Sandra Finley

Dec 162016
 

(I thought I had posted about this Movie “No” after I watched it.  If so,  I can’t find the posting.  I am interested in how governments are changed.  This article from “The Atlantic” is good, re Chile and Pinochet.)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Pablo Larraín’s recent film borrowed from the actual effort to depose Pinochet, but reality was far messier than a catchy ad campaign.

by Olga Khazan

 

bernalno.jpg

Actor Gael Garcia Bernal of Chile’s Oscar entry “No” answers questions during the Foreign Language Film photo opportunity for the 85th Academy Awards in Hollywood, California, on February 22, 2013. (Reuters)

 

It’s been quite the year for historical half-truths in movies: First Argo inflamed debate about the actual Iranian hostage crisis. Then, Zero Dark Thirty was accused of glorifying torture’s role in capturing terrorists. And now, some Chileans are wondering why a new arthouse film makes it seem as though their country was liberated thanks to a modified soda-pop jingle.

 

In the new film NO, the rule of Augusto Pinochet ends after Chile’s voters get inspired by a peppy ad campaign designed by a skateboarding, politically agnostic ad executive named Rene, played by Mexican actor Gael Garcia Bernal.

 

To the tune of a catchy theme song, Rene’s ads promise Chileans a brighter, happier future without Pinochet (and apparently one filled with horse-riding couples and sexy dancers). Voters take him up on it, showing up at the polls in droves and deposing the dictator with a 56 percent “No” vote in the 1988 plebiscite.

The movie was shot with a retro camera to give the appearance of authenticity and even included period footage of Pinochet and the ads themselves.

But in reality, the struggle to depose Pinochet and return Chile to democratic governance was a decades-long slog in which dozens of opposition leaders toiled to register voters, hammered out a platform, and persuaded bitter enemies to work together.

 

Of course, NO is just realistic fiction. The film is loosely based on a play called The Plebiscite, by Chilean writer Antonio Skármeta. NO’s director, Pablo Larraín, described the film in aNew York Times interview as “a strange balance between documentary and fiction,” and said that “the way things happen in the movie is not exactly the way they were, but the facts are the same.”

The movie is something of a love letter to democracy — it’s produced in part by Participant Media, the same movie house behind other social-action flicks like Waiting for Superman and Food, Inc. And the movie plot does adhere to a few realities. Chile’s landmark 1988 plebiscite was a referendum in which citizens were given a choice over whether to end the dictatorship for the first time since the 1973 coup.

 

Vote “Yes,” and Pinochet would stay in power for another eight-year term; vote “No,” and the country would hold free elections.

 plebisciteballot.jpg

Pinochet was one of the continent’s most brutal rulers: His government “disappeared” about 3,000 of his political opponents, arrested more than 30,000, and cast away more than 200,000 others to live in exile.

 

But after 16 years of living without democracy, it was surprisingly hard to convince Chileans to pick another alternative. Rival anti-Pinochet parties had been feuding for years about whether a potential future new government would be pro-Western or Marxist. Many citizens were afraid to vote altogether, thinking it might cause them to be targeted, and some doubted the idea that Pinochet would honor the results of the vote.

pinochet.jpg

Augusto Pinochet. (Reuters)

 

In the weeks leading up to the vote, each side — Yes” and “No” — was given 15 minutes of TV advertising time each night. The pro-Pinochet side alternated between cloying propaganda and foreboding images warning of an apocalyptic post-Pinochet future. Meanwhile, the campaign led by a coalition of opposition parties — the “No” — did in fact concoct a positive, joyful ad campaign, and Chileans did, for a number of reasons, overwhelmingly vote down Pinochet.

“But what led up to that last 30 days was only the last snapshot of a very long struggle,” said Ken Wollack, head of the National Democratic Institute, which helped to set up election monitoring during the plebiscite.

NOmovie-114.jpg

 

Genaro Arriagada, right, director of Chile’s “No” campaign, speaks with Chilean opposition leader Sergio Bitar during a panel on March 26, 2013 in Washington. (Joy Asico)

 

I sat down with the director of the real “No” campaign, Genaro Arriagada, to talk about what life was actually like leading up to the plebiscite. Here are four surprising elements of that were left out or glossed over in the film version:

 

The guy who came up with the No campaign wasn’t an outsider:

 

In the movie, the slogan the No campaign dreamt up — La alegría ya viene (“Joy is coming”) — is ripped straight from the actual commercials the campaign ran. But the heads of the campaign didn’t bring in a random local ad man to do it. Instead, American consultants helped the Chileans run focus groups, and they found a happy message resonated better than one centered on Pinochet’s human rights violations.

 

Frank Greer, head of the political communications firm GMMB, traveled to Chile at least six times in 1987 and 1988.

“We received assistance from the Soros Foundation to hire a group of people who went to Chile to make focus groups. They proved that if you want to win, it’s necessary to have a moderate message. And of course, we have some people to the far left who say, well, I don’t agree with this, so they were put out of the coalition,” Arriagada said.

The opposition parties were arch-rivals that had to learn to agree:

 

Arriagada and his colleagues worked for years to bridge differences between 17 different groups who all had visions for what Chile should be after Pinochet. Some wanted Pinochet supporters punished, but the No campaign organizers knew they could never win unless they assured regime backers of their safety after Pinochet’s fall.

 

“Pinochet had the support of the upper class and business community. Our conviction was that if we … put in jail or in exile the people of Pinochet, that will be the end of the country. It was necessary to have room for everybody,” he said.

 

“This was a matter of creating tolerance between former enemies. About building a country in which you can have a place. Even if you are coming from Pinochet or other parties, we are trying to build a fatherland for all. But that moderation was not discovered in the last 30 days, or even the last year. It was a long, long road that took at least 10 years.”

 

Some parties even suggested abstaining from the plebiscite entirely, thinking that would be the best way to signal their belief that Pinochet’s government was illegitimate.

 

“But my recommendation in any place is that you should go to an election, even if you are defeated, you must participate,” Arriagada said.

 

The ad wasn’t the most important part:

 

Before voting day on Oct. 5, 1988, the No coalition led a massive grassroots effort to register 92 percent of the electorate — a registration drive that both Wollack and Arriagada said was a turning point.

“Pinochet who had the support of all of the army and the support of the business community. We had the students, we had human rights, we had a very well-structured political parties, and we had the people in the streets in order,” Arriagada said.

 

Chileans didn’t know right away who won:

 

Pinochet’s camp had plans to incite rioting and disorder should the “No” camp win, according to a Defense Intelligence Agency document, and President Reagan had tried to prevent that possibility, warning Chilean police to uphold the results.

“President Pinochet should also be informed that nothing could so permanently destroy his reputation in Chile and the world than for him to authorize or permit extreme violent and illicit steps which make a mockery of his solemn promise to conduct a free and fair plebiscite,” the American talking points read.

 

The plebiscite was monitored extremely closely, with vote counters at each of the more than 10,000 polling stations. When it became obvious to Pinochet’s supporters that the opposition had won, at around 7:30 that evening, the government hesitated to release the results and instead began airing cartoons on the state broadcast channels. At first, there were fears that Pinochet would not honor the results.

 

“And in that moment, there was a very deep split in the regime – some who wanted to recognize the defeat, and some who wanted not to recognize it,” Arriagada said. Pinochet tried forcing the military to give him “extraordinary powers” to cancel the vote, but top generals refused

 

“At midnight, the military generals appeared on TV, and they said, they are defeated,” Arriagada said. “I will say that of course we were extremely happy with this, but at the same time, it was the beginning of something that was completely unknown.”

Dec 152016
 

Hi Tyler,

In follow-up to your email of  November 29th  (We hope to have the Plaintiff’s Affidavit ready for you before the new year.)

