great expectations

This is truly blogging on the run, well blogging on the rails anyways. I'm currently riding viarail from Toronto to Ottawa to see a friend from up north who moved to the nation's capital.

I'm a little less than impressed with my train voyage so far. I started this morning in my hometown in the suburbs outside of Toronto. The plan was to catch via in the hometown, switch trains in Toronto and then off to Ottawa. With all of the advertising via has done about how taking the train is the human(e) way to travel, I think my expectations had been raised beyond via's ability to meet them.

I expected something different than you typical voyage on Canada's national airline or that other perky airline. First off, via is "arrive 30 minutes before" or "one hour before" if you want to check baggage. Ok this is a little better than the airlines, but not much.

As I arrived the requisite amount of time in advance, I'm then told the train is running 20 minutes late. It ended up being 30 minutes late. The reason for these delays, "A large number of passengers and bags". Maybe via's advertising has been too successful and they can't meet the demand they have created.

Unfortunately, although I was continuing on to Ottawa on the same train we had to get off and reboard the train (although we were allowed to leave our luggage). I took a short stroll around union station only to find that the lineup to board my train ran the full length of the departure area, up the ramp and into the main part of the station. Some of these people had to be lined up at least an hour before the train was scheduled to leave. It's beginning to seem a lot like an airport.

I can't understand the rush, people have assigned seats, there's no advantage to standing in line. Speaking of seats, my window seats selected in advance were changed with no notice by via when I picked up my tickets.

Finally, all those annoying people who I thought only flew, appear also to take the train. Such as the a-hole in 11C who has his chair reclined to the point where his head is in my lap, or the person who broke out a harvey's meal right beside. Both were victims of the withering look of disapproval(tm).

Maybe via is a more human way to travel, but the problem is that it still includes other humans. I don't think I'm cut out for mass transit.

separating the wheat from the chaff

Well they've only been in power for a couple of weeks now, and the Sask Party is not off to a great start. When they should be focusing on their key campaign promises and the big issues, Saskatchewan's New Government (sound familiar?) decided to turf the province's 30 year old logo, a stylized wheat sheaf.

Now, in their own defence, I wasn't able to write about this quick enough, as the Saskatchewan's New Government has, with tail between their legs, turned around from this position already. Public outrage over changing the logo, their lack of any sense of priority, and the cost of such of a move has made them change their mind. Not only did they change their mind, they announced it twice, releasing two news releases only hours apart changing the wording between the first and the second.

None of the current SaskParty Cabinet members have any experience in government and it is already beginning to show. I know it will take some time for them to get up to speed, but their lack of political savvy is alarming. The SaskParty railed against the NDP's decision to rebrand the Saskatchewan wordmark as Saskatchewan!. They argued it wasn't necessary, it was too much money, government should be spending money on more important things. However, as soon as they are in power they arbitrarily declare the wheat sheaf persona non grata and replace it with the Government crest, announcing they will go through a costly process of developing a new logo.

Speculation is that they are not happy having a logo created by an NDP government, that has been in use during a period dominated by NDP politics. However, there were conservative governments during that period.

Sending out two press releases changing the words in a quote from one to the other is not acceptable. The story as it was in today's local paper was about the retreat and the fact that they sent out two press releases saying two different things.

This is bad public relations skills. You can one shot at trying to explain a mistake or backpedal so you better get it right. Make sure that you can live with every word in your news release. If you can't don't send it out until you get it right. If you get it wrong, own up to it, don't try to pass it off in another news release. The Deputy Premier should have got on the phones and worked new quotes directly with the press rather than try to pass off another news release.

Hopefully the SaskParty is staffing up with some skilled politically savvy people otherwise they could be in for a long and bumpy ride.

may the curve be with you

Well, it's done. All my exams are over for this term and I am officially done half of law school. 3 semesters to go. At this point for this term I've done all I can do and my fate is in the hands of my profs and the curve.

The little law school on the prairie marks using a curve. This means only some many of each mark is available. If a prof wants to deviate from the curve they have to go and argue their case before the entire faculty, so I doubt this happens too often except for the moots, law review and seminars.

