning(July 11), the vandalism is still there. I also tweeted the sign to Mayor Ford's "official" account as well. No response.

A Round Up, but not the kind that causes birth defects.

2011-06-24T11:42:00.010-04:00

Torontonians woke up to an unsettling reality this morning: the Mayor is still refused to go to Pride, the House of Commons was still in session, the police admitted to some G20 mistakes, the Jarvis bike lane was gone(or, will be gone), and J. Crew announced plans for a store here(seriously, that was in the news).

All of these things paired with the dark, ominous clouds and rain make this one of the weirdest Fridays in recent memory.

Toronto Sun OpEd: Mayor Ford stands proud: "Indeed, we admire Ford for sticking to his guns on this issue, now that all the usual suspects who hate Ford and everything he stands for, no matter what he does, are trying to puff up this non-issue into a crisis."

I wonder which guns the Toronto Sun are referring to here? In reality, Ford is trying to make his neglect of Pride a non-issue, requiring no guns at all. It's just a matter of scheduling, according to him and his mama. So while we who "hate Ford and everything he stands for" are taking this opportunity to highlight some issues, Ford supporters seem to putting words in his mouth and making it seem like he stood on top of city hall and burnt the Pride flag while screaming that he'll die before we force him to partake in homo explosion. Pretending that he's taken a clear stance(a stand even), when he really hasn't, is no better than what they're accusing us of doing.

Next, the G20: It's funny that something like "Toronto police admit to making mistakes" would be a headline, but after last year's G20 mess it's about time they admitted to something--anything!!! And speaking of the G20, remember when Rob Ford was just a candidate for mayor and he said that the police were "too nice" during the G20 and then he became the mayor? Life really is stranger than fiction.

Speaking of strange, who could have guessed that the debate on back to work legislation for Canada Post would not only go through the night, but into the afternoon? With no signs of stopping? Back to work legislation is the worst, especially considering the lockout. Forcing unions back to work kind of goes against the entire idea of having a union--that sometimes people try to fuck with your rights and you should have some options to fight back and maintain or improve your situation. Back to work legislation is just plain lazy and it does irreparable damage to workers rights in this country. So, I like this all night debate.

I think it's great that the NDP is holding strong (proving some of us naysayers wrong), and they're probably having an easier time filling seats considering they have so many young MPs! Toss a couple of redbulls at those young 'uns, a few bags of chips, maybe a nintendo DS, and you've got yourself a debate! Besides it being interesting, I also like the idea of politicians actually working hard for their paycheques. The thought of Prime Minister Harper trying to steal a few hours of sleep on his office couch? Priceless. Also, it reminds me of the Parks and Recreation episode when Leslie filibusters her own meeting and reads the constituents a children's book. Watch and read the debate, live, on the CBC.

Onto bike lanes: the Jarvis bike lane issue is just silly. Removing a bike lane less than a year after it was installed is short sighted and hasty at best. Of course there should have been community involvement and of course the Councillor of that area should be an integral part of any decision made. I've used the Jarvis bike lane maybe three times, I actually really don't like taking it because it's covered in pot holes and by the time I reach my destination my teeth feel like they might fall out from rattling so much. But, that's a description of practically every bike lane in this city.

How much will it cost to actually remove this bike lane? Is it worth that cost? The lack of a physical bike lane doesn't actually stop cyclists from utilizing a road, so why go to the trouble of removing it? Why not spend the money and time that has now been (and will be) wasted and use it to fix some bike lanes that are in shitty condition. I'm obviously biased, my biggest fantasy is to have one major road running North/South and East/West that is entirely for cyclists, and I think that makes me a crazy lefty cyclist who doesn't stop at red lights.

Jake Tobin Garrett(Spacing) 'On the removal of bike lanes': "It’s almost as if Rob Ford is running around with big Wite-Out pen and gleefully erasing everything he can of the Miller years. Transit City? Check. Fort York Bridge? Check. Jarvis bike lanes? Check. It's important to note that in each one of those cancellations, Ford also forfeited any taxpayers money that had already been committed or spent on the projects. A strange way of respecting the taxpayer, indeed."

It certainly is a strange way of respecting tax payers or, rather, the vast army of taxpayers who are apparently "calling" Mayor Ford incessantly. He told the press: “Yeah, I want to get rid of the bike lanes on Jarvis,” Ford said. “I got a lot of people calling me — they want to get rid of them. I do what the taxpayers want me to do. They want them gone, so I’m going to try to get rid of them.”

Who are these people who seem to have the Mayor on speed dial? Could ONE person who called Rob Ford and asked, specifically, to have the Jarvis bike lane removed step forward--just to prove that you aren't some figment of his imagination?

Does that mean if a lot of taxpayers call Ford and ask him, or tell him, to attend a Pride event then he has to? Or does he only answer his banana phone?

in the spirit of openness: million dollar baby?

2011-06-24T00:04:00.004-04:00

the author of this blog post is allegedly being sued for one million dollars:

http://uofowatch.blogspot.com/2011/02/did-professor-joanne-st-lewis-act-as.html

i'm reproducing it here because a million dollars is worth some debate, right?

so debate it.

Why it does matter when the Mayor snubs Pride:

2011-06-23T11:07:00.016-04:00

It might not come as a surprise to most of us, but at least it's official: Mayor Rob Ford will not be marching in or attending the Toronto Pride Parade this July 2nd. The major event, which is the culmination of a week's worth of events, conflicts with plans to go to his Muskoka cottage -- a tradition in his family for generations and generations.

When asked about his plans for the Canada Day weekend, Ford responded that he's been going to the cottage since he was a child: "Since I was a little boy, we always used to go up north to our cottage, and I’m carrying on the tradition that my father had.”

Fair enough. We all have family traditions that are important to us, that are priorities , and that we try to organize our hectic lives around but for most of us there comes a time when it becomes impossible and we have to (sadly) arrive late or even miss our favorite family festivities. It's a fact of life and, unfortunately for Mayor Ford, it's especially a fact of life for those in public positions who are paid with taxpayer dollars.

In today's National Post Barbara Kay wrote: "Good for Rob Ford. Canada Day is a day for all Canadians to celebrate their nation as a 38-million strong collective, not a small minority of people celebrating their sexuality. There are times when family trumps political work, and this is, or should be, unarguably one of them." (the article was lovingly accompanied by the photo on the right)

Well, okay. Interesting theory...? First of all, it's not a "small minority" of people. It's been estimated that participation in Pride events, and especially the parade, runs into the hundreds of thousands--a million even. That's comparable to the Caribana festival --or, rather, the Scotiabank Toronto Caribbean Carnival -- and even if it was just a small minority of people? What then? It's okay to not endorse and support the event? Well, that's just silly Barbara. The fact is that Toronto Pride is a massive corporate event and it brings an insane amount of money into our fair city, money that isn't just queer money even : straight people also attend Pride events! That "small minority" IS celebrating but so are their straight friends, their straight parents and grandparents, their straight children, and their straight colleagues. That's called a "community" and Pride is a "community" event.

Secondly: Canada Day isn't an excuse. Does the Prime Minister always miss Canada Day celebrations? Do other elected officials get to say "oh, a national holiday? Naaaah, I have to go BBQ at the ol' cottage!" Being elected Mayor of a city like Toronto means that your old holiday schedule might have to change, be flexible. It's that lack of flexibility that is the real problem here, the reason why it IS important that Ford is choosing to miss the Parade. Huntsville is a three hour drive away. Leave your cottage in the a.m, come wave a bit and throw some candy into the crowd, take the boos with a grain of salt, then drive back to Huntsville in time to toss a few beers back and set off some fireworks with the family. People do it ALL of the time. He's not going to a cottage on a private island in the middle of the ocean, he's going to the Muskokas, which is practically still in Toronto.

Just because it's Canada Day weekend doesn't mean that his choice is an obvious one-- maybe if being with your family on Canada Day is so important politicians should lobby for airline discounts during that weekend, so those of us who are not from the GTA could actually go home for a change. If Barbara Kay thinks that being with family is the most important thing on Canada Day then I will gladly accept a ticket home on her behalf, because guess what-- some of us don't have the luxury of skipping work to go home, let alone cottages.

In the same vein, why didn't Rob Ford take St. Patrick's Day off? Or Easter? He marched in both of those parades. I didn't get upset that the Mayor marched in an Easter Parade, despite the fact that I am not a Catholic and that I have major issues with organized religion. The Catholic Church doesn't want me to have protected sex because it thinks I should be a vessel for babies, risk be damned. But hey, Ford may be Catholic and he has Catholic constituents, so I don't really care that he marched in that Parade because that's what the Mayor does.

It is precisely because it would be so easy for Ford to attend(and that it's kind of his job) that makes it ridiculous that he won't. David Miller and Mel Lastman both marched in Pride while they were Mayor of Toronto. Even Police Chief Bill Blair once marched in the Parade. If Ford doesn't want to be there, that's fine. Don't march. But some kind of official representation from the City of Toronto's highest office is certainly in order here, especially in this case. Why isn't the Mayor on the Program for the Pride Flag raising at City Hall on June 27th? Is he at the cottage that day as well? Of course not, because where he is isn't the point.

Let's not pretend that Rob Ford hasn't displayed homophobic tendencies(to put it lightly). When he was a councillor in Etobicoke he commented that “if you’re not doing needles and you’re not gay, you won’t get AIDS, probably.” As mayor he was the only person who voted against restoring provincial funding for syphilis and HIV screening programs, he tried to defund Toronto Pride, and he doesn't support same sex-marriage rights.

Ford holds the same views on homosexuality and lgbtq rights as a lot of Conservative leaning politicians and people do, that's no secret. It isn't his homophobia or right wing politics that are at issue here, it's what he's planning on doing with them. That is why I agree with Councillor Wong-Tam who characterized the choice as a "missed opportunity... given the past historical remarks that he has made," an opportunity for him to "step forward" and begin to "make amends with the community." Whatever his own personal politics are, there IS hatred in this city. There are hate crimes, violence, and bullying perpetrated against homos (sorry po-mos, it's the truth). There are kids in high schools who aren't allowed to form gay-straight alliances, who aren't allowed to display rainbows, who KILL THEMSELVES from being bullied and called gay.

In Barbara Kay's article she declares that "Pride has no more legal and political ambitions to fill" because the "revolution is over." She says that "Pride is no longer about support for gays" and is actually just about having "gay-themed fun"(whatever that may be). Revealing her own deep-seated homophobia, Kay writes that Pride participants do everything but have sex in public, that it deserves public funding just about as much as a strip show, and is all about lewd self promotion. "Tolerant and non-homophobic Canadians" don't want to celebrate that yuckiness!

The culture we live in is one in which a straight woman feels entitled to tell us when our own revolution is over, that we are all dirty gay sex fiends, and that a diverse(and often family friendly) celebration is not worthy of our own tax dollars. And that's not homophobic? Pride isn't the only solution to this kind of garbage but when politicians and public figures participate it is always a step in the right direction. Barbara Kay herself is a good argument for Ford marching in the Parade -- hatred is so normalized that it's in the mainstream media without question.

Deciding against participation creates an Us vs Them kind of mentality with Ford on one side and the lgbtqa community on the other. Ford is the Mayor(unfortunately), we're stuck with him. But he's stuck with us too. This is our city AND his. To march in the Parade, or to be involved in any way, might not have meant a lot to some people but we need to stop and consider what it means to Ford. It means he doesn't want to extend an olive branch, he doesn't really want to work with this community, that he is so stuck in his own ideology that he can't even participate in something he doesn't 100% believe in. It means he doesn't acknowledge that there will be people participating in Pride who actually voted for him because all he sees are left-wing radical perverts. Sure, I might not want to see Ford at Pride shaking his money maker(actually.. I did) but it would definitely demonstrate that he's willing to step outside of his comfort zone and really lead this city, fags and all. To be a healthy city we need the Us and the Them to at least try to work together and that is why it matters that Rob Ford won't march.

Who knows, maybe Ford is just saving up all of his rainbow glitter for Muskoka Pride.

it'll make you laugh, it'll make you cry.

2010-12-20T18:39:00.002-05:00

hilarious new AIDS WOLF video by explodingmotorcar-- apparently it was supposed to premiere on pitchfork.com but pitchfork rejected it. isn't it just like a mega music machine like pitchfork to ignore quality work by canadian artists(explodingmotorcar are based in toronto, the video was filmed in montreal where AIDS WOLF resides).

the word on the grapevine is that pitchfork felt it was too "behind the scenes" or something like that, which is completely ridiculous. maybe they just didn't like that this video so brilliantly makes fun of the music video industry and decided to do something different for once. it's a funny, smart, and hilarious music video--what else could they possibly want?

not to mention, the puppets in this video are pretty cool and the puppeteering is so good it makes me believe that these little shits are really stalking the band.

so, make pitchfork regret rejecting this video, post this shit everywhere:

happy holidays from britain's ugliest dog!

