A Bilingual Supreme Court & Other Asymmetric Nonsense

News that the Conservative government is using every device it can find to kill Bill C-232 in the Senate isn't sitting well among francophone intellectuals, who decry the Harper government's decision to thwart efforts to require Supreme Court judges to be bilingual as a condition of employment.

“The government is fundamentally opposed to the bill because we believe that we must be guided by the principles of merit and legal excellence,” Ms. LeBreton said. She said the bill discriminates against unilingual Canadians and would reduce the pool of qualified candidates for the Supreme Court.

read: Tory senators accused of stalling Supreme Court language bill 

The proposition was sent to the Senate by a majority vote in the House of Commons that succeeded because all the opposition parties voted in favour of the Bill, a political ploy by which the Liberals and NDPers plan to embarrass the government, knowing full well, that the Harperites would never tolerate such an idea.

As the Bill faces a lingering death in the Senate, voices are being raised across the editorial pages in Quebec voicing concern that the use of the unelected Senate to block the 'will of the elected' is unethical as well as unfair.
The Bill's sponsor, Yves Godin, a NDP member from Acadie-Bathurst, in New-Brunswick (a francophone riding) is furious that after eight months the Bill is going nowhere. Every time it comes up for debate, the Conservative senators use a variety of devices to keep the Bill from reaching the committee in an effort to stall until the Conservatives achieve an absolute majority in the Senate. That happened this week when the Prime Minister named two more Conservatives to the senate and the balance of power shifted to the Conservative side.

The debate over a bilingual Supreme Court is interesting because it isn't really a fight for bilingualism, rather it is a brawl between francophones and anglophones over political control of the Canada's highest court.

The argument is made that it is important that judges be able to hear cases without the aid of simultaneous translation, as a courtesy and necessity to Francophones petitioners, who should be accorded the right to be heard directly.

This argument is patently foolish and doesn't hold up to scrutiny at all.

In lower court cases (below the appellate division), be it civil or criminal, it is important for judges to assess the veracity, truthfulness and credibility of the witnesses. This requires a judge to be able to understand the language spoken, either English or French.

But the Supreme Court is different, the legal arguments presented by lawyers are based on sterile legalities and the oratorical skill of the presenter is irrelevant. The arguments always refer to points of law, and lawyers argue dispassionately without the device of showmanship, hyperbole or theatrics, which would actually be detrimental to one's chances to prevail.

There is zero chance that anything is lost by the use of simultaneous translation, and to say so, is utter tripe.

The questions put to lawyers by the Supremos after the presentation, are mostly technical and again translation has no deleterious affect. In fact, the oral question and answer phase is the least important part of the process, with the submitted brief what the Supreme Court actually uses to decide. Supreme Court cases are debated and decided behind closed doors.

The idea that Supreme Court judges should be bilingual may sound like a noble design, but it does in fact place a terrible burden and disadvantage to provinces like British Columbia, where French trials are practically unheard of and where French jury trials are restricted to just one jurisdiction, in New Westminster.

Do you think this fact is lost on those arguing for a bilingual Supreme Court?

Perhaps the learned jurists who argue for bilingual judges should be reminded of the principle of the 'balance of inconvenience'

Shutting out highly qualified Anglophone jurists is too high a price to pay for bilingualism. Only about 10 % of anglophones are bilingual as opposed to around 40 % of francophones and the majority come from Quebec. 

The argument being offered by francophones is that the inconvenience should fall on the court, not the appellants, but the vast majority of Canadians are not bilingual and the court should reflect a cross-section of Canada. To be anything else is an 'inconvenience' to Canadians.

By the same logic, one could argue that all members of Parliament should also be bilingual, so that they may understand other member's speeches without any mechanical aid, another patently stupid and antidemocratic idea that would favour the minority over the majority.

The demand for bilingualism is nothing more than another power grab by Quebec to bolster the over-influence that the province already bears on the Supreme Court, a back door attempt that is rightfully and heroically being fended off by the government of the day.

Quebec already enjoys an asymmetrical representation on the Supreme Court with an enshrined right to three out of the nine judges, an over representation of almost 30%.

The debate over Mr. Harper's plan to add 30 more 'anglophone' seats to the federal Parliament is also being assailed in Quebec as inherently unfair.