  1. My documents are pretty much ready to go.
  1. I had time today to satisfy my curiosity regarding process.

You may wish to know:   I googled “Canada Law Extortion Abuse Justice System”.   The first thing that came up and the only link I looked at is a Government of Canada, Department of Justice website:  A Handbook for Police and Crown Prosecutors on Criminal Harassment.    The  (last) Date modified is 2016-04-27, a “Print Screen” of the top of the page is appended.   http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/fv-vf/har/part1.html

I only had time for quick skim.   And for “search page”  for the word “Extortion”.   You’ll find it under 1.6.1      So far (I will read more),  I view it in the context of:

  • my email to you of November 28,   I propose that the Expedited procedures for claims under $100,000.00 set out in the “New Rules”, July 2013, would be appropriate)  and 
  • your reply of November 29, It is our position that it would be inappropriate for this matter to proceed expeditiously, for the following reasons:   
    1. This claim could easily exceed $100,000.00, . . .

My calculation of how you arrived at $100,000 is this:

There are 3 potential financial streams:

  1. I pay to settle
  2. LFC pays to settle and
  3. lawyer expenses.

How would those be apportioned?   . . . It is documented that when the Plaintiff threatens different people that he will sue them,  he consistently says it will cost them (a number that is more than $20,000) in legal bills.

So:

  1. the lawyer expenses part of the pie is roughly $25,000.
  2. Which leaves approximately $75,000 to bring us to your figuring This claim could easily exceed $100,000.00,
  3. The obvious split is: Sandra will be forced to settle for $50,000 or more.  LFC will be forced to settle for $25,000 or more,  making up the $75,000

I presume you are aware of the history of Court awards in cases of Defamation, a few thousand dollars at most for ordinary citizens, if they are found to be guilty.

Perhaps you are junior counsel, as is Rachelle for senior counsel Paul Wagner (representing LFC) and  as was Samuel for Grant Scharfstein representing me.

To my way of thinking, and I could be completely wrong:    this is a matter for discussion with a supervising senior,  but perhaps that has already been done.   I don’t know when “settlement” becomes “extortion”,  but I do know that participation in extortion is a serious criminal offence.  The Handbook confirms it.   I hope this is helpful.

I remain committed to my reply to you, November 29.   As I view it, it’s your call, and I have no desire to contest your decision which would only bring about more delay and expense.

From: Sandra Finley
Sent: November 29, 2016 6:00 PM
To: ‘Tyler Dahl’ <tdahl@cuelenaere.com>
Subject: RE: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. NEXT STEP

Thanks for your reply Tyler. 

No problem.   We will proceed as you and your client wish – – to Questioning and pre-trial conference.

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley

APPENDED  PRINT SCREEN

Dec 092016
 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/washington-state-sues-monsanto-over-pcb-pollution/

The Associated Press

 

SEATTLE – Washington has become the first U.S. state to sue the agrochemical giant Monsanto over pervasive pollution from PCBs, the toxic industrial chemicals that have accumulated in plants, fish and people around the globe for decades. The company said the case “lacks merit.” 

Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee and Attorney General Bob Ferguson announced the lawsuit at a news conference in downtown Seattle Thursday, saying they expect to win hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars from the company. 

“It is time to hold the sole U.S. manufacturer of PCBs accountable for the significant harm they have caused to our state,” Ferguson said, noting that the chemicals continue to imperil the health of protected salmon and orcas despite the tens of millions of dollars Washington has spent to clean up the pollution. “Monsanto produced PCBs for decades while hiding what they knew about the toxic chemicals’ harm to human health and the environment.” 

PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyls, were used in many industrial and commercial applications, including in paint, coolants, sealants and hydraulic fluids. Monsanto, based in St. Louis, produced them from 1935 until Congress banned them in 1979. 

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PCBs have been shown to cause a variety of health problems, including cancer in animals as well as effects on the immune, nervous and reproductive systems. 

Monsanto spokesman Scott S. Partridge said in a statement that the “case is experimental because it seeks to target a product manufacturer for selling a lawful and useful chemical four to eight decades ago that was applied by the U.S. government, Washington State, local cities, and industries into many products to make them safer. PCBs have not been produced in the U.S. for four decades, and Washington is now pursuing a case on a contingency fee basis that departs from settled law both in Washington and across the country. Most of the prior cases filed by the same contingency fee lawyers have been dismissed, and Monsanto believes this case similarly lacks merit.” 

In response to a similar lawsuit filed last year by the city of Spokane, Washington, Monsanto said a previous incarnation of the company produced the PCBs, which it said “served an important fire protection and safety purpose.” 

“PCBs sold at the time were a lawful and useful product that was then incorporated by third parties into other useful products,” Charla Lord, a company spokeswoman, wrote. “If improper disposal or other improper uses created the necessity for clean-up costs, then these other third parties would bear responsibility for these costs.” 

Several other cities – including Portland, Oregon, and Oakland, Berkeley, San Jose, Long Beach and San Diego, California – have also sued Monsanto over PCB pollution, the Attorney General’s Office said. Those cases are ongoing. 

Ferguson, a Democrat, pointed to internal Monsanto documents that show the company long knew about the danger the chemicals posed. In 1937, an internal memo said testing on animals showed “systemic toxic effects” from prolonged exposure by inhaling PCB fumes or ingestion. In 1969, a company committee on PCBs noted, “There is too much customer/market need and selfishly too much Monsanto profit to go out.” 

“There is little probability that any action that can be taken will prevent the growing incrimination of specific polychlorinated biphenyls … as nearly global environmental contaminants leading to contamination of human food (particularly fish), the killing of some marine species (shrimp), and the possible extinction of several species of fish eating birds,” a committee memo said. 

Nevertheless, Monsanto told officials around the country the contrary. In a letter to New Jersey’s Department of Conservation that year, Monsanto wrote, “Based on available data, manufacturing and use experience, we do not believe PCBs to be seriously toxic.” 

Ferguson said that infuriated him. He noted that his great-grandparents settled along Washington’s Skagit River in the late 19th century. The Skagit was one of more than 100 water bodies in the state listed in the lawsuit as being polluted with PCBs. 

“That river, the Skagit River, which my family depended on to a great degree in the 19th century as they homesteaded here, is now contaminated by PCBs, as are the fish,” he said. “That makes me mad.” 

Ferguson said his office had been in touch with counterparts in other states, but it remained unclear if other states would follow Washington’s lead in suing the company. 

Washington’s lawsuit seeks damages on several grounds, including product liability for what it described as Monsanto’s failure to warn about the danger of PCBs; negligence; and even trespass, for injuring the state’s natural resources.

Dec 082016
 

THE LAWSUIT:  Saleh v. Bush

BACKGROUND:  2016-09-04   Iraqi Woman Uses Chilcot Report in War Crimes Lawsuit Against George W Bush, Truthout

Note:  the link at the bottom of the article, to the Oct 24th decision by the Court:  the application to enable use of the Chilcot Report was denied.

UPDATE:  from  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saleh_v._Bush  (Wikipedia)

Saleh v. Bush was a class action lawsuit filed in 2013 against high-ranking members of the George W. Bush administration (including George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, and Paul Wolfowitz) for their alleged involvement in premeditating and carrying out the Iraq War. In December 2014, the district court hearing the case ordered it dismissed with prejudice. The dismissal was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. . . .

On July 22, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a motion for judicial notice, submitting excerpts from the Chilcot Report in support of their claims.[4]

Oral argument was held on December 12, 2016, before Judges Susan Graber, Andrew Hurwitz, and Richard Boulware, heard thirty minutes of oral arguments on December 12, 2016.[d][e]

On February 10, 2017, the Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the judgment (INSERT:  dismissed with prejudice) in an opinion by Judge Graber.[5][6]

RELATED:  

= =  = = = = = = = = = =

California Court confirms judges who will hear argument on legality of Iraq War December 12

George W. Bush war crimes trial given go-ahead in California court

The United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit today (Dec 5) confirmed that Judges Susan Graber and Andrew Hurwitz will hear arguments on December 12, 2016, in the case of Saleh v. Bush.

Witnessiraq.com reports:

San Francisco, Calif. — Today the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit confirmed that Circuit Judges Susan Graber and Andrew Hurwitz, as well as District Court Judge Richard Boulware (sitting by designation) will hear oral argument on December 12, 2016, in Saleh v. Bush.