2010-12-19T17:52:00.003-05:00

it's christmas again, and that means being stuck in northern alberta sans internets at home.

needless to say, there won't be many blog posts during the holiday season--but it is the holiday, so hopefully people have better things to do with their time than be on the internet watching videos of scottish fold kittens dancing or whatever.

but, just in case, here's an ugly/cute dog that kind of looks my family's dog, without fur.

start collecting your middle class fossils now

2010-12-15T10:01:00.006-05:00

surprise, surprise. toronto, like the rest of the world, is seeing a decline of its middle class and the income divide is getting worse in our city.

u of T professor David Hulchanski published the latest installment of his Three Cities Within Toronto study on wednesday and it paints a "devastating picture of income segregation by neighborhoods"

the last report(from last year) showed that about 15% of traditionally middle income neighborhoods have changed since 2001, mainly being reverted to low income areas where people are earning 20-40% under the city average.

if the trend continues until 2025 about 10% of the city will be middle income , 30% will be upper middle, and 60% will be low to very low income.

this toronto star article is actually VERY confusing because the author hasn't seen the report. they're writing the story based on a "source" who has seen it. they also made pretty grandiose statements about why hulchanski published the report--"one observer pointed out that the report’s release is timely in light of the fiscally minded administration at city hall headed by newly minted Mayor Rob Ford."

why can't they do anything but speculate? because they couldn't get an interview with hulchanski and they haven't read the actual report.

a lot of this speculation is attributed to michael shapcott, the director of affordable housing for the wellesley institute.

i wonder if the toronto star actually interviewed shapcott or if they just trolled his website and pulled quotes from what he's already written? now that's REAL journalism!

besides the shoddy journalism of the toronto star, why is anyone surprised by this report?? this is a trend that has been happening the world over--the middle class is becoming extinct everywhere--so of course it's also happening in toronto, the largest city in canada.

the middle class of our parents generation is crumbling because we have less job security and many of the long term/secure jobs of the past have been moved out of the country(like, to mexico) to take advantage of cheaper labour and lack of labour standards. manufacturing jobs are practically non existent in this country and especially in this city. everyone who has job hunted knows how hard and competitive it is just to fill in someone's maternity contract.

we have people who are specialized but can't find a job in their field so these people are working at restaurants and bars, in retail, waiting until they can finally score something full time and in their area of education.

it's interesting though, to consider what it really means to not be middle class. if we're looking at paycheques, i probably don't know anyone who is middle class right now--i certainly don't make enough money to be considered a part of the middle income bracket, not even close. most of my friends don't either. but we don't buy houses or cars, we aren't married, and we mainly don't have kids. this is a biiiig difference from the middle class of days gone by. we just have a different standard of living and we spend our money in different ways.

in a world where the ultra rich get tax breaks but use more resources is it really surprising that a middle class no longer exists? did you know that there's a list of transnational corporations who headquarter in canada who have never paid their taxes? like, a list. of millions of unclaimed dollars in taxes that could pay for things like services that support people in low, very low, and middle class brackets.

look at the united states, where the ultra rich don't even really PAY taxes. it seems completely backwards. you make more money, so you pay less money? even though you use the infrastructure of the nation more? look at don cherry(i know, we're all so sick of hearing about don cherry, but he's a great example) : this guy makes like $700'000.00 to talk about sports on public television. he's a conservative guy and he publicly supported the wars that canada is currently bleeding money in. he supported the invasion of iraq and also of afghanistan. he gets paid more than most canadians, out of canadians own pockets, to publicly voice his uneducated opinion on things that the majority canadians DON'T support. then he has the nerve to lambaste the left of the toronto city council and the left of the nation, calling them bike riding, lefty kooks- pinkos.

well, us pinkos might just be left wing kooks for a good reason--because we're POOR! does don cherry know how much money riding a bike saves??? this year the TTC fare went up to 3$. That means that on days that I have to go to school at York i pay 6$ for a return trip.( cities that have far larger and far better transit systems than toronto don't have fares that high)

so we bike.

we're leftist kooks, pinkos, because we don't want rob ford to scrap transit city and put the city farther into the hole than it already is. we don't want him cutting services that actually affect us and affect the most vulnerable people in the city.

some people see a policy change and it translates into not being able to afford the ttc anymore, or having to choose between bare essentials, because some people are fucking poor. so that makes us left wing pinkos, because we actually have to count every single quarter we have in our change jar to afford to do our laundry. unlike some people, who have a scrooge mcduck pool of loose change that they'll never have to count.

someone like rob ford can talk all he wants about not spending his councillor's budget and wanting to "Save money" as mayor, but the truth is that he didn't NEED to spend his budget because he's fucking loaded. just because he's fat and ugly doesn't make him working class and the whole point of having a councillor's budget is so that people who aren't loaded can do the job without suffering.

so the middle class is disappearing and we have idiots like don cherry and rob ford who claim to represent the "little guy" steering the ship... it's cognitive dissonance at its best when millionaires can claim to be 'blue collar' and people believe them.

the mysterious officer mike.

2010-12-14T10:49:00.003-05:00

apparently a police officer called the john oakley show on AM640 and talked candidly about the G20, saying that "99% of the public were fine and 99% of the officers were fine...but there was absolutely a culture that was tainted."

the officer, who called himself "Mike", went on to describe that culture as stemming from a "shut you mouth, don't say anything to the media and this is going to go away and it will be business as usual" message from cops and superiors alike.

he said there is "no question there was an amped up testosterone culture that i saw only in my days of college football" that they were "sent out to the streets cranked up... on the street level, and on the buses, before we were deployed there was a real, sort of, sports culture." surprisingly mike mentions chief blair, saying that that culture "testosterone" was there whether or not "the chief wants to admit that."

we all know what a sports culture looks like and we all know what it looks like when athletes are getting pumped up before the game. we also all knew it was happening at the G20 but since there is no public inquiry we won't ever hear police officers testifying about it.

talking about the covering up of badge numbers, mike says that "when you cover up your badge number it shows premeditation and it shows culpability...you knew you were doing something wrong and didn’t want to be identified.”

he says normal procedure "went out the window" and that police officers "were not functioning within the rules." he also laments not reporting the officers he saw breaking the law, stating:

“I don’t sleep well at night because I have to go into Regent Park and I have to look people in the eye after gang shootings. I have to tell them they should be ashamed of themselves for not speaking up to help their community and when I go home at night I have to look in the mirror and I have to have the same discussion with myself and I can’t give the same answer any more.”

if this guy is a real police officer(and there's no reason to suspect that he isn't, i think) then it's pretty amazing. i think that what will be really interesting is to hear from police officers eventually about what happened at the G20-- did it change how they think of themselves? what they think of policing? of their superiors?? how the G20 affected the police officers who were involved might be something the public never hears about without a public inquiry.

more officer mikes!!

oh i get it, he thinks he's the mayor of CANADA...

2010-12-13T12:51:00.005-05:00

in response to the hundreds of complaints hitting rob ford's office over don cherry's crazy speech, the mayor has been sending out this reply:

“I appreciate you taking the time to voice your concerns, and I value the privilege to directly connect with the citizens of this great City. I invited Don Cherry to be my special guest at the Inauguration because I have always admired his Canadian patriotism and community involvement. Mr. Cherry is a colourful character with strong opinions. As your Mayor, I promise to be open and attentive to alternative points of view and I encourage all frank and honest discussion. I hope that we can work together to provide positive growth and change for the City of Toronto.”

first of all, why isn't anyone editing this before it leaves his office? you don't say "i value the privilege to directly connect" you say "i value the privilege OF directly CONNECTING".

anyways, small things....

moving on.

ford says he invited don cherry because he admires his "canadian patriotism and community involvement" and when i read that it suddenly dawned on me... rob ford thinks he's the mayor of canada, not toronto!!!

of course!! don cherry doesn't live in toronto, so his appearance didn't really make sense in the whole "respect taxpayers" sense.. why bring him? why have him introduce the mayor of toronto???

but now it makes sense.

i'll just clear things up:

"dear mayor ford,

it seems that you have mistaken yourself for the mayor of canada. just so you know, canada is the country in which we live--you are currently the elected mayor of TORONTO."

i think we can look forward to things getting a lot better now that we've settled this!

"Ahhhhh"!

2010-12-13T10:47:00.004-05:00

this is hilarious. there's an app for ipads called "halls eater":

“HALLS Eater” app features four nubile Miss Magazine lovelies, eager to feed you your favorite HALLS with an “Ahhh”.

yeah... because HALLS are so tasty?? the buzzfeed link to this video has the title "pervert gets an ipad", but i don't think this guy is a pervert at all. i think he's making fun of the application and how people get so obsessed with them--and also how people get so obsessed with electronic ladies.

either way, it's really funny.

nothing like an 8 hour long filibuster on a sunday morning

2010-12-12T10:45:00.002-05:00

yeah... obama kind of dropped the ball on this one.

bernie sanders: "it seems to me to be unconscionable for my conservative friends and for everyone else in this country, to be driving up this already too high national debt by giving tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires who don't need and in a number of cases, mr. president, don't even want it."

"being a racist? priceless"

2010-12-11T15:58:00.006-05:00

anyone who wants to donate to Wikileaks using a mastercard or a visa will find it difficult, impossible actually, to do so. several days ago mastercard stopped funneling donations made to wikileaks and visa wasn't far behind.

a mastercard spokesman is quoted as saying that wikileaks was being cut off due to "rules barring use for directly or indirectly engaging in or facilitating any action that is illegal."

also paypal is giving wikileaks the old heave ho'.

interesting. seems like people should be able to do what they want with their money, right? but i guess with credit cards, the credit belongs to the company, so they can decide what they will or will not allow in terms of donations.

so, i wonder why mastercard AND visa both allow donations to be made, with their credit, to the ku klux klan?

yeah, this image was copied directly from that website--it's the contributions page for the KKK. they accept visa, mastercard, and american express.

the contributions page says there are "thousands of organizations working for the interests of negroes, asians, mexicans, jews, homosexuals"and that large corporations are applauded for "doling" out money to these causes while "white christian man and woman are not afforded the same courtesy."

the website asks "have you ever thought to your self i wish there was a political organization that speaks up for a white christian person like me? well, there is!" the motherfucking KKK!!!

if you've ever wondered "why is it white people don't stick together and all other races do?" well you're in luck, because mastercard/visa/american express will allow you to put your money where your MIND is--racial purity!

so you can donate money OR you can buy something from the GIFT SHOP--like this "Statuette" with lighted eyes:

perfect for the hatemonger on your christmas list this year.

because freedom of speech and donations should only be extended racists, homophobes, and sexists.

oh no you didn't!

2010-12-11T10:41:00.010-05:00

story in the toronto star today about the decline of iconic canadian beer brands, molson canadian and labatt blue. lack of advertising, price slashing, and the delisting of the beers at restaurants and stadiums have all indicated that these "super brands" are not what they once were.

well, of course they aren't.

one of the dudes quoted in the story, beer author stephen beaumont, notes that while once upon a time this "slide in canada's beer megabrands might have wounded a patriotic drinker's pride a genderation ago, that's ... not the case now."

he goes on to say that the "idea of canadian beer patriotism is pretty much dead, if it weren't they wouldn't be having so much success with budweiser and coors light" and that "people who want to drink a canadian beer are more likely to be drinking a craft beer" these days.

errr... isn't that kind of like, the epitome of canadian beer patriotism? to drink the smaller, more local craft beers and support an actual quality canadian product?

and also, once a product is no longer canadian then why should we buy it? both molson and labatt were sold off to larger international corporations and are no longer considered to be canadian--so doesn't it make sense that people who are interested in supporting canadian business ventures would choose something they know is made in canada?

not only do i think most canadian beer drinkers would take offense to be accused of not supporting canadian beer, but we also have eyes and tastebuds and appreciate that being taken into consideration. actual canadian breweries taste better and have way better packing and bottle design. we shop with our eyes and seeing packaging that is visually pleasing obviously contributes to our purchases.

take one of my personal favorites, the great lakes golden horsehoe lager. not only is it an award winning lager, but the bottle label LOOKS nice-- so does the packaging(unlike molson canadian and labatt blue).

there's also kind of a culture associated with canadian and blue that i think a lot of people aren't into anymore. for example, when i google image the phrase "molson canadian" one of the first images i get is of a girl in a molson canadian red shirt grabbing her boob.

for both "labatt blue" and "molson canadian" google suggests that i complete the phrase with "girls". if i take the suggestion i get lots of photos of scantily clad WOMEN--clad in the colours of the beer, obviously.

if i google any of the following breweries NONE have a google suggestion to add "girls" :

big rock , steamwhistle, mill street brewery, great lakes, stratford brewing, nickelbrook, f&m brewery.

and even if i do type in "steamwhistle girls", nothing comes up.

molson canadian and labatt blue both came of age in an era when objectifying women's bodies was the way you sold beer--to men. all of the major brands do it, and that's fine because that's just advertising--we objectify women's bodies to sell everything. but for a lot of people, that kind of booby beer is over. seeing a beer ad that is obviously aimed at selling to men who want to get the ladies drunk doesn't make me want to buy the beer, it just annoys me.

instead of mourning the decline of two beers that aren't even that great, that aren't keeping up with the rest of the market, and are mass produced shouldn't it be considered a positive signal for canadian beer that molson canadian and labatt blue are being pushed out of the market?

and why the blame on "canadian beer patriotism"?? clearly canadians love beer, and they love canadian beer most of all. if anything, we deserve a pat on the back for choosing better canadian products.

wow, do you really need us to spell it out toronto star?

2010-12-10T11:20:00.005-05:00

this is all over the 'news': women fare better during the recession than men!!

in the toronto star the headline was "why women fared better in the recession than men."

apparently "when it comes to employment numbers women were hit less hard then men during the economic downturn. They also continued to hold far more part time jobs than men, but made significant gains in professions where they would earn a higher paycheque."

interesting.

according to a stats canada report(which you can see here) women "dominate in service industries" which includes the health care, educational, and social assistance professions.

in 2009 women held 67% of teaching, nursing, and other health positions.

in 2009 70% of part-time work was done by women in canada--a stat that hasn't changed much in three decades.

so "women did better" during the recession than men. that means that women, who generally have to take more part-time jobs and do caring work for little pay got to keep their crappy jobs while big banker and lawyer men were losing their awesome jobs that paid a lot of money.

that's not "faring better", actually. not losing your job in the mall, or your three jobs at three different nursing homes is not "faring better." it means that while men are losing their jobs more frequently and staying unemployed longer, women's status isn't really changing at all.

and how is it "faring better" when women are supporting children and jobless partners? then are they "faring better"? no, they're not. it means they're working part time jobs or long hours at demanding and low pay jobs and now they are the only provider for their family.

this is the problem with just grabbing stats and making it news--there is no analysis. the toronto star is just like "hey women are doing GREAT!" why are we doing great?! because we can still get jobs as servers at restaurants and bars? because high paying, full time jobs were historically not available to most women so instead of doctors women became nurses? and because nurses were primarily women the job got less respect and less money than doctors did?

that's called the "feminization" of a work place. it means that a career or job is treated differently because women are the primary holders of it and it isn't an indicator of women "doing well."

it's too bad actually, the toronto star could have taken the stats and actually utilized them to write an interesting piece but instead they were just like "picture of pretty teacher, snazzy headline, and we're off to the printer! let's get drunk!"

SO cool

2010-12-09T11:27:00.004-05:00

design student kaylene kau created this sweet, sweet prosthetic limb for a class where the professor told the students to "push the boundaries of current upper limb prosthetic design."

so she decided to created a functioning tentacle!!

functional means that you can use it, like, this could be your permanent arm. very cool.

that face... is burned into my brain...

2010-12-09T11:18:00.003-05:00

oh god... it's so horrifying.

i hate it when stephen harper rocks out. it is SO embarrassing. it's also incredibly embarrassing that he's rocking out to the proclaimers. the only people who can rock out to the proclaimers ARE the proclaimers.

uuggghhh... poor canada!!!!s

she's wearing glasses! get her!

