In order to add to the wall, select the appropriate option from the pull-down menu above.
2181 Rue de Bordeaux, Delorimier, QC
- Tuesday, May 13, 2008 at 19:12:37 (PDT)
Jeudi le 8 mai, 19h à 21h
Café Culturel Volver, 5604 Parc. Montréal.
Art et Oppression: À quelles fins utilisons-nous l’art?
À quelles fins utilisons-nous l’art? Est-ce dans un but divin et pour adorer Dieu ? Ou pour nous libérer de l’oppression ? Ou encore pour faire de la propagande ? Aujourd’hui et à notre âge, que signifie la création pour nous? Est-ce que l’art existe, tel une force capable de modifier le cours de l’histoire ? Ou l’art est-il simplement devenu un autre bien de consommation que nous produisons, consommons et dont nous débarrassons après usage ? Venez discuter du rôle de l’art dans notre société.
Invités: Pascal Contamine partage son temps entre l'écriture, la mise en scène, l'interprétation, les arts multidisciplinaires et l'enseignement. Il est le fondateur et directeur artistique du CIRAAM, www.ciraam.info. En parallèle, il a développé un grand intérêt pour le mouvement (kalaripayattu, wushu, capoiera, danse, mime...), participé à divers projets multimedia et réalisé deux court métrage.
Ilona Dougherty est directrice exécutive de Apathy is Boring www.apathyisboring.com, un organisme national non partisan dont le but est d’utiliser l’art et la technologie pour réinsérer les jeunes dans le processus démocratique. Elle a récemment été nommée l’une des cinq femmes qui contribuent à changer le monde et est à l’honneur dans le livre Notes form Canada’s Young Activists, publié par Severn Suzuki.
Modératrice: Lynne Cooper sort du lot de par son histoire tout à fait originale: celle d’une immigrante polyglotte chilienne-trinidadienne-britannique, elle est aussi une artiste de scène et de guérilla théâtrale. Elle surfe aux commandes de Santropol Roulant, s’amuse follement dans son rôle de directrice artistique de Sunk in the Trunk et ne se tient plus de joie lorsqu’elle découvre d’autres façons d’utiliser les arts comme outil de développement communautaire.
- Monday, May 05, 2008 at 07:44:26 (PDT)
Mis U lotz Rob!
- Sunday, April 27, 2008 at 10:08:49 (PDT)
Miss U lotz Rob!
- Sunday, April 27, 2008 at 10:08:00 (PDT)
Change the World.
Michelle Spottedhorse.
hey wats up all people out there my name iz michelle and im 14 years old nuttin to say so mabey comment me and ill tell you more but if you a h8a then get the fuck off my page..oh also
Roses are red NATIVES are brown
That's my race so don't fuck around
My NATIVE pride I will not hide
My NATIVE race I will not disgrace
My NATIVE blood flows hot & true
My NATIVE peeps I will stand by you
Thru thick & thin till the day we die
Our NATIVE flag always stands high
I yell this poem louder than all the rest
Cuz every1 knows NATIVES ARE THE BEST!!!
NATIVE pride in my mind
NATIVE blood is my kind
So step aside and let me through
Cuz it's all about the NATIVE crew
Life sucks and then you die
But if you're NATIVE you die with PRIDE!!!!
IF YOU NATIVE AND YOUR PROUD OF IT
SEND THIS TO ALL YA HOMIES THAT YOU KNOW
WHO ARE DOWN WITH THE NATIVE YOU KNOW I BE REPPEN CRIPS CUZ BLOODZ ARE A PIECE OF SHYT
Michelle Spottedhorse says, "I really wish that I HADNT LOST MI BESTEST CUZN ROBERT BETO MANUEL RAMON HE WILL NEVER BE 4 GOTTEN !
- Sunday, April 27, 2008 at 10:04:29 (PDT)
Jeudi le 24 avril • 19h à 21h Café Culturel Volver, 5604 ave du Parc, Montréal.
Art et Oppression: Est-ce que l’argent modifie notre façon de créer?
Nous vivons dans une société où l’art est consommé rapidement. Comment cela influence-t-il la façon dont nous créons? Est-ce que le type de subvention (privée ou gouvernementale) change quelque chose à notre façon de faire de l’art ou au résultat final? Sommes-nous libres de créer ce que nous voulons lorsque l’argent investi dans le projet ne provient pas du créateur lui-même?
- Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 07:01:32 (PDT)
EARTHQUAKE! gimmie that bottle, Schtevie--whole lotta shakin' goin' on--AGAIN.
- Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 23:55:11 (PDT)
- Saturday, April 19, 2008 at 07:15:59 (PDT)
a dark heart burns
celestial sun
- Friday, April 18, 2008 at 20:48:29 (PDT)
.....FREE MY CROWN BOTTLE !!! .........puhleeeezz
- Sunday, April 13, 2008 at 18:57:06 (PDT)
Every once in awhile just let go of the steering
wheel and trust there will be someone to help drive.
Fly on, Little Wing...........
- Saturday, April 12, 2008 at 11:14:16 (PDT)
Hi George that Richard Gere film in "Spring Break in Bosnia" or The Hunting Party" is a cool movie.
Change the World in a Café.
Soufia Bensaïd, via The Metro (Presse papier). 07 April 2008.
Thinking on the University of the Streets Café via Concordia University is about people communicating their Life journey’s knowledge to one another in a free flowing way, that opens us to new awareness. And giving his views in a public place, like a garden of learning, is the formula of a university and it islike no other. The University otherwise: In cafés proposes a new way of learning by participating spontaneously in public conversations in cafes.
"These meetings, everyone can participate. They teach us to commit ourselves with others, to talk and listen to other opinions, "says the fiery coordinator appointments, Elizabeth Hunt, in an interview at Subway. They also learn to demystify the idea that we have to be an expert to give his opinion on a matter that concerns us. "
A concept Montreal: This concept, now widespread in cafes in Vancouver, has sprouted in Montreal in 2003 at Concordia University. The formula is simple: a social issue important, a veteran, two or three special guests who transmit knowledge theoretical or practical, a friendly atmosphere and the world in coffee. All those present can react and embarking on the conversation.
"I emerged from this meeting more informed," said Hani Patric,
Participating in a public conversation about what is on your plate. I changed the way I eat since, I buy more "responsible". Moreover, when the "lay" confront me in relation to it, I am more able to explain the real issues involved, I am more convincing. "
Transforming society ...
When the Institute for Community Development at Concordia University has launched another way: In the cafes, the goal was to create spaces that allow citizens to learn and participate voluntarily to the social dynamics. These exchanges are in fact perceived as part of the process of social transformation of the community.
In a society where people from diverse backgrounds, with bold different cultural baggage, University otherwise: In cafés inspired by the popular education which is transmitted through the floor. "The idea is to give the opportunity for people to talk together and see what kinds of visions and perspectives are issued each other," says the coordinator of these meetings.
Like pubs of yesteryear where members of a group gathered to remake the world, the university differently: in cafes offering Montrealers to continue learning, to go further in their commitment and " deepen their reflection.
"The other side of the coin is that we do not know the impact of these conversations in the community and what people pose in the future," says Mme Hunt.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper slammed for refusing to discipline MP over homophobic slur. The Canadian Press.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is subtly condoning bigotry by refusing to discipline a Conservative MP over a vulgar anti-gay slur, say the Liberals.
Liberal MP Scott Brison, one of several gay MPs, said Harper's refusal to strip Tom Lukiwski MP of his duties as a parliamentary secretary "debases" the institution of Parliament.
The prime minister's "tepid" response to the affair also suggests that "hate prejudice and bigotry are just fine in his Canada," Brison told the House of Commons on Friday.
Lukiwski was caught on videotape during a boozy party at Progressive Conservative campaign headquarters during the 1991 Saskatchewan election. He pontificated about the difference between himself and "homosexual faggots with dirt in their fingernails that transmit diseases."
The Regina MP apologized Thursday and repeated that Friday to the House. In particular, he sought the forgiveness of gay friends and colleagues whom he acknowledged must have been aghast at his comments.
"To them I say, I'm truly sorry . . . To the entire gay and lesbian community, I also want to extend my deepest and most abject apologies."
He said the remarks were "stupid, thoughtless and insensitive," and do not reflect his personal beliefs.
MP Peter Van Loan, the government's House leader, said the government is satisfied that Lukiwski's apology was "quick, complete and unequivocal" and declared the matter closed.
Lukiwski made no attempt to rationalize his remarks or explain the context in which they were uttered. Indeed, he said the gay and lesbian community is justified in being furious with him.
"The comments I made . . . should not be tolerated in any society. They should not be tolerated today, they should not have been tolerated in 1991, they should not have been tolerated in years previous to that."
Lukiwski insisted he is not anti-gay and the comments don't reflect his personal beliefs either then or now.
"Which lends itself to the obvious question . . . if I didn't mean what I said why did I say those things to begin with? The only explanation, Mr. Speaker, that I can give to you and the members of this House is that I was stupid, thoughtless and insensitive."
Lukiwski concluded: "I will spend the rest of my career and my life trying to make up for those shameless comments."
Saskatchewan New Democrats found the videotape of Lukiwski, Premier Brad Wall and others, which contains sexist, racist and homophobic comments.
- Sunday, April 06, 2008 at 06:31:30 (PDT)
The Framing of Immigration.
By George Lakoff and Sam Ferguson
(c) 2006, 2008 The Rockridge Institute.
Framing is at the center of the recent immigration debate. Simply framing it as about "immigration" has shaped its politics, defining what count as "problems" and constraining the debate to a narrow set of issues. The language is telling. The linguistic framing is remarkable: frames for illegal immigrant, illegal alien, illegals, undocumented workers, undocumented immigrants, guest workers, temporary workers, amnesty, and border security. These linguistic expressions are anything but neutral. Each framing defines the problem in its own way, and hence constrains the solutions needed to address that problem. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, we will analyze the framing used in the public debate. Second, we suggest some alternative framing to highlight important concerns left out of the current debate. Our point is to show that the relevant issues go far beyond what is being discussed, and that acceptance of the current framing impoverishes the discussion.
On May 15th, in an address from the Oval Office, President Bush presented his proposal for "comprehensive immigration reform."
The term "immigration reform" evokes an issue-defining conceptual frame - The Immigration Problem Frame - a frame that imposes a structure on the current situation, defines a set of "problems" with that situation, and circumscribes the possibility for "solutions."
"Reform," when used in politics, indicates there is a pressing issue that needs to be addressed - take "medicare reform," "lobbying reform," "social security reform." The noun that's attached to reform - "immigration" - points to where the problem lies. Whatever noun is attached to "reform" becomes the locus of the problem and constrains what counts as a solution.