Bloc Quebecois members are quick to argue in favour of an asymmetrical division of power in Ottawa that would increase Quebec and francophone power beyond that which the demographic numbers would justify, on the basis that it is the only way for francophones to have some level of say in the direction and policies of this country.

Canadians are not an unkind or ungenerous people. The idea of asymmetry could actually fly,  save for the one fly in the ointment.
Quebec too, would have to act in good faith.

For the separatists, it's a case of having one's cake and eating it too. While militating for sovereignty, under any and all circumstances,  they exhort Canadians to be more generous with the division of powers.

Ugh, Ugh.. that doesn't work for the ROC.

As long as Quebec sends separatists to Ottawa, the idea of giving Quebec more than proportional power is  beyond ludicrous and no federal government should ever entertain the notion.

As long as Quebec voters sends separatists to Ottawa, every effort should be made by federalists to limit any courtesy or accommodation.

For Quebec, being an engaged and committed member part of this federation is a prerequisite to obtaining special treatment.

I wonder if these legal eagles who are arguing for an asymmetrical division of power to the benefit of Quebec and francophones would also extend the privilege to the anglophone minority in Quebec.

Anglophone and ethnic voters in the heavily populated urban ridings in the western and central part of the island of Montreal are already penalized in the provincial Parliament by having their vote worth about half of that of francophone voters in ridings in the boonies.

The decidedly anglo riding of Nelligan in the west island of Montreal boasts a voter base of 54,000 compared to just 27,000 in the exclusively francophone Gaspé riding.

Subsequently Anglos and ethnics are badly under-represented in Quebec National Assembly.
Consider that there are less than a dozen bone fide anglos and ethnics in Parliament (Some francophone members claim ethnic roots, they don't count) while demographics dictate that there should be over twenty.

Addressing this injustice (adding four or five new anglophone/allophone seats) would redress the unfair situation and for good measure and in keeping with the policy of asymmetric representation, perhaps even more of these seats could be added, beyond what pure demographics indicate.

This would lead to anglophones and allophones having a much larger say in Quebec's Parliament and is the exact same argument made by francophones who demand asymmetric representation in Ottawa.

Ridiculous? ....You bet.

In Quebec the idea of granting anglophones more voting power is laughable.

In Ottawa, granting francophones more voting power is fair...

Shoe Store Boycott Roundly Defeated!

Hmm... I thought Communists were against child exploitation!

 After the publicity concerning Amir Khadir joining the boycott of a Montreal shoe store by a motley crew of communists and the anti-Israel PAJU organization, the blowback has thoroughly defeated any attempt to make an example of the small merchant by affecting his sales volume. 

Read my post Amir Khadir Helps Terrorize Merchant-You Can Fight Back!

Actually, I stand corrected. The demonstrators and the attached publicity has affected the small store's volume....in a positive way!

Last Saturday, demonstrators who once again tried to keep people out of the store were greeted by Montrealers determined to break the boycott.

Over 150 people showed up and bought shoes, increasing Mr. Archambault's sales volume by 500%..

This wasn't just a reaction by Montreal's Jewish community, Richard Martineau (columnist for Le Journal de Montreal) and his wife went to the store to buy shoes to show solidarity against intimidation..

A typical reaction of those buying shoes was this, by a Montreal Gazette reader;

"I'm off to buy some Israeli made sandals at a store I'd never heard of before." Montreal Gazette

The success or failure of the boycott is not lost on opposing forces.

A successful boycott would have resulted in more intimidation of merchants on St. Denis Street, where PAJU wanted to create an Israeli-free zone. By successfully intimidating a small merchant first, they hoped to trigger a domino effect.

After seeing the sales results, I'm sure other merchants would welcome such a boycott of their premises!!

There was some light scuffling between demonstrates and irate customers, with the latter no doubt looking to start something bigger.  Policeman stopped by sporadically to keep the peace and to limit demonstrators from blocking the entrance.

In a radio interview  the reporter who broke the story, Eric Duhaime, wondered how the protesters were allowed to camp out in front of the store each week, considering that if the merchant put a table of wares out on the street in front of his store, the police would immediately force him to withdraw, under penalty of fine. Hmm..... Listen in French

Curiously, no cameras or reporters were on hand to report the goings-on, not even the English media.