2010-12-09T11:09:00.003-05:00

another photo of the stupidest police officer in the world beating on someone with his face exposed has surfaced.

this time the victim is a woman, Wyndham Bettencourt-McCarthy, who blogs for torontoist.

she says of the incident:
"I saw a few officers take down a man next to me . . . and they began beating him while he was in the fetal position on the ground.” she says she turned around and then : “I got hit from behind by an officer. He struck me twice. Then he turned, and I ran.”

clearly this police officer was on a fucking rampage, swinging his baton at any civilian he could reach. it also looks like maybe he's practising a dance move?

too bad about the baton though, because that police officer looks pretty small and kind of doughy. she could totally take him sans baton.

mccarthy says that she filed a complaint with the RCMP over the incident but that's it's been slow going.

so now there's a face, so what?

2010-12-08T12:02:00.007-05:00

the latest in the G20 police brutality saga is that new footage has been uncovered that shows the clear face of a police officer beating up adam nobody, a G20 protester.

this article in the toronto star "make it right, chief blair" makes a case for going after this police officer and (for once) rosie dimanno actually gets some of it right. she goes through, step by step, the ways to find out who this police officer is--since the others in the video have their faces obscured.

dimanno's step by step is important not because this police officer needs to be "brought to justice." i think it's important because she's demonstrating how easy it would be for the police chief to find the police officer despite what the chief has been saying.

of course the police officer in question should be punished-- he is clearly one of many breaking the law he is paid to protect. with this in mind though, i think that we need to be careful not crucify him just because he was the only one stupid enough to leave his face uncovered. punish this man for his actions, but don't let it obscure the broader issues here : the culture of impunity, of violence, and the illegality abound at the G20 summit--before and during.

like the ontario ombudsman's report declaring that the toronto police's usage of the public works act to be illegal. constructing the wall, forcing people to identify themselves and submit to searches, raiding homes, all of these things are illegal because the public works act is war-time legislation.

storming into the designated protest zone and ripping the prosthetic legs off of people sitting there, keeping people detained in cages, threatening to rape female captives, and then claiming that because the police responsible aren't on the toronto force so you can't actually do shit about it--that's illegal, yo. ILLEGAL.

the author of the report, andre marin, stated: “There was a premeditated, conscious, flagged decision not to announce the existence of the regulation or the reviving of this war-time act, this relic. The government poked a hibernating bear and they didn’t want the public to know.’’

i'm pretty sure we don't need that report to tell us that what happened before and during the G20 was wrong, but I'm also sure we don't need a report or a picture to tell us that it wasn't individual police officers who made those decisions.

and no, this isn't an argument that the police officers were just "doing their jobs" or "taking orders" (although they were). what each police officer did individually contributed to this event becoming a horror story and they should all be punished. sometimes, though, focusing on individual punishment obfuscates where these decisions were coming from. the primary culprit here is chief blair and the chain of command--and i think it's there that we need to be looking for punishment.

by invoking antiquated war-time legislation, building the fence, and making security hyper-intensive chief blair created a climate in which individual police officers were encouraged to go above and beyond, legally speaking. everyone knew that shit was going to hit the fan and i'm sure there weren't a lot of "show restraint" speeches before sending those police out onto the street.

remember when they started building the fences and asking people to vacate their homes and workplaces?? we knew it was illegal. the police knew it was illegal. so maybe we should be focusing on how to stop these things BEFORE they happen instead of trying to chase them afterwards with reports and videos. we try leaders of countries for war crimes, for making decisions carried out by foot soldiers. so why aren't we going after the head of the snake here? our fingers should be pointing at chief blair, the province, and the federal government.

this plot's so thick it's practically stew.

2010-12-06T15:00:00.006-05:00

i wrote a bit ago about george galloway speaking at york university and the kerfuffle it caused:
"maybe yorku should sue the excalibur."

that event was protested by some, attended by many, and was a focus point for groups on both sides of the israel/palestine debate.

rabbi aaron hoch wrote in an email to his community that in allowing galloway's lecture to proceed president shoukri was showing "his amazing tolerance for anti semitism and lack of vigilance regarding the feeling of safety for jewish students on campus."

as i wrote, president shoukri took exception to being called an anti-semite and sent hoch an email through his counsel, harriet lewis. she warned hoch to stop spreading "defamatory remarks about the...president and stop encouraging non-students to protest the george galloway speech on campus." (you can read the full letter here).

lewis demanded that hoch apologize to shoukri and in return, shoukri's office received a letter from the "friends of simon wiesenthal centre" demanding HIS apology to hoch and the jewish community.

the letter states that shoukri warned hoch "and the jewish community", that it was essentially saying "galloway in-jews out", and that a speaker like galloway does not "constitute legitimate activity at york university."

the letter also declares that george galloway is anti-semitic and that the university is also guilty of anti semitism based on the "working definition of antisemitism and nathan sharanksy's 3D test of antisemitism: demonization, double standard and delegitimization(of israel)."

by making antisemitism the focus of their accusations, the letter from the 'friends of simon wiesenthal are conflating the jewish faith and culture with support for the state of israel. their letter ends strongly, assuring president shoukri that their "25'000 members in canada and 400,000 members worldwide would react strongly to any legal action which may be undertaken."

ooooh. scary.

here's an interesting fact about the 'friends of simon wiesenthal', or rather, an interesting fact about A friend of simon wiesenthal.

meet honey sherman:
honey sherman is on the board of governors for york university(community affairs committee) and she is also part of the york university foundation.

she is also the wife of barry sherman (apotex, of nancy olivieri fame).

so honey sherman is listed on the letter to shoukri from the 'friends of simon wiesenthal'. actually, she's on the board of directors of the foundation.

isn't it kind of weird for someone so intimately involved with the operations of a university to be attacking its president though an external organization? isn't it kind of a conflict of interest? or perhaps it just makes her position on the B.O.G and the foundation that much more transparent.

here comes the best twist in the story though: the independent jewish voices sent this letter of support to president shoukri-- combating the idea that the entire jewish community supports israel and views shoukri's actions as anti semitic. in fact, the IJV views the letter sent by the 'friends of simon wiesenthal' as a "vicious attack" and describes it as part of the campaign to "criminalize legitimate criticism of the state of israel."

the IJV is offering its support to shoukri--i wonder how he'll respond. it's obvious from the involvement of honey sherman that this is sticky territory for the president to be treading in and the allies he chooses could be verrryyy significant in the years to come at york university.

letters:

harriet lewis to rabbi aaron hoch
friends of simon wiesenthal to president shoukri
independent jewish voices to president shoukri

for geek christmas parties

2010-12-05T17:40:00.003-05:00

it's christmas season and that means lots and lots of parties. the difference between christmas parties and regular all-year parties is food.

when you go to a christmas party you should usually bring food with you--as a gift for your host, but also just because it's christmas and people expect A LOT of tasty treats.

so you can just bring a brie wheel, or you can wow your geek friends with treats garnished with a super mario mushroom radish:

thanks internet!

elitist and artsy, or, the sarah palin of canada.

2010-12-04T11:44:00.003-05:00

i'm sure we were all a little confused when the first agenda on the first city council meeting of rob ford's tenure was "don cherry speaks."

and speak he did! cherry went on a tirade, explaining to city council that voters are “sick of the elites and artsy people" running politics.

after i stopped laughing, i started thinking. who are these elitist artsy freaks running the show anyways? elitist, yes. but artsy?

stephen harper? he slashed funding to the arts in canada.

david miller? well, he's moving on to the world bank... i mean, he was a fine mayor, but let's not get career politician confused with artsy here.

who exactly is don cherry talking about? it just seems like a statement that really isn't based in reality. "elitist and zionist"? that might be closer to the mark. "elitist and racist" would probably be even closer. but elitist and artsy? please, mr. cherry, tell us who you're talking about.

withouth pointing out the subject of his tirade, cherry's taken canadian politics one step further down the road to sarah palinification. the "art" of rhetoric, of bold and totally untrue statements, of saying one thing when reality demonstrates another.

you can see russia from your house, ms. palin? or your obama's "death panel" is going to kill your downs syndrome baby? well, in canada "elitist and artsy" people run politics.

i think we could probably establish some ground rules for elitism. lots of money for a job that has little positive impact on society could be one. having a platform to express your own biased views and never needing to consider anyone elses. using your money and celebrity to garner political favours and sway elections.

in 2002 don cherry resigned his deal with the HNIC(that's hockey night in canada). his reported pay for the contract before? $700,000.00. to talk about sports on t.v.

so he makes a shit load of money, he runs his mouth without consequence, and he has his suits custom made out of flamboyantly in your face prints.

i don't know, but that sounds pretty "elitist and artsy" to me.

stick to sports, don cherry, because you're kind of stupid in the real world.

"harper congratulates ford in person"

2010-12-03T14:29:00.002-05:00

the picture under this headline, in a perfect world, would be this:

minks!!! evil, evil minks!!

2010-12-03T12:00:00.004-05:00

this is quite an ominous headline from the toronto star today : "minks colonizing toronto island as small pets disappear"

apparently the american mink is making itself quite comfortable on the island and making some residents angry. the headline suggests that minks are killing pets left and right. hide your cats! if your kids are small enough, hide them too!

its a funny headline for the story--kind of like the toronto star is trying to up readers by insinuating that there is an attack on a pet every day-- actually, only one resident has seen a mink fishing out of her backyard pond and goldfish in a back yard don't count as pets.

everyone else in the story is all like "well, we do live on an island..." and one scientist says its a good thing considering minks are highly sensitive to pollutants and wouldn't make their home on a highly contaminated island.

the only other reference to a missing pet is a small cat that went missing and was "last seen" with a mink. experts say that minks don't hunt cats but if the cat got too close the mink could have hurt it.

instead of writing an interesting piece about an interesting animal the toronto star is(as usual) pandering to the one curmudgeon on the island who doesn't want her precious goldfish eaten and creating some kind of crisis on the island to sell newspapers.

who cares if the mink are eating goldfish? who cares if they killed a cat? they're wild animals!! they're supposed to do those things!

"or tickling your butthole"

2010-12-02T14:01:00.001-05:00

the next logical step:

this creeps me out.

2010-12-02T13:29:00.003-05:00

how much money would you bet that this kids parents wrote this for him? like what kid sits there during Marmaduke and thinks "it's totally like the dogs represent different races!!"

the world is such a weird place...

if you give a pig a mandate...

2010-12-02T13:09:00.005-05:00

"so let it be written, so let it be done." if you've seen the movie the ten commandments, you know that the pharaoh says that a lot and when he says it things actually happen.

not so when you're mayor rob ford. even though on his first day in office he was all "kill the ttc--so let it be written, so let it be done" that shit can't just happen overnight.

ontario transportation minister kathleen wynne stepped into the debate today and basically warned the mayor to put the brakes on his rhetoric, because the "$8.15 billion toronto light rail plan has already left the station."

wynne expressed her concern over the possibility of simply scrapping such an enormous project that is already underway and that "any plan that comes from the city has to come from the full council and the transit commission."

it's ridiculous to scrap the plan, yes, but it's also symbolic. ford's campaign platform was all about halting transit city so of course he's going to come out swinging the first day to prove to the people who voted for him that he's no lame duck.

the fact of the matter is that there was supposed to be a subway to york university like ten years ago. there still isn't a subway to york university. public transportation, especially underground, isn't something that you can alter overnight. it takes YEARS of planning, researching, testing, applying for permits and money, campaigning, and all of the other hard things that rob ford isn't going to want to do.

let's face it--the man didn't even attend a single budget meeting last year, he's not going to want to do this real work.

so people of toronto who hate rob ford, let's choose being rational and calm. let's choose facts over this myth that the mayor can just halt a billion dollar government funded plan. let's be proactive and engage our city councillors--if you're still complaining about ford but you haven't sent your city councillor an email, then shut up.

we all know how the story goes--if you give a pig a pancake, he's going to want to put syrup on it and then he's going to eventually want to build a treehouse and cause major problems(or, however that story goes). same plot applies when you give a pig a mandate. we just have to not give the pig everything it wants--the pig's demand for syrup doesn't have to be met!

plus, i have a feeling this pig won't last long without syrup.

let them fight, to the death!

2010-12-02T12:23:00.003-05:00

the globe and mail put together this handy little list of city councillors for, against, or on the fence about transit city.

it's pretty interesting to look at the segments of the city that support the plan--trinity spadina, roseadle, danforth, parkdale/high park--parts of the city that heavily rely on transit, transit that is being overburdened and is losing its capacity to serve its users. but these are parts of the city where the subway can't be expanded, so LRT seems like a good plan to unburden the system.

also, this list is good because it breaks down this whole suburbs vs core thing.

york centre, don valley east, scarborough centre, don valley west. these are all parts of the city that have a city councillor for AND against transit city. that means that it isn't just "us vs them", that certain parts of the city aren't just responsible for ruining everything. it means that instead of coming to quick conclusions we have to actually learn about why those parts of the city are divided and how the needs of both sides can be met without sacrificing public transit.

For:

Adam Vaughan (Trinity Spadina)
Maria Augimeri (York Centre)
Kristyn Wong-Tam (Toronto Centre Rosedale)
Mike Layton (Trinity Spadina)
Glen de Baeremaeker (Scarborough Centre)
Mary Fragedakis (Toronto Danforth)
Sarah Doucette (Parkdale High Park)
Janet Davis (Beaches East York)
Paula Fletcher (Toronto Danforth)
Josh Matlow (St. Paul's)
Joe Mihevc (St. Paul's)
Gord Perks (Parkdale-High Park)
Shelley Carroll (Don Valley East)
Mary-Margaret McMahon (Beaches East York)

For but with changes:

Jaye Robinson (Don Valley West)
Ana Bailão (Davenport)
Josh Colle (Eglinton Lawrence)
Frank Di Giorgio (York South-Weston)

Against:

Gary Crawford (Scarborough Southwest)
James Pasternak (York Centre)
Vincent Crisanti (Etobicoke North)
Mike Del Grande (Scarborough Agincourt)
David Shiner (Willowdale)
Peter Milczyn (Etobicoke Lakeshore)
John Parker (Don Valley West)
Michael Thompson (Scarborough Centre)
Gloria Lindsay Luby (Etobicoke Centre)
Denzil Minnan Wong (Don Valley East)
Raymond Cho (Scarborough Rouge River)

i see my city councillor on the "for" list, and i emailed him yesterday to voice my support for transit city and my concern about "killing it."

don't see your councillor on the list? is your councillor expressing a view that you don't support?
don't know who your city councillor is?

find your city councillor's contact info here and email them. call them!

let the games begin!!