To illustrate, take "lobbying reform." In the wake of the Jack Abramoff scandal, "lobbying reform" was all the talk in the media and on Capitol Hill. The problem defined by this frame has to do with lobbyists. As a "lobbyist" problem, the solutions focused on Congressional rules regarding lobbyists. The debate centered around compensated meals, compensated trips, access by former Congressmen (who inevitably become lobbyists) to the floor of the Senate and House of representatives, lobbying disclosure, lobbyists' access to Congressional staff and the period of time between leaving the Congress and becoming a registered lobbyists.
Indeed, if the reform needed is "lobbying reform," these are reasonable solutions. But, the term "Congressional ethics reform" would have framed a problem of a much different nature, a problem with Congressmen. And it would allow very different reforms to count as solutions. After all, lobbyists are powerless if there's nobody to accept a free meal, fly on a private plane, play a round of golf in the Bahamas and, most importantly, accept the political contributions lobbyists raise on their behalf from special-interests with billions of dollars in business before the federal Government. A solution could, for example, have been Full Public Financing of Elections and free airtime for political candidates as part of the licensing of the public's airwaves to private corporations. The "lobbying reform" framing of the issue precluded such considerations from discussion, because they don't count as solutions to the "lobbying" problem. Issue-defining frames are powerful.
"Immigration reform" also evokes an issue-defining frame. Bush, in his speech, pointed out the problems that this frame defines. First, the Government has "not been in complete control of its borders." Second, millions are able to "sneak across our border" seeking to make money. Finally, once here, illegal immigrants sometimes forge documents to get work, skirting labor laws, and deceiving employers who attempt to follow the law. They may take jobs away from legal immigrants and ordinary Americans, bear children who will be American citizens even in they are not, and use local services like schools and hospitals, which may cost a local government a great deal. This is his definition of the problem in the Immigration Reform frame.
This definition of the problem focuses entirely on the immigrants and the administrative agencies charged with overseeing immigration law. The reason is that these are the only roles present in the Immigration Problem Frame.
Bush's "comprehensive solution" entirely concerns the immigrants, citizenship laws, and the border patrol. And, from the narrow problem identified by framing it as an "immigration problem," Bush's solution is comprehensive. He has at least addressed everything that counts as a problem in the immigration frame.
But the real problem with the current situation runs broader and deeper. Consider the issue of Foreign Policy Reform, which focuses on two sub-issues:
* How has US foreign policy placed, or kept, in power oppressive governments which people are forced to flee?'
* What role have international trade agreements had in creating or exacerbating people's urge to flee their homelands? If capital is going to freely cross borders, should people and labor be able to do so as well, going where globalization takes the jobs?
Such a framing of the problem would lead to a solution involving the Secretary of State, conversations with Mexico and other Central American countries, and a close examination of the promises of NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank to raise standards of living around the globe. It would inject into the globalization debate a concern for the migration and displacement of people, not simply globalization's promise for profits. This is not addressed when the issue is defined as the "immigration problem." Bush's "comprehensive solution" does not address any of these concerns. The immigration problem, in this light, is actually a globalization problem.
Perhaps the problem might be better understood as a humanitarian crisis. Can the mass migration and displacement of people from their homelands at a rate of 800,000 people a year be understood as anything else? Unknown numbers of people have died trekking through the extreme conditions of the Arizona and New Mexico desert. Towns are being depopulated and ways of life lost in rural Mexico. Fathers feel forced to leave their families in their best attempt to provide for their kids. Everyday, boatloads of people arrive on our shores after miserable journeys at sea in deplorable conditions.
As a humanitarian crisis, the solution could involve The UN or the Organization of American States. But these bodies do not have roles in the immigration frame, so they have no place in an "immigration debate." Framing this as just an "immigration problem" prevents us from penetrating deeper into the issue.
The current situation can also be seen as a civil rights problem. The millions of people living here who crossed illegally are for most intents and purposes Americans. They work here. They pay taxes here. Their kids are in school here. They plan to raise their families here. For the most part, they are assimilated into the American system, but are forced to live underground and in the shadows because of their legal status. They are denied ordinary civil rights. The "immigration problem" framing overlooks their basic human dignity.
Perhaps most pointedly, the "immigration problem" frame blocks an understanding of this issue as a cheap labor issue. The undocumented immigrants allow employers to pay low wages, which in turn provide the cheap consumer goods we find at WalMart and McDonalds. They are part of a move towards the cheap lifestyle, where employers and consumers find any way they can to save a dollar, regardless of the human cost. Most of us partake in this cheap lifestyle, and as a consequence, we are all complicit in the current problematic situation. Business, Consumers and Government have turned a blind eye to the problem for so long because our entire economy is structured around subsistence wages. Americans won't do the work immigrants do not because they don't want to, but because they won't do it for such low pay. Since Bush was elected, corporate profits have doubled but there has been no increase in wages. This is really a wage problem. The workers who are being more productive are not getting paid for their increased productivity.
A solution to the "immigration problem" will not address these concerns because they are absent from the "immigration frame."
Framing matters. The notion of this as "an immigration problem" needing "immigration reform" is not neutral.
Surface Framing: We now turn from conceptual framing of the current situation to the words used and surface frames those words evoke.
The Illegal Frame: The Illegal Frame is perhaps the most commonly used frame within the immigration debate. Journalists frequently refer to "illegal immigrants" as if it were a neutral term. But the illegal frame is highly structured. It frames the problem as one about the illegal act of crossing the border without papers. As a consequence, it fundamentally frames the problem as a legal one.
Think for a moment of a criminal. Chances are you thought about a robber, a murderer or a rapist. These are prototypical criminals, people who do harm to a person or their property. And prototypical criminals are assumed to be bad people.
"Illegal," used as an adjective in "illegal immigrants" and "illegal aliens," or simply as a noun in "illegals" defines the immigrants as criminals, as if they were inherently bad people. In conservative doctrine, those who break laws must be punished - or all law and order will break down. Failure to punish is immoral.
"Illegal alien" not only stresses criminality, but stresses otherness. As we are a nation of immigrants, we can at least empathize with immigrants, illegal or not. "Aliens," in popular culture suggests nonhuman beings invading from outer space - completely foreign, not one of us, intent on taking over our land and our way of life by gradually insinuating themselves among us. Along these lines, the word "invasion" is used by the Minutemen and right-wing bloggers to discuss the wave of people crossing the border. Right-wing language experts intent on keep them out suggest using the world "aliens" whenever possible.
These are NOT neutral terms. Imagine calling businessmen who once cheated on their taxes "illegal businessmen." Imagine calling people who have driven over the speed limit "illegal drivers." Is Tom Delay an "illegal Republican?"
By defining them as criminal, it overlooks the immense contributions these immigrants subsequently make by working hard for low wages. This is work that should more than make up for crossing the border. Indeed, we should be expressing our gratitude.
Immigrants who cross outside of legal channels, though, are committing offenses of a much different nature than the prototypical criminal. Their intent is not to cause harm or to steal. More accurately, they are committing victimless technical offenses, which we normally consider "violations." By invoking the illegal frame, the severity of their offense is inflated.
The illegal frame - particularly "illegal alien" - dehumanizes. It blocks the questions of: why are people coming to the US, often times at great personal risk? What service do they provide when they are here? Why do they feel it necessary to avoid legal channels? It boils the entire debate down to questions of legality.
And it also ignores the illegal acts of employers. The problem is not being called the Illegal Employer Problem, and employers are not called "illegals."
The Security Frame: The logical response to the "wave" of "illegal immigration" becomes "border security." The Government has a responsibility to provide security for its citizens from criminals and invaders. President Bush has asked to place the National Guard on the border to provide security. Indeed, he referred to "security" six times in his immigration speech.
Additionally, Congress recently appropriated money from the so-called "war on terror" for border security with Mexico. This should outrage the American public. How could Congress conflate the war on terror with illegal immigration? Terrorists come to destroy the American dream, immigrants - both documented and undocumented - come to live the American dream. But the conceptual move from illegal immigrant (criminal, evil), to border security to a front of the war on terror, an ever expanding war against evil in all places and all times wherever it is, is not far.
It is this understanding of the issue that also prompted the House to pass the punitive HR 4437, which includes a provision to make assisting illegal immigrants while they are here a felony. It is seen as aiding and abetting a criminal.
But how could this be a "security" issue? Security implies that there is a threat, and a threatened, and that the threatened needs protection. These immigrants are not a physical threat, they are a vital part of our economy and help America function. They don't want to shoot us or kill us or blow us up. They only want to weed our gardens, clean our houses, and cook our meals in search of the American Dream. They must be recognized as Americans making a vital impact and contribution. And when they are, we will cease to tolerate the substandard conditions in which they are forced to work and live. No American - indeed, no person - should be treated so brashly.
Amnesty: "Amnesty" also fits the Illegal Frame. Amnesty is a pardoning of an illegal action - a show of either benevolence or mercy by a supreme power. It implies that the fault lies with the immigrants, and it is a righteous act for the US Government to pardon them. This again blocks the reality that Government looks the other way, and Business has gone much further - it has been a full partner in creating the current situation. If amnesty is to be granted, it seems that amnesty should be given to the businesses who knowingly or unknowingly hired the immigrants and to the Government for turning a blind eye. But amnesty to these parties is not considered, because it's an "immigration problem." Business has no role in this frame, and Government can't be given amnesty for not enforcing its own laws.
The Undocumented Worker Frame
By comparison, the term "undocumented worker" activates a conceptual frame that seems less accusatory and more compassionate than the "illegal" frame. But a closer look reveals fundamental problems with this framing.
First, the negative "undocumented" suggests that they should be documented - that there is something wrong with them if they are not. Second, "worker" suggests that their function in America is only to work, not to be educated, have families, form communities, have lives - and vote! This term was suggested by supporters of the immigrants as less noxious than illegal aliens, and it is, but it has serious limitations. It accepts the framing of immigrants as being here only to work.
Temporary Workers
"Undocumented workers" opened the door to Bush's new proposal for "temporary workers," who come to America for a short time, work for low wages, do not vote, have few rights and services, and then go home so that a new wave of workers without rights, or the possibility of citizenship and voting, can come in.
This is thoroughly undemocratic and serves the financial and electoral interests of conservatives.
This term replaced "guest worker," which was ridiculed. Imagine inviting some to dinner as a guest and then asking him to pick the vegetables, cook the dinner, and wash the dishes!
Frames Not Taken
Most of the framing initiative has been taken by conservatives. Progressives have so far abstained.
Progressives could well frame the situation as the Cheap Labor Issue or the Cheap Lifestyle Issue. Most corporations use the common economic metaphor of labor as a resource. There are two kinds of employees - the Assets (creative people and managers) and Resources (who are relatively unskilled, fungible, interchangeable). The American economy is structured to drive down the cost of resources - that is, the wages of low-skilled, replaceable workers.
Immigration increases the supply of such workers and helps to drive down wages. Cheap labor increases "productivity" and profits for employers, and it permits a cheap lifestyle for consumers who get low prices because of cheap labor. But these are not seen as "problems." They are benefits. And people take these benefits for granted. They are not grateful to the immigrants who make them possible. Gratitude. The word is hardly ever spoken in the discourse over immigration.