Saleh v. Bush involves claims by an Iraqi woman, Sundus Shaker Saleh,  that former President George W. Bush and other high ranking Bush-era officials broke the law when they planned and waged the Iraq War.

Saleh alleges that former Bush Administration leaders committed the crime of aggression when they planned and executed the Iraq War, a war crime that was called the “supreme international crime” at the Nuremberg Trials in 1946.

Saleh is appealing the immunity provided to the Defendants by the district court in December 2014.

“We are pleased that the Ninth Circuit will hear argument. To my knowledge, this is the first time a court will entertain arguments that the Iraq War was illegal under domestic and international law,” Saleh’s attorney D. Inder Comar, legal director at Comar LLP, said. “This is also the first time since World War II that a court is being asked to scrutinize whether the war itself was an illegal act of aggression — a special war crime that was defined at the Nuremberg Trials in 1946.” Comar is handling Saleh’s case pro bono.

Assuming the oral argument takes place, the argument will be live streamed and recorded on the  Ninth Circuit’s YouTube channel, permitting members of the public to watch the argument. The Court’s calendar commences at 9:00 a.m. Pacific Time on December 12th; the case will likely be heard later in the morning, as it is last on the Court’s calendar.

In addition to former President Bush, Saleh has named former Administration officials Richard Cheney, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz as defendants in the case.

In December 2014, the district court dismissed Saleh’s lawsuit, holding that the defendants were immune from further proceedings because of the federal Westfall Act of 1988 (28 U.S.C. § 2679). The Westfall Act immunizes  former federal officials in civil lawsuits if a court determines that the official was acting pursuant to the legitimate scope of his or her employment.

Saleh disputes the immunity, arguing that the planning and waging of a war of aggression against Iraq fell outside the legitimate scope of employment of former President Bush and the other defendants.

 

= = = = = = = = = = = =

I commented  (edited):

Thank you very much for this information.   And the earlier report that the Court denies entry of the Chilcot Report (UK).   The decision is  (I don’t know the right word).   If it is “to be expected” then where are citizens?  Why do people put up with a justice system that is not just?

I helped with the efforts in Canada to get Bush / Cheney arrested when they thought they could come here and be celebrities flogging books.    They no longer come;  at the last visit, protesters blockaded Cheney at a venue in Vancouver,  for 7 hours.

I try to maintain a list of the various efforts around the World to bring these war criminals to justice  (see  Arrest George Bush.  Rule of Law critical to Democracy).   Sundus Shaker Saleh together with Comar Law  is an important addition.   Bless her and bless you for making this story known.

Dec 012016
 

July 21, 2022  Note

In the materials Tyler submitted to the Court re Sandra Finley (2022), to substantiate my Contact Info (Service of Documents),  he excerpts from an email I sent him.

A single page, an email I sent to Tyler following the Mediation on November 22, 2016.  It says, “Thanks for your email of Dec 7.” And is dated December 10-16.   He used that to substantiate my email address.

It is part of an exchange I initiated with Tyler in the week after Mediatio

Maybe I will have the opportunity to refer to Tyler’s evidence – – he confirmed that he participated in the email exchange.

EXCERPTS, FINLEY TO DAHL (full email below), 2016 

  • The rule-makers would not construct Rules that have no application.  . . . How is the Rule, procedurally, brought to bear?

5-3(1) The Court may modify or waive any right or power pursuant to a rule in this Part or make any order warranted in the circumstances if:

a person acts . . .  in a manner that is vexatious, evasive, abusive, oppressive, improper or tediously lengthy; 

 

  • I respect the intelligence of your client (Ashu Solo).  His actions on November 22 (Mediation) were effective.  Numerous times he has claimed knowledge of the law (I can provide those statements).  But you don’t actually need to be conversant with the intricacies to know that if you do what he did,  the Mediation would be drawn to a close, which is exactly what happened. 

 

  • My turn to speak was taken away because of actions specifically described in 5-3(1).   You will of course know that under the Constitution Act, Section 2,  I have the Right to express myself.   Where could that be more critical than in legal proceedings?

 

  • Why would the Plaintiff risk doing what he did when there were witnesses in the room? Do the cost-benefit-risk analysis.

The cost:  5 credible witnesses observe you (Ashu Solo) in action.

The benefit:  the defendant is prevented from being heard.

The risk:  little, because what is said and done in Mediation is inaccessible at Trial.

 

But again,  rule-makers do not construct Rules that have no application.   The (confidential) information must be sealed in a form satisfactory to the local registrar or a judge when filed,  .  .  .

 

Since my proposed  application has no hope of succeeding  – – (your words, thank-you)   – –   I have been reading more to understand an alternate way in which the intention of the Law and Rules can be achieved.

 

It is obviously not the intention that persons can use abusive, oppressive actions and knowledge of how the system works to silence the testimony of others.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

From another communication to Tyler: 

Search:   “Canada Law Extortion Abuse Justice System”.

Result:  Government of Canada, Department of Justice website:  A Handbook for Police and Crown Prosecutors on Criminal Harassment.    The  (last) Date modified is 2016-04-27,   http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/fv-vf/har/part1.html

 

Search page:  for the word “Extortion”.

It’s under 1.6.1      I view it in the context of:

 

  • my email to you of November 28,   I propose that the Expedited procedures for claims under $100,000.00 set out in the “New Rules”, July 2013, would be appropriate)  and

 

  • your reply of November 29, It is our position that it would be inappropriate for this matter to proceed expeditiously, for the following reasons:   
    1. This claim could easily exceed $100,000.00, . . .

 

  • My calculation of how you arrived at $100,000 is this:

There are 3 potential financial streams (for you): 

  1. I pay to settle
  2. LFC pays to settle and
  3. lawyer expenses paid by your client, maybe out of the settlement he receives, I don’t know.

 

How would those be apportioned?   . . . It is documented that when the Plaintiff threatens different people that he will sue them,  he consistently says it will cost them (a number that is more than $20,000) in legal bills.

So:

  1. the lawyer expenses part of the pie is roughly $25,000.
  2. Which leaves approximately $75,000 to bring us to your figuring This claim could easily exceed $100,000.00, 
  3. The obvious split is: Sandra will be forced to settle for $50,000 or more.  LFC will be forced to settle for $25,000 or more,  making up the $75,000

 

I presume you are aware of the history of Court awards in cases of Defamation, a few thousand dollars at most for ordinary citizens, if they are found to be guilty.

 

I don’t know when “settlement” becomes “extortion”,  but I do know that participation in extortion is a serious criminal offence.  The Handbook confirms it.   (A Handbook for Police and Crown Prosecutors on Criminal Harassment.)

 

I remain committed to my reply to you, November 29.   As I view it, it’s your call, and I have no desire to contest your decision which would only bring about more delay and expense.

 

From: Sandra Finley [mailto:sabest1@sasktel.net]
Sent: November 29, 2016 6:00 PM
To: ‘Tyler Dahl’ <tdahl@cuelenaere.com>
Subject: RE: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. NEXT STEP

 

Thanks for your reply Tyler. 

No problem.   We will proceed as you and your client wish – – to Questioning and pre-trial conference.

– – – – – – – – – – –

Nothing happened.  Until now.   Five years later.

It’s not about Justice.  It’s about using the Justice System, with impunity,  as a tool of threat and coercion.

– – – – – – – – – – –

From: Sandra Finley [mailto:sabest1@sasktel.net]
Sent: December 10, 2016 11:53 AM
To: ‘Tyler Dahl’ <tdahl@cuelenaere.com>
Subject: RE: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. CHANGE

Hi Tyler,

Thanks for your email of Dec 7.   (2016)

By next week I expect to respond more fully with an alternate proposal to my Dec 6 email to you.

My thinking:

  • A role of the Justice system is to help achieve “Peace, order, and good governance”.
  • The rule-makers would not construct Rules that have no application.  I just have to figure out how the Rule, procedurally, is brought to bear.