2010-12-01T11:49:00.004-05:00

it truly is a glorious day. it's damp, dark, and it's december.

december 1st. today torontonians woke up to their new reality: mayor rob ford.

we did this to ourselves, my friends, and now we have to pay the price. but who says it has to be all bad? if the price for voter apathy and bad organizing is that now we have to be hyper attentive to city politics, watch-dog style, then fair enough.

i couldn't wait to read the news this morning, warm up the twitter, and get going. i feel like this is probably how hunters feel when hunting season opens--finally, fair game!!

until now all we could do was speculate about what ford would do but now we get to see it in action. hopefully noone's expectations were disappointed by his first big move--the complete and total destruction of public transportation in our great city.

in his own words: "transit city's over."

transit city, the long term plan for the city's public transit, is already underway and the ontario government has already spent approximately $130 million dollars on the plan. the city has also signed contracts worth about $1.3 billion for things like new streetcars.

that's a lot of money and planning to just scrap.

councillor josh matlow was quoted in the toronto star as saying he believes that city council should "have an opportunity for discussion about public transit in this city" because "transit affects everyone in every corner of the city and there are millions of tax dollars at stake."

he says he respects that ford was elected on the mandate of public transit, but points out that councillors were elected with mandates supporting transit city and there needs to be "responsible, thoughtful discussion."

i've got news for you, matlow, thoughtful and responsible discussion is a thing of the past.

so rob ford was elected because he said he'd kill transit city. so how about we not let rob ford supporters be the loudest voices? CALL city hall. CALL mayor rob ford. CALL your city councillor. send them all emails. tell them that although rob ford was elected mayor, he wasn't elected into the position of emperor and city council still has the imperative to represent everyone in the city not just the people who voted for ford.

you can email the new mayor (mayor_ford@toronto.ca)
you can call him here: 416 397 2489. you can also find your city councillor here.

let's just be proactive and not crazy. clearly standing at city hall "protesting" a democratic election isn't going to do anything but make us look like sore fucking losers. also, if you didn't vote, you don't GET to protest.

so let's do our best to look on the bright side of things-- we have to wake up and get involved, we can't be pouty babies about this, and we have four years of great gravy themed jokes ahead of us.

really? we're worried about our apples turning BROWN?

2010-11-30T10:35:00.003-05:00

for real. i thought that this whole craze about making food look eerily perfect all of the time was over? i thought GMO foods were kind of...creepy to the public?

who would think, then, that a company would spend money and technology trying to find a way to ensure that your stupid apple doesn't turn brown once you cut it.

why? well because apples are popular, people like to eat apples and add them to things like salads. apparently these people give a shit that their apples turn brown a little bit once the flesh is hit with oxygen, even though the apple is still perfectly fine to eat.

the weirdos who invented this thing "said the technology would lower the cost of producing fresh slices, which have become a popular addition to children’s lunch boxes, and make apples more popular in salads and other quick meals."

i'm sorry, the "cost of producing fresh slices"? like you slice them at a factory and then send them to the store? of course they're going to turn brown!

i'm a big, big, big hate of pre-cut fruit and vegetables at the grocery store. i believe that the only "technology" that should be involved with sliced apples is a knife in your own kitchen. unless you're buying some kind of concoction that's been diced up at the store, i think that packaging fruit is weird. buy it, wash it, slice it yourself.

it just seems like a stupid thing to waste money and science on when some people in the world don't even have apples, or food, or clean water. get over yourself, north america. haiti is experiencing a cholera epidemic and we're worried about our apple slices turning an unsightly shade of non-white.

"if you rob people of their identity, if you rob them of their democracy, then all they are left with is nationalism and violence"

2010-11-29T11:38:00.002-05:00

a video of nigel farage giving it to the EU, pretty amazing.

"what they are being told as their government is collapsing is that it would be inappropriate for them to have a general election. In fact commissioner Rehn here said they had to agree to a budget first before they are allowed to have a general election. Just who the hell do you think you people are. You are very, very dangerous people indeed: your obsession with creating this European state means that you are happy to destroy democracy, you appear to be happy with millions and millions of people to be unemployed and to be poor. Untold millions will suffer so that your euro dream can continue. Well it won't work"

well... i guess everyone owes this guy a post-mortem apology...

2010-11-29T10:37:00.004-05:00

this is so sad. remember when the TTC was hiking fares to $3.00 and everyone was upset because the price of the TTC was already too high?

well, emotions were running high and (as usual) people made the mistake of targetting an individual instead of the system.

remember napping TTC worker?

i wrote about it here "the trick to avoiding the 3$ ttc fare? go to this guy's booth."

"we've all fallen asleep at work. the difference is that this guy works for the most hated public service in ontario, one that bleeds money and provides shitty service for an exorbitant and outlandish price to its users.

so i guess we could look at it as being a waste of money, or we could look at it as the ttc employee's resistance to the fare increases--letting a few customers go by with an extra three dollars in their pockets.

he's probably not even sleeping, just slyly looking out from under his eyelashes chuckling at his little thursday night insubordination. "

that man, George Robitaille, would eventually disclose that he had health problems that had caused him to fall asleep. he eventually went on medical leave and was very "disheartened" by the napping incident.

Robitaille worked for the TTC for 29 years, had a spotless record, and saved a man's life in 1995.

Robitaille died on Saturday, reportedly of a stroke, and hopefully he didn't die because toronto broke his heart.

TTc spokesman Brad Ross has said that despite the napping incident, Robitaille shouldn't be remembered for such a small mistake, and that "the best way to remember him is "the caring, compassionate and well humoured man" that his colleagues remember him as."

my brain automatically knows canadian facts because i was born here.

2010-11-29T10:20:00.006-05:00

there's a newly designed test for people who would like to become citizens of canada. apparently officials decided the old test was "too easy" so they made it "more hard."

then they also decided that a 60% pass wasn't good enough, a canadian citizen should at least get a 75% on the exam.

so people started failing the test more, which creates more of a backlog for the system, which forces officials to change the rules/the tests/the procedures/ etc over and over again.

you can read all about it here in the toronto star but what i really love about the situation is the emphasis on cheating.

spokeswoman karen shadd told the star that the test questions were being shuffled more often to end what they "believe" to be "rampant cheating under the old system."

she goes on:

“In the past, with the old test, some people would buy the answers from unofficial sources...After paying for the answers, they would memorize them in order to pass the test. This accounted, in part, for a much higher pass rate.”

in other words the "wannabe citizens" found out the facts that they needed to know to be canadian, then they learned those facts, then they had the answers for the test.

i remember doing something similar, but i guess when you're "born" a canadian citizen you get to call that "learning" and not "cheating.

hello, saturday

2010-11-27T10:34:00.003-05:00

you know how it goes, you watch one youtube video for a german children's toy and it leads you into a world of other videos.

and then...

no, ann coulter isn't a homophobe at all...

2010-11-26T14:13:00.004-05:00

i have to admit, i've never read fox nation and i don't a lot of attention to fox news. but now that i've seen it once i'll probably be addicted to it.

fox nation published an ann coulter opinion piece today about the TSA regulations in which she suggests that members of congress also go through the intrusive airport searches before entering congressional office buildings.

she gets in a little jab and congressman barney frank: "We've patted you down twice, Congressman Frank. Why don't you just go to your office now?"

why is that? because barney frank is gay he probably would like being patted down by strangers? classy, coulter, as usual.

it's kind of like when she got applauded for calling john edwards a "faggot" in this video

or the time she made the joke about two things gay men CAN'T do: get married and throw a baseball without looking like a girl.

because when you're a lady with long blonde hair and skinny, skeletor arms it's FUNNY to be hateful.

FoxNews cites a source more reliable than itself: The Onion

2010-11-26T13:43:00.005-05:00

the fox nation website published a story in its "culture section" that they got from the Onion. The Onion!

the headline reads: "The Onion: Frustrated Obama sends nation rambling 75'000 word email"

the "story" reads as follows:

"Having admittedly "reached the end of [his] rope," President Barack Obama sent a rambling 75,000-word e-mail to the entire nation Wednesday, revealing deep frustrations with America's political culture, his presidency, U.S. citizens, and himself.

The e-mail, which was titled "A couple things," addressed countless topics in a dense, stream-of-consciousness rant that often went on for hundreds of words without any punctuation or paragraph breaks. Throughout, the president expressed his aggravation on subjects as disparate as the war in Afghanistan, the sluggish economic recovery, his live-in mother-in-law, China's undervalued currency, Boston's Logan Airport, and tort reform."

maybe it's time to get a new website intern, foxnation...

"i'm sorry for perving on your thanksgiving preparations"

2010-11-26T13:02:00.004-05:00

so it's american thanksgiving (american thanksgiving is waaay too close to christmas), and so the internet is exploding with pictures of turkeys and dogs staring at turkeys.

so i was getting a little sick of seeing all of the different ways you can stuff ten different animals into a turkey when i came across this thanksgiving story:

"tracking down the trans"

james west, an australian journalist/author/producer, has been accidentally included in an email conversation about thanksgiving for the past three years. the emails were from a family somewhere in the united states whose last name is "tran." he ignored the emails for awhile but then started reading them(weird--which he admits) and became completely intrigued by the tran family and their thanksgiving.

this year, he decided to make a video to a) apologize for reading their emails and becoming so anonymously involved in their lives and b) to track them down and get them to actually invite him to thanksgiving.

the episodes are all on the website but i'll spoil it--the trans DO invite him for thanksgiving! they even pick him up at the airport! it's a pretty great story and also an interesting way of fighting the kind of "the internet is disconnecting us from one another" rhetoric that we all get so wrapped up in.

it's also just a really good and bizarre story, watch it!!

you're going to TWIST breasts? do you also twist balls?!

2010-11-25T12:22:00.007-05:00

this whole TSA security thing is really interesting for a lot of reasons.

i just read this story about a radio host who opted out of the body scanner and then wanted to ask some questions about the full body pat down ( here) and was cuffed/had her ticket ripped up/and escorted out of the airport by a dozen cops.

there's a lot of speculation about whether or not it's been exaggerated but i don't think that's really that important-- i think the situation raises a lot of questions, valid questions, about the new procedures.

mainly, are the new procedures really that effective and if they aren't(which many people argue), then what is the point of forcing people to either be naked on a screen or have their boobs and balls twisted.

jeff goldberg, a journalist, has been very outspoken about the ineffectiveness of the new TSA regulations and especially of the body scanners. instead of actually being a barrier to people bringing restricted items on board, goldberg argues that the regulations basically just make it look like they're doing something. a gross abuse all for nothing.

he's not just writing about it, golberg has tested security at airports over the years

he writes of TSA regulations in 2008:

"I have for some time now been testing, in modest ways, their effectiveness. Because the TSA’s security regimen seems to be mainly thing-based...I focused my efforts on bringing bad things through security in many different airports, primarily my home airport, Washington’s Reagan National, the one situated approximately 17 feet from the Pentagon, but also in Los Angeles, New York, Miami, Chicago, and at the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport."

in one instance at chicago o'hare international airport, he managed to get through security wearing a "beerbelly": "a neoprene sling that holds a polyurethane bladder and drinking tube. "

the beerbelly can hold up to 80 oz of fluid and is worn under clothes--so you can sneak booze into football games or whatever. goldberg poured two cans of bud light into his beer belly before he went through security and it went undetected even in secondary screening. he was, however, relieved of his eight oz bottle of water.

goldberg has gone through security wearing or carrying blatantly pro-osama bin laden t shirts and "knick knacks" without even raising an eyebrow.

the best part of what goldber has done though, and what raises the biggest question about actual airport security, is that he has managed to get through all of these security checkpoints with FAKE BOARDING PASSES.

security expert bruce schneier created (and uses) the fake boarding passes for the express purpose of proving that the TSA regulations are a waste of tax dollars and do nothing to increase airport security.

schneier himself is on the famed No-Fly list but he makes himself fake boarding passes in his own name because the list is checked only at the point of purchase, not at security.

not only were they waved through security but schneier was carrying a 120z bottle labelled "saline solution." anyone who was on a flight in 2008 or since then probably thinks that getting liquids on a flight is impossible--i've had a clear bottle with literally less than an inch of shampoo in it thrown out because it wasn't in a container that would ONLY hold 100ml. bottles of water, breast milk, contact solution, lotion, all of these things usually get tossed in the trash.

but if you had the bottle labelled "saline solution", then you would have been fine in the states because medical supplies don't come in the prescribed "under 3 oz" size. the security didn't even check schneier's bottle.

getting through security with all of their items intact, without getting arrested, and with fake boarding passes proved the uselessness of "the ID triangle."

the ID triangle is a process meant to establish three times that you are who you say you are. you buy your ticket, you pass through airport security, and you board your flight. at all of these contact points you are identified and have to prove your identity.

sure, you're not going to get on an actual flight with a fake boarding pass, but schneier and goldberg prove that getting through security was pretty easy.

they also point out that the most dangerous place to be (and the most vulnerable spot in the entire airport) is the long, often snaking pre-security line. somebody detonating a bomb in this pre-security area on a very busy day could cause major damage and kill countless people.

but that wasn't happening every day, despite the lack of real security at airports and how does nudity and invasive pat downs resolve issues like the fake boarding pass issue or the fact that once someone intent on doing damage arrives at the airport its basically too late?

is it to reinforce the idea in americans brains that they are not safe and so should accept any and all security "precautions"? that they should trust the state blindly to protect them, despite evidence that they are no safer? while airport patrons are being groped and x-rayed, airport employees aren't. while women and men are having their junk be exposed to a maybe pervert who will perhaps masturbate to the image in the bathroom on his lunch break, security is doing nothing to prevent restricted items and people from getting on flights. it just doesn't make sense.

in his most recent article about airport security he has a discussion while going through screening with a TSA agent. goldberg refuses the nudity scanner and the TSA agent laughs at him, telling him that he won't like the pat down. the TSA agent also said noone would opt out of the nudity scanner once they'd been through the humiliating pat down. the TSA agent called over to a colleague "tell him what you call the back-scatter [nudity scanner], and the colleague responds "the dick measuring device."

so the cost of security that isn't real security is having people mock your naked body or prod your privates? and how likely is it that you'll be selected "randomly" for screening if you're a hot girl and the agents are dirty perv men? how often are dudes high fiving each other after patting down or scanning a particularly hot lady?

maybe nudity scanners and body pat downs will find items like "underwear bombs", but they don't address issues of identity and they don't increase security.

goldberg pulls off the most telling and shocking of his experiments in st. paul minneapolis-- getting through security without ID.

he writes:

"I decided to make myself as nervous as possible. I would try to pass through security with no ID, a fake boarding pass, and an Osama bin Laden T-shirt under my coat. I splashed water on my face to mimic sweat, put on a coat (it was a summer day), hid my driver’s license, and approached security with a bogus boarding pass"

i read this and thought that there was no way he was getting through without proper I.D.