Now consider the frame defined by the term "economic refugee." A refugee is a person who has fled their homeland, due to political or social strife, and seeks asylum in another country. An economic refugee would extend this category (metaphorically, not legally, though it might be shifted legally in the future) to include people fleeing their homeland as a result of economic insecurity.
Refugees are worthy of compassion. We should accept them into our nation. All people are entitled to a stable political community where they have reasonable life prospects to lead a fulfilling life - this is the essence of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
To frame the debate this way is to advance a progressive understanding. While immigrants are here, they should be integrated into society either temporarily, if conditions improve in their home country, or permanently, if they can integrate and become productive members of our nation. It will focus solutions on US foreign policy to be about people, not profits. The only way the migration of people from the South to the North will stop is when conditions are improved there. As long as there is a pull to the North and a push from the South, people will find their way over, no matter how big, how long or how guarded a border fence is. (As an aside, who will build that fence if all the undocumented immigrants leave?) Increased security will force people to find ever more dangerous crossings, as has already happened, without slowing the flow of immigrants. More people will die unnecessarily.
Even if we could "protect" ourselves by sealing the border and preventing businesses from hiring undocumented immigrants by imposing hefty fines or prison sentences for violations, progressives should not be satisfied. This still leaves those yearning to flee their own countries in search of a better life in deplorable situations. The problem is not dealt with by making the United States a gated community.
While these refugees are here, they must be treated with dignity and respect. Indeed, if they cannot return home, we have a responsibility to welcome them into ours. And we must treat them as Americans, not as second-class citizens, as they are currently. If they are here, they work hard and contribute to society, they are worthy of a path to citizenship and the basic rights we are entitled to (a minimum wage, education, healthcare, a social safety net).
Currently, the undocumented immigrants living amongst us are un-enfranchised workers. They perform all the work, pay all the duties, and receive many fewer of the benefits - especially voting rights. They must be given an opportunity to come out of the shadows and lead normal lives as Americans.
The answer to this problem isn't an "open-border." The United States cannot take on the world's problems on its own. Other affluent countries need to extend a humanitarian arm to peoples fleeing oppressive economic circumstances as well. How many immigrants the United States should be willing to accept will ultimately be up to Congress.
In presenting these alternative frames, we want to inject humanitarian concerns based in compassion and empathy into the debate. The problem is dealing adequately with a humanitarian crisis that extends well beyond the southern border. The focus must shift from the immigrants themselves and domestic policy to a broader view of why so many people flee, and how we can help alleviate conditions in Mexico and Central America to prevent the flow in the first place. Only by reframing of the debate can we incorporate more global considerations. Immigration crises only arise from global disparity.
Why It's Not a Single Issue
The wealth of frames in this debate has made it confusing. The frames within the debate have been divisive. But the absence of frames to counter the idea of the "immigration problem" has also been divisive. Since each frame presents a different component of the problem, it's worth noting who stresses which frames, and which problems that frame define.
Conservatives
The conservative views:
* Law and Order: The "illegal immigrants" are criminals, felons, and must be punished - rounded up and sent home. There should be no amnesty. Otherwise all law will break down.
* The Nativists: The immigrants are diluting our culture, our language, and our values.
* The Profiteers: We need cheap labor to keep our profits up and our cheap lifestyle in place.
* The Bean Counters: We can't afford to have illegal immigrants using our tax dollars on health, education, and other services.
* The Security Hounds: We need more border guards and a hi-tech wall to guarantee our security.
Progressives
* Progressivism Begins at Home: The immigrants are taking the jobs of American works and we have to protect our workers.
* African-American Protectionists: Hispanic immigrants are threatening African-American jobs.
* Provide a path to citizenship: The immigrants have earned citizenship with their hard work, their devotion to American values, and their contribution to our society.
* Foreign Policy Reformers: We need to pay attention to the causes that drive others from their homelands.
* Wage supports: Institute a serious earned income tax credit for Americans doing otherwise low-paying jobs, so that more Americans will want to do them and fewer immigrants will be drawn here.
* Illegal Employers: The way to protect American workers and slow immigration of unskilled workers is to prosecute employers of unskilled workers.
We can see why this is such a complex problem and why there are so splits within both the conservative and progressive ranks.
Summing Up
The "immigration issue" is anything but. It is a complex melange of social, economic, cultural and security concerns - with conservatives and progressives split in different ways with different positions.
Framing the recent problem as an "immigration problem" pre-empts many of these considerations from entering the debate. As a consequence, any reform that "solves" the immigration problem is bound to be a patchwork solution addressing bits and pieces of much larger concerns. Bush's comprehensive reform is comprehensive, but only for the narrow set of problems defined in the "immigration debate." It does not address many of the questions with which progressives should be primarily concerned, issues of basic experiential well-being and political rights.
Ultimately, the way the current immigration debate is going - focusing narrowly on domestic policy, executive agencies and the immigrants - we will be faced with the same problems 10 years from now. The same long lines of immigrants waiting for legal status will persist. Temporary workers will not return home after their visas have expired, and millions of undocumented people will live amongst us. Only by broadening the understanding of the situation will the problem, or, rather, the multiple problems, be addressed and adequately solved. The immigration problem does not sit in isolation from other problems, but is symptomatic of broader social and economic concerns. The framing of the "immigration problem" must not pre-empt us from debating and beginning to address these broader concerns.
The Rockridge Institute is a tax exempt research and educational institution organization operating under Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS Code. We partner with advocates, activists, and policy professionals to articulate the system of American values and ideas and reframe public debate. We do not endorse or oppose any particular candidate or party.
- Friday, April 04, 2008 at 07:12:14 (PDT)
University of the Streets Café, Montréal.
Thursday, April 10 • 7 to 9 p.m.
Art and Oppression: Do we need oppression in order to create?
Guests: Sami Al-Kilani, Rachael Van Fossen
Moderator: Lynne Cooper
Venue: Arts Café, 201 Fairmount O.
Monday, April 14 • 7 to 9 p.m.
Youth Citizens: How does media help young people have a voice, even if they can’t vote (yet)?
Guest: Paul Shore
Moderator: Miriam Verburg
Venue: Café Pera, 2055 Bishop
Monday, April 21 • 7 to 9 p.m.
Ego Trippin’: If we’re all making media, then who is watching?
Guest: Isabella Salas
Moderator: Miriam Verburg
Venue: Café Ciné-Express, 1926 Ste-Catherine O.
Tuesday, April 22 • 5:00 to 7:00 p.m.
Earth Day 2008: with CBC Montreal:
Should we worry about water?
Guest: To be confirmed
Moderator: Geeta Nadkarni
Venue: Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise
Thursday, April 24 • 7 to 9 p.m.
Art and Oppression: Does money change the way we create?
Guests: Émilie Monnet, Guilaine Royer
Moderator: Lynne Cooper
Venue: Café Culturel Volver, 5604 ave du Parc
Tuesday, April 29 • 7 to 9 p.m.
Does public education benefit the public?
Guests: Noel Burke
Moderator: Michal Gomel
Venue: Coop La Maison verte, 5785 Sherbrooke O.
Monday, May 5 • 7 to 9 p.m.
University of the Streets Café 5th anniversary!!
Conversation Space: How do we build a conversant community?
Guests: Thomas Haig
Moderator: Elizabeth Hunt
Venue: Arts Café, 201 Fairmount O.
Thursday, May 8 • 7 to 9 p.m.
Art and Oppression: What are we using art for?
Guests: Pascal Contamine, Ilona Dougherty
Moderator: Lynne Cooper
Venue: Café Culturel Volver, 5604 ave du Parc
Tuesday, May 13 • 7 to 9 p.m.
The Ethical Engineer: How can small decisions in design lead to socially and environmentally responsible solutions?
Guests: To be confirmed
Moderator: Mario Ciaramicoli
Venue: Coop La Maison verte, 5785 Sherbrooke O.
Wednesday, May 14 • 7 to 9 p.m.
University of the Streets Café 5th anniversary!!
Conversation Space: How is a conversation a community?
Guests: Eric Abitbol, Janice Astbury
Moderator: Elizabeth Hunt
Venue: Café Sarajevo, 6548 Saint-Laurent
- Thursday, April 03, 2008 at 12:36:28 (PDT)
O then, tell me Sean O'Farrell,
tell me why you hurry so?
"Hush a bhuachaill,
hush and listen",
and his cheeks were all aglow,
I bear orders from the captain:- get you ready quick and soon
For the pikes must be together at the rising of the moon
By the rising of the moon,
by the rising of the moon,
For the pikes must be together at the rising of the moon
O then tell me Sean O'Farrell where the gath'rin is to be?
In the old spot by the river,
right well known to you and me.
One more word for signal token:- whistle up a marchin' tune,
With your pike upon your shoulder, by the rising of the moon.
By the rising of the moon, by the rising of the moon
With your pike upon your shoulder, by the rising of the moon.
Out from many a mud wall cabin eyes were watching through the night,
Many a manly heart was beatin, for the coming morning light.
Murmurs ran along the valleys
to the banshee's lonely croon
And a thousand pikes were flashing at the rising of the moon.
At the rising of the moon, at the rising of the moon.
And a thousand pikes were flashing at the rising of the moon.
All along that singing river that black mass of men were seen,
High above their shining weapons flew their own beloved green.
Death to every foe and traitor!
Forward! Strike the marching tune.
And hurrah my boys for freedom; 'tis the rising of the moon.
Tis the rising of the moon, tis the rising of the moon
And hurrah my boy for freedom;
'Tis the rising of the moon".
Well they fought for poor old Ireland, and full bitter was their fate,
Oh what glorious pride and sorrow, fills the name of ninety-eight!
Yet, thank God, e'en still are beating hearts in manhood burning noon,
Who would follow in their footsteps,
at the risin' of the moon
By the rising of the moon,
By the rising of the moon
Who would follow in their footsteps,
at the risin' of the moon.
O Paddy dear, an' did ye hear the news that's goin' round?
The shamrock is by law forbid to grow on Irish ground;
St. Patrick's Day no more we'll keep,
his colour can't be seen,
For there's a cruel law agin the wearin' o' the Green.
I met wid Napper Tandy and he took me by the hand,
And he said,
How's dear ould Ireland,
and how does she stand?
Her faithful sons will ever sing
The Wearing of the Green.
- Thursday, April 03, 2008 at 07:07:17 (PDT)
"Prejudice is a burden that confuses the past, threatens the future and renders the present inaccessible." Maya Angelou.
I'd like to dance and tap my feet
But they won't keep in rhythm
You see, I washed them both today
And I can't do nothing with 'em
(Chorus)
Ho hum the tune is dumb
The words don't mean a thing
Isn't this a silly song
For anyone to sing?
