-Caveat Lector-
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Party of Citizens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Deborah Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Taking a Sledgehammer to the Foundation of Justice & Human Rights
in Canada
Deborah Jones
Moderator
Canadian Association of Journalists List
Thank you for your reply. I have renamed this: "Taking a Sledgehammer to
the Foundation of Justice & Human Rights in Canada" (Was: "CAJ & Canadian
Journalistic Negligence"). I have cc'd UNHCHR although they will get this
posting anyway, either via the quick and inexpensive methods of accessing
the archives online or the slow and expensive method of us sending them
the printouts by postal mail.
G.M. Danilenko tells us about "jus cogens" at
<http://www.ejil.org/journal/Vol2/No1/art3.html>: "The idea of
international jus cogens as a body of 'higher law' of overriding
importance for the international community is steadily gaining ground".
That may conjure up images of austere global jurists communicating among
themselves in a language few mortals can understand, about concepts which
may forever be beyond our reach. But the "fundamental justice" at issue
here is easily understood and it is universal. If you are peacefully
walking down a street in Japan or Nigeria or Canada and someone starts
beating on you, threatening and attacking your life and health, that is
CRIMINAL ASSAULT on an innocent person in anyone's understanding.
But that is effectively what has been happening here to thousands of our
citizens and after UNHCHR has examined this matter thoroughly we are
asking that they send it to ICC for an investigation of the CRIMINAL
aspect of human rights violations in Canada. We have quasi-judicial human
rights bodies at various levels in Canada and they deal mostly with the
non-criminal aspect of human rights violations.
If Citizen X does not get the job at a local gas station because of race,
religion or ethnicity, X can complain to one of these human rights
commissions in Canada and X probably will have that complaint dealt with
properly. In the post sledge-hammer era, X may now return to an alley to
die of exposure (as Frank Paul died for example) "assured" by the powers
that be that human rights and justice have been served. X may be relegated
to that alley to die for non-compliance with the minor dictates of a
government bureaucracy. X may be given this russian-roulette
probability-basis death sentence even if X has a well diagnosed and
serious medical disability. X may be given the death sentence despite X's
many volunteer contributions to society, let us say as a CAJ List
volunteer (your comments below) because the bureaucrats administering the
death sentence will not even ask X what X does voluntarily for society and
does not care. Mssrs. Martin, Campbell et al are saying by performance
that the X's of Canada can be legally and justly killed by society at
large with government speaking and acting for society at large. Now if
that doesn't make a farce out of human rights what does? The racial,
religious and ethnic characteristics are not allowed to factor into the
decision at the gas station because human lives in general are deemed to
be of inherent value. Mssrs. Martin, Campbell et al have taken a
sledge-hammer to that idea. So much for jus cogens. In Canada now
INNOCENCE IS NO DEFENCE AGAINST A DEATH PENALTY.
How else might a journalist then title this story? How about "Conception
to Death Pro-Choice in Canada". In Canada, there are innocents who can
legally be put to death by society at large from conception to death. Gary
Breitkreuz, (MP-Conservative) knows this, if for no other reason than us
telling him repeatedly. Ask Conservatives who support his pro-life private
member's bill why they won't they won't expand the bill to protect the
lives of innocents post-natally.
But the reason the concerns were raised on CAJ was explicitly to find out
why the journalists of Canada have ignored the important issues (the real
story) all along. It was not to present a story per se. Why did the media
fail the citizens of Canada when it came to safeguarding our democratic
society?
Journalists might also wonder WHO is behind the wrecking crew. Is it just
coincidence that this "MHR Regimen" is mostly a post 9/11 phenomenon? Are
Martin and Campbell under orders from south of the 49th? Speculative at
this time but a good question. On the level of FACT we have innocent
citizens being told every day that society at large can legally and justly
torture and kill them. Hyperbole? Bring forward any journalist or anyone
else for that matter to argue against our position online.
POC
<http://www.geocities.com/universalhumanrightscanada>
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Deborah Jones wrote:
>
> To whoever the POC is:
>
> I suggest if you're going to campaign for media attention that you first find
> out the basics of how the media and various organizations work.
>
> The CAJ is a national volunteer self-help organization run on a financial shoe
> string, by and for journalists across the country and internationally. It is not
> a media outlet that "runs" stories. The CAJ does not tell stories. Nor does it
> have the resources or mandate to investigate and rate how media outlets treat
> specific stories. Its list serves operate by and for journalists and lobbying
> for stories on them is not allowed, because otherwise everyone with a cause
> would sign up and all the journalists, who are lobbied all day and who come to
> the lists to discuss craft, would leave.