he continues:

"I told the document checker at security that I had lost my identification but was hoping I would still be able to make my flight. He said I’d have to speak to a supervisor. The supervisor arrived; he looked smart, unfortunately. I was starting to get genuinely nervous, which I hoped would generate incriminating micro-expressions. “I can’t find my driver’s license,” I said. I showed him my fake boarding pass. “I need to get to Washington quickly,” I added. He asked me if I had any other identification. I showed him a credit card with my name on it, a library card, and a health-insurance card."

goldberg got through security with a credit card, a library card, a health insurance card, and a FAKE boarding pass.

and how does a TSA agent measuring your dick or looking at your naked boobs detect a fake boarding pass or an identity theft. how does it protect people in lineups like these, that are completely unprotected??

for all of our friends in north korea

2010-11-24T15:45:00.006-05:00

most of us know that yesterday north korea killed four people(including two civilians) on a south korean island. this is horrifying for many different reasons--one being that tensions between the (communist) north korea and (not communist) south korea are always running high and people sometimes forget that.

it's important for politicians to react swiftly to news of north korea's attack on south korea, because they don't want people to start freaking out about north korea's nuclear capabilities etc.

so thank the lord baby jesus that 2010 presidential candidate sarah palin was on the glenn beck radio show to soothe the public and prove just how great she would be as president of the united states.

when asked by beck how she herself would have dealt with the attacks, ms. palin responded:

"This speaks to a bigger picture here that certainly scares me in terms of our national security policy but obviously we've gotta stand with our North Korean allies."

yeah.... north korea is not one of america's allies.. in fact, north korea is one of the original members of the axis of evil. that's the opposite of an ally. but i mean, it's the radio and sometimes ladies can't remember facts off the top of their heads without having them written on their hands. she's a beauty queen not a nobel prize winner: pat the pretty bitch on the head, give her a cookie, and send her on to the next radio show content in knowing that she tried her "darn" hardest!

and why should she have to remember the difference between north and south? communist and not communist? ally or axis member? because she' wants to be the president? well.. that's just a double standard!! probably people are being so hard on her because she's a WOMAN!

or maybe just because she's stupid and always on the radio and tv and god only knows why people listen to her at all.

she was corrected by beck and continued the interview. glenn beck for president?

well this makes me insanely angry.

2010-11-24T10:41:00.003-05:00

sometimes i wonder why the police even go through the motions. why BOTHER knocking on doors? why BOTHER patrolling? if you aren't going to follow through with a suspicion, why even bother pretending to do your job.

today in the toronto star they ran a story about an OPP officer who noticed a vehicle not belonging to jessica lloyd park in front of her house--the officer knocked on the door and when noone answered, she left the premises.

well, russel williams owned that car. he watched the police officer leave. then he broke into the home and tortured jessica lloyd before taking her to his own cottage where he would eventually murder her.

apparently the police officer is "taking it very badly and is very hard on herself" and regrets not doing anything.

well yeah, you get paid to "do something." why not run the license plate? or take note of it? that way when jessica lloyd was reported missing maybe you'd have a lead and she wouldn't have been murdered.

people make mistakes, police make mistakes-- but this is a big fucking mistake. this is a woman who lives alone and the police officer feels strongly enough about the situation to go knock on her door but then just leaves? so why bother knocking on the door at all? was there so much going on in belleville that night that you didn't have time to radio in the license plate?

vancouver police letting women go missing under their noses for years and years without doing anything, cops at the G20 threatening to rape female reporters, cops in ottawa arresting a woman without cause and strip searching her illegally, and now this. why are police too busy being lazy or abusing their power to do the job they get paid to do? how much more will it take for us to realize that there is something very wrong the institution of policing?

so as much as the toronto star article makes us want to feel bad for this cop, that she's "beating herself up over it", i think it's more important for this to serve as a lesson-- when we place our "safety" in the hands of the police and they fuck up and don't do their jobs, when bad things like this happen they should feel bad. they should feel horrible.

when i make a mistake at my serving job, there was hell to pay. and that was FOOD. when cops make mistakes like this, it needs to be a bigger deal.

why would anyone flag this?

2010-11-22T11:51:00.003-05:00

this is the greatest craigslist ad i have seen in a really long time. i have a feeling that you might not think it's as funny unless you've had an epic gaming session so intense that the only thing you can do while playing is go get a coffee crisp bars from the freezer, stuff it in your mouth, and toss the empty wrapper onto the pile with the others.

"we will probably have a great time." yeah, you probably would actually. it's like how my sister has a great time while my brother and i play games and we force her to sit on the couch and watch us. sometimes she'll fall asleep or try to "leave" and she gets a gentle reminder that she is having FUN. game time is family time, when we're questing we need positive reinforcement from her. she gets that.

this guy is just trying to fill the gap that having no siblings has left in his life!

"The Tyranny of Soy in Paraguay"

2010-11-21T14:41:00.001-05:00

a great piece from the real news network and produced by jesse freeston about the soy business in paraguay.

"As it stands, more than 25 percent of Paraguay's arable land is taken up by genetically modified soy farms. Peasant farmers, or campesinos, have organized to oppose this lucrative industry."

"And this industry is rapidly expanding. It's largely powered by Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, Monsanto, and various Brazilian companies. Small farming communities, small farmers are having to migrate to the cities in a massive exodus from the countryside. They're doing this because of the repression they face from thugs hired by the soy owners, the terrible pesticides that are used in soy production that poison water sources, that kill livestock, that kill anything else but soy, and that create cancer, blindness, birth deformities among campesino farmers that are living side by side next to these seas of soy."

More at The Real News

because we all need more receptacles for fruit and plants.

2010-11-21T13:48:00.007-05:00

i saw these on design milk today:

they're called cocoon and they were designed by a swedish student,Måns Salomonsen, at university stenebyskolan.

the top of the cocoon holds plants and herbs and the underneath holds vegetables or whatever else.

Måns describes his the entire process of creating these two pieces on the website.

in his description he includes his first sketches of what he wanted to create, which are just as great as the actual pieces themselves.

the sketches look like the greatest dr Seuss town of all time:

another great thing on design milk today --air plant tiles! air plants are pretty and unique, but they don't root in soil--instead they grow on other plants, buildings, etc. this design by pigeon toe ceramics solves the problem of air plants. i don't really know how well this would do inside a home--on a wall-- but it would be pretty neat in gardens or outdoor spaces.

also, it's getting cold and winter is much more imminent and one of the best parts about winter is spending ten million hours on the internet looking up things for summer.

Iran to join European Missile Defence Shield

2010-11-21T12:35:00.005-05:00

Iran to join European Missile Defence Shield

by Hans Rollmann
Associated Pamphleteers (AP)

Negotiations with Iran over its participation in the European Missile Defence Shield have concludedsuccessfully, NATO’s chief announced Saturday at the alliance’s summit in Lisbon.

“Iran has committed to joining the missile defence shield and protecting Europe and itself from potentialmilitary and terrorist threats from abroad,” Anders Foggy Rasmussen announced at a press conference.

Iran’s surprise announcement comes hot on the heels of yesterday’s announcement that Russia
would also be joining in on the missile defence shield. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11803931 signed a written commitment indicating that NATO andRussia no longer considered each other a threat, and that both would work together to expand the military alliance and better equip it to counter whatever remaining countries it could plausibly label as threats. Analysts suggested Iran’s partnership would be based on the same type of agreement. Some insider sources suggested the EU and US would retain rights to spar with Iran over its development of nuclear reactors, while cooperating on matters of joint defense.

Rasmussen brushed off suggestions that with Iran’s joining the missile defence shield, the system would no longer be necessary.

“There’ll always be a need for a missile defence shield,” he explained. “We shouldn’t get wrapped
up in thinking about who might attack. What we need to focus on is who we’re defending. And with the number of countries that are part of our defensive shield growing, it’s only logical that we should increase the military capability of that shield.” Mr. Rasmussen noted, for instance, that both Mongolia and Madagascar still remained outside of the missile defence system, and therefore could pose potential threats to the European mainland in the future.

Defence industry contractors were also pleased. They noted that while the military and strategic value of the missile defence shield was dubious, its role in expanding arms production and other defence- related industries would provide an invaluable contribution to the global economy.

“We should think of the missile defence shield not so much as a strategic military asset, but rather as a financial stimulus plan,” said an industry spokesperson. “It demonstrates the continuing importance of NATO in today’s world, not so much as a military alliance perhaps but more as a sort of Scotiabank for the defence industry.”

Even British Prime Minister David Cameron, originally an outspoken opponent of both NATO and Iran, gave his grudging approval.

“NATO’s sort of like that old employee who’s been around longer than anyone can remember, but you just can’t quite convince to retire,” he said. “He can’t really do any of the tasks he’s assigned, and when he tries he often just bungles them and makes things worse, but if you tried to get rid of him you’d have the union all over you. I think building up missiles all around the world to protect the world from the rest of the world is a fairly harmless thing for him to be doing.”

Rasmussen, meanwhile, noted that negotiations with China over the possibility that it might join the missile defence shield were continuing on a positive footing. He emphasized however that even if China joined the European Missile Defence Shield, the need to continue expanding the system would be greater than ever.

“What critics don’t understand is that the missile defence system – no matter how large and all- encompassing it is – will never be foolproof,” he emphasized. “One weak spot we’ve already identified is the risk of a missile attack on Europe from the moon. If the Taliban, or Somali pirates, were able to get a foothold on the moon, or even worse Mars, we’d be in a very difficult strategic position. The ongoing expansion of NATO and the missile defence system play a vital role in countering that clear and present danger.”

"guys aren't supposed to be short, that's funny!"

2010-11-19T15:44:00.002-05:00

these videos from second city? hilarious.

hello christmas gift...

2010-11-19T11:33:00.003-05:00

you know what is sometimes the worst? computer accessories. cables, cords, shiny blacks and greys. these things are ugly, normally look innocuous, and basically make you want to smash your computer and become a hermit.

once in awhile, though, you see a product that makes you change your mind about smashing this shit up.

meet the wooden external hardrive.

created by BPCustomWoodworks in seattle( and available through Etsy) , the hard drives are made from %100 reclaimed or discarded wood -- the item in this picture is made from "a hunk of left over American Walnut from a much larger furniture project."

the drives come complete with a 2.5" 500GB SATA device with a USB 2.0 interface and the entire unit is powered with the provided usb cable. not to mention this would look really great on a desk. i want one.

right now they have 16 different hard drives to choose from and also other things like pet feeders, mailboxes, wine racks, and cutting boards.

also, buying from etsy is nice because there is no middle man--you buy directly from the person who (handcrafted) the thing you want!

a brief warning though: keep your credit card hidden when browsing on etsy...

it's true, towels can be filthy!!

2010-11-19T10:42:00.003-05:00

this is the best commercial for a product i have ever seen.

the product is called the "true clean towel" and it's basically just a towel that warns you not to rub your face with the ball side of the towel.

actually, this is kind of ingenious. sure, it's also a hilarious joke but we've all seen our share of nasty towels and it certainly would be prudent not to dry your face with something that has touched man-butt. buy your true clean towel here!

keep your towels clean.

maybe YorkU should also sue the excalibur

2010-11-18T19:05:00.004-05:00

for those of you who don't know, george galloway spoke at york university yesterday.

considering that he was banned from entering canada last year it's quite an accomplishment for york to secure such a big name speaker.

not everyone sees it that way though.

according to the always fair and balanced excalibur:

"Lots of legitimate points of debate need to be brought up surrounding George Galloway’s visit to York’s campus. The opinions he has voiced on the Israel-Palestine conflict have rightfully divided many York students into harshly opposed camps. Meanwhile, the YFS’s involvement in the event brings up tough questions about how far the union’s elected leaders should be allowed to pursue their own political agenda over the concerns common to all students."

well, the event WAS sold out... so it's kind of a supply and demand thing.. but i guess that's behind the point.

according to the author of this piece, it's not fair for the YFS to provide speakers that only represent one side of a debate:

"it’s hard to imagine what insight those who support Galloway got out of the speech. While Galloway is a big name, calling him an expert on the Middle East and Asia is a contentious claim, especially considering how little interest he has in alternative views of the issues there.

Ultimately, those students who agree with Galloway’s general position got to listen to an extreme voice affirm views they already held, unchecked by any moderator or opposing stance to provide new information or a different perspective. Those who don’t agree with Galloway got nothing."

well, excalibur writer, i would say the exact thing about rag you have the nerve to call a newspaper. the excalibur consistently towes the administrative line and only represents a specific chunk of the student population at york university. it features shoddy journalism at best and has often taken an explicitly anti-student stance(do i need to recall your vari hall debacle, where you lied about carrying out polls with hundreds of students?)

but, it has every right to exists and produce garbage that idiot student journalists can put on their C.VS when they get out of business school and cash in their membership to various zionist organizations for a six figure job.

i digress. so normally what the administration says at york, excalibur parrots back. in this case, however, yorku and president shoukri himself are standing up for the galloway talk.

in a surprising twist of events, president shoukri is threatening to sue a rabbi who had the gall to call him an anti-semite(the story in the national post, here)

rabbi aaron hoch is being told to stand the fuck down by yorku's legal representative (harriet lewis, who has impeccable morals), to stop spreading "defamatory remarks about the...president and stop encouraging non-students to protest the george galloway speech on campus."

apparently rabbi hoch wrote in an email that president shoukri "has again showed his amazing tolerance for anti-semitism and lack of vigilance regarding the feeling of safety for jewish students on campus."

i think that shoukri and the administration should take the excalibur to task as well since the "newspaper" is obviously supporting the idea that shoukri and the university are backing up the YFS conspiracy to end free speech on campus.

obviously, according to this story, the university doesn't take being called an anti-semite lightly anymore--unless your name is dr. david noble.

oh look, a new look!

2010-11-18T17:45:00.002-05:00

a lot has changed sinced the inception of this blog so it made sense to change the way it looked as well.

better or worse?

aw... sad stephen hawking

2010-11-18T13:00:00.003-05:00

illegal foods, neat.

2010-11-18T12:44:00.002-05:00

is this true?! because i totally bought a mangosteen last year...

Infographic by Culinary Schools.org

sarah palin made a funny!