One would expect Radio-Canada the French CBC to avoid any story that showed Mr. Khadir in a bad light.
The vast majority of reporters working at the publicly financed network are bone fide members of the 'Clique du Plateau,' decidedly sovereignist and vehemently anti-Canadian, United States and of course, Public Enemy Number One-Israel.

On Nov. 8, Radio-Canada host Simon Durivage drew an equivalence between Israel, Iran and Sudan on the political talk show 'Le match des élus.' Radio-Canada has since acknowledged that Durivage drew an "inappropriate comparison" noting that "Iran and Sudan were in no way suitable examples." Link Eng...   ...See the subtitled comments on YouTub

Keep shopping!!!!

Amir Khadir Helps Terrorize Merchant-You Can Fight Back!

Amir Khadir & father Jafar (holding sign)

Last Saturday Amir Khadir was out picketing in front of a shoe store on St. Denis Street in the infamous Plateau Mont-Royal district of Montreal.

What was the stores transgression?

......Selling shoes made in Israel.

A coalition of communists and anti-Israeli activists has decided to intimidate the small, family run shoe store by picketing in front of the premises each Saturday afternoon, ever since October.
They accost customers and attempt to convince them not to enter the store, politely, yet determinedly.

At first the boycott organizers claimed that the shoes were made in the 'occupied territories' but when this proved false they fell back on a general plan to make the 'Plateau,' an Israeli product-free zone.

While many other stores sell the Israeli brand of 'Beautifeel' shoes, Yves Archambault's boutique 'Le Marcheur' was targeted because as a small merchant, he is presumed more likely to cave into pressure.

Targeting a small fry is a disturbing and cynical decision that is not going down well with the general public. The Israeli shoes are sold in department stores like The Bay, Mountain Coop Equipment and Chapters/Indigo and the protesters are well aware that efforts to picket theses heavyweights would likely be met by steely corporate resistance, coupled perhaps, with a vicious legal counter-strike.

And so it's more convenient to target the establishment owned by Mr. Archambault, who works the store with his family and typically puts in 60 hours a week. 

His store has sold the shoes for fifteen years and to his credit, he has refused to give in to the pressure to remove the shoes, even though sales generated from selling the shoes amounts to less than 2% of his sales volume.

He told the protesters and anyone who listens that he isn't going to give into blackmail.

  "If they’re so concerned about human rights, I would like to hear what they have to say about human rights in China. I wonder what kind of protest they would make if they knew how much people are being paid to work in Chinese and Korean shoe factories and what those wages mean for the Canadian shoe business.” 

Last Saturday, Amir Khadir joined his father, life-long communist agitator, Jafar Khadir as well as William Sloan, a member of the Communist Party's Central Committee in demonstrating in front of the store. Read the Montreal Gazette article

When asked on the radio what Khadir was doing there, the man in charge of the boycott, Bruce Katz, a self-loathing Jew and founder and spokesman for Montreal’s PAJU (Palestinian and Jewish Unity,) claimed that Khadir just happened to be walking by and stayed to show support for the boycott. This was a blatant lie as witnesses and pictures show Khadir all bundled up in winter wear, prepared for the hours he spent outside the shop hassling shoppers.

If you understand French, watch this excellent report.

Once he realized that the public wasn't thrilled with a small merchant becoming the target of a vicious boycott, Khadir changed his tune. He told reporters that he only told people not to buy the Israeli product, another blatant lie, as witnesses reported that Khadir tried to get them not to enter the store. He then said that he'd like to meet with the store owner, who upon being informed, told reporters he didn't see much point.

"Embarrassed by his active presence in a demonstration urging a boycott of a shopkeeper in his constituency, Mr. Amir Khadir tried to explain yesterday, citing a "terrible misunderstanding" between him and the shoe salesman Yves Archambault."....