5-3(1) The Court may modify or waive any right or power pursuant to a rule in this Part or make any order warranted in the circumstances if:

a person acts . . .  in a manner that is vexatious, evasive, abusive, oppressive, improper or tediously lengthy; 

  • I respect the intelligence of your client.  His actions on November 22 (Mediation) were effective.  Numerous times he has claimed knowledge of the law (I can provide those statements).  But you don’t actually need to be conversant with the intricacies to know that if you do what he did,  the Mediation would be drawn to a close, which is exactly what happened.
  • My turn to speak was taken away because of actions specifically described in 5-3(1).   You will of course know that under the Constitution Act, Section 2,  I have the Right to express myself.   Where could that be more critical than in legal proceedings?
  • Why would the Plaintiff risk doing what he did when there were witnesses in the room?   Do the cost-benefit-risk analysis.   The cost:  5 credible witnesses observe you in action.  The benefit:  the defendant is prevented from being heard.   The risk:  little, because what is said in Mediation is inaccessible at Trial.    But again,  rule-makers do not construct Rules that have no application.   The (confidential) information must be sealed in a form satisfactory to the local registrar or a judge when filed,

Since my proposed  application has no hope of succeeding  – – (your words, thank-you)   – –   I have been reading more to understand an alternate way in which the intention of the Law and Rules can be achieved.

It is obviously not the intention that persons can use abusive, oppressive actions and knowledge of how the system works to silence the testimony of others.

Best wishes,  Sandra

From: Tyler Dahl [mailto:tdahl@cuelenaere.com]
Sent: December 7, 2016 10:42 AM
To: Sandra Finley <sabest1@sasktel.net>
Subject: RE: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. CHANGE

 

Hello Ms. Finley,

Thank you for your email.

I strongly recommend that you seek legal counsel with respect to your desire to expedite the trial process. Your email mentions bringing a court application under Part 5 of the Queen’s Bench Rules. However, Part 5 is concerned with the disclosure of information stage of the proceedings and not with expediting matters.

In particular, Rule 5-4(2), which you mention, has no application to the privileged communications that took place in mediation; rather, it applies to the information and documents referred to in Rule 5-4(3), none of which have been produced in this case.

So too, Rule 5-3(1), which you mention, applies to modifying or waiving a right or power with respect to the disclosure of information. It is my opinion that this case requires the disclosure of information and documentation in order for all parties to identify what is in dispute and what evidence is available about the dispute.

Accordingly, my client will vigorously oppose the application that you described in your email. We suggest that you refrain from making unnecessary applications that lack merit. Otherwise, my client and Loose Foot Computing will be put to unnecessary expense, which will undoubtedly result in costs being awarded against you. Furthermore, since your application has no hope of succeeding, we will serve a formal offer in response to any such application, in order to be awarded double costs.

Govern yourself accordingly,

 

Tyler M. Dahl, B.A., J.D.

Cuelenaere, Kendall, Katzman & Watson

#500, 128 – 4th Avenue South

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan  S7K 1M8

Phone: (306) 477-7260

Fax: (306) 652-4171

Email: tdahl@cuelenaere.com

www.cuelenaere.com

 

“WITHOUT PREJUDICE”

 

CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING

 

This message and any attachments are solely for the use of intended recipients. They may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you received this email in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachments associated therewith from your computer. Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated.

 

From: Sandra Finley [mailto:sabest1@sasktel.net]
Sent: December-06-16 1:42 PM
To: Tyler Dahl <tdahl@cuelenaere.com>
Subject: RE: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. CHANGE

 

Hi Tyler,

I rescind the agreement I communicated to you on November 29th:    We will proceed as you and your client wish – – to Questioning and pre-trial conference.

It was made in a state of ignorance.

Under the circumstances I seek to go directly to trial.   I see where the Rules provide for protection against more of the abusive, oppressive and improper behavior exhibited by the Plaintiff at Mediation (5-3-1).

There is also provision for information from Mediation that would is confidential under normal circumstances (5-4-2).

Today,  I spoke with the Court of Queen’s Bench, Deputy Registrar.   It is agreed that I will send the Notice of Application for remedy (straight to trial) with any references to information from Mediation in a sealed, marked envelope.

I will get the documents to the Court as soon as possible.

Thanks  Tyler,

Sandra Finley

—–Original Message—–
From: Sandra Finley [mailto:sabest1@sasktel.net]
Sent: November 29, 2016 6:00 PM
To: ‘Tyler Dahl’ <tdahl@cuelenaere.com>
Subject: RE: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. NEXT STEP

Thanks for your reply Tyler.

No problem.   We will proceed as you and your client wish – – to Questioning

and pre-trial conference.

/Sandra

—–Original Message—–

From: Tyler Dahl [mailto:tdahl@cuelenaere.com]

Sent: November 29, 2016 10:33 AM

To: sabest1@sasktel.net

Subject: RE: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. NEXT STEP

Hi Sandra,

Thank you for your email. I spoke with my client about your proposal, regarding going forward under the rules for expedited proceedings. It is our position that it would be inappropriate for this matter to proceed expeditiously, for the following reasons:

  1. This claim could easily exceed $100,000.00; 2. The parties will benefit from examinations for discovery, as the factual circumstances are largely in dispute between the Plaintiff and both Defendants; and 3. The parties will benefit from hearing from a Judge at a pre-trial conference, with respect to the trial’s possible outcomes and the strengths and weaknesses of their case/defence, which may increase the likelihood of resolving the matter without the need for a trial.

Nevertheless, my client does not wish to delay the proceedings in any way.

Accordingly, he has begun assembling his documentation for the Affidavit of Documents. We have already requested that Loose Foot Computing do so as well, and now we are requesting the same from you. We hope to have the Plaintiff’s Affidavit ready for you before the new year.

Once the Affidavits of Documents have been filed, we will attempt to schedule Questioning between the parties as soon as possible, while accommodating your and Loose Foot’s availability.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best regards,

Tyler M. Dahl, B.A., J.D.

Cuelenaere, Kendall, Katzman & Watson

#500, 128 – 4th Avenue South

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan  S7K 1M8

Phone: (306) 477-7260

Fax: (306) 652-4171

Email: tdahl@cuelenaere.com

www.cuelenaere.com

“WITHOUT PREJUDICE”

CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING

This message and any attachments are solely for the use of intended recipients. They may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you received this email in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachments associated therewith from your computer. Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated.

—–Original Message—–

From: sabest1@sasktel.net [mailto:sabest1@sasktel.net]

Sent: November-28-16 4:08 PM

To: Tyler Dahl <tdahl@cuelenaere.com>

Subject: Solo v. Finley, QB 500 of 2015. NEXT STEP

Hello Tyler,

The Dispute Resolution Office has submitted its certificate to the Court; the way is clear to move forward to the next step

I propose that the Expedited procedures for claims under $100,000.00 set out in the “New Rules”, July 2013, would be appropriate.

The pre-trial Questioning (formerly Examination for Discovery) and Pre-trial Conference with a judge can be skipped.

I wish to proceed directly to trial, under the Expedited procedures.

Please confirm that your client wishes to do the same.

Thank-you and

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley

— – —  – – –

Tyler M. Dahl, B.A., J.D.  . . . .

Oct 272016
 

 

‘They couldn’t have chosen a worse place for an industrial facility’

by Nika Knight, staff writer

(NOTE:  Search this blog on “Skeena”.  We joined others as long ago as 2007 to protect this River.)

The Skeena River, in British Columbia

The Skeena River, where Canada’s second largest salmon run occurs each year, is to be the site of a liquefied natural gas project worth $11 billion. (Photo: Frank Carter/Getty Images)

 

In an effort to block a massive liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility that threatens one of Canada’s most critical salmon habitats and the livelihood of local First Nations, several Aboriginal and conservation groups in British Columbia filed multiple lawsuits against the Canadian government in a Vancouver court Thursday.

“We feel like this is the absolutely right thing to do for today and and for future generations. If we lose these salmon runs, we’d lose a critical part of who we are.”

—Greg Knox, SkeenaWild

 

The Gitwilgyoots tribe of the Lax Kw’alaams, the Gitanyow First Nation, and SkeenaWild Conservation Trust are hoping the last-ditch effort will prevent the project, valued at $11.4 billion CAD, from ever being built.