2010-11-18T12:21:00.003-05:00

in an interview with barbara walters, sarah palin was asked if she thought she could beat barack obama.

palin responded that she "believes so."

she also said:

"I'm looking at the lay of the land now, and ... trying to figure that out, if it's a good thing for the country, for the discourse, for my family, if it's a good thing."

yeah, if it's a good thing for the discourse. the discourse! jesus christ sarah palin is fucking stupid. who even let's her say things like this on television? doesn't she have handlers who say "oh mrs. palin, that's not the correct term. let's reshoot."

and also, "the lay of the land"? what is she doing, coming up with a hunting strategy?

it's just embarassing that this person could even be taken seriously as a presidential candidate. if i was barbara walters i'd have a giggle fit and have to ask her to leave my set.

and i have to say, her being considered a pretty woman is totally the reason she's still around because we all know what happens to ladies who are stupid AND ugly.

national defriend day came and went?

2010-11-18T11:57:00.004-05:00

national defriend day was yesterday. created by jimmy kimmel, the day was "an opportunity for Facebook "junkies" to comb through their list of so-called "friends" and weed out the ones that really aren't "true" friends (i.e. acquaintances you hardly know and old classmates you really don't give a crap about.)"

it's funny because, sure, we all have people on facebook that we're not really "friends" with--but we also all define friendship differently. some people LIKE have people on facebook that they don't really know or have a close relationship with. some people use facebook for work and so they don't really use it as a friendship conduit.

here's the thing--you know who your "real friends" are. we all do. but is there really something wrong with being updated about people's lives? what's really that bad about knowing what your grade five best friend is doing now? yeah, you might not want to visit them on christmas day or go to their birthday but knowing something about another human is never a bad thing.

of course facebook is annoying, but i actually like finding people i didn't stay in touch with. i like finding out that they have kids now, that they got their dream job, that they like to go to starbucks and post that as their update. because hey, starbucks makes them so happy they want to share that shit with the world and i'm alright with that.

is it supposed to be cool or better to be disdainful of connecting with people? like "ugh, i'm so sick of reading so and so's status updates about eating dinner or shopping!" well, if you really don't like it then you should delete them--or delete yourself from facebook. also, there are these things called "functions" on facebook, so you can HIDE people who have annoying updates a million times a day.

i've hidden probably ten different people on facebook. this means that i can look them up or communicate with them, but their BILLION status updates don't take over my news feed. and these aren't "non friends", i've hidden people that i've known forever, that i consider to be very close friends.

the point is that we control facebook, not the other way around. some people may have trouble deleting or disengaging with people on facebook who they don't like, don't want around, or have trouble with but that's not just a facebook problem. these people can't say no to anyone and they have people in their real lives that they have the exact same problems with.

if you don't give a shit about people, then don't have them on your facebook, but i don't really love this push to delete everyone who aren't best friends with because it's just silly. time, distance, and being lazy can get in the way of keeping in touch with people and sometimes it's nice to know what those people are up to and that even though you didn't stay "best friends"(whatever the hell that means) that they've thought about you over the years and they'd like to share a bit of their life with you. they just got a new puppy to go with their brand new baby? well that's nice. they're making pornography now? well, that's just great! they joined a cult? how interesting.

we don't discourage people from going to high school/postsecondary reunions because they didn't remain close with everyone else attending, so what's the big deal with having facebook friends you haven't seen in ten years?

i get that there are a lot of problems with facebook and, believe me, i have definitely deleted my share of people. national defriend day is funny in a way, and it's a great bit of media for jimmy kimmel, who could probably stop making his show tomorrow and noone would give a shit, but i think they could have been a bit more creative than just saying "defriend people who aren't your real friends."

"the success of sarah palin and women like her is good for all women, except for those women who end up paying for their own rape kit"

2010-11-17T11:19:00.002-05:00

tina fey was award the mark twain award for american humour and this video of her full acceptance speech is hilarious.

mainly the part at the end when she talks about sarah palin. but, it's worth watching the whole 15 minutes!

Watch the full episode. See more Mark Twain Prize.

what's the canadian equivalent? buy a truck get a free beaver tail?

2010-11-15T13:02:00.005-05:00

a car dealership in florida is engaging in basically the smartest and most awesome advertising ploy of all time.

buy a truck, get a free AK-47!!!

nick ginetta, the owner of the dealership, said he came up with the idea in honour of veterans day.

he says he's giving away the assault rifle “to honour all the sacrifices that the veterans gave to this country, which give us the right to own weapons in this country.”

yes, because i'm sure 9/10 veterans would agree that the right to own weapons was exactly what they fought for.

actually, the right to bear arms in the united states was the second amendment to the united states constitution and bill of rights, it was adopted in 1791. i'm not sure i could name a war that was fought for the right to bear arms after 1791 but i'm no history scholar.

because it's not enough just to have the right to bear arms, you have to exercise your right and get as many guns as possible of varying types. use it or lose it!

rock climbing is hard!

2010-11-15T12:42:00.003-05:00

i don't have cable and i only very recently discovered that i get cbc on my television but good god did i wish that i had cable this week.

why? well because this sunday was the premiere of a new reality television show.

sarah palin's alaska.

i LOVE sarah palin. i think that she is the most entertaining politician ever and each time she opens her mouth a comic gem falls out.

that's why i'm sad that i missed the premiere. luckily for me gawker has featured the "five most ridiculous moments" from the premiere!

my favorite video is the clip where she talks about her husband building a fourteen foot fence around her lakefront property so that her author neighbor can't watch her, she goes on to say that the fence they've built is a good example of what should be done to protect the "nation's" border. this is smart of her, because we all know that mexicans MAY be able to run but they can't climb fences.

also at one point she gets angry at her daughter for going upstairs with a boy. i think that's just smart of sarah palin, haven't her daughters already had a million babies while they were underage? at least sarah palin knows they weren't conceived in her daughters own beds.

i hope this show has ten seasons.

it's like bringing sexy back, but with the devil.

2010-11-14T11:32:00.004-05:00

so roman catholic priests in the states attended a conference this weekend all about the joys of exorcism-- a practise that some in the church are pushing to have a comeback, kind of like fanny packs.

you can read the post about that here. "this is why religion is fucked"

for years, countless damaging stories have flown around about sexual abuse in the church so it's no surprise that these priests are trying to bring exorcism back.

like this story today from the toronto star about the huge problem of not only abuse in the church, but the powerful of the church covering the abuse up.

see, if the church can bring exorcism back they won't have to deal with children and adults who say they were /are being abused by their trusted priests. the church will no longer have to deal with the courageous individuals who dare to come forward, defying their faith and often their community, because they can just exorcise those little devils right OUT of them!!

i mean consider this: if 40 years ago your kid was acting insane because they were being abused by your priest but you didn't know why they were acting insane. if exorcism had been more popular and "acceptable", your priest could have just insisted that your child was possessed by the DEVIL. that would take care of that tricky, sexually abused child always causing trouble!

if powerful figures in the church were willing to cover up abuse they knew about, there would have been no problem approving exorcisms to help cover them up.

but, we all know the church is slow moving so it makes sense that they're only now jumping on the exorcism bandwagon.

maybe now they'll finally get around to exorcising all of the witches that wriggled out of their grasp during the great burnings!!

too little, too late weirdos.

THIS is why religion is fucked.

2010-11-13T18:00:00.003-05:00

don't worry everyone, all of the problems in the world are on their way to being solved thanks to... american bishops!!

friday and saturday, bishops in america will meet at a conference designed to prepare" more priests and bishops to respond to the demand" for... for what? for better pastoral guidance in a changed world? to be more accepting of all kinds of people? to discuss changing their stance on birth control or homosexuality?

oh bitch please, no!

they're meeting to prepare more priests and bishops to respond to the demand for EXORCISMS.

the conference is meant to help catholic clergy members distinguish between people who need psychiatric care and those who actually need an exorcism.

that's right, because the catholic church believes that people can actually be possessed.

bishop thomas j paprocki drops this truth bomb on us: "not everyone thinks they need an exorcism actually needs one."

oh, really? because i thought that people who felt that a demon or devil was physically manifesting itself in their body and minds just needed a cross and some holy water thrown on them.

paprocki goes on to say that exorcism "is only used in those cases where the devil is involved in an extraordinary sort of way in terms of actually being in possession of the person."

so if the devil is involved in a less than extraordinary way you're shit out of luck, because then you're just crazy.

sure, it's trashy... but why are we really freaking out about Lake Shore?

2010-11-13T12:26:00.004-05:00

everyone is having a goddamned fit about this new "show" Lake Shore.

i've seen the trailer and it's certainly something that i wouldn't like to watch, so i won't watch it. but what about this program is causing such public outrage and furied tweeting/facebooking about how horrifying it is?

there are petitions to stop it from airing, people declaring it's the end of the world, that it signifies some kind of shift, and basically all around pointing to it as something meaningful and new.

but how new is it really? how extra-offensive is it compared to programming that's been airing for years?

my favorite thing right now is seeing my friends who were obsessed with shows like "a shot at love with tila tequila", who watch the "jersey shore", or who consume any number of offensive and trashy reality tv posting articles and videos about Lake Shore like it's different from everything else they've been watching obsessively.

it's not different from those shows. there is ALWAYS race baiting in reality tv, it's one of the factors that keep people going back--to see what outrageous racist, sexist, homophobic thing these idiots will say next. is there really a huge difference between what was on that trailer for Lake Shore and watching the "america's next top model" contestants talk about how they're the best model and most worthy of winning because they're white?????

this article in the toronto star called "pushed into race-bashing" describes how lake shore contestants were pigeonholed into different races and asked to play them up. uh, yeah, duh. the kind of outrageous shit that they do on this show and EVERY reality tv show pushes ratings, are you telling me that on jersey shore they weren't asked to play up their "guido-ness"?? because they most certainly were, because that's how they sell their product.

in shows like "a shot at love with tila tequila" we watched people get wasted out of their minds, fight with one another (verbally and physically), and line up to make out with one person. do we really think that these people weren't asked to be extra dramatic and skeezy for the cameras??
we've been watching the worst of people magnified on television for as long as reality tv has existed.

do people really think that the people on Lake Shore are somehow being taken advantage of? there is a certain kind of person who wants to be on reality tv, for a myriad of reasons, but can we stop pretending that reality tv and documentary are the same thing here, because they really aren't. reality tv shows are about the spectacle, about being the MOST offensive, the MOST disgusting, the MOST caricature, and the people who get on these shows are into that--and they're allowed to be.

so why are we freaking out about Lake Shore? because it's based in toronto? because it's canadian?

remember the reality series "the lofters"? that was based in toronto and it was pretty trashy. that was in the era of hidden camera reality tv, which was always totally creepy but promised to catch people at their worst (or at their most naked).

sure, it's pretty nasty that Lake Shore labels people by their "race"-- the turk, the jew, etc.. but jersey shore already does that and pretty much every reality tv show has people playing into stereotypes about race and race relations.

i think people are going nuts for a lot of reasons, the biggest one being that this show is being produced in toronto and features canadians. long gone are the days where we can feel good about all of the trashiest shows being produced in america and consumed by americans because now we are just as bad (and if you listen to some media outlets, we're WORSE).

this show didn't come out of nowhere, toronto, and pretending that it exists in a vacuum doesn't really do anything except give the show tonnes of media exposure.

if you don't like reality tv, don't watch the show but let's not pretend that we haven't been participating in this exact system happily all of this time.

cindy mccain kicks john mccain in the butt.

2010-11-12T16:54:00.004-05:00

interesting!

this is another celebrity "don't bully" video, but this one has a verrryy surprising twist:

oh yeah, that's cindy mccain. that's cindy mccain, the wife of john mccain. john mccain who is a staunch supporter of "don't ask, don't tell."

i think cindy mccain is crazy, but i really like this video just because she's in it saying what she's saying. any one of those celebrities could have made the jab about lgbt people not being able to serve their country, but she does it. it's such a public slap in the face to her weird husband who continues to block the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" for god knows what reason.

i kind of hate celebrity videos, but i love juicy political gossip.

donate to the real news network!

2010-11-12T12:52:00.003-05:00

i went to a great event last night at beit zatoun-- a fundraiser/talk by lia tarachansky, the middle east correspondent for the real news network.

the real news network is currently fundraising to send lia back to the middle east as well as raise enough funds to hire a palestinian journalist.

lia showed a few videos and discussed her position as a correspondent reporting on the israeli/palestine conflict as an israeli. lia's reports were amazing and she's a great speaker--the audience was really engaged and there was some really thoughtful discussion.

the report that i found most interesting was a report on the gaza flotilla attacks--lia was in israel when the attacks took place and she said that she didn't know why everyone was so surprised because the israeli media had been reporting about how the attacks would go down weeks before they took place.

that report is here:

More at The Real News

so the whole point of her talk was to show how necessary actual news reporting is and to get donations, so go here and donate--you can specifiy which sector you want your donation to support-- if they raise enough money they can send lia back to do more reporting AND add another reporter to the mix!

donate!

also, if you haven't been to beit zatoun yet, you should go--it's great.

please sir, can i have one more solid gold pencil?