"Changing his tone, Amir Khadir claimed to be ready to "encourage people to go into the shop (Le Marcheur) to buy something other than Israeli products. "

However, the owner of the store is adamant that the member of the National Assembly verbally encouraged customers not to enter his store. LINK Fr

Khadir may have over-played his hand this time, mainstream reporters, not just the likes of Eric Duhaime, who has been just about the only high profile columnist who has taken on Khadir, are now starting to take notice of Mr. Khadir's agenda.  Read Eric Duhaime's column in French

"Do you share with your communist comrades a deep hatred of democracy? Does your primary hatred of Zionism hide more sinister designs?...

....Why only boycott products from Israel? Why not protest outside the consulate of Iran, Russia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Libya, Burma, Sudan?

Don't Iranian homosexuals condemned to death by hanging deserve your support, Mr. Khadir? Are Saudi women who need permission of a man in order to receive treatment in hospital not worthy of your compassion?

Why do you always demonstrate against Israel and the United States (democratic countries have had governments of both right and left) and never the Islamic countries (which, as everyone knows, are a paradises of human rights.) Your compassion seems to be double standard? " Richard Matineau Journal de Montreal

The publicity surrounding the boycott has triggered an anti-boycott reaction.

You don't have to be a supporter of Israel to know that targeting a small fry like Mr. Archambault is cruel.

I've heard many of our readers exclaim frustration at not being able to affect any real change, that one person's effort is meaningless.

Here's a real chance to prove that idea wrong.

If enough people rise to fight the boycott, it will turn into a fiasco. If demonstrators see clients visiting the store with the express reason of defeating their efforts, it is we that can prevail.

Believe me, rewarding Mr. Archambault for standing firm against extortion is a noble gesture that we can all perform. Each purchase is an act of resistance. Other merchants will take note, when they too are threatened.

Nobody is calling for confrontation with demonstrators, unlike the countries which these Islamo-communists militate for, Canada allows for freedom of assembly and expression.

The biggest punishment is to have the boycott trigger a wave of buying.

Even if you have never done a political thing in your life, here is your chance.

If you are local, you can visit the store and buy a pair of shoes. It doesn't have to be the Israeli shoe, any brand that you buy is an act of boycott-busting.

You or your loved one will forever enjoy wearing them and can imagine that each step that you take in those shoes is like stepping on the heads of these extremists bastards.

"While he (Archambault) doesn’t know what kind of effect the weekly demonstrations are having on his business, both he and his partner, Ginette Auger, said many of their customers make a point of telling them how they came to buy something in his store as a protest against the boycotters." Suburban

If you believe that this boycott is wrong and you if don't act, don't bitch in the comments section about how unfair everything is.

Visit the store's website here.

If you can't buy something, send a message of support. Here's the email address of the store.

If you are a reader that opposes Israeli policy, that is your right.

If you are a reader that believes that targeting and terrorizing a small merchant is fair, kindly piss off......

Further reading:
Amir Khadir Has a Lot to Hide

Terrorist Inspires RRQ Intimidation Campaign

Today the word 'terrorist' is bandied about flippantly to describe just about anybody who uses force of arms in any context at all and ranges from the extreme to the benign.

Recently in Quebec, Marc Lepine the serial killer in the École Polytechnique massacre, was described as a terrorist instead of the deranged and disturbed killer that he was. Un acte terroriste antiféministe, 

Colonel James Angus, at the opposite end of the scale of violence was described as a terrorist for his decidedly angry rants against Francophones.  
Canada is often described by nationalists as a 'terrorist' state.Canada - un État terroriste.

In Quebec, everyone seems to fit the label of terrorist, except the actual few who fit the definition, like FLQ members who actually perpetrated over 300 acts terrorism, including over two hundred bombings.

One such a man  is  Rhéal Mathieu, a FLQ member who in 1967 was sentenced to nine years in prison for terrorist activities including murder. Because of his unrepentant attitude, he served the whole sentence before being released.
After seemingly having been rehabilitated, he was given a pardon for his 'youthful indiscretions' but in the year 2001 he was again convicted and served time for being involved in the terrorist fire-bombing of the three Second Cup coffee shops over language issues, this time under the guise of another terrorist group, the Brigade d'auto-défense du français (BAF)  Read an interesting article describing Mr. Mathieu

Mr. Mathieu is also a prolific contributor to vigile.net where he continues to spout his radical agenda.