I chased a polecat up a tree
Way out on upon a limb
And when he got the best of me
I got the worst of him
(Chorus)
(Yodel, etc.)
- Tuesday, April 01, 2008 at 11:27:08 (PDT)
Combien de conservateur porcs faut-il pour fixer une ampoule électrique? Néant. Premier Ministre Harper et son Tory guerre-porcelets aiment travailler dans le noir.
- Tuesday, April 01, 2008 at 05:22:38 (PDT)
Two good ol' boys in a West Virginia trailer park were sitting around talking one afternoon over a cold beer. After a while the 1st guy says to 2nd, "If'n I was to sneak over to your trailer Saturday & make love to your wife while you was off hunting and she got pregnant and had a baby, would that make us kin?"
The 2nd guy crooked his head sideways for a minute scratched his head and squinted his eyes thinking real hard about the question.
Finally, he says, ......"Well, I don't know about kin, but it sure would make us even."
Adam Fallon's CD "Slightly Used" is a great listen!!
It’s dusk, it’s cool, and the stadium lights are on. About 50,000 concert-goers are singing a song back to Adam Fallon, the headline act.
This is Fallon’s ultimate musical goal. Based on the rapid growth of his audience throughout North America and his new EP, Slightly Used, he could achieve it very soon.
From his base in Chicago, Adam Fallon is building a following throughout the Midwest, Ontario and across the continent. Audiences are opening up to his style: his own unique take on the tradition of singer/songwriter, but with an intangible quality that makes listener feel that, deep down, he knows what they are feeling. Fallon moves effortlessly from ballads to upbeat pop to full-out rock.
The 26-year-old Canadian singer and songwriter has been, at various times, a performer, producer, promoter, and roadie. Fallon is something of a local legend around Belleville, Ontario, where he pulled up to an A&W --former band Pickseed aboard a flatbed truck-and drew 300 people for an impromptu concert.
It may be his knack for producing and promoting that keeps him so connected to what his fans expect. “The typical person at my show tends to be laid back, casual and looking for good live entertainment,” Fallon says. “They just want to close their eyes, listen to the story, and be carried away.”
He’s been there himself: Fallon learned at an early age that music could take him away from problems at home and school. He started with clarinet at age 12; and really developed a deep appreciation for music at age 14, when he got his first drum set. “I’d go into the garage four hours a night,” he says, “and just put on a CD and headphones and play along.” He credits those early sessions with Pearl Jam, Smashing Pumpkins, and Foo Fighters with honing his skills and helping him feel good about himself. (He also includes Led Zepplin, The Beatles, The Who, the Matthew Good Band, Our Lady Peace and the Tragically Hip among his influences.)
As he finished high school and pursued a degree in radio broadcasting at Loyalist College, his songwriting style crystallized. Fallon considers himself a free-association writer. “The majority of my songs are written off cuff,” he says. “I get an idea in my head and then put the pen to the paper and just start writing, because if I think about what I want to say, I overthink and censor myself.”
Many of his songs spring from experiences with his wife, Kim, who has a profound influence on his art-she’s his Muse, you could say. Fallon credits her with keeping his creativity on track. “She’s not afraid to tell me if something stinks or needs to be better or if it's perfect,” he says. “I can sometimes come up with an idea that I've played before; she has a great memory and will step in very quickly to let me know that I’m re-using stuff that I've already done.”
Despite his extensive musical experience, Fallon understands the power of collaboration. His five-year co-writing relationship with guitarist Kyle Defreitas, whom he considers a “guitar genius,” is a good example “After developing the original idea for a song-the lyrics and basic musical structure-Kyle and I work on the progression and harmonies and then build the song from there,” says Fallon. “Two songs on the new EP, “Someday” and “Ignored,” are examples of what we can do together.”
When the new EP, Slightly Used, is released on NYOC Records this year, it will be Fallon’s fourth recording. He recorded a 3-song solo EP with Defreitas in March 2002 titled The Power of the Voice of One Vol. 1; followed that up with a full-length album with his former band, Pickseed; then re-teamed with Defreitas for The Power of the Voice of One Vol. 2. Scott Juba of the-trades.com said Vol. 2 “demonstrates his tremendous versatility as an artist and proves why he is beginning to earn radio airplay in select US and Canadian markets.”
Back to the stadium: the song is over, the crowd is roaring, and Adam Fallon lets the sound wash over him. Big dream? Sure. But this artist, who backs up the dream with talent, enthusiasm and a relentless drive to succeed, will soon be stepping onto a larger stage. Give'em a listen (http://www.adamfallon.com).
- Tuesday, March 25, 2008 at 16:05:35 (PDT)
Five questions for Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan MPP.
As Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan rises in the Ontario Legislature today (Tuesday, March 25, 2008) to deliver the 2008/09 provincial Budget, here are five key questions from the Wellesley Institute on housing and homelessness issues:
ONE: Will Minister Duncan commit the funds to close Ontario’s billion-dollar housing deficit? In 2001, the Ontario government signed the Affordable Housing Framework Agreement with the federal government and all the other provinces and territories. Under this deal, Ontario agreed to increase provincial housing spending by $352 million, but actual provincial housing spending has actually dropped by $731 million, according to Statistics Canada. This has created a billion-dollar housing deficit. The huge gap between the promise of increased funding and the reality of funding cuts is one major reason why the province has failed to deliver the 20,000 new affordable homes that were supposed to delivered under the 2001 agreement. As of February of 2008, the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing says that it has developed 7,234 new affordable homes. It says another 3,719 are under development.
Ontario hasn't released any details so we don't know the rents / ownership costs of these new homes and cannot assess whether they are truly affordable to low and moderate-income households.
The Wellesley Institute’s National Housing Report Card of February, 2008, notes that Ontario has the worst housing spending record of any province or territory.
TWO: Will Minister Duncan ensure that the $150 million or more in unspent federal housing funds are allocated before the funding expires this fiscal year? Parliament authorized $1.6 billion in affordable housing funding in 2005, and the federal government in 2006 assigned $312.3 million to Ontario for an affordable housing trust fund, and an addition $80.2 million for an off-reserve Aboriginal affordable housing trust fund. The 2007 Ontario budget announced plans for this spending, but as much as half, or more, of the dollars remain uncommitted. The single biggest spending envelope for the affordable housing trust fund was a housing allowance program that was supposed to benefit 27,000 households and cost $185 million. It is estimated that only half the funding has been committed.
Not one penny of the Aboriginal funding has been committed, and it is estimated that as much as $80 million of the other fund remains unspent. If the money is not committed by the end of fiscal 2008, then it will revert back to the federal government.
THREE: Will Minister Duncan complete the uploading of the cost of social housing programs back to the provincial level? In the 2007 budget, the Ontario government uploaded housing and other costs from the 905 municipalities to the provincial level, but left Toronto and the rest of the province to continue paying the costs for programs that properly belongs at the provincial level. In recent days, the provincial government has announced a $100 million capital repair fund for social housing and a $500 million loan program. There are reports that as much as $300 million in additional repair funding may be announced in the Budget or soon after.
All this is an important down payment on the billion-dollar-plus province-wide capital repair bill for former public housing projects, but it is only one part of the huge financial burden that the province downloaded on municipalities starting in 1998.
Municipalities may be well-placed to take on the administration of housing programs, but they cannot the financial costs - which properly belong at the provincial level.
FOUR: Will Minister Duncan ensure that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and other provincial ministries, have the capacity to fund and deliver critical housing and homelessness programs? The 2007 Ontario Budget reported spending cuts for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in 2006 and again in 2007. Some experts have suggested that the difficulties in delivering housing programs at the provincial level (including the housing allowance, Aboriginal trust fund, affordable housing and other initiatives) is related to the limited capacity within the Ministry to develop and effectively administer programs.
The Ministry was gutted in the 1990s to suit the political interests of the government of the day. Housing programs were fractured as they were downloaded to municipal service managers.
Supportive housing - which provides a home with special physical and / or mental health supports -was transferred to the Ministry of Health.
Recently, supportive housing programs have been downloaded by the Ministry to the Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs). LHINs, like municipal housing service managers, may be effective administrators at the local level, but they need the funding and program support from the province.
FIVE: Will Minister Duncan use the 2008 Ontario Budget to make a major down-payment on a comprehensive Poverty Reduction Strategy, as promised in the government’s last Speech from the Throne? Housing insecurity and homelessness are critical health issues, leading to increased illness and premature death. The links between poverty and poor health are recognized by the World Health Organization at the international level, and confirmed by countless research reports, including research funded by the Wellesley Institute.
Some politicians, including federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, have called on Ontario to make additional corporate tax cuts in the hope that the benefits of these cuts will somehow trickle down to benefit those who are suffering from poverty, poor housing and poor health. But corporate tax cuts don’t create the social investments in housing, health, education and other fundamental determinants of health. While it make take the Ontario government a number of months to fully develop its Poverty Reduction Strategy, the 2008 Ontario Budget is an excellent place to start with a significant down-payment in the form of increased investments in housing and other fundamental determinants of health.
sincerely,
Michael Shapcott Director of Community Engagement.
The Wellesley Institute,
45 Charles Street East - #101
Toronto, Ontario,
Canada, M4Y 1S2
- Tuesday, March 25, 2008 at 11:35:16 (PDT)
On Days Like These.
Quincy Jones.
Questi giorni quando vieni il belle sole
la la la la la-la-la-la la la la la
On days like these when skies are blue
and fields are green
I look around
and think about what might have been
and then I hear
sweet music float around my head
as I recall the many things we left unsaid
its on days like these that I remember
singing songs and drinking wine
while your eyes played games with mine
on days like these
I wonder what became of you
maybe today you are singing songs
with someone new
I'd like to think you're walking
by those willow trees
remembering the love we knew on days like these
its on days like these that I remember
singing songs and drinking wine
while your eyes played games with mine
on days like these
I wonder what became of you
maybe today
you are singing songs with someone new
Questi giorni quando vieni il belle sole
la la la la la-la-la-la
- Monday, March 24, 2008 at 11:48:07 (PDT)
No end to Ontario's child tax benefit clawback: People on social assistance will still have the child tax benefit taken away by the Ontario government. The Liberals and their local supporters the very people in your neighborhood who voted for the liberals have broken yet another promise.
Attacking children by reducing their portion and removing them from the parent's benefits will not eliminate child poverty but may eliminate the child
OW and ODSP will receive the Ontario Child benefit of $50.00 but the McGuinty Ontario Liberals will continue to clawback the NCBS and reduce monthly payments.
Seems like a pretty clear and easy-to-understand policy, right? WRONG!
The McGuinty government is trying to confuse people by claiming that the new Ontario Child Benefit will end the current clawback of up to $121 per child per month from the NCBS but fails to tell the media or people that the amount of assistance will be reduced.