2010-11-11T12:48:00.009-05:00

i was walking down bloor street yesterday and i saw this billboard at shaw. it's for the globe and mail and it says "money can buy anything. until you find that lump in your breast."

i've seen a few other billboards like it for the globe and mail, and it's part of a specific campaign to promote a series of health care articles in the globe and mail that discuss private and public health care in canada.

i found this one to be incredibly irksome. to publicize the debate "is profit the medicine for ailing public health care?" the example is breast cancer? because once you get breast cancer the amount of money you have doesn't matter?

the globe and mail billboard certainly provokes debate with this statement because that just isn't the case. how much money you have obviously doesn't determine what kind of cancer you get, but it certainly does contribute to living longer and healthier before, during, and after treatment.

getting cancer doesn't mean you automatically get a free ride from the health care system, everything isn't paid for and it can be extremely expensive in this country to get sick. first of all if you get cancer, hopefully you have a job that gives you time off for being sick or-even better-sick pay. if you don't, like many of us, have this luxury then you can look forward to losing your job or going on leave without pay.

for real, when i had bronchitis my job stopped accepting me calling in sick. i was a SERVER. bronchitis is often contagious!

every canadian might have a semblence of health care coverage, but basic health care coverage doesn't cover everything.

take cervical cancer, for instance. once a year, OHIP pays for me to have a pap test and physical. if i had a physical in january 2010 i have to wait until january 2011 to book my next physical. but what if i've been exposed to hpv at one point or another and i need to have an extra pap? or if anything else happens in between that necessitates an extra physical? well, i have to pay for that.

it's easy to say, well of course you'll pay for it if you need it but that's not true. there have definitely been times in my life where i didn't get things that i needed because they were just too expensive at the time. even something as small as a $50 doctor's fee can be too much when you're low on cash.

so, then if you don't want to pay for it, you won't get your extra pap(or whatever test it is). this gives your cervical cancer an extra twelve months to develop.

a commenter on the article "nobody should profit from health care? get real!"(written by karen selick) asks:

"How do we get the benefits of privatization while maintaining the comfort of knowing low income Canadians will not receive "hamburger health care"."

we don't. we don't get the benefits of privatization for some while maintaining quality health care for all because that's not how it works. we either decide that public and accessible health care is a right that canadians stand behind or we move to a different system.

people who have more money ALREADY have better health care provided to them--they can afford to flee the country and get whatever procedure they need, they can afford to buy medication they need that isn't covered, they can cut lines by going to private providers. they can afford gym memberships, healthy eating, and time to relax.

in fewer words, health isn't just not being sick and some people can certainly afford more general wellbeing than others.

in the article, karen selick compares health care to any other commodity:

"Office supply stores sell wooden pencils for as little as eight cents each. Swanky gift shops also sell pencils: gold-filled and priced as high as $1,400."

she continues, writing that nobody accuses "supermarkets of being evil for profiting from people’s hunger, or shoe stores for profiting from people’s barefootednesssuper ...yet, Canadians have become so accustomed to thinking that health care must be provided by government that moral panic ensues the moment anyone suggests it could be provided by private, profit-making enterprises. “Nobody should profit on the backs of the sick,” opponents cry."

this is true, people don't often call supermarkets evil because they sell something that people need or shoe stores for selling shoes for people's feet. BUT people very often call supermarkets evil for procuring food in evil ways, for supporting mass production farm factory systems that are bad for animals and people and produce vegetables that are making us sick.

people need shoes, but that doesn't stop people from demanding that the shoes they purchase not be sewn by children in another country. it doesn't stop people who want shoes from deciding that they don't want to purchase leather shoes or shoes that have unethically produced leather in them.

she writes that "those who really want to help the poor and sick should be clamouring for the private sector to be allowed to do the job" because historically private sector technologies and advances available only to the wealthiest EVENTUALLY become available to the "poor."

just because products are available doesn't mean that suddenly there are no ethics involved,and a long history exists of people/consumers demanding more ethical commodities.

or maybe the ultra wealthy could stop cutting in line and stop propping up the pharmaceutical companies for their own benefit.

take this story: a low cost, easily accessible and safe diabetes drug may have an off label use as a cancer fighting drug. metaformin has been shown in studies to slow the progression of lung and breast cancers.

well shit, that's great news!!

unfortunately, because the study is based on a generic drug that doesn't offer huge returns to any pharmaceutical company, there is "no financial incentive for drug companies to fund" this research.

dr pamela goodwin, an oncologist studying metaformin in three different studies in toronto, says

"We first proposed this five years ago...It took us five years of multiple presentations and requests for funding to cobble together funding."

COBBLE together fucking CANCER RESEARCH funding. because noone wants to fund it because it isn't going to make them any money!

this is the kind of mind set that selick's article defends. like, actually if you want to help the poor and sick maybe you should fight to have these kinds of studies funded despite the fact that they won't make money off of sick and cancer ridden people. this seems like a better idea to me than feeling magnanimous for purchasing a $1400 pencil so that "someday" the poor can have one too.

censor that! censor it immediately!

2010-11-10T18:00:00.006-05:00

people are going absolutely nuts over amazon.com's decision to continue the sale of this book: "The Pedophile's guide to Love and Pleasure."

there's even a dedicated twitter hashtag devoted to amazon right now: #amazonfail

people who are angry are angry because they think amazon.com because "selling certain books is just wrong."

on sale since october 28th(but just for the kindle e-reader), the product description of the book by phillip r greaves states:

"This is my attempt to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them, by establishing certian rules for these adults to follow. I hope to achieve this by appealing to the better nature of pedosexuals, with hope that their doing so will result in less hatred and perhaps liter sentences should they ever be caught. "(all of these spelling errors are in the product description... makes me think it's not a very well written book...)

amazon isn't backing down on this one and has released a statement that refusing to sell certain book is censorship, and i tend to agree with amazon on this one. amazon has written:

"Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."

you can get anything on amazon and that's one of the best things about it. if you don't like it, don't buy it. if you're offended by the title, boycott that specific book.

this isn't the only questionable title on amazon, by any means.

i don't remember people freaking out like this when amazon started selling O.J Simpson's book "if I DID IT."

or what about the hundreds of true crime novels that explicitly detail sexual crimes against children? if you type in "true crime" right now into the amazon search engine, the first book that comes up is one that describes the abduction, rape, and torture of two sisters(and i'm sure it's very graphically detailed).

also, i can buy all kinds of homophobic books on amazon like "gays and guns: the case against homosexuals in the military" by john eidsmore or "the transexual empire" by janice raymond.

the novel lolita describes, in depth, the desires of a pedophile and how he acts them out. i'm sure if amazon were around when lolita was first published, angry readers would call for it to be banned but we now consider lolita to be great Literature.

i'm not saying this guide will eventually be considered great Literature, because it's available on the kindle for like 4$ and is probably complete garbage, i'm just saying we can't be so eager to look to censorship as the answer to all of society's problems.

the angered are calling for a boycott of amazon unless they take the book down, but we all know that won't work. noone is really going to boycott amazon, because christmas is coming and there are too many small towns without book stores in north america for that.

maybe instead of just calling for a boycott and censorship, someone could try to engage the author in a discussion about why he wrote the book and what he hopes to accomplish? maybe they could even ascertain if likes to abuse children and then put him in jail.

the kindle and e-readers in general have opened up the publishing world in a way, making it extremely easy to write something crazy and have it sold on amazon or online immediately. the knee jerk reaction to this kind of shift might be to just stamp "censored" on everything we disagree with, but i think it's wiser to go in the opposite direction and become more thoughtful in the face of this kind of technology.

"they think we murder piglets"

2010-11-10T11:50:00.006-05:00

i read the best story in the toronto star today. there's this website called "The Cheeky" and they make cheeky items.

they make things like big stickers to put on your suitcase so that it looks like you're carrying around a dead body, towels with stick figure genitals on them, and teabagging tea bags.

a little while ago they posted a new item -- a real piggy bank. the bank is made from what was once a live piglet that died of natural causes, was taxidermied, and made into a piggy bank.

well after seeing this new item, the winnipeg humane society got all up in arms about it. aileen white of the humane society went so far as to call it "callous and insensitive," a "trivialization of what was once a living being."

i guess some people didn't get the "cheeky" memo.

the creator of the piglet bank, colin hart, has been receiving hate emails(because we all know the best way to express your opinion about something is to threaten and demean someon via electronic mail) about the piglet bank and can't really understand why because the item was meant to be a joke: the website has it listed as costing $4000.00, taking 12 months to ship, and the photo of the piglet bank is a photoshopped image of a live piglet. they haven't made a single piggy bank and they don't intend to.

the winnipeg humane society's website has a call for action posted for this piggy bank, stating that "while animals are routinely killed for their meat and hides, this is a particularly callous and demeaning exploitation of a baby animal's dead body." so it's okay to kill and eat ADULT animals but it's not okay to taxidermy the corpse of a piglet that died naturally? that makes no sense to me. animals that are in the meat/hide system live horrible lives and die horrible and inhumane deaths, if the humane society is really concerned about "demeaning" animals are they all vegetarians? do they have a call of action on their website to stop the "callous" and insensitive factory farming system?

does the winnipeg humane society have a blanket anti-taxidermy policy? because people kill then pay to have animals stuffed every day.

anyways, this whole commotion made me think of a great christmas gift, the rob ford bank:

the perfect gift for anyone who needs somewhere to stow their spare gravy train change.

obviously due to the nature of the bank this is a one of a kind item and will be verrrryyyy expensive. and the person who purchases this item will have to wait for rob ford to die of natural causes before his body can be turned into a change bank. also, rob ford would have to consent(in writing) to the procedure before he died. but it's a real thing! we're selling it! act now while supplies last!

missing: one backpack

2010-11-05T12:26:00.003-04:00

some dude stole this kid's backpack from the car!!

he doesn't know why someone would do that, it must be really frustrating.

it had super heroes on it and his halloween candy inside of it, and his psp.

he really wants it back, could you tell some people? tell them to look for it?

if this is torture, sign me up for another one.

2010-11-05T00:20:00.005-04:00

in the news today george bush admits to directly authorizing the use of waterboarding in interrogations. he also said he'd "do it again" because it saves/saved lives.

torture doesn't work. it's never worked. even napoleon knew it didn't work and he was CRAZY.
as he wrote in a letter to louis alexandre berthier in 1798:

"the barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. it has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile. the poor wretches say anything that comes into their mind and what they think the interrogator wishes to know."

but i guess george bush doesn't consider waterboarding to be torture and he refuses to call it that. the real truth of the matter might be that he thinks waterboarding is some kind of fun extreme sport, meant to be a treat for prisoners or detainees who give up special secrets.

you can't take those to the drycleaners

2010-11-05T00:13:00.002-04:00

saw this on buzzfeed today: "cheeseburger bath"

it's so disgusting, and i imagine that the smell of all of those cheeseburgers are going to be really hard to get out of their balls.

but i don't even believe in the KKK!!!!!

2010-11-04T19:42:00.004-04:00

it's old news now that two idiots in ontario went dressed as a KKK member and a black dude for halloween.

it's not old news that one of the idiots was a fucking former COP.

here is the problem with cops encapsulated in one news story: they didn't THINK about what they were doing.

they didn't consider how their actions(or costumes) would affect other people. they didn't have an inkling that people might be offended by the blackface or the KKK costume.

the wife of the KKK costumer said she didn't think about it either:

"It was just a last-minute 'Well, what am I going to wear? There's a bedsheet. Well I'm not going as a ghost.""

oh no, of course you can't go as a GHOST. how embarassing! what a silly costume! a white sheet draped over your head like some silly cartoon character?

so naturally they "rolled" up a piece of bristol board they just had lying "that was his costume."

i mean, obviously. you can't expect the man to go dressed as some silly ghost when a perfectly good KKK costume is just sitting there, along with a confederate flag they just "happened" have as well.

the pair of men "might" apologize to the black person who complained about them winning the best prize competition that night.

the most pathetic thing about this entire ordeal is that instead of just being like "shit, that was racist and we didn't realize it, we will LEARN from this error in judgement" these guys are all "waaahhh, we didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings, we're not racists ever, for real guys!!"

just own up to your mistake white guys. or, even better, don't just own up to your mistake--actually DO learn something from it.

take a look at that HAIR!

2010-11-02T12:05:00.005-04:00

sarah palin has really outdone herself here.. that is some BIG hair. bitch is really bringing the beehive back.

if you've ever been to america you'll know that hair is bigger there than it is in canada. it just is. you walk through an airport and those ladies have their hair standing tall and proud--i don't know how they manage to do it(especially the short haired ladies), but they do. it's an american secret i guess.

when i was working as a server at a restaurant frequented by a lot of tourists i could always spot the americans because the lady american always had this tower of hair. at first it was a running joke to spot the americans by their hair, but soon we all realized that it worked, when we joked about who was american it generally turned out to be true.

sarah palin has always rocked this hair so i wonder if maybe it's particular to the "conservative" demographic? or maybe a lady with a tower of hair looks more trustworthy?

it's a mystery. maybe sarah palin's crazy just doesn't fit into regular hair.

new blog alert!

2010-11-02T11:49:00.003-04:00

there's a new blog out there that you should read, because it's good!

"In Place of Death" is the new project of university of ottawa student and troublemaker Joseph Hickey

the blog seems to be mainly about education, which hickey knows a lot about.

here's an excerpt, go read the rest:

"As honest T.A.’s we need to identify and eliminate the obstacles that interfere with creative and authentic learning: remove the needles and the electric clamps. Drop the red hot iron and cut through the wires. Act out against the grading system that is shredding your own mind and the minds of your students. Transform from torturer into teacher."

this, i like.

kung fu ford

2010-11-02T11:33:00.003-04:00

you know who you should follow on twitter, if you're into that kind of thing?

RobFordTo

we have the best mayor ever! look what he shared the other day in response to my suggestion that he utilize the new toronto zoo pandas to stop the gravy train with their cuteness:

"@effandtee If you think they're cute, wait till you see me in action! Promo Shot attached - http://yfrog.com/jwyannj"

cutest video ever?

2010-10-31T18:55:00.000-04:00

look at that little rodent, it's so surprised!!!

horsepower before hoes

2010-10-29T14:13:00.003-04:00

this is probably the best advertisement ever. i didn't realize that this was bmw's market, but apparently the "guys who prefer to fuck cars" IS the bmw market!!

when your girlfriend/boyfriend starts to get tedious just replace their face with a magazine bmw advertisement and you will be ready to go!

this is why if you're a straight man you give your car a lady name, obviously.

it's all so clear now....

2010-10-29T12:49:00.004-04:00

now that we are all recovering from our post election hangover, articles are popping up left and right about how the hell this happened.

since we didn't do enough beforehand to stop the Ford onslaught, we're going to make up for it now by blaming everyone and anyone we can think of.

and now that we can see the result elections, officially, there are articles AND images explaining who we're really supposed to blame: THE SUBURBS.

this one is from torontoist and it places the blame squarely on the shoulders of those who live in the GTA.

but the left, downtown core aren't the only ones using these stats and images. we here at pamphleteers have an exclusive leaked document from a presentation rob ford gave the day after he was elected, proving once and for all that his intentions are sinister and that his idea of the downtown core is totally skewed and biased.

we give you, rob ford's master plan:

child soldiers? naaaah.