The facility is to be built near Saint Rupert, B.C., at the mouth of the Skeena River, which hosts Canada’s second largest salmon run. It also falls within Lax Kw’alaams traditional territory on Lelu Island and the adjacent Flora Bank, as Common Dreams reported.

 

“They couldn’t have chosen a worse place for an industrial facility,” Greg Knox, director of SkeenaWild, told Common Dreams in an interview.

The lawsuits allege that the government’s environmental assessments of the project were deeply flawed, and that the impacted First Nations were not adequately consulted.

The Lax Kw’alaams famously turned down a $1 billion payout to approve the project last year and refused to grant approval for the project to move forward. Yet despite such opposition, the federal government went ahead and approved it last month.

 

“We had a couple meetings in June and July, but the material and research we put forward with respect to this project was minimized or denied,” Chief Malii, chief negotiator for the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs, told the Vancouver Metro. “It wasn’t meaningful consultation.”

The suits will name Petronas, the company with a majority stake in the project, as an associated party, the groups told Reuters.

A ceremony was held outside of the courthouse to celebrate the filing:    (short video at the URL)

 

The plaintiffs were encouraged by the success of a similar legal challenge that defeated Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, another massive fossil fuel project, earlier this year. The Petronas LNG terminal poses no less a threat to the environment and Aboriginal rights, the groups say.

“The place where they’re proposing the plant is where the young salmon, the juveniles, come,” Knox explained, explaining that the young salmon stay in the area for an extended period in order to adjust to salt water before swimming out to sea. “Anywhere from 300 million to 1 billion juvenile salmon live here for several months of the year,” he said.

Knox noted that because “all of the salmon from a huge watershed” come and live at the river’s mouth for months, the proposed project will significantly impact even those Aboriginal communities hundreds of miles upstream of it, who rely on the fish for sustenance.

Moreover, the conservationist alleged that “the federal Canadian government knew that this was a terrible place for an industrial facility dating back 40 years.”

A government-sponsored study carried out in the 1970s found that “this was the most important salmon habitat on the coast,” he said, and the government concluded that “if a major industrial facility was built, the salmon would be seriously impacted.”

Yet the current government’s environmental assessments for the LNG project concluded that the massive facility would cause “no significant impacts” to fish.

Of the Liberal cabinet’s approval for the project, Knox observed that “so far what we’ve seen is massive lobbying from the oil and gas industry, and the government seems to be caving to their pressure. They’re not following through on their elections promises that they made.”

However, Knox added, “it feels good [to be a part of this fight]. We have a lot of support from these local communities and from the Aboriginal groups that we’re working with. We feel like this is the absolutely right thing to do for today and for future generations. If we lose these salmon runs, we’d lose a critical part of who we are.”

– – –

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

Oct 272016
 
Media Blackout as Militarized Police Begin Clearing DAPL Protest Camp

by Deirdre Fulton

‘We will be peaceful, we will be prayerful, we will not retreat’

 

There are a number of videos for viewing at the above link (Media Blackout).   The text of the article appears below.

There are 2,000 people in solidarity, now at the protest camp  (Oct 27, 2016).

 

I don’t get it why anyone would criticize these people for standing up to protect their water supply.

Through the years, on this blog we’ve documented stories of other people whose water supply has been poisoned by the petro-chemical industry.

  • At some point the people have to leave,  unless you are willing to sacrifice your children and your livelihood.   The health outcomes are terrible – – recorded in other postings.  (Search this blog on any of Sarnia, ON  (Aamjiwnaang),  Niger Delta (Ogoni),  Ft Chipewyan (Denesuline (Chipewyan).   Jessica Ernst, Rosebud AB.   How many examples are required?  

 

 

Law enforcement lined up at the reclaimed frontline camp. (Screenshot: Atsa E'sha Hoferer/Facebook)

Law enforcement lined up at the reclaimed frontline camp. (Screenshot: Atsa E’sha Hoferer/Facebook)

Update, 2:30pm EDT:

Arrests have begun at the recently erected frontline camp in the path of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), as police and military move in on Indigenous water protectors and their allies in North Dakota.

With law enforcement seemingly interfering with cell signal, it is difficult to get a live feed from the ground. Some social media users were able to post video and updates from the scene:

Earlier:

Indigenous water protectors and their allies are prepared for a crackdown by law enforcement on Thursday, vowing to hold ground they reclaimed through eminent domain last weekend despite threats by Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) developer Energy Transfer Partners and local officials.

 

Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners warned on Tuesday that demonstrators occupying land in the pipeline’s path—land to which both the corporation and local tribes lay claim—must leave or face prosecution. The new frontline camp sits just north of the main protest camp on federal land near Cannon Ball, a town about 50 miles south of Bismarck.

The Associated Press reported:

Law enforcement officials demanded that the protesters leave the private land on Wednesday, but the protesters refused. It appeared only thick fog and cloudy skies kept a large contingent of law enforcement officers from moving in. Officials have frequently monitored protesters by air.

According to a separate AP report:

Cass County Sheriff Paul Laney told reporters that authorities don’t want a confrontation but that the protesters “are not willing to bend.”

“We have the resources. We could go down there at any time,” he said. “We’re trying not to.”

Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier said authorities would continue to try for a peaceful resolution but that “we are here to enforce the law as needed.”

But the activists have refused to bend. The Bismarck Tribune quoted protest organizer Mekasi Camp-Horinek, of Oklahoma, as calling out, “No surrender, no retreat!” as he walked away from the negotiations with top law enforcement officials on Wednesday afternoon.

The Tribune reported:

Camp-Horinek said he told police the group did not intend to relocate, then warned protesters to expect 300 officers to remove everyone from the camp and take them to jail.

“We will be peaceful, we will be prayerful, we will not retreat,” he said.

“We’ve got to make our bodies a living sacrifice,” John Perko, a demonstrator from South Dakota, told the newspaper. “This is the most honorable thing I could be doing right now.”

Another member of the movement, Didi Banerji, who lives in Toronto but is originally from the Spirit Lake Sioux reservation in North Dakota, told the AP: “I’m here to die if I have to. I don’t want to die but I will.”

Meanwhile, also on Wednesday, the Morton County sheriff’s office—which the Guardian notes “has been leading the police response to the demonstration and conducted mass arrests over the weekend”—announced that the use of dogs by private security guards against protesters last month was potentially illegal. 

The sheriff’s office reportedly determined that “dog handlers were not properly licensed to do security work in the state of North Dakota” and passed the results of its investigation along to to the Morton County States Attorney’s Office and the North Dakota Private Investigators and Security Board for possible charges.

Private security workers were continuing to monitor water protectors on Wednesday afternoon, Leota Eastman Iron Cloud, a Native American activist from South Dakota who has been at the protests for months, told the Guardian by phone. “We’re watching them watching us.”

– – – – – – – – –  — – – – –

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

 

 

Oct 202016
 

“It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us.  We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life—daily and hourly. Our answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual.”

Man’s Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl  (short and cheap!).   His most famous book.

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

Or, try The Meaningful Man,  a CBC podcast about Frankl’s work, the Sunday Edition, Michael Enright, Oct 9, 2016.     I highly recommend it.  http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/news-from-the-red-desert-dead-mom-talking-man-s-search-for-meaning-1.3794516/the-meaningful-man-1.3794527 

– – – – – –

Or, this 3.5 minute video:

“Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue.”

– – – – – –

he gives the example of two suicidal inmates he encountered there. Like many others in the camps, these two men were hopeless and thought that there was nothing more to expect from life, nothing to live for. “In both cases,” Frankl writes, “it was a question of getting them to realize that life was still expecting something from them; something in the future was expected of them.” For one man, it was his young child, who was then living in a foreign country. For the other, a scientist, it was a series of books that he needed to finish. Frankl writes:

This uniqueness and singleness which distinguishes each individual and gives a meaning to his existence has a bearing on creative work as much as it does on human love. When the impossibility of replacing a person is realized, it allows the responsibility which a man has for his existence and its continuance to appear in all its magnitude. A man who becomes conscious of the responsibility he bears toward a human being who affectionately waits for him, or to an unfinished work, will never be able to throw away his life. He knows the “why” for his existence, and will be able to bear almost any “how.”