In light of the recent letter campaign, aimed to intimidate large Quebec Liberal Party donors, Mr. Mathieu proudly recounts how in 1998 he undertook another letter campaign, eerily similar to the one waged by the RRQ. Link fr


The 1998 letter-bombing campaign consisted of a group of militants hand delivering letters to Westmount addresses.
In Mr. Mathieus own words on vigile.net;

"In support of the letter campaign that the RRQ sent to Liberal party donors, I am reminded of a similar gesture made by the MLNQ (Mouvement de Liberation National du Quebec) on 17 May 1998. This date was the 35th anniversary of 'Operation Mailbox' in Westmount, led by the Front de Liberation du Quebec (FLQ) ,on  May 17, 1963: 10 bombs, 5 blasts, a Canadian army officer severely wounded."

And so this letter campaign conducted by the MNLQ was to commemorate and honour the 1963 terrorist attack.  Hmm...

"The MLNQ therefore decided to use this anniversary, to place in the mailbox of virtually every citizen of Westmount, a circular which you will find the text in the attached file ."

Click to Download the letter (French

 The letter, written in French, also sported the familiar 'Patriote" bearing arms, as you can clearly see in the attached copy .
The letter chastised the city of  Westmount and particularly Mayor Peter Trent for passing a resolution in favour of partition in the event of Quebec sovereignty.

"Indeed, you must think  about what you do when Quebec becomes a sovereign state. You should think carefully before acting, because if your city tries to partition, it is likely that your life will become hell. Your situation could be similar to that of American hostages in the embassy in Tehran, or at best, that of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip ."

It's pretty clear that today's RRQ letter bombing campaign aimed at Liberal donors is nothing more than a repeat of the 1998 action in Westmount.

If you don't remember the 1998 incident, don't worry, time has proven how event-changing the action really was- zero.
The same can be said for the current letter-bombing campaign, its no big deal.

Like the 1998 action, it is essentially a masturbatory effort meant to titillate and thrill those in the radical separatist movement. As for changing minds either in Westmount or among Liberal donors, the effect will be almost negligible.

If you are worried that the RRQ, an organization that has devilishly hinted at violence, but cleverly  never taken that step, now boasts a real terrorist among its ranks, don't be concerned.

The organization remains under strict watch by security services especially the Surete du Quebec who has no doubt placed many agents within its membership. I dare say that when Patrick Bourgeois orders take-out, the Surete listeners are commenting among themselves over his choice.

There's little doubt that there's nothing the RRQ can plan, or do, that the forces of order don't know about. The first whiff of real violence will trigger an arrest wave unseen since the October Crisis.

The RRQ is painfully aware of this fact and limits itself to bellicose roaring that can be safely ignored.

In his article Mr. Mathieu proclaims his letter-bombing campaign a stunning success. Why, I don't know, Westmount never did reverse its partition resolution.

Perhaps he measures success in the ability to deliver a letter. If that's the case, he could have been just as successful using the post office, just like the RRQ.

He categorized  the Westmount Anglos as 'paper tigers' but the reality is that the term more appropriately describes the RRQ, an organization full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

They are without a doubt a bunch of modern chikenshit pseudo-revolutionaries, nothing like militants of the past. They haven't got the stones.

The RRQ today is nothing more than weekend revolutionaries, who discuss independence over $5 lattes in coffee shops and Internet forums.
The sad part is that they are given so much play by the press, they are nothing.

Ignore them and they will talk only to themselves.

In fact, the next time they make a threat of violence, its time to face them down, the promise of confrontation more frightening to them than to the police.

To them I say;

Come on down, let's rumble!

More Cries of Francophone Discrimination In The NHL

Last year Bob Sirois, an ex-NHLer wrote a book entitled Le Québec mis en échec (Quebec Body-checked) that put forward the theory that Francophone Quebeckers are systematically discriminated against by NHL teams that prefer Anglophone Canadians over all others.
Using a variety of statistics he showed that this discrimination works against Francophones and players from Europe.
That book has now been translated into English under the title Discrimination in the NHL, although I can't imagine who'd read it, certainly not NHLers, who are, to say the least, not particularly scholarly.
Read my post about that book.. NHL Francophone Conspiracy Theory

For regular readers, you'll understand that I don't put much stock in statistics, they can be made to support just about any crackpot theory one can imagine.
I've read blog pieces wherein the author has claimed with statistical certainty that francophones dominate the NHL beyond their demographic numbers and I've even seen lists that include Roberto Luongo designated as a francophone...Argh....