2010-10-28T12:35:00.007-04:00

isn't it kind of hypocritical that one one hand the canadian media (and people) celebrate the rehabilitation and rescue of child soldiers but on the other hand totally ignores omar khadr, lets him be put on trial, and allowed him to remain detained for so long? especially in light of all of the media around romeo dallaire's new book on child soldiers?

what's the difference between ishmael beah(author) and omar khadr? one was give a chance and the other one was made an example of?

ishmael beah wrote "a long way gone: memoirs of a boy child soldier" about his childhood in sierra leone and his time in the military as a child soldier.

beah says he killed "too many people to count" and has talked about how "dehumanizing" children is a relatively easy task for the military. after three years as a soldier beah was rescued by unicef and eventually wrote his book about his experiences.

i watched this clip of ishmael beah on the hour (ishmael beah on the hour) and then i read this article about the widow of the soldier who omar khadr "killed" reading her impact statement and letters from her children.

she called omar khadr a "murderer" and that it doesn't "matter" what he says.

she read letters from her daughter and her son, expressing their anger and their hatred of the child who killed their father. "because of you my dad never got to see me play soccer.”
well... because of the war, because of illegal use of child soldiers, and because of the canadian government and people's complete apathy towards what was and is happening in afghanistan, omar khadr never got to play soccer. a child was captured and detained until he was an adult, and then put him on trial to satisfy the public's demand for "justice."

in 2002 canada signed an international treaty aimed at rehabilitating child soldiers. canada was even the first to ratify the option protocol to the convention on the rights of the child, a "treaty that requires signatories to give special consideration to captured enemy fighters under the age of 18."

well, canada's basically bowed out of that one as we can see with khadr's guilty plea this week.

how often do soldiers who die in combat get to put ONE person on trial for their death? i get that this is sad for the family who lost their husband and father, but is breeding hatred and indifference really going to help? is putting someone who is actually a child soldier in jail going to help? no, it isn't.

one of the letters the widow read from her children concluded by saying: “Army rocks. Bad guys suck.”

ah yes, how astute. to a lot of people around the world, the canadian army is the bad guy. all of the afghanis who are killed by canadian soldiers don't get trials, they don't get to read victim impact statements.

i read a news story today about two men who planned a rape and murder of a young woman in b.c., her badly burned body was found in march. the men, 16 and 18 years old, lured the woman to their home, raped her, and murdered her. then they transported her body to a trail and set it on fire.

these men can't be named in the media, because they were underage when the crimes occurred.

rapists and murderers are protected by the courts and the media, but we're putting a child soldier on trial and encouraging people to demonize him.

complete hypocrisy, it's what canadians are good at.

york prof questions hillel's advocacy... what's new?

2010-10-28T11:19:00.005-04:00

what's new is that the excalibur, notorious for being the newspaper of the university administration, did its JOB on this one!!

for real, this article("york prof questions hillel's advocacy") is as good and revealing as i've ever seen in excalibur. that's not to say the excal has never covered david noble or the israel lobby and york, but usually they take the hard right stance and just mock everything that isn't 'office of the president approved.'

unlike the time they faked a student poll and would only express one side of the vari hall debate, in "york prof questions hillel's advocacy" author yuni kim actually went so far as to contact people INVOLVED in the story.

according to the article, york prof david noble is "not pleased with the university’s Hillel@York Jewish student group, and he’s letting York president Mamdouh Shoukri know about it."

citing an october 8th letter that noble sent to president shoukri, the article describes how noble has asked the president to end the "club's advocacy on behalf of the state of israel."

alex bilyk, the media relations guy, told the excal that the president would respond in due time.

let's just take a second here. alex bilyk??? when the fuck did that guy parachute back into the university?? remember for a while he was gone? after he put his big foot in his big mouth and told women on campus to watch their backs yo!!then he was off the radar, off the website, not quoted in the excalibur?

like a pregnant teen in the 1950s, alex bilyk was mysteriously whisked away for a period of time and now he's just back with no baby.

(alex bilyk is totally slime, so slimy that we have an entire label dedicated to him!! you can read about all of the different times he's fucked up here.)

anyways, basically the administration ignored noble's letter(as usual) and the excalibur even did a follow up this week on that-- that story is here-- keep it up excalibur!!

"i dont know "how that works""

2010-10-27T18:39:00.005-04:00

this is one of my favorite rob ford promises: to replace street cars with buses in downtown toronto.

what he "hears" is that street cars just really back up traffic(no word on how dedicated streetcar lanes back traffic up, but i'm sure we'll get a clear explanation eventually) and so they should all be scrapped and replaced with buses.

buses don't back traffic up apparently. i've heard from a very trustworthy source that ford is planning on having all of the replacement buses outfitted with special ramps, so that cars can actually drive right over the buses in heavy traffic.

ford also wants to complete the sheppard subway (started by-surprise-mel lastman!)from downsview to Scarborough town centre and then convert the Scarborough rail transit into a subway. this is a great idea because pretty much noone uses the sheppard line and almost everyone agrees that it was bad transit planning.

sometimes we don't understand the genius... but, rest assured, the genius is there somewhere.

"congratulations, you're a real winner"

2010-10-27T13:40:00.002-04:00

i love watching abortion protesters get schooled like this. more often than not they are willing to show horrific signs and shout abuses at people but the second someone confronts them they take a hands off approach.

pretty great, you can read more about the guy who took the video and why he took it here.

guest blogger: "common sense, yo. Let's get into it."

2010-10-26T15:50:00.003-04:00

hans on the rob ford victory and what it really means for torontonians:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If Facebook had an application that could measure the proportion of anger and rage being expressed in its newsfeeds, last night it would have been on overload. The number of furious curses bewailing Rob Ford’s election as mayor that I saw on my newsfeed was quite staggering. If I were a yoga instructor, today I’d be advertizing special post-election discounts on deep breathing exercises to help Torontonians come to terms with the outcome (and then I’d rope them into 4-year contracts by convincing them it’s the only way they’ll survive till the next election. See I’d be a really great capitalist if I ever had the time to be at it).

Many of those Facebook entries asked the question: “Why, Toronto? Why?? How could you?” (as though 47% of the population had just collectively cheated on the other 53%)

The bigger problem with Monday’s election is not what Toronto did do, but what it didn’t. The very simple reason Rob Ford was elected was that hundreds of thousands of hard-working Torontonians didn’t vote. Not because they didn’t bother, but because they’re not allowed.

Toronto is one of the world’s most multicultural cities. Exactly half of its 2.5 million people are not originally from Canada (the percentage is almost as high in the 5.5 million GTA). In 2004, the United Nations reported it had the second-highest foreign-born population of any large city in the world. Such distinctions would normally sound good on a city, indicating its welcoming, cosmopolitan nature. Unfortunately, since Toronto’s public policy has lagged so far behind other multicultural cities, it’s resulted in a city with a two-tier population: one tier of largely Canadian citizens who are fairly well off and get to vote and set city policies; and a second tier of immigrant residents who live predominantly in poverty, work the actual jobs that keep the city functioning, and are not permitted any real say in how the city is governed or how the policies are set which affect their lives (and keep them in poverty).

And ‘poverty’ is not an exaggeration. According to a 2001 study, poverty rates among Toronto’s immigrant population have risen by about 12% in the previous ten years, while average earnings for immigrant workers have dropped by about 21%. And this is despite the fact that the immigrants of today are far more educated and skilled than their predecessors: 59% of immigrants accessing food banks in Toronto had a university or college education, as opposed to the mere 12% of immigrant food bank users with such skills in the mid-1990s. Another study indicated almost 50% of the African, Caribbean and Vietnamese community in Toronto are living at or below the Low-Income Poverty Line. These are the workers struggling through three jobs a day to survive, being exploited by Toronto’s notorious temp agencies that pay them sub-par wages and ignore labor regulations (because the government has cut back on labor enforcement staff/resources), and being killed by companies that ignore safety regulations. They’re the ones most directly affected by public policy, and yet also the ones who can’t vote to change any of it.

In the Facebook fallout following the election, I noticed Smitherman supporters berating Pantalone supporters for not having voted for the candidate with the best chance of defeating Ford. Pantalone supporters angrily shot back that even if they’d all voted for Smitherman, he still wouldn’t have had enough votes to beat Ford.

What nobody seemed to consider, was that if the immigrant resident population of the city was allowed to vote – those who live and work here, but were not born here and don’t have ‘citizenship’ – they number more than the total number of people who voted for ANY candidate, Ford included. The problem is not who people voted for. The problem is who was not allowed to vote.

Would they have made a difference? Probably. Much of Ford’s support came from middle/upper class voters (both Canadian-born as well as those immigrants affluent or lucky enough to be able to get ‘citizenship’). Ford’s campaign was focused on cutting public services and public government. These mildly well-off voters are not the ones who will be affected – as directly – by those cuts. The ones most immediately affected will be those who are living in or near poverty, and who rely on accessible public services simply to survive, not to mention raise their families with a decent standard of living. And they – the most vulnerable and the most affected - are the ones who cannot vote.

But wouldn’t it be ridiculous to just give non-citizens the vote? Well actually no. Until World War II, half the US states extended voting rights to non-citizen residents; it was the combined effects of the Civil War and then the Cold War that fueled the wave of anti-immigrant hysteria which led to more restrictive voting laws in that country. Today, however, more and more countries are realizing how outdated and backward it is not to allow all residents an equal vote. Belgium, Austria, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, and dozens of other countries have opened up municipal elections to non-citizen residents. A growing number of other countries – including Chile, Portugal, Sweden, Uruguay and New Zealand – allow non-citizen residents to vote in national and regional elections too. If Toronto is indeed the world’s most multicultural city, it’s time for it to stop being at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to public policy and basic rights for its multicultural population.

Countries have come up with all sorts of reasons for denying people the right to vote over the centuries, and they’ve all been equally silly (and equally tragic). They all reflect efforts by people who’ve got a little tiny slice of wealth or power, and don’t want to share it with their neighbours. So they come up with silly reasons not to allow them to vote. People have been forbidden to vote because they’re black, because they’re Jewish, because they don’t have enough money in their bank account, because they don’t own property, because they’re women, because they’re married, because they’re Protestant, because they’re Catholic, because they’re aboriginal, because they’re not aboriginal, because they’re aboriginal but married to a non-aboriginal, because they’re Muslim, because they’re not Muslim, because they didn’t serve in the military, because they don’t own horses, and now, of course, because they were born somewhere other than the place where they live. THEY’RE ALL SILLY. If you live somewhere, and work somewhere, then you deserve the right to have a say in how that place is governed and how the place functions. That’s what we refer to as ‘common sense’ in the biz.

Mind you, Toronto isn’t the first large city to rely on having a second-class working population, deprived of basic rights, in order to make the city function for its first-class elites. They’re not the first, and sadly they probably won’t be the last. Rome required quite a large population of slaves to make the city function. The United States used ‘convict leasing’ (arresting blacks on trumped-up charges and then ‘renting’ them out as slaves) to rebuild the southern US economy after the Civil War (since slavery was considered technically illegal but economically vital). South Africa built itself on apartheid, and Canada pioneered the infamous ‘Live-In Caregiver’ program whereby predominantly Filipina women work in slavery-like conditions for middle/upper class ‘Canadian’ families. It’s little wonder the federal Conservatives are so terrified of refugees arriving, given all their efforts to create programs like the LCP, seasonal agricultural worker program, and other initiatives designed to bring foreigners to Canada to work in slavery-like conditions. And the more Canada comes to rely on, and legitimize the use of, a workforce of second-class residents deprived of basic rights, the more it lines itself up alongside the other infamous racist states of history that were built on a foundation of slavery and exploitation.

Is it dramatic to draw these analogies? Hardly. The Toronto Police openly admit to racially profiling Torontonians to keep its poverty-stricken (read: visible minority) community in line. Not much those people can do about it: they can’t even vote. There may not be chains and manacles. But to be denied a voice in the city you live and work in, is to be denied the basic freedom that we shouldn’t still have to be fighting for in the 21st century.

So Toronto, don’t berate yourself...at least not over things that aren’t the real problem. If Smitherman had been elected, things probably wouldn’t be any different for the hundreds of thousands of people of Toronto who are disenfranchised and deprived of these most basic rights. You think YOU were angry after you took the time and trouble to go out and vote, and then Ford gets elected anyway? Well imagine how it must have felt to those who had to sit back and watch the entire slow-motion train wreck which was the Toronto election, knowing the entire time that you wouldn’t even have the right to so much as cast a ballot.

I moved to this city barely a year ago and I was able to go out and vote for candidates I don’t have a clue about, on the basis of pamphlets that talked about things I’d never seen or heard about. Meanwhile, the neighbors on either side of me have lived in this city for over 30 years, own houses, run businesses, have families, and can recite municipal bylaws off the top of their heads. But because they're from Portugal and I'm from Newfoundland, I can vote and they can’t.

Common sense, yo. Let’s get into it.

So forget about ‘strategic voting’, whatever that’s supposed to mean. Let’s spend the next four years working to ensure that all Torontonians have the basic right to vote. Then the people who are actually most affected by the policies that the rest of us spend our time arguing about, will finally have a chance to participate in that conversation too. And then maybe we’ll see some real change.

toronto elects a new king!!

2010-10-26T10:48:00.008-04:00

last night torontonians celebrated their new leader by dancing in the streets and releasing doves.

ford is going to save the city. we all know that toronto bleeds money for no reason and ford is going to stop the flow of money out and keep the money IN. where he will put that money, we're not sure, but that's not really our business as subjects.

downsize city council:

according to ford, there are too many cooks in the kitchen. we all know that too many cooks in the kitchen ruin the soup--or the gravy, in this case-- so something has to be done about it.

he says that toronto has "22 MPs, 22 MPPs and 22 School Trustees" but that it only needs 22 city councilors. it doesn't matter that these are all representatives at different level of government, it's too many. it especially doesn't matter because toronto will soon become a city state and we won't need so many representatives. but anyways, there are 5 million people populating toronto and the GTA, and we only need 22 people to represent the needs of all--that's just common sense.

too much money, not enough work:

rob ford thinks that city councillors should "get off the gravy train". this means that they make too much money and spend too much money on non-city items like parties and cabs to see their mistresses.

city councillors make $100,000.00 a year PLUS other top ups. rob ford was a city councillor for ten years so he knows all about this. rob ford is so dedicated to cutting back these expenses that he has skipped every budget meeting this year so that he could spend the time formulating his master plan for saving money and gravy.

no registration fee for vehicles:

rob ford thinks it is very unfair that people have to pay yearly to register their vehicles. if there are two things you shouldn't have to register it's your vehicle and your gun.

the 60$ vehicle registration tax is an "unfair cash grab" that "hits families hard." never mind the families who rely on the TTC, because to make up for the vehicle registration tax ford will probably have to hike TTC fares again, but his number one priority right now is getting rid of that fascist tax.

Toronto residents should not have to pay $60 every year to register their vehicle. It’s an unfair cash grab that hits families hard. Rob Ford will push to eliminate the Vehicle Registration Tax at the first City Council meeting after becoming Mayor.

end the war on cars, start the war on bikes:

noone likes gridlock but everyone loves to drive. rob ford wants more roads and more lanes, so we can drive to more places fast and not have to wait so much.
roads were designed for cars and should be used accordingly. hippies and communists who want to cycle should do so at their own risk. ford will lead this charge

oriental flavour: 100% pure

rob ford doesn't like immigrants and he thinks we should halt immigration to toronto for one year. however, he has expressed his respect for "orientals" who "work like dogs" and "sleep next to their machines."
toronto needs less talky immigrants and orientals and more worky ones. rob ford the leader will help this become a reality!

conclusion:

finally, the city we've always wanted!!! long live rob ford!!!