– – – – – – – –

“By declaring that man is responsible and must actualize the potential meaning of his life, I wish to stress that the true meaning of life is to be discovered in the world rather than within man or his own psyche, as though it were a closed system. I have termed this constitutive characteristic “the self-transcendence of human existence.” It denotes the fact that being human always points, and is directed, to something or someone, other than oneself–be it a meaning to fulfill or another human being to encounter. The more one forgets himself–by giving himself to a cause to serve or another person to love–the more human he is and the more he actualizes himself. What is called self-actualization is not an attainable aim at all, for the simple reason that the more one would strive for it, the more he would miss it. In other words, self-actualization is possible only as a side-effect of self-transcendence.”
― Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning

 

“A man who becomes conscious of the responsibility he bears toward a human being who affectionately waits for him, or to an unfinished work, will never be able to throw away his life. He knows the “why” for his existence, and will be able to bear almost any “how”.”
― Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning
“Love goes very far beyond the physical person of the beloved. It finds its deepest meaning in his spiritual being, his inner self. Whether or not he is actually present, whether or not he is still alive at all, ceases somehow to be of importance.”
― Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning

– – – – – – – – –

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/01/theres-more-to-life-than-being-happy/266805/

Oct 202016
 

The Police Officer will do a good job.  But at the root?   it’s not actually his job.

 

The growth of gangs is a symptom that tells us we are failing.  So how do we get a passing grade?

A fundamental responsibility of our communities is to provide the stew to nourish our individual toddlers into adulthood, to empower them to develop their gifts.

Simply so they may experience comfortable pleasure in greeting others and know the joy of giving.

A lot of work is required to improve our communities.   The souls who can do it are with us.

Our job is to remove the shackles that place them in a situation where their needs are met in the community of a gang, on a path of self-destruction.

My contribution is to pass along what I learned from a community in South Africa, in a way that will hopefully be helpful for reaching a passing grade.   I don’t have any more answers than you have.  I know less than the Police Officer;  but I do know that his job is impossible without our attention (discussion), at minimum.

There was a time when we didn’t have the large problem we have today with gangs (and the concomitant drugs).

The gangs are the result of a need that kids have;  our communities aren’t delivering.

The evolution of gangs as an answer for the kids is probably a natural evolution under the conditions.

The lesson taught to me by an unknown South African points in a direction I would not have thought of for some of the answers. 

 

 

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

PREFACE

The Canadian ideal is  peace, order and good governance.  

The American ideal is  life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Viktor Frankl :   I recommend that the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast be supplemented by a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast.

Viktor Frankl:    Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue.   

 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Oct 19th  CBC Radio,  On the Island,  Gregor Craigie interviewing.

 

 

The Police Officer (whose name I didn’t catch, sorry)  commented on the motivation that leads some young men, boys, to join gangs.

 

If we can get the answer and response to that right,  more young men will have the opportunity to contribute.  They will help to build better communities instead of contributing to the deterioration towards violence.

 

At a basic level the things that erode the  peace, order and good governance  of a community will have commonality with other communities of human beings.    In the 1990’s  we went to a community-constructed Museum housed in a little church in Capetown, South Africa.   Someone had written down their understanding of why the gangs developed.

 

Later, back home in Dartmouth Nova Scotia, boys who were around grade 10 level, from “good” homes, terrorized and trashed;  two of their targets were the children of friends.  The behavior of these kids was almost impossible to make sense of   . . .   until that piece of paper tacked on the wall of the little museum in South Africa floated back into my consciousness.

Memories, observations, reflections had been written and brought to the Museum to form a collective memory and testament to a community that had once existed and obviously been loved.   One of those writings lodged in my brain, the one that recorded the experience with gangs.   I conjecture that the person knew and loved some of the children when they were “good kids” in District 6 and sought to understand how it was that they changed.  Many parents, relatives and friends of our gang members will know that same search for answers.

 

A thriving mixture of people had lived not far from the docks in Capetown – – “District 6”.   Men walked to work, loading and unloading cargo at the docks.   At home, shopkeepers, repairmen, women buying fresh vegetables and meat moved about the streets.  Kids attended school.  In the evenings someone strummed a guitar, there was rhythm, laughter and chatter.  On Saturday night the music-makers coalesced in the school hall.  From the very young to the very old, the members of the community came together to talk, to dance and have fun.  Nobody wanted to miss the weekly happening. It was a vibrant community with solid values.

 

I think you will come to see that although their material circumstances were very different from ours, the roots of their gangs are not altogether different from the roots of our gangs.

 

The Police Officer told your listeners that gang members in B.C. are from many backgrounds.   He singled out the fact that some are from well-to-do families.    And named a couple of the kids as examples of those who – – you struggle to understand – –  and conclude they are motivated by greed alone.  (Read on.  That conclusion might appear to be the case but it’s not at the root.)

 

The people whose lesson I remember were Poor, as categorized by others.  Prior to the evolution of gangs, their photos and stories  tell of a community rich in things not measured:  self-sufficiency; looking out for each other;  integrity; a healthy, diverse, supporting community.   Some of our Canadian  gang members come from poor backgrounds, too.

 

I will return to the influence of the stew we feed our kids – – But keep in mind:  you can be measured if your transactions go through the cash register.  Otherwise you can’t be.  Our economic system categorizes you as “poor” if you grow your own food, make your own music, and build your own home – –  no matter how finely crafted, the aesthetics and the value.  No matter how meaningful it is for you to make a home for your family, and to prepare good food for them.   What has meaning is not counted.  You move up the ladder, you contribute to economic growth through the “more” you buy – – it can be measured and reported through the cash register.   If YOU create – – – oops and damn!   Added insult:  because of advertising we assign value and “must have” status to – – – I am laughing now – – – you will have your own crazy examples.  The fad passes and the doll is in the dumpster.

Some part of a child can be moulded.   Another part is highly intuitive.   Viktor Frankl writing about unemployment and depression at one point draws in “the young”:

depression  . . .  insofar as the feeling of meaningless is concerned, however, we should not overlook and forget that, per se, it is not a matter of pathology;  rather than being the sign and symptom of a neurosis, it is, I would say, the proof of one’s humanness.  But although it is not caused by anything pathological, it may well cause a pathological reaction; in other words,  it is potentially pathogenic.  Just consider the mass neurotic syndrome so pervasive in the young generation:  there is ample empirical evidence that the three facets of this syndrome — depression, aggression, addiction – – are due to what is called . .  the “existential vacuum”, a feeling of emptiness and meaninglessness.

It goes without saying that not each and every case of depression is to be traced back to a feeling of meaninglessness, nor does suicide   ….  

 

Returning to South Africa:

The development of gangs for those who were removed from District 6  in Capetown can be dated back to 1966.   The Museum records  (Caution:  “The Cause”  comes later – – to my understanding, THIS IS NOT IT!):    

On 11 February 1966 it (District 6) was declared a white area under the Group Areas Act of 1950, and by 1982, the life of the community was over.  More than 60 000 people were forcibly removed to barren outlying areas.

(Black people had been removed decades earlier.  Whites coveted the area;  “the “coloreds” were removed in 1966.  Most of the homes and buildings were bull-dozed.  The church was not.).

 

The memory of the “used-to-be” and loved community did not die.   Even though its inhabitants were dispersed and impoverished, post-apartheid they created this moving Museum.   They brought their old pictures.   There are ragtag pieces of paper with hand-writing and words to match the diversity of the recorders who tacked their memories to the walls and other surfaces in the church.

As mentioned,  one of those recorders helped me and my friends make sense of the gang behavior of a small group of boys from Dartmouth; that story follows.  First:

The story of the District 6 children and the rise of gangs goes like this, fleshed out and in my words:

 

The forced removal meant that the men could no longer walk to work.   Which meant the addition of relatively large transportation costs.  Work plus commute time meant the removal of the male influence and role in the family, the weakening of connection with him.