$523.00 Basic Allowance for parent with 1 child
-$168.00 Clawback of Child`s Basic Allowance =$355.00 -$121.00 = $234.00
$234.00+549.00 Shelter Portion = $784.00 this is the amount you will seen on your cheque
For each additional dependent 13 years and older: subtract $147.
For each additional dependent under 13 years old: subtract $109.
43.00 added for child over 13 or subtract from the above
Minus $128.00 Back to school ended 2007
Minus $111.00 Winter Clothing Ended 2007 Total Loss $239.00
Yes, Jesus Returns to Earth, Breaking Easter News: Is March 2008 the second coming? And is there a connection between our saviour's appearance and the supreme court's gay marriage ruling?
"Hello everybody! How's everybody doing? My God it's cold down here! Well, I'll keep this brief-as my assistant Larry just said, this is the second coming, and I'm very happy to be here. Right after I get myself a latte, I will commence with the judging...of the quick...and the dead. I'll now take your questions"
Listen to Hammer News Network's live coverage of Jesus Returns to Earth. Watch HNN on http://www.thehammer.ca
- Thursday, March 20, 2008 at 17:14:39 (PDT)
May I be so bold as to offer my own pitifully biased opinion on the matter presented below? I, for one, would prefer a sharpened stick to the eye socket in exchange for the opportunity to purchase the house of Usher!
Regards,
Edgar Poe
- Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 23:59:10 (PDT)
let's see now...I have a stack of ancient VCRs, the latest in thrift store fashions, mis-matching dishes, artwork and writing someone might suddenly declare ingenious after my death....hmmm, not much else.
Bite me, Ebay ;)
- Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 23:49:27 (PDT)
SYDNEY, Australia - A painful breakup with his wife has prompted a man to put his entire life — his house, his car, his job, even his friends — up for sale online in an effort to start over.
Ian Usher, a British immigrant to Australia, said Tuesday he would auction everything he owns and more on e-Bay starting June 22.
"On the day it's all sold and settled, I intend to walk out of my front door with my wallet in one pocket and my passport in the other, nothing else at all," Usher says on his Web site.
Story continues below ↓advertisement
Up for bid is Usher's three bedroom house in the western city of Perth and everything inside it, his car, motorcycle, jet ski and parachuting gear.
Usher says he is also selling a one-time introduction to his friends and a trial run at his job — a plan endorsed by his friends and his employer.
In media interviews, Usher said he wants a fresh start after realizing that most things in his current life remind him of the relationship he had with the wife of five years whom he broke up with more than a year ago.
"Everything that I have — the furniture in the house — all has memories attached to it," Usher, 44, told Seven Network television. "It's time to shed the old, and in with the new."
Usher said his life will be sold in one lot, and that bidders should expect to pay more than $390,000, which is the upper end of a realtor's valuation of his house that he posted online.
- Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 23:37:42 (PDT)
- Monday, March 17, 2008 at 12:32:45 (PDT)
Èirinn gu bràth!! Slanj Maa!!
Slàinte Mhath! Happy Paddy's Day.
- Monday, March 17, 2008 at 07:36:59 (PDT)
Èirinn gu bràth!!!!
- Monday, March 17, 2008 at 07:30:51 (PDT)
um...it's BLUE! wha?? hahahaaaaaaa*hic*
- Monday, March 17, 2008 at 00:49:53 (PDT)
Happy St. Pat's Day!
- Monday, March 17, 2008 at 00:48:55 (PDT)
"I have attended dinners among white people. Their ways are not our ways. We eat in silence, quietly smoke a pipe and depart. Thus, is our host honored. This is not the way of the white man. After his food has been eaten, one is expected to say foolish things. Then the host feels honored." Four Guns, Oglala Lakota (Sioux).
- Sunday, March 16, 2008 at 07:08:05 (PDT)
Cadman affair and NAFTA-gate: the Conservatives' growing list of controversies.
The Conservative government is facing a growing list of controversies including the Cadman affair and NAFTA-gate, yet is still refusing to give Canadians the answers they seek.
NAFTA-gate, the latest controversy, is the fall-out from several alleged government leaks which media reports have linked to Mr. Harper's Chief of Staff Ian Brodie and Canada's Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Wilson. The leaks of this sensitive diplomatic information may have had a direct impact on the US Democratic race and risk having a lasting negative impact on Canada-U.S. relations.
As well, Canadians deserve answers on the Cadman affair. They deserve clear explanations from Prime Minister Stephen Harper on his government's growing list of controversies. These issues will not go away until the Prime Minister finally answers.
"With poverty everything becomes frightful." Nicolas Boileau, Satires.
- Friday, March 14, 2008 at 13:06:34 (PDT)
University of the Streets Café, March.
Friday, March 7 2008.
Arts Café, 201 Fairmount Ouest
Politicize This! Home life: What’s your home-made manifesto?
To what extent is the personal also political? In this discussion, we will explore ways in which one's home can become a vehicle for political values. We will consider issues related to cooperative living, home waste management, efficient energy, alternative energy, and alternative home-based education. We will discuss various locally developed approaches to these issues, as well as their motivations.
Moderator: Jim Morris
Guests: Stephanie Conway, Leslie Bagg
Monday, March 10
Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise*
The Commons: Who owns what? Stewardship, Ownership and Privatization
Who does society 'belong' to? Do we take better care of things we own? Can we take care of something we are not allowed to own at all? How do we care for what we have agreed belongs to everybody? What are the implications of these questions? What possible responses exist and how does this impact how we approach changing society? During this conversation we will explore issues related to the ownership and stewardship (and the threat of privatization) of the physical and the knowledge commons.
Moderator: Kim Klein
Guest: David Austin
All conversations in this series will take place The Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise between St-Remi and Chemin de la Côte St-Paul. You can get there by taking a short ride on the 78 bus from Lionel-Groulx metro, the 37 bus from either Vendôme or De l'Église metro, or the 36 bus from Monk metro (http://www.stcum.qc.ca). Free on-site parking is also available.
Wedesday, March 12
Le Cagibi, 5490 Saint-Laurent
Sex Talks! Is anybody having SAFE sex? (and what does that mean anyways?)
Ah, the buzzword of the ‘90s: safe sex. Whatever happened to that concept? A generation or so ago youth were inundated with information and scare tactics about how to have safe sexual practices. Currently, some of the highest rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are among young people ages 15 to 24, the same age group where more than half of respondents in a recent survey believed there is a cure for AIDS. Not to mention a growing concern about seniors who are leading longer, healthier and more sexually active lives but who don’t see STIs as a concern. What kind of portrait does that paint for safe sex today? Is postivie sexual education even possible in today’s climate? Sex is going to happen so how do we create a culture of sexual health?
Moderator: Daniel Bouchard
Guests: Christina Foisy, Hugo Vaillancourt
The University of the Streets Café creates gathering places for citizens to pursue lifelong learning and engagement through public conversations. These collective discussions are an opportunity for people of diverse backgrounds and realities to meet, in a respectful environment — where all perspectives are welcome!
- Wednesday, March 12, 2008 at 07:16:42 (PDT)
Montreal Canadiens and the NJ Devils battle for East lead.
The Montreal Canadiens took over the Eastern Conference lead when they defeated the New Jersey Devils at the Bell Centre more than a week ago, and hope for the same result tonight, (Mar 11,08...7:30 p.m. ET) in Montreal.
The Habs begin an important four-game homestand in second place in the East with 85 points, one behind the Devils. The teams also battled for first place in the conference on March 1, with the Canadiens winning 2-1.
Forward Andre Kostitsyn's power-play goal late in the third period paced Montreal to its second consecutive victory over the Devils for the first time since 1993.
"We played really good hockey in the first half of the season," said Canadiens coach Guy Carbonneau after the win. "But ever since Christmas, we've been playing really great hockey."
The Canadiens (38-23-9) remain one of the hottest teams in the NHL, but are coming off a 2-2-0 road trip that finished with a 3-1 loss to the defending Stanley Cup champion Anaheim Ducks on Sunday night. Forward Alex Kovalev scored his team-leading 30th goal of the season and rookie goaltender Carey Price made 34 saves for Montreal.
With the game tied 1-1 heading into the third period, Montreal allowed two goals, including one short-handed marker.
"It's tough to give up a goal in the third period. It's even tougher to give up two, because you know you were so close the whole game," Price said.
Still, Price has been solid since taking over the No. 1 role between the pipes after netminder Cristobal Huet was traded to Washington, going 4-2-0 with a 2.51 goals-against average.
The Canadiens may be without centre Tomas Plekanec, who is doubtful because of a bout with to the flu. Plekanec's possible absence means rookie Mikhail Grabovski will be called upon for a second straight game if Montreal's second-leading goal scorer can't play.
With a victory, the Canadiens, two points ahead of the Ottawa Senators in the Northeast Division, can clinch the season series against the Devils for the first time since 1993 - the last year Montreal won the Stanley Cup.
But a win over the disciplined Devils (40-23-6) will be difficult. New Jersey has won its last three games, including 2-1 versus the Toronto Maple Leafs on Saturday.
Brodeur's the bomb
Goaltender Martin Brodeur played his typical stellar game, making 42 saves in his 27th consecutive start.
Forward Zach Parise netted his second goal of the game with only 48.3 seconds remaining in regulation for the Devils, who are only one point ahead of the surging Pittsburgh Penguins in the Atlantic Division.
Brodeur has been brilliant during the Devils' 12-3-3 surge, and has stopped 104 of 107 shots in the last three games.
"Marty, obviously, has been unbelievable," Parise said told the team's official website. "He's one of the main reasons we are where we are. We like the way we've been playing, and the way we've been winning games lately."
While Brodeur is only 1-2-0 with a shutout in three meetings with Montreal this season, he remains dominant against the team he grew up idolizing. In his career, he is 34-14-0 with five ties, eight shutouts and a 1.76 GAA in 53 games.
Brodeur, who had won four consecutive contests at Bell Centre before New Jersey's loss on March 1, is also 14-11-0 with a tie, four shutouts and a 1.77 GAA in 26 games in his hometown.
Blind Guitarist Jeff Healey Dies at 41
March 3, 2008, 8:59 AM EST
TORONTON (AP) -- Blind rock and jazz musician Jeff Healey has died after a lifelong battle against cancer. He was 41.
Healey died Sunday evening in a Toronto hospital, said bandmate Colin Bray, who was in the room with Healey's family when the guitarist died.
The Grammy-nominated Healey rose to stardom as the leader of the Jeff Healey Band, a rock-oriented trio that gained international acclaim and platinum record sales with the 1988 album "See the Light." The album included the hit single "Angel Eyes."
Healey had battled cancer since age 1, when a rare form of retinal cancer known as Retinoblastoma claimed his eyesight.
Due to his blindness, Healey taught himself to play guitar by laying the instrument across his lap.
His unique playing style, combined with his blues-oriented vocals, earned him a reputation as a teenage musical prodigy. He shared stages with George Harrison, B.B. King and Stevie Ray Vaughan.