I'm not conceding that francophones are under-represented in the NHL, but even if they were, so what?

The NHL is a business and the players chosen to represent teams are picked not only for their ability to contribute on ice, but also on their attraction to fans and ability to generate fan interest. Let us remember that 29 out of the 30 franchises are in North American English markets and must satisfy that fan base.

Let me ask readers who are hockey fans a legitimate question;
If you were a general manager and had the choice of acquiring Sydney Crosby or Alexander Ovechkin, who would you pick?
Forget for a moment that Crosby is having a career year and Ovi an off year, historically both players have been neck and neck.
I'm sure that you, as well as the thirty general managers in the NHL, would all choose Crosby. While the on-ice talent may be similar, Crosby is light years ahead of Ovechkin in marketability and the  all-Canadian kid is a natural franchise builder. Not only is Ovechkin slightly challenged in the looks department, his command of English is off-putting and so it's natural that fan interest does not rise to the same level as for Crosby.
I would venture to say that even if this year's numbers were reversed and Ovi was blazing out ahead of Crosby, Sydney would still be a more valuable commodity to any NHL team.
That's just reality.

Before I get into the argument between francophones and anglophones, I'd like to say that this discrimination business just doesn't hold up.

Sports and entertainment are the two fields where talent wins out. When Jackie Robinson broke the colour barrier in baseball, it wasn't because of altruism on behalf of the Brooklyn Dodgers owner, Branch Rickey, it was because he believed Robinson could help his team win and it was worth the effort to suffer the consequences of racism.
Today times have certainly evolved, Blacks are over-represented in all the major sports of football, baseball and basketball. Does that mean that Whites are being discriminated against?

Today's NHL has an over representation of francophone goaltenders, likely because Quebec junior hockey is the best breeding grounds for their development in the world. On the other hand the Western Hockey leagues consistently produces the NHL's best defenceman. Why?..... dunno.
Francophones are well represented in the coaching and management ranks of the NHL. If there was discrimination wouldn't it start at the top?

There has been talk that the Quebec junior league, the QMJHL, is just not as good as the two other leagues in Canada, the Western Hockey League and the Ontario Hockey League. This opinion is hotly denied by francophone apologists but consider that in the annual tournament between these three major junior hockey leagues held annually to determine the best junior team in Canada,  the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League has the worst record amongst the three leagues.  Ever since the Memorial Cup expanded to four teams, here are the winning number of championships per league.

WHL -    15 Memorial Cup championships
OHL -      9 Memorial Cup championships
QMJHL - 4 Memorial Cup championships

It’s pretty difficult to dispute those numbers, but of course somebody will.

Mr. Sirois predicted that the QMJHL would be humiliated again in the selection of Canada's Junior Team, set to compete against the world starting on Boxing Day. It didn't happen, with four players being selected to the team yesterday, not a shabby outcome.

At any rate, let's get back to the notion of Anglophone teams preferring Anglophones over Francophones or European talent. I've never heard an anglo sportswriter or hockey official enunciate that position, but I have heard francophone sportswriters making the case that the Montreal Canadians should hire more francophone players.

By far the most vociferous proponent of this concept is blowhard sports writer  Réjean Tremblay of La Presse, who has been screaming for more francophones on the Canadiens.

"À talent égal, on prend un francophone. Et en corollaire, on s'arrange pour ne pas échapper un seul bon franco au repêchage." 
 (Faced with equal talent, take the francophone. Never let a good francophone draft choice go) LINK 

Makes sense to me.
Quebec fans want to see more local talent that they can identify with. It makes for a better fan experience and will help increase fan loyalty.

Why is it okay for the Montreal Canadians to want to hire more francophones as opposed to the Toronto Maple Leafs wanting to hire more anglophones?

I suppose there will be someone in the comments section who will make the argument that it isn't the same thing at all and Quebec is a special case.

Yup, poor Quebec is always a special case.