In first year the curve worked both ways for me. In one or two classes I rode the curve up, and in one class for certain, I rode the curve down. This term it will be interesting to see what happens. I had one seminar, where a paper I wrote was worth 60%, and participation and presenting my paper were the other 40%. I think I should do okay, plus it's a seminar so I'm not sure how the curve works. To avoid having three exams in four days, I wrote a major paper (worth 100%) in one class.

That left me with three exams. So how did they go. I would characterize them, with my apologies to Clint, as the good, the okay and the ugly. Today's exam I think I rocked so we'll call it the good. It was public international law. I had five days to prepare, I knew my stuff, and I had time to plan and review my answers.

The okay, was Indian and Aboriginal Law. I say okay because I have had this prof before for a number of assignments and a class. I have never gotten anything other than a B+ from this prof, no matter how much work I do or don't put in, and regardless of whether I thought I did good or bad. It's anonymous marking, but 3 out of the 5 things I have done for this prof have been anonymous and it still hasn't made a difference.

The ugly, well that was Evidence. It was the day after my Indian and Aboriginal law class and it was well just plain ugly. The exam looked nothing like any other exam we have had, and looked nothing like the tutorial problems we were given. Nice. I just didn't get evidence, and what little I did get didn't make it onto the page. It is for this reason that I pray the curve is with me.

A short break is now allowed, and new classes start in January. However, over the holidays I have to prepare for my moot. When I'm back in January, it's before a three-member panel of QB judges to rake me over the coals, over an evidence problem no less. GAH!

you're always on my mind

The thing that I hate most about exam time here at the little law school on the prairie is the fact that you can never get away from exams. They are always on your mind.

Monday's exam went well, but Tuesday's was a disaster. I decided to take the rest of Tuesday off, and start fresh on Wednesday. My next exam is not until Monday and I decided I would just work everyday between now and then to get ready for it. My next exam is international law.

After two days of solid work, I thought a reward was in order, and nothing says reward like Matt Damon. I sat down with the Saskatoon Uncles to watch the Bourne Ultimatum. Instead of a nice relaxing evening, the following was constantly running through my head, and occasionally out of my mouth:

"Hey, that was a violation of international law!"

"Rendition is illegal, that's a violation of Morracco's sovereingty!"

"The UK can file a claim over the killing of it's citizen, they have enforcement juridiction because the objective element of the offence occurred on their territory!"

"The US could be held responsible for that internationally wrongful act!"

So what does this show us, well two things. One, I may actually have learned something in international law. Second, you can never get a relaxing break away from exams, movies are ruined for me forever, or at least until Tuesday.

Here's hoping Question 3 on Monday's exam will be:

"Identify the various violations of international law that occurred in the Bourne Ultimatum, the state responsible, which states would be able to invoke state responsibility and whether there were any circumstances which would preclude the wrongfulness of any of these acts."

If not, maybe it will make a good minor paper topic next year.

polkaroo, polkaroo, polkaroo

Those of you in Ontario will be familiar with Polkaroo, the mysterious creature who appeared on the TVO show Polka Dot Door. On the show, live hosts, a male and a female would interact with stuffed toys like Marigold and Humpty. These were not the highest quality stuffed todays, very round, exaggerated and childish. Perfect for the audience, and we were talking about a show that aired on Ontario's public broadcaster. The male host would disappear at times, and the mysterious Polkaroo would appear and exclaim his name over and over again.


I've been thinking about Polkaroo and the Polka Dot Door a lot lately after seeing the new mascots for the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. They were announced several weeks ago and I meant to blog about them at the time, but never did. However, they've been bouncing around in my head ever since. Here's a photo of them:



The photo, was part of a story the Globe and Mail did on the mascots. The three mascots, representing a sea bear (Miga), a legendary Sasquatch (Quatchi) and an animal spirit hybrid (Sumi), are inspired by aboriginal myths and the province's wildlife.

I don't know about you, but mascots that need a lot of interpretation and explanation just don't work for me. Sumi (insert law school joke here), is part bear, whale and bird. I applaud the VANOC for finally incorporating some local aboriginal traditions, considering the image of the 2010 Vancouver Olympics is an Inukshuk, which is a symbol of the Inuit of the Eastern and Western Arctic, not the pacific coast.