Bray said he and many others expected the guitarist to rally from this latest illness.
"I don't think any of us thought this was going to happen," Bray said. "We just thought he was going to bounce back as he always does."
Healey had undergone numerous operations in recent years to remove tumors from his lungs and leg.
Bray and fellow bandmate Gary Scriven remembered their frontman as a musician of rare abilities with a generous nature and wicked sense of humor.
Healey's true love was jazz, the genre that dominated his three most recent albums.
His love of jazz led him to host radio shows in Canada where he spun long-forgotten numbers from his personal collection of over 30,000 vinyl records.
His death came weeks before the release of his first rock album in eight years.
"Mess of Blues" is slated for a North American release on April 22.
He is survived by his wife, Christie, and two children.
- Monday, March 03, 2008 at 11:09:37 (PST)
jeeezuzz ..........this should be named the canadian politics tribal soul kitchen wall ....sumone pass the Crown .......
- Monday, March 03, 2008 at 05:34:56 (PST)
have a splendid day!
- Saturday, March 01, 2008 at 06:12:18 (PST)
BAD CRACK OTTAWA: Just wanted to let you know that we received a call from staff at Sherbourne Health Centre today, advising that there have been several reported cases of "bad crack" in the downtown area recently. *Apparently people have been presenting at St. Mike's Emergency Dept. with symptoms of stroke. The rock has been described as both dark beige or gleaming white in colour, there seems to be both around and has a cat pee odour about it. Staff at Sherbourne advised that the crack is reportedly being mixed with embalming fluid. Maybe Stephen Harper has been moon-lighting again.
Alex Krinos.
- Friday, February 29, 2008 at 07:49:03 (PST)
Wellesley Institute's Federal Budget Housing Scan:
Healthy corporate profits – healthy communities???
Minister Flaherty federal budget fails to offer funding;
Billion-dollar housing / homelessness gap is looming
Just five days before federal Finance Minister James Flaherty rose in the House of Commons earlier today (February 26) to deliver the 2008 national budget, Statistics Canada reported that corporate profits reached their highest level ever in 2007. “Canadian corporations earned record high operating profits of $262.5 billion in 2007,” reported Canada’s national statistical agency on February 21.
“Canadians want a healthy environment,” said Minister Flaherty in his budget speech. “They also want healthy, safe communities.” The national budget is the place where the government sets out its fiscal plan of strategic investments so that the top priorities of Canadians can be met.
Put the two together (record-high corporate profits and an urgent need for healthy communities), and you’d expect that the 2008 federal budget would include a sensible plan for increased strategic investments in Canada’s fraying economic and social infrastructure paid with a fair share of those record-high corporate profits.
That didn’t happen. In fact, profitable corporations will continue to benefit from billions in corporate tax cuts announced in the past two years.
There’s not a penny for new truly affordable homes in federal budget 2008, even though all three national housing and homelessness programs are due to expire in fiscal 2008.
Minister Flaherty missed the opportunity to announce plans to renew and enhance those programs in his budget speech. If the federal government doesn’t renew these programs within the next 12 months, then there will be an annual billion-dollar hole in funding for new affordable homes, transitional housing and supports / services for the homeless.
That’s the amount of money that will be lost each year from a failure to renew federal affordable housing spending, along with funding for the federal housing rehabilitation program and the national homelessness strategy.
Officially, 1.5 million households (about 4.2 million women, men and children) are in “core housing need” and perhaps 300,000 Canadians will experience homelessness over the course of the year. Housing insecurity has a large personal cost, leading directly to increased illness and premature death. It also disrupts communities and puts a brake on economic competitiveness, according to a growing number of business organizations.
Homelessness – the most visible sign of housing insecurity – also carries a high cost for taxpayers. One recent study estimated that homelessness costs Canadians between $4.5 and $6 billion annually – more than triple the dwindling amount that the federal government pays for affordable homes.
In his budget speech, Minister Flaherty said: “Even in good economic times, there are those at risk of being left behind. But Canadians are guided by the values of compassion, kindness and generosity. That’s why the Mental Health Commission of Canada was struck last year. Under the leadership of the Honourable Michael Kirby, the Commission has recommended the Government proceed with five pilot projects across the country. These will help increase our knowledge of those who are homeless and suffering from mental illness.”
Increasing knowledge is critically important, but so too is building affordable homes with the appropriate supports for people with mental health concerns. And the money to do that is absent from the 2008 federal budget except for a handful of pilot projects in just five communities (Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal and Moncton).
These projects, while worthy, will at best prove the very same lessons that Canada’s supportive housing providers have demonstrated time and again over the past two decades in previous pilot projects: Safe and affordable homes combined with accessible and appropriate services are the most fundamental needs for people suffering mental health issues.
There was some new spending in federal budget 2008, including an additional:
- $122 million for prisons;
- $400 million to recruit new police officers; and
- $43 million for the super-secret Communications Security Establishment (Canada’s electronic snoopers).
“The fundamentals underpinning the Canadian economy remain strong,” says the 2008 federal budget plan at p.29 in what is the traditional message of finance ministers. But Canada’s housing fundamentals are extremely shaky:
- housing affordability is deteriorating for homeowners across the country;
- average market rents have outpaced the household incomes of more than half of Canada’s renter households; and
- homelessness and housing insecurity remains deep and persistent in urban, rural, remote and Northern communities.
- Michael Shapcott
PS – The Wellesley Institute’s federal pre-budget backgrounder, with more details, is available at http://www.wellesleyinstitute.com
PPS – John Stapleton’s quick scan of social policy issues in federal budget 2008 is attached.
* * *
Michael Shapcott
Director of Community Engagement
The Wellesley Institute
45 Charles Street East, #101
Toronto, ON, Canada M4Y 1S2
Dès le roi des animaux,
Qui dans sa grotte était malade,
Etait laisser savoir à ses vassaux
Que chaque espèce de l'ambassade
Envoyé des gens à le visiter,
En vertu de la promesse de bien traiter
Les députés, eux et leur maintien,
Foi de Lion très bien écrite.
Bon passeport comptoirs de la dent;
Contre la griffe tout autant.
L'édit du Prince est effectuée.
De chaque espèce un nomme à lui.
Renards de maintien de la maison,
L'un d'eux dit cela d'elle:
Etapes impressionné sur la poussière
Par ceux qui à partir de là, seront apportées à la cour de leur patient,
Tous, sans exception, regarder sa den;
Pas un ne marque pas un retour.
Cela nous met en méfiance.
Que Sa Majesté nous dispense.
Agrandir la merci de son passeport.
Je crois que la bonne mais, dans cette caverne
Je vois très bien, comme on entre,
Et ne voyez pas là que l'on sort
Toutes les Fables de Jean de la Fontaine, livre VI, Fable XIV.
- Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 20:56:10 (PST)
Fee! Fie! Foe! Fum!??
I smell the blood of an Englishman!
Bring him, find him make ith he dead,
I'll grind his bones to make my bread.
Jack the Giant-Killer.
By Joseph Jacobs.
When good King Arthur reigned, there lived near the Land’s End of England, in the county of Cornwall, a farmer who had one only son called Jack. He was brisk and of a ready lively wit, so that nobody or nothing could worst him.
In those days the Mount of Cornwall was kept by a huge giant named Cormoran. He was eighteen feet in height, and about three yards round the waist, of a fierce and grim countenance, the terror of all the neighbouring towns and villages. He lived in a cave in the midst of the Mount, and whenever he wanted food he would wade over to the main- land, where he would furnish himself with whatever came in his way. Everybody at his approach ran out of their houses, while he seized on their cattle, making nothing of carrying half-a-dozen oxen on his back at a time; and as for their sheep and hogs, he would tie them round his waist like a bunch of tallow-dips. He had done this for many years, so that all Cornwall was in despair.
One day Jack happened to be at the town-hall when the magistrates were sitting in council about the Giant. He asked: “What reward will be given to the man who kills Cormoran?” “The giant’s treasure,” they said, “will be the reward.” Quoth Jack: “Then let me undertake it.” So he got a horn, shovel, and pickaxe, and went over to the Mount in the beginning of a dark winter’s evening, when he fell to work, and before morning had dug a pit twenty-two feet deep, and nearly as broad, covering it over with long sticks and straw. Then he strewed a little mould over it, so that it appeared like plain ground.
Jack then placed himself on the opposite side of the pit, farthest from the giant’s lodging, and, just at the break of day, he put the horn to his mouth, and blew, Tantivy, Tantivy. This noise roused the giant, who rushed from his cave, crying: “You incorrigible villain, are you come here to disturb my rest? You shall pay dearly for this. Satisfaction I will have, and this it shall be, I will take you whole and broil you for breakfast.” He had no sooner uttered this, than he tumbled into the pit, and made the very foundations of the Mount to shake. “Oh, Giant,” quoth Jack, “where are you now? Oh, faith, you are gotten now into Lob’s Pound, where I will surely plague you for your threatening words: what do you think now of broiling me for your breakfast? Will no other diet serve you but poor Jack?”
Then having tantalised the giant for a while, he gave him a most weighty knock with his pickaxe on the very crown of his head, and killed him on the spot.
Jack then filled up the pit with earth, and went to search the cave, which he found contained much treasure. When the magistrates heard of this they made a declaration he should henceforth be termed and presented him with a sword and a belt, on which were written these words embroidered in letters of gold:
“Here’s the right valiant Cornish man,
Who slew the giant Cormoran.”
The news of Jack’s victory soon spread over all the West of England, so that another giant, named Blunderbore, hearing of it, vowed to be revenged on Jack, if ever he should light on him. This giant was the lord of an enchanted castle situated in the midst of a lonesome wood.
Now Jack, about four months afterwards, walking near this wood in his journey to Wales, being weary, seated himself near a pleasant fountain and fell fast asleep. While he was sleeping, the giant, coming there for water, discovered him, and knew him to be the far-famed Jack the Giant-killer by the lines written on the belt. Without ado, he took Jack on his shoulders and carried him towards his castle. Now, as they passed through a thicket, the rustling of the boughs awakened Jack, who was strangely surprised to find himself in the clutches of the giant. His terror was only begun, for, on entering the castle, he saw the ground strewed with human bones, and the giant told him his own would ere long be among them. After this the giant locked poor Jack in an immense chamber, leaving him there while he went to fetch another giant, his brother, living in the same wood, who might share in the meal on Jack.
After waiting some time Jack, on going to the window beheld afar off the two giants coming towards the castle. “Now,” quoth Jack to himself, “my death or my deliverance is at hand.” Now, there were strong cords in a corner of the room in which Jack was, and two of these he took, and made a strong noose at the end; and while the giants were unlocking the iron gate of the castle he threw the ropes over each of their heads. Then he drew the other ends across a beam, and pulled with all his might, so that he throttled them.