The postings were explicit and clear. This was a meta-journalism query as
to why the journalistic community in Canada had failed the citizenry. It
was NOT lobbying for a story. That phase of our work was completed. The
journalists of Canada failed in their professional duty to see the
important story/stories which they should have seen without any help from
POC.
> If you have a story you think should be covered, you might accomplish this by
> sending clearly explained material with background, naming names, details,
> times, dates and contact data, to a reporter who covers that topic, or to the
> editors of media outlets in the appropriate locale -- in this case, it's not
> clear but I'd guess you're looking at British Columbia-based media outlets. It
> would help your cause if you include your name and contact data and explain what
> you're talking about. For example your reference to "Form/Procedure 2863 of MHR
> in BC" and references to several people without some explaination would mean
> nothing to the reporters on the CAJ list serve who are, say, in Digby, Nova
> Scotia, in Iraq or Afghanistan, Singapore or even Toronto. I'd wager even most
> Vancouver reporters would not know what you're talking about. Because reporters
> get hundreds of story pitches across desks daily, something incomprehensible
> will be ignored.
All of these things were done repeatedly. But in any case journalists
should have seen the important issues without our help.
> Another suggestion, if you don't want to approach media outlets in your area.
> You could do what all journalists do when they care about something deeply: they
> write about it, and submit it for publication at media outlets.
>
> Railing at me or at other CAJ volunteers will accomplish exactly nothing. This
> is my last communication with you. Please note that I am a volunteer with no
> power or influence to help you publicize a story, and I don't have any more time
> to explain how things work.
Oh we do our share of railing alright as it is part of cyber-politics. But
there is still a need for some cool, clear-headed analysis and
self-examination by the journalists of Canada. When Martin, Campbell et al
took that sledge hammer to the foundation of justice and human rights in
Canada, where were they?
POC
> Deborah Jones
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Party of Citizens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 1:16 PM
> Subject: CAJ & Canadian Journalistic Negligence
>
>
> | It is FACT that the health and lives of thousands of our citizens have
> | been subjected to daily threats; and to harm when the threats have been
> | actualized. If organized crime were to do this as directly as
> | Form/Procedure 2863 of MHR in BC, the media of the land most certainly
> | would see this as newsworthy. But NOT ONE MEDIA STORY has presented the
> | MHR Regimen in these terms, ie as WHAT IT IS. What is it? It is a direct
> | and criminal threat to our citizens. Thousands of stories have reported
> | the officially accepted smoke and mirrors propaganda line that this is
> | only about budgetary cuts, the kind of cuts we all make in daily life.
> |
> | IT IS NOT ABOUT CUTS. It is about threatening the health and lives of
> | innocent Canadians as surely as if by pointing a gun at their heads across
> | the desk of a bureaucrat. The dishonesty and lack of professionalism in
> | the CAJ refusal to examine its own misconduct (below) now creates another
> | newsworthy story and one which will not be told by CAJ of course.
> |
> | So ask yourself how well the media are doing in the great scheme of things
> | and those 'checks and balances' which are supposed to protect democracy
> | and the constitutional rights of our citizens. Ask yourself why the
> | closest the media have come to the real story is by Mansbridge of CBC
> | asking Layton on June 1/04 with obvious sarcasm whether he was calling
> | Martin the "personal killer" of the victims we are defending before UNHCHR
> | and Palmer asking Layton's BC provincial counterpart MacPhail much the
> | same. And what were the answers? LOOK JUST A LITTLE DEEPER AT THE ANSWERS.
> |
> | Both avoided or negated the idea of "personal killers" in government. Both
> | said that government actions had consequences and the consequences WERE
> | KILLING PEOPLE. Now we add 2 and 2 and what do we get? The journalists of
> | Canada would have us believe that innocent citizens get killed by
> | bureaucrats explicitly and sometimes mockingly as our report to UNHCHR
> | reveals, from across desks, using forms with printing which articulates
> | the threats to health and life, and somehow, in Alice and Wonderland
> | fashion, there is NO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Thus when a "client" (ie
> | victim) is killed there is no "personal killer". How do you in the media
> | live with yourselves and this STUPID LIE while you allow one of the
> | blackest chapters in Canadian history to be written? So yes there is a
> | story, a story of evil and the media of Canada are helping to create it
> | through the MALPRACTICE OF THEIR "CRAFT".
> |
> | Here is the story the unprofessional and unbelievably stupid malpractice
> | of CAJ et al would want us to believe:
> |
> | Under administrative orders which go all the way to Campbell and Martin
> | (both PERSONS you will note) a minor bureaucrat, a PERSON, issues threats
> | to the health and life of another PERSON from across a desk. The second
> | PERSON as a result, ends up dying (not living) in an alley. The second
> | PERSON predictably sickens and dies because of what the first PERSON said
> | and did under orders from the two PERSONS above. The second PERSON is
> | killed as Frank Paul was killed (death-by-exposure said the coroner) in a
> | Vancouver alley.