 

On break-even budgets as dock-hands, the new need to buy transportation meant that the women had to find jobs that generated cash.  One paycheque was no longer enough.  Consequence:  the women were now effectively removed and disconnected in the same way the men were removed and disconnected from the family.

 

The lack of local shops with fresh food, the all-consuming time demands of work and commute – – long days  – –  meant that the nutritional needs of everyone suffered significantly.

The changed structure of the economy meant there were now few caretakers, how could there be?

 

There was no community – – the removal from District 6 was to large settlements with many strangers.

 

The recorder understood the deterioration in behavior of the kids,  the roots of gang culture and its companion violence in this context:

Children pretty much had to fend for themselves.   And they did – –  in the way that was available to them.

 

Younger and vulnerable kids had to find protection.  The family was no longer able to provide that to them – – but gangs of kids with older ones in charge, could.   (Compare this with – – next story – –  the intervention of a mother in the Dartmouth situation.)

“Younger kids” become “older kids” and move up while new young kids come in below.   The system serves a need; it perpetuates.

 

The Dartmouth experience goes like this:

 

My friend’s son was small for his age.  His home was within walking distance of the school.   A group of three boys “from good homes in the suburbs” singled him out to be one of them, a friend.   They came home with him one lunch-time.   His Mother was happy to see him with friends and invited them to have lunch.   She is health-conscious;  they ate well.    And they came back.  This woman worked part-time;  on a noon-hour when she was not there they emptied the fridge.    The Mother sat down with her son when it became obvious that these were free-loaders, not friends.

 

The son’s response:  do you think I don’t know that?   Do you think I invited them?   He reluctantly told her what was happening.  They followed him out of the school and attached themselves to him.  He was forced into the spikes of a hawthorn hedge if he resisted them.  From the first day, they ran him by terrorizing him.   When she knew all this, the Mother put an end to it.

 

But “the gang” just moved on to another kid who lived near the school.   Both parents worked outside the home;  there were no adults in the house at lunch-time.  “The gang” ate;  they shook up pop bottles and sprayed the sticky liquid over the walls and ceiling.  Ketchup was used to make designs on the walls.  They found the assignment that their new-found “friend” had just completed in time for the teacher’s deadline.  They tore it up.   Each of these boys had material abundance at home and specifically received money to buy their lunches.

 

Of course,  there was discussion about going to the parents of the gang members.   Someone offered that it had been tried.  Another offered that both parents had demanding jobs;  their participation in the school community, if it happened, came in the form of a cheque.   Less important people than they had time to do the volunteer work that makes the community tick.  Another offered that anything that might be considered as criticism of one of the kids would definitely be interpreted by the parent as criticism.  No matter how tactful,  the parent would become angry and defensive of the kid, no matter what he had done.   It would be someone else’s fault.   The parents had some influence – – you don’t talk about them or their children.   There was fear of retaliation on my friends’ kids,  by the bullying boys if the parents or the school was approached.

 

I think the boys in Dartmouth told us something.  And the something has only worsened in the time since.  There is complexity, of course.   But we are overlooking or denying significant roots of the problem.   It is often easier to see things in the microcosm (Dartmouth and a 3-member gang) than it is to observe in the macro.   The  gang in Dartmouth  had a number of factors in common with the gang members in the re-settlement of District 6.   An economic structure that achieves “growth” on the backs of the children.

 

William Golding’s Lord of the Flies – – even boys from English private schools don’t retain the veneer of civilization in which they’ve been steeped, when left to their own devices.

The wisdom recorded in the District 6 Museum is that children need the protection and guidance of a community of adults.  If they don’t receive that, they must find ways to protect themselves, and they do, simple as that.   The gang, the tribe, extracts a heavy price for its protection.

 

 The problem is not the kids.   It is the adults.  

Viktor Frankl:   I recommend that the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast be supplemented by a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast.

As I read it, the American dream of “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness” has created what is more accurately described as a nightmare.

Frankl:   Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue.   

Chinua Achebe (now deceased) was interviewed by the BBC in 2008.   He clarifies:

1.    The culture that children are immersed in will be reflected in the children of that culture.   

It is not the kids, the gang members, who created our culture.  The adults did – – whether through inaction, or through participation.

In Achebe’s words:

. . .  actually the story of Okonkwo (his book, “Things Fall Apart”) is almost like a parallel story to the story of his community.    His community is not very gentle in its behavior.  The cruelty that we see in Okonkwo is actually a reflection of cruelty in the society itself.    The crimes Okonkwo commits, in the sort of cosmic sense, the crime against women – –  in a way his community is also guilty of this.  It’s not  a question of which one was it that caused the falling apart.  It’s this complex of events.  And then you add onto it the invasion of the community by Europe (and later American imperialism).  So it’s when you put all this together that you say, this is why things fall apart   

 

2.    There is a failure in Leadership:

QUESTION:   . . .   And I just wanted to know what you attribute as the reason for things falling apart in present-day Nigeria? 

ANSWER:   My analysis is that it’s bad leadership.    By leadership I don’t mean just one person, the president or the prime-minister, but I mean a whole class of leaders,  leaders in different spheres who have fallen short of their responsibility.   If you look at what is going on now in Nigeria I sometimes wonder   Where are the people?  I mean educated people.  Nigeria has the resources, human and material,  to a degree that would make many, many countries envious  and yet   why are they allowing themselves to be bullied,  to be  bullied by one dictator or a bunch of dictators?   I don’t know   I think we have not got it right.

Our “leaders” and “influential people” by-and-large come from the Universities – – the “educated people” who Achebe refers to.

Have a look at this failure in leadership, if you can stomach it:   2016-10-20 University of Ottawa won’t commit to investigating sexualized pub crawl

 

Returning  to the stew we feed our children and the reminder that our economy is based on “rich or poor” measured by what goes through the cash register:

The absence of a connected and effective  community of adults, the caretakers of the kids, means a severance in transmission of knowledge from one generation to the next.   The knowledge of what’s important in life.

The question has been thought about by people for literally thousands of years.  Some of the thinkers were and are pretty smart people.   But even without them,  we know.   The ponderings that have been accepted and that have endured, that have been passed down generation-to-generation for literally centuries – –   as far as I can see,  all have arrived at what is basically the same conclusions when answering “what’s important in life”?   The invention of cash registers did not change the conclusions.

If we break the inter-generational transmission and enactment of that knowledge,  if we instead feed our kids the stew of violent sexualized western pop culture,  that is what kids will reflect back to us – – our culture.

Canadian culture, for as long as I’ve known, has been summarized as “Peace, Order and Good Governance“.    Our kids probably think it’s “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”.  A hedonistic failing state having its last orgy judging by the U of Ottawa video.   I remind myself of all the wonderful young people I know who will be as disturbed as I am by the U of Ottawa.   They, too, are our culture being reflected back to us.   If we don’t engage alongside them in a renewal process,  the descent swamps the boat.

To attain the passing grade, maybe we should all start by reading    Man’s Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl  (short and cheap!).      Or, try The Meaningful Man, a CBC podcast about Frankl’s work, I highly recommend it.   See  Viktor Frankl   – – I will continue to add items.   At the top of the page:

“It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us.  We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life—daily and hourly. Our answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual.”

 

The children of District 6 absorb imported western pop culture through ubiquitous television and electronic devices, their “baby-sitters” by necessity.   “Poor” homes almost all have TV’s.   Our culture has been swamped by the material and meaningless, normalized in North America, inescapably violent.   The documentary film “Bowling for Columbine” by Michael Moore which followed the first of the murderous attacks on school children in the U.S.  masterfully portrayed, if you wanted to see it, the systemic but veiled violence in “American” culture.  The film identifies root causes.   Judging by the results – –  the thought and resources that went into the film were a wasted effort by Moore.

 

The evolution of gangs is a symptom of our failures – – the adults.  The situation at the U of Ottawa reflects the failures of adults.   We are the ones responsible for rearing our children.

Rachel Carson observed:   Those who dwell…among the beauties and mysteries of the earth are never alone or weary of life.