Then, when he saw they were black in the face, he slid down the rope, and drawing his sword, slew them both. Then, taking the giant’s keys, and unlocking the rooms, he found three fair ladies tied by the hair of their heads, almost starved to death. “Sweet ladies,” quoth Jack, “I have destroyed this monster and his brutish brother, and obtained your liberties.” This said he presented them with the keys, and so proceeded on his journey to Wales.
Jack made the best of his way by travelling as fast as he could, but lost his road, and was benighted, and could find any habitation until, coming into a narrow valley, he found a large house, and in order to get shelter took courage to knock at the gate. But what was his surprise when there came forth a monstrous giant with two heads; yet he did not appear so fiery as the others were, for he was a Welsh giant, and what he did was by private and secret malice under the false show of friendship. Jack, having told his condition to the giant, was shown into a bedroom, where, in the dead of night, he heard his host in another apartment muttering these words:
“Though here you lodge with me this night,
You shall not see the morning light
My club shall dash your brains outright!”
“Say’st thou so,” quoth Jack; “that is like one of your Welsh tricks, yet I hope to be cunning enough for you.”
Then, getting out of bed, he laid a billet in the bed in his stead, and hid himself in a corner of the room. At the dead time of the night in came the Welsh giant, who struck several heavy blows on the bed with his club, thinking he had broken every bone in Jack’s skin. The next morning Jack, laughing in his sleeve, gave him hearty thanks for his night’s lodging. “How have you rested?” quoth the giant; “did you not feel anything in the night?” “No,” quoth Jack, “nothing but a rat, which gave me two or three slaps with her tail.” With that, greatly wondering, the giant led Jack to breakfast, bringing him a bowl containing four gallons of hasty pudding.
Being loth to let the giant think it too much for him, Jack put a large leather bag under his loose coat, in such a way that he could convey the pudding into it without its being perceived. Then, telling the giant he would show him a trick, taking a knife, Jack ripped open the bag, and out came all the hasty pudding. Whereupon, saying, “Odds splutters hur nails, hur can do that trick hurself,” the monster took the knife, and ripping open his belly, fell down dead.
Now, it happened in these days that King Arthur’s only son asked his father to give him a large sum of money, in order that he might go and seek his fortune in the principality of Wales, where lived a beautiful lady possessed with seven evil spirits. The king did his best to persuade his son from it, but in vain; so at last gave way and the prince set out with two horses, one loaded with money, the other for himself to ride upon.
Now, after several days’ travel, he came to a market-town in Wales, where he beheld a vast crowd of people gathered together. The prince asked the reason of it, and was told that they had arrested a corpse for several large sums of money which the deceased owed when he died. The prince replied that it was a pity creditors should be so cruel, and said: “Go bury the dead, and let his creditors come to my lodging, and there their debts shall be paid." They came, in such great numbers that before night he had only twopence left for himself.
Now Jack the Giant-Killer, coming that way, was so taken with the generosity of the prince, that he desired to be his servant. This being agreed upon, the next morning they set forward on their journey together, when, as they were riding out of the town, an old woman called after the prince, saying, “He has owed me twopence these seven years; pray pay me as well as the rest.” Putting his hand to his pocket, the prince gave the woman all he had left, so that after their day’s food, which cost what small spell Jack had by him, they were without a penny between them.
When the sun got low, the king’s son said: “Jack, since we have no money, where can we lodge this night?”
But Jack replied: “Master, we’ll do well enough, for I have an uncle lives within two miles of this place; he is a huge and monstrous giant with three heads; he’ll fight five hundred men in armour, and make them to fly before him.” “Alas!” quoth the prince, “what shall we do there? He’ll certainly chop us up at a mouthful. Nay, we are scarce enough to fill one of his hollow teeth!”
“It is no matter for that,” quoth Jack; “I myself will go before and prepare the way for you; therefore stop here and wait till I return." Jack then rode away at full speed, and coming to the gate of the castle, he knocked so loud that he made the neighbouring hills resound.
The giant roared out at this like thunder: “Who’s there?” Jack answered: “None but your poor cousin Jack.” Quoth he: “What news with my poor cousin Jack?” He replied: “Dear uncle, heavy news, God wot!”
“Prithee,” quoth the giant, “what heavy news can come to me? I am a giant with three heads, and besides thou knowest I can fight five hundred men in armour, and make them fly like chaff before the wind.”
“Oh, but,” quoth Jack, “here’s the king’s son a-coming with a thousand men in armour to kill you and destroy all that you have!”
“Oh, cousin Jack,” said the giant, “this is heavy news indeed! I will immediately run and hide myself, and thou shalt lock, bolt, and bar me in, and keep the keys until the prince is gone.”
Having secured the giant, Jack fetched his master, when they made themselves heartily merry whilst the poor giant lay trembling in a vault under the ground.
Early in the morning Jack furnished his master with a fresh supply of gold and silver, and then sent him three miles forward on his journey, at which time the prince was pretty well out of the smell of the giant. Jack then returned, and let the giant out of the vault, who asked what he should give him for keeping the castle from destruction. "Why,” quoth Jack, “I want nothing but the old coat and cap, together with the old rusty sword and slippers which are at your bed’s head." Quoth the giant: “You know not what you ask; they are the most precious things I have.
The coat will keep you invisible, the cap will tell you all you want to know, the sword cuts asunder whatever you strike, and the shoes are of extraordinary swiftness. But you have been very serviceable to me, therefore take them with all my heart." Jack thanked his uncle, and then went off with them. He soon overtook his master and they quickly arrived at the house of the lady the prince sought, who, finding the prince to be a suitor, prepared a splendid banquet for him.
After the repast was concluded, she told him she had a task for him. She wiped his mouth with a handkerchief, saying: “You must show me that handkerchief to-morrow morning, or else you will lose your head.” With that she put it in her bosom. The prince went to bed in great sorrow, but Jack’s cap of knowledge informed him how it was to be obtained. In the middle of the night she called upon her familiar spirit to carry her to Lucifer. But Jack put on his coat of darkness and his shoes of swiftness, and was there as soon as she was. When she entered the place of the Old One, she gave the handkerchief to old Lucifer, who laid it upon a shelf, whence Jack took it and brought it to his master, who showed it to the lady next day, and so saved his life.
On that day, she gave the prince a kiss and told him he must show her the lips to-morrow morning that she kissed last night, or lose his head.
“Ah!” he replied, “if you kiss none but mine, I will.”
“That is neither here nor there,” said she; “if you do not, death’s your portion!”
At midnight she went as before, and was angry with old Lucifer for letting the handkerchief go. “But now,” quoth she, “I will be too hard for the king’s son, for I will kiss thee, and he is to show me thy lips.” Which she did, and Jack, when she was not standing by, cut off Lucifer’s head and brought it under his invisible coat to his master, who the next morning pulled it out by the horns before the lady. This broke the enchantment and the evil spirit left her, and she appeared in all her beauty. They were married the next morning, and soon after went to the court of King Arthur, where Jack for his many great exploits, was made one of the Knights of the Round Table.
Jack soon went searching for giants again, but he had not ridden far, when he saw a cave, near the entrance of which he beheld a giant sitting upon a block of timber, with a knotted iron club by his side. His goggle eyes were like flames of fire, his countenance grim and ugly, and his cheeks like a couple of large flitches of bacon, while the bristles of his beard resembled rods of iron wire, and the locks that hung down upon his brawny shoulders were like curled snakes or hissing adders. Jack alighted from his horse, and, putting on the coat of darkness, went up close to the giant, and said softly: “Oh! are you there? It will not be long before I take you fast by the beard.” The giant all this while could not see him, on account of his invisible coat, so that Jack, coming up close to the monster, struck a blow with his sword at his head, but, missing his aim, he cut off the nose instead. At this, the giant roared like claps of thunder, and began to lay about him with his iron club like one stark mad.
But Jack, running behind, drove his sword up to the hilt in the giant’s back, so that he fell down dead. This done, Jack cut off the giant’s head, and sent it, with his brother’s also, to King Arthur, by a waggoner he hired for that purpose.
Jack now resolved to enter the giant’s cave in search of his treasure, and, passing along through a great many windings and turnings, he came at length to a large room paved with freestone, at the upper end of which was a boiling caldron, and on the right hand a large table, at which the giant used to dine. Then he came to a window, barred with iron, through which he looked and beheld a vast number of miserable captives, who, seeing him, cried out: “Alas! young man, art thou come to be one amongst us in this miserable den?”
“Ay,” quoth Jack, “but pray tell me what is the meaning of your captivity?”
“We are kept here,” said one, “till such time as the giants have a wish to feast, and then the fattest among us is slaughtered! And many are the times they have dined upon murdered men!”
“Say you so,” quoth Jack, and straightway unlocked the gate and let them free, who all rejoiced like condemned men at sight of a pardon. Then searching the giant’s coffers, he shared the gold and silver equally amongst them and took them to a neighbouring castle, where they all feasted and made merry over their deliverance.
But in the midst of all this mirth a messenger brought news that one Thunderdell, a giant with two heads, having heard of the death of his kinsmen, had come from the northern dales to be revenged on Jack, and was within a mile of the castle, the country people flying before him like chaff. But Jack was not a bit daunted, and said: “Let him come! I have a tool to pick his teeth; and you, ladies and gentlemen, walk out into the garden, and you shall witness this giant Thunderdell’s death and destruction.”
The castle was situated in the midst of a small island surrounded by a moat thirty feet deep and twenty feet wide, over which lay a drawbridge. So Jack employed men to cut through this bridge on both sides, nearly to the middle; and then, dressing himself in his invisible coat, he marched against the giant with his sword of sharpness. Although the giant could not see Jack, he smelt his approach, and cried out in these words:
“Fee, fi, fo, fum!
I smell the blood of an Englishman!
Be he alive or be he dead,
I’ll grind his bones to make me bread!”
“Say’st thou so,” said Jack; “then thou art a monstrous miller indeed.”
The giant cried out again: “Art thou that villain who killed my kinsmen? Then I will tear thee with my teeth, suck thy blood, and grind thy bones to powder.”
“You’ll have to catch me first,” quoth Jack, and throwing off his invisible coat, so that the giant might see him, and putting on his shoes of swiftness, he ran from the giant, who followed like a walking castle, so that the very foundations of the earth seemed to shake at every step. Jack led him a long dance, in order that the gentlemen and ladies might see; and at last to end the matter, ran lightly over the drawbridge, the giant, in full speed, pursuing him with his club. Then, coming to the middle of the bridge, the giant’s great weight broke it down, and he tumbled headlong into the water, where he rolled and wallowed like a whale. Jack, standing by the moat, laughed at him all the while; but though the giant foamed to hear him scoff, and plunged from place to place in the moat, yet he could not get out to be revenged. Jack at length got a cart-rope and cast it over the two heads of the giant, and drew him ashore by a team of horses, and then cut off both his heads with his sword of sharpness, and sent them to King Arthur.