> |
> | Now we need X Files music in the background because a miracle happens.
> | There is NO "PERSONAL KILLER" in the above. The Pentagon needs the story
> | of this miracle from CAJ. If only they could get rid of all those Al
> | Qaeda and Iraqi rebels without having to use a personal killer!
> |
> | "The truth is out there"
> |
> | POC
> |
> | ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> | Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:09:50 -0400 (EDT)
> | From: Zandu Goldbar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | To: Deborah Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | Subject: [UNIVERSALHUMANRIGHTS] Re: caj list
> |
> | I reply without respect for your obtuse comments below and for a "profession"
> which is too hypocritical to examine itself even when it sets up a list like CAJ
> with a mandate for doing so.
> |
> | I dealt specifically with the meta-journalism issue of why Canadian
> journalists were not able to see the real story in this even before our formal
> complaint to UNHCHR.
> |
> | POC
> |
> | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> |
> | Deborah Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Hi Zandu,
> |
> | With respect, caj-l is not a forum to discuss MHR procedures, cuts to social
> | services, what the Prime Minister said about values in the election or the
> | Canadian Constitution -- all worthwhile topics, but as they're non-journalism
> | topics -- despite the references to journalism -- they do not fit the mandate
> of
> | this list. caj-l is funded and volunteer-managed by journalists for
> | journalists, as a forum for journalists to discuss craft issues.
> |
> | I respectfully suggest that you take discussion of your issues to other lists.
> | If you wish to lobby journalists about issues, I suggest that you write and
> send
> | your own essays to publications, or send press releases to news rooms.
> |
> | I have removed your address from caj-l.
> |
> | Deborah Jones
> | caj-l moderator
> |
> |
> |
> | From: Zandu Goldbar
> | | Subject: re What is the Story?
> | | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | | Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | |
> | | Note: forwarded message attached.
> | |
> | | I received an email reply from a Victoria journalist interested in "the
> story"
> | but I'd like to go a few rounds on the meta-journalism aspect of this (which
> is
> | the list Charter of course). During that time, too, UNHCHR will decide how to
> | respond to the filed complaint:
> | |
> | | http://www.geocities.com/universalhumanrightscanada
> | |
> | | Attached is an email reply from Attorney General Plant on the criminality of
> | MHR procedures. That gives us a clue that the real story was not simply "cuts
> to
> | social services". If only I had a nickel for every page of newsprint on
> "cuts"!
> | It reminds me of the conflict between the big-endians and little-endians from
> | Gulliver's Travels and frankly of not much more interest than how we top our
> | eggs. One camp shouted "more" and the other shouted "less" and journalists
> | dutifully wrote down what they said.
> | |
> | | What is the story in "more" v. "less"? We do the more v. less thing every
> day
> | with our household and personal budgets. I suppose book-keeping and
> accountancy
> | have their place in journalism but isn't there something else to this? Isn't
> | there a much more important story about VALUES ... and Prime Minister Martin
> did
> | say this election is about values.
> | |
> | | Let me just put a few ideas out for consideration and they are from the
> | Canadian Constitution (Charter of Rights and Freedoms). If society at large
> and
> | the government acting on its behalf can legally take the lives of innocent
> | citizens by depriving them of the essentials to sustain life and health, what
> | does that say about "fundamental justice" in Charter S.7? If the only legal
> | death penalty in Canada is then one levied against poor folk who have
> committed
> | no crime, what does that say for "equality rights" in Charter S.15? When we
> had
> | a BC Ferries strike, there were lots of stories written about how Premier
> | Campbell was ready to invoke Charter S.36, "essential services" to keep food
> | from perishing en route to restaurants. But neither Premier Campbell nor Prime
> | Minister Martin believe they have a comparable commitment, duty or obligation
> to
> | make sure that the essentials like food get to the poorest folk in the land.
> Ask
> | them if you doubt that.
> | |
> | | Surely then there is a story which far outweighs "more v. less" and surely
> it
> | has something to do with fundamental values in this country, values which are
> | articulated in our Constitution and values which must be safeguarded by the
> | community of journalists. I am hoping you can tell me more about the nature of
> | the real story.
> | |
> | | ZG
> | |
> | |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> | ---------------------------------
> | Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals
> |
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/JFQulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
America-the-Good chafes under the iron heel of the Cult of U-S-A as do other states of
the world: LIBERATE America, shore up world JUSTICE!
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LIBERTY-AND-JUSTICE/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