However, mascots directed at kids should be simple and easy to understand. As much as the Polka Dot Door toys were not fancy, as a kid I could understand them. You had Humpty, Dumpty, Bear and Marigold. I bet you can pick them all out. Polkaroo appeared on imagination day and was supposed to be part of your imagination. These are all easy concepts to understand.

In fact, looking at the picture above, I'm a little embarrassed by the mascots. However, when drawn, rather than as 3D character costumes they are better:

law school musical

I know that as I post more of these videos, you're going to think that we don't actually do any work at law school. The fact is we do so much work that rather than face the reality of it, we spend our time finding ways of not dealing with it. Like making or searching out these videos.

snail in a bottle

Blogging may be a little hit or miss, or video heavy the next week or so as I'm into final exams. Yesterday I was studying Evidence and the Lego Men straightened hearsay out for me. Today I'll be studying Evidence and Indian and Aboriginal. However, I don't have a video for either.

This video though is a nice summation of the modern tort of negligence. This tort began with a snail found in a bottle of ginger beer. It's no "Tort Law Back" but the makers of this video get bonus points for the use of a Police song, and the little A-Ha interlude.

proving the truth of its contents

I'm studying for evidence today and am wondering why my evidence prof couldn't have taught the class this way:

she's at it again

I guess maybe Ms. Hampson has realized her pieces have been a little one-sided and has decided to write her current piece on what women of a certain age want in men. However, not to fear, this does not mean she has reduced her dependence on ego stroking, cliches and stereotypes. Alright, you know the routine, go read it, you know you want to, then use the back button to come on back.

First off, Ms. Hampson works in a coy little story to show that despite her recent divorce she's still 'got-it'. Why else for the story about being hit on by a creepy, old married man. Ms. Hampson, I think it's time you got the "old creep-o-meter" re-tuned, because if it didn't flicker on the dying man saying he didn't have to be 'married' that night, then it's broken.

Later in the article, it's said that men "...should feel like your favourite pair of sweatpants." Nice, maybe Ms. Hampson was feeling guilty for last week's comparison of women to car seats and old leather and tried to balance the analogy scale.

What intrigues me is how although being a piece on what women want, it really seems to be tips on how women should compromise, balding, that's ok, a little paunch, that's ok too, things like career and success aren't too important. It's fascinating to see this.

Last week's piece was positioned as rules for women about what men want in women of a certain age, so why she didn't write this piece as rules for men is beyond me. It would seem more fair, rather than this piece which puts the emphasis on women looking past things in men that men may not be prepared to look past in women.

For example, women of a certain age, according to last week shouldn't talk too much about their children. It's against the rules. However, women should "pay attention to a man's relationship with his children from a previous marriage." It's important for women to know he plays a meaningful role with his children, but she's not supposed to talk about hers. If he does have a meaningful relationship with his children, I imagine he'll want to know that a woman he's interested in has good relationships with her children. But no, she can't talk about that, it's "against the rules".

You may also note that everything a woman should be looking for in a man, how he talks about his ex, his relationship with his children are predicated on a previous relationship. What about the single older man, oh wait, that's right, we're talking about Ms. Hampson, and she's the founding memberof the "if they're over 40 and never been married than they are not dating material" club. ARGH!

I mean really, once we all reach a certain age, male or female, aren't we looking for something other than the rules and games of our youth when we didn't know any better. Ms. Hampson is doing nothing other than trying to bring back those silly days of youthful relationships and trying to plant them on a completely different point of our lives, where we want to be and in fact are past them.

this kind of stuff still shouldn't happen

From the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission:

New York, Wednesday December 5, 2007) - The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) has learned today that despite an order by the Iranian Chief Justice to nullify his death sentence, Mr. Makvan Mouloodzadeh was executed in Kermanshah Central Prison at 5 a.m. this morning, Iranian time. Neither Mr. Mouloodzadeh's family or his lawyer were told about the execution until after it occurred. IGLHRC is still investigating the facts in this case.

"This is a shameful and outrageous travesty of justice and international human rights law," said Paula Ettelbrick, IGLHRC's executive director. "How many more young Iranians have to die before the international community takes action?"