After some time spent in mirth and pastime, Jack, taking leave of the knights and ladies, set out for new adventures. Through many woods he passed, and came at length to the foot of a high mountain. Here, late at night, he found a lonesome house, and knocked at the door, which was opened by an aged man with a head as white as snow. “Father,” said Jack, “can you lodge a benighted traveller that has lost his way?" "Yes,” said the old man; “you are right welcome to my poor cottage." Whereupon Jack entered, and down they sat together, and the old man began to speak as follows: “Son, I see by your belt you are the great conqueror of giants, and behold, my son, on the top of this mountain is an enchanted castle, this is kept by a giant named Galligantua, and he by the help of an old conjurer, betrays many knights and ladies into his castle, where by magic art they are transformed into sundry shapes and forms.
But above all, I grieve for a duke’s daughter, whom they fetched from her father’s garden, carrying her through the air in a burning chariot drawn by fiery dragons, when they secured her within the castle, and transformed her into a white hind. And though many knights have tried to break the enchantment, and work her deliverance, yet no one could accomplish it, on account of two dreadful griffins which are placed at the castle gate and which destroy every one who comes near.
But you, my son, may pass by them undiscovered, where on the gates of the castle you will find engraven in large letters how the spell may be broken.” Jack gave the old man his hand, and promised that in the morning he would venture his life to free the lady.
In the morning Jack arose and put on his invisible coat and magic cap and shoes, and prepared himself for the fray. Now, when he had reached the top of the mountain he soon discovered the two fiery griffins, but passed them without fear, because of his invisible coat.
When he had got beyond them, he found upon the gates of the castle a golden trumpet hung by a silver chain, under which these lines were engraved: “Whoever shall this trumpet blow,
Shall soon the giant overthrow, and break the black enchantment straight; so all shall be in happy state.”
Jack had no sooner read this but he blew the trumpet, at which the castle trembled to its vast foundations, and the giant and conjurer were in horrid confusion, biting their thumbs and tearing their hair, knowing their wicked reign was at an end. Then the giant stooping to take up his club, Jack at one blow cut off his head; whereupon the conjurer, mounting up into the air, was carried away in a whirlwind. Then the enchantment was broken, and all the lords and ladies who had so long been transformed into birds and beasts returned to their proper shapes, and the castle vanished away in a cloud of smoke. This being done, the head of Galligantua was likewise, in the usual manner, conveyed to the Court of King Arthur, where, the very next day, Jack followed, with the knights and ladies who had been delivered. Whereupon, as a reward for his good services, the king prevailed upon the duke to bestow his daughter in marriage on honest Jack.
So married they were, and the whole kingdom was filled with joy at the wedding. Furthermore, the king bestowed on Jack a noble castle, with a very beautiful estate thereto belonging, where he and his lady lived in great joy and happiness all the rest of their days.
- Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 16:18:03 (PST)
"Revolution is not something fixed in ideology, nor is it something fashioned to a particular decade. It is a perpetual process embedded in the human spirit." Abbie Hoffman.
- Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 11:38:36 (PST)
Bonjour!
Lundi prochain nous lançons une nouvelle série de conversations publiques sur les thèmes du bien commun et des biens communs (The Commons.) Ces conversations se dérouleront en anglais, mais comme d'habitude avec l'Université autrement les interventions en français sont les bienvenues. Vous trouverez plus d'information (en anglais) ci-dessous.
Au plaisir,
Elizabeth
L'Université autrement: Dans les cafés
www.univcafe.org
***********************
Hello!
Next Monday (February 25th) we are launching a new series of public conversations on "The Commons" (see descriptions below) that will take place each Monday for four weeks. This series is especially exciting as we are broaching a new topic, trying a new venue (the Centre St-Ambroise) and working with Kim Klein (see bio below), the Institute's current Resident Resource Person , and thinker extraordinaire, to develop the content and focus of this series. Kim will be playing a major role in each of these conversations as either guest or moderator.
So please circle the date on your calendar and circulate this information to your networks.
I hope to see you there!
************************
The Commons – Winter 2008
Monday, February 25: What Belongs to Everybody?
Monday, March 3: What role should taxes play in taking care of our common assets?
Monday, March 10: Who owns what? Stewardship, Ownership and Privatization
Monday, March 17: So Many Answers, So Few Questions. What do we do with all this knowledge?
All conversations in this series will take place The Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise between St-Remi and Chemin de la Côte St-Paul. You can get there by taking a short ride on the 78 bus from Lionel-Groulx metro, the 37 bus from either Vendôme or De l'Église metro, or the 36 bus from Monk metro (http://www.stcum.qc.ca). Free on-site parking is also available.
Monday, February 25 - 7 to 9 p.m.
Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise
The Commons: What Belongs to Everybody?
The commons is a short, simple phrase that describes all the resources a community has rights or access to. Either because these resources exist all around us, such as sunlight, water, air, and oceans, or because they were built using tax dollars for the benefit of the public as a whole, such as libraries and parks or the infrastructure that allows us to get around, such as sidewalks, bridges, and streetlights. This notion even includes the more hidden and complicated infrastructure of sewers, health inspectors, fire protection, courts, and the like. During this conversation, we will explore the very definition of ‘the commons,’ how it is expanding with the Internet and contracting every time a plant or an animal becomes extinct. We will ask ourselves: Are there things in the commons that should not be there? And things that should be that aren’t? Is the phrase ‘the commons’ helpful or off-putting? How is the commons accessible to the public?
Guest: Kim Klein has been in fundraising for 31 years. She is the founder of the Grassroots Fundraising Journal and the author of Fundraising for Social Change. She is also a member of the Building Movement Project, working on understanding what should be privately funded and what taxes should pay for. This has led her to a keen interest in exploring the Commons. On break from her California life, Kim is currently Resident Resource Person at Concordia University’s Institute in Management and Community Development.
Moderator: Elizabeth Hunt coordinates the University of the Streets Café program at Concordia University, a space for community members to pursue lifelong learning and engagement in the form of public conversations. Elizabeth enjoys that her work allows her to connect people with each other and watch ideas grow.
Monday, March 3 - 7 to 9 p.m.
Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise
The Commons: What role should taxes play in taking care of our common assets?
Death and taxes, we are told, are inevitable – and there is nothing anyone can do about it. During this conversation we will explore the relationship of the commons (all the resources a community has rights or access to) to the common good, and how the common good is made possible by taxes. Do taxes do their job? Are they fair? How could they be more fair? What does it take for us to feel good about all the taxes we pay?
Guest: Kim Klein – see above for bio
Moderator: Elizabeth Hunt – see above for bio
Monday, March 10 - 7 to 9 p.m.
Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise
The Commons: Who owns what? Stewardship, Ownership and Privatization
Who does society 'belong' to? Do we take better care of things we own? Can we take care of something we are not allowed to own at all? How do we care for what we have agreed belongs to everybody? What are the implications of these questions? What possible responses exist and how does this impact how we approach changing society? During this conversation we will explore issues related to the ownership and stewardship (and the threat of privatization) of the physical and the knowledge commons.
Guest: David Austin is a Montreal writer with years of community development experience. His writing explores social, political, cultural, and historical themes and the meaning of social change in our time. David is a trustee of the Alfie Roberts Institute.
Moderator: Kim Klein – see above for bio
Monday, March 17 - 7 to 9 p.m.
Centre St-Ambroise, 5080 St-Ambroise
The Commons: So Many Answers, So Few Questions. What do we do with all this knowledge?
With the world wide web, we now have access to the world's biggest library: more facts, opinions, history, critique anyone could ever want, but no one could ever thoroughly explore. Almost any question can get a variety of answers. Yet what are the questions that cannot be answered solely by facts, that cannot be explored through technology? And what use is knowledge if it doesn't helping us come up with better solutions? How do we learn to ask the questions that will create the answers that will help us create the world we want? And what does all of this have to do with protecting, enhancing and preserving the commons?
Guest: Michael Lenczner works at the intersection of activism, community and technology. He has been working in community information and communication infrastructure since 1998 and has been a partner or researcher in related academic groups since 2003. He is a co-founder of Ile Sans Fil and Civic Access.
875 C.E. Celtic Monks from Greenland are believed to have established a colony on Brion Island (Magdalen Island) in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and to have eventually settled on Cape Breton Island. Their settlement by Scandinavian tradition is called Huitraamannland. It is believed they are gradually absorbed into the Mi'-Kmaq tradition.
- Wednesday, February 20, 2008 at 13:01:19 (PST)
The University of the Streets Café is proud to announce this week's upcoming events.
Thursday, February 21 - 7 to 9 p.m. Artist + Audience: Languaging art and negotiating language politics,where do we start? Guests: Karen Spencer, Sylvie Lachance, Karen Trask Moderator: Michelle Lacombe Venue: articule - artist-run gallery, 262 Fairmount O.
Friday, February 22 - 7 to 9 p.m.Politicize This! Sports: Is this a playing field or a battlefield? Guests: Shirley Roburn, Paul Beaulieu Moderator: Alex Megelas Venue: Arts Café, 201 Fairmount O. The University of the Streets Café creates gathering places for citizens to pursue life long learning and engagement through publicconversations. These collective discussions are an opportunity forpeople of diverse backgrounds and realities to meet, in a respectfulenvironment - where all perspectives are welcome! Established as part of Concordia University in 1993, the Institute in Management and Community Development was created through a collaborative effort with community-based groups. The Institute supports the building of democratic community structures and innovative programming that respond to challenging social justice issues. The work of the Institute is based on the belief that an engaged citizenship and support for community-based organizations through shared reflection, resources and action is essential for building and nourishing healthy communities.
For more information:univcafe@yahoo.cawww.univcafe.org 514-848-2424 ext. 3968
- Tuesday, February 19, 2008 at 15:34:38 (PST)
Tolkien estate sues over Lord of the Rings movies.
CBC News
The charity that manages the estate of British writer J.R.R. Tolkien has sued the studio behind the Lord of the Rings film trilogy, saying it hasn't been paid a cent for granting the rights to the story.
The Tolkien Trust and publisher HarperCollins filed suit against New Line Cinema in a Los Angeles Superior Court on Monday.
The suit is claiming $150 million US in damages and threatens to revoke New Line's right to make The Hobbit, another Tolkien tale, into a film.
The suit claims New Line has not paid any part of the 7.5 per cent of gross receipts from the films it promised in return for rights to film the story.
Tolkien, who died in 1973, is the world-renowned author of the Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit.
The filing estimates return from the three Lord of the Ring films — The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of the King — at $6 billion US, but says New Line has not allowed it to audit the last two films of the series.
- Friday, February 15, 2008 at 07:04:40 (PST)
American Prayer
- Saturday, February 09, 2008 at 19:55:28 (PST)
bottle rolls across the table, clung, across the floor and on into the corner -- Bo-Diddley have ya heard, *hic* pass that RubenRyeSandwich and mustard: Burp.......!!