The Africans provide insight.   But do we want to acknowledge or to learn?    Denial is an obstacle to addressing the growth of violence that comes with gangs in our communities.

 

I recently read  Midnight in Mexico: A Reporter’s Journey Through a Country’s Descent into Darkness,  2014,  by Mexican-American  Alfredo Corchado.

Mexico is our partner, along with the U.S., in NAFTA.  This book does an excellent job of presenting the Mexican experience of gangs grown so large that they go by a different name:  cartels.  We know of the violence in the U.S..  Canadians are skating on very thin ice if we think we can “leave it to police to deal with”.

The lessons make clear that the Police are unfairly tasked with solving the gang problem.   It is a societal problem.   The “economy” was created by us.  We are creatures molded by our economy.  It can be changed by us.   It SHOULD be changed if it is not serving us well.  The wisdom of the ages is that “things” are not the answer.   Yet that is the stew we feed our kids.

 

From the interview with the Police Officer:  the kids from the well-to-do homes seemed to participate in gangs because they are motivated “solely by greed”.   That is an imperfect answer.  What experience do they have with anything else but consumption of things?   They are rated;  they are evaluated by their “things”.  The same applies to the other kids without reference to rich or poor   As with language, they learn culture by absorbing it and then one day they emerge onto a higher plateau with an amazingly well-developed ability to spew it forth.   But what if “the who” of their being has never been a factor in their lives?   What if “the who” of their being, that has never been acknowledged or respected or even sought,  finds no meaning in our culture?   Why would they not gravitate to another culture?

It has to be a “community” of supportive adults.  The presence of adults in the home is not sufficient.   I recall a friend whose father and older brother sexually abused her when she was young   (as an adult she knew she hated her father, but she didn’t know why until the curtain lifted).  The family was European, 6 kids.  Could the Mother have found help to protect this daughter, whether or not she knew what was happening? . . .   The daughter tells the poignant memory of her Mother trying to change the family circumstances.   She packed some things in a small suitcase and was at the short picket fence before the sidewalk.  She didn’t speak English.  She had been isolated in the home looking after the children.  May not have known where to go to find help.  Her kids were crying, pleading with her not to leave.  Her shoulders stooped, her head hung down,  she waited . . .  then turned around and came back.

Today the immigrant adult in the home that speaks little English might have natural brown or dark skin, not “tanned” brown skin.  The mother has friends in her community, is living with a sister-in-law to help make ends meet, but has been struggling for a long time unsuccessfully to help her son who is addicted and in a gang, discovers that her husband is living with another woman when he goes back to China.  Seeing herself as a failure as a mother, a failure as a wife – – what does she do?

Thank-you to the Police Officer for “going public” on his work to reduce the need that kids have for gang families.   It will be to our benefit to prioritize and fulfill our responsibility to our children, which will help him find success and satisfaction, too.   So might we together achieve a passing grade.

Oct 202016
 
Jacques Frémont, president of the University of Ottawa, says the university's student federation is investigating the pub crawl.

Jacques Frémont, president of the University of Ottawa, says the university’s student federation is investigating the pub crawl. (Giacomo Panico/CBC)

University of Ottawa administrators will not commit to investigating the organizers of a now cancelled annual pub crawl, during which students were reportedly encouraged to engage in sexual acts in exchange for team points.

The student federation is investigating instead, said university president Jacques Frémont on Thursday morning.

“We will get in touch with them [the federation] today to see what can be done,” he said.

“The federation and the student association, if they want to conduct an inquiry, I think it’s probably the proper thing to do and we will support them.”

‘A lot of work to do’

Asked if there will be sanctions, Frémont said the university would wait to see how the investigation unfolds, but added that’s not the important issue.

“The main issue is not so much the sanctions — it’s to take stock that we’ve worked very hard for this coming back to school in September. There’s been sessions, we’ve invested money and time, the whole campus came around the new sexual harassment policy,” he said.

“But still, this event happened. I think it shows how deeply entrenched that culture remains on the campus and elsewhere in society, and it shows we have a lot of work to do.”

Yasmine Mehdi

Yasmine Mehdi, a news editor of the University of Ottawa student paper La Rotonde, infiltrated a Vet’s Tour pub crawl on Oct. 7. She has received violent messages and threats since revealing details about the event. (Radio-Canada)

Student journalist infiltrated event

The most recent edition of the pub crawl, known as the Vet’s Tour, happened Oct. 7 and was infiltrated by Yasmine Mehdi, a news editor at the French-language student newspaper La Rotonde, who said she intended to write an article on it.

According to Mehdi, close to 150 participants were handed a list of dares to be performed during the tour of private rooms in bars in Ottawa’s ByWard Market. Those who completed the acts to a judge’s satisfaction received points.

Included on the list of acts was being naked in the bar, performing oral sex on one of the judges, having sex in a bar bathroom and eating a doughnut off a judge’s penis, she said.

Once the details came to light the pub crawl was quickly condemned by the university and the school’s Science Students’ Association, which ran it. Future events have been cancelled, the association said.

Media placeholder

uOttawa president says student federation is investigating 0:19

Receiving threats

Mehdi, meanwhile, has been receiving threats of sexual violence and racial slurs on social media since the story broke.

“So a Muslim now tells CBC that having fun at College & University is against her ethics & morals. According to Sharia Law university students can’t have a good time or party. She wasn’t invited (for obvious reasons) and now has a hate-on for some white kids who drink,” one post Mehdi shared on Twitter reads.

“Sorry Yasmine, in this country your parents immigrated to we drink, we f— & we eat pork. Take your Nazi social control back wherever u came from,” it continues.

University of Ottawa

The University of Ottawa spent a lot of time educating students about sexual harassment and violence this year, according to the university’s president. ‘But still, this event happened.’ (Danny Globerman/CBC)

Backlash ‘absolutely unacceptable,’ university president says

Frémont condemned the backlash against Mehdi on Thursday.

“The comments that were made … against the reporter from the student journal La Rotonde are absolutely unacceptable. Cyberbullying and hate speech have no place on our campus or in our society,” he said.

“I reached out to the reporter to express my deep concern.”

For her part, Mehdi said she expected some backlash but not to this degree.

She’s considering filing a complaint with police, she said.

Event cancelled in 2014-15 but brought back

Elsa Mirzaei, a former president of the Science Students’ Association, brought forward concerns about the event in 2013, then cancelled it while serving as head of the association in the 2014-15 academic year.

In 2013, Mirzaei’s attempts to make the event safer weren’t fully successful.

“Many students who had been around and who had done it before and who were on the executive told me that because the event was happening between consenting adults, that I shouldn’t be worried and that I shouldn’t really impede on the event,” Mirzaei said in an interview.

“In my year, 2013, that’s when the slogan was, ‘It’s not peer pressure, it’s just your turn.’ So I did argue that coercion was involved in this event, but I was shot down by some older male students.”

In 2014-15, other members supported the decision to cancel the pub crawl.

“People were fully supportive of me in that year, which I guess is kind of interesting now, to see certain members who had actually returned from my year, who seemed to continue this event [in 2016]. It was just a shock to me,” Mirzaei said.

Elsa Mirzaei former SSA president Vet's Tour Oct 20 2016

Elsa Mirzaei, a former president of the Science Students’ Association, is ‘shocked’ the pub crawl was brought back after being cancelled in 2014-15. (CBC)

‘Need to be held accountable’

“I have a really hard time believing that the executive didn’t understand the high risk associated with the event. I really have a difficult time believing that it was really worth it for the fun just to put people in those situations of coercion. And I really think that they do need to be held accountable for putting these students [at] risk.”

While it’s unfortunate some students who enjoyed the event are feeling shamed for their sexuality, Mirzaei said the reports of sexual harassment, coercion and assault stemming from the pub crawl over the years made continuing the event “a really irresponsible choice.”

Mirzaei said: “Now that this has happened, I hope it doesn’t come back in future years under a more secretive way, and I hope that the members who were responsible for putting it on really are able to sit down and humble themselves and have some serious reflection about the kind of risk that they were putting people [in].”