Mr. Mouloodzadeh was a 21-year-old Iranian citizen who was accused of committing anal rape (ighab) with other young boys when he was 13 years old. However, at Mr. Mouloodzadeh's trial, all the witnesses retracted their pre-trial testimonies, claiming to have lied to the authorities under duress. Makvan also told the court that his confession was made under coercion and pleaded not guilty. On June 7, 2007, the Seventh District Criminal Court of Kermanshah in Western Iran found him guilty and sentenced him to death. Despite his lawyer's appeal, the Supreme Court upheld his death sentence on August 1, 2007. The case caused an international uproar, and prompted a letter writing campaign by IGLHRC and similar actions by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Outrage! and Everyone Group.

In response to mounting public pressure, and following a detailed petition submitted to the Iranian Chief Justice by Mr. Mouloodzadeh's lawyer, the Iranian Chief Justice, Ayatollah Seyed Mahmoud Hashemi Shahrudi, nullified the impending death sentence of Mr. Mouloodzadeh. In his November 10, 2007 opinion (1/86/8607), the Iranian Chief Justice described the death sentence to be in violation of Islamic teachings, the religious decrees of high-ranking Shiite clerics, and the law of the land.

In accordance with Iranian legal procedure, Mr. Mouloodzadeh's case was sent to the Special Supervision Bureau of the Iranian Justice Department, a designated group of judges who are responsible for reviewing and ordering retrials of flawed cases flagged by the Iranian Chief Justice. However, in defiance of the Chief Justice, the judges decided to ratify the original court's ruling and ordered the local authorities to carry out the execution.

Mr. Mouloodzadeh's execution came days after a panel at the UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty.

You can read IGLHRC's action alert on our website: http://www.iglhrc.org/site/iglhrc/section.php?id=5&detail=797

Our Letter to the Iranian authorities is also posted on our website in both English and Persian: http://www.iglhrc.org/site/iglhrc/section.php?id=5&detail=798

singing in the shower

The following youtuber takes it out of the shower but stays in the bathroom for this recording. He says that his bathroom has the best acoustics. He has quite the voice, and it's an impressive rendition of the song.

A warning for the Grinches among my readers, it's a Christmas song:



Anyways, this will make a good story for if he makes it big. How were you discovered, "singing in my bathroom on youtube".

one size fits all is a lie

I have a very large head, there's no denying. Even other people with big noggins have commented on the sheer size of my scalp. I've blogged before about my love for the movie "So I Married an Axe-Murder!" In it is a hilarious scene where Mike Myers, playing his character's father does a bit of routine on his brother's head. This was me growing up. You can catch a bit of it here:

How all this head talk has come about is that old man winter has blown onto the prairie for good this time and I've decided to sport an old man hat for the season. But this isn't any ordinary old man hat; it's harris tweed, but it's got gor-tex. 

One of the reasons for this specific hat is that one size fits all hats are a lie! Don't believe them. They may fit most, but they won't fit all. My noggin is not going into a one size fits all hat. When I find some who makes an XXL hat I feel compelled to buy it out of gratitude alone, regardless of what I may think of the hat.  

As for those shocked and appalled by the thought of an XXL hat, my ski-doo helmet is an XXXL and has that conveniently printed across the back for the world to see. I'm surprised I can stand upright when I have it on. It's probably about forty pounds of plastic and padding. I don't resent the helmet though, as my head is how I make my living and it needs to be safe.

Anyways, back to the old man hat. I bought this because the XXL actually included my size, 7 and 7/8 inches, yes I pretty much have eight inches (insert innuendo here). I like the style but I'm not sure I'm loving it yet. Here's me in my old man hat:

I think Russell would approve, but do you?

talk among yourselves

Okay I am really busy cranking out the last couple of sections for my environmental law major paper today (that is due tomorrow - never again, never again).

Today you'll have to talk among yourselves, here's a topic:

• Canada's arctic waters: is sovereignty the key to environmental protection or is the focus on sovereignty putting the environment at a greater risk?

world aids day

hold on to your undies

Well before I went offline last weekend, I did promise a Tom Jones post. It came up when I termed Shirley Bassey as a female Tom Jones. They're both Welsh (like me) and have distinctive voices and sounds. And they're both still going strong today despite decades in the business. I blame my parents for my knowledge of things like this. I remember Tom being played throughout my youth.

I've got two clips. One a classic Tom Jones song full of innuendo and trumpets. The second is a more recent effort where he paired up a number of other acts, including the Stereophonics, a Welsh band.