TO ATTACK WITH PIRACY OR TO SHARE WITH FRIENDS? Freeing oneself from corporate software

“It may be illegal, not all the features may be working, but if you download it... it's free,” the Future Shop employee responded after I inquired about Adobe Photoshop's price. It's Boxing Day, everything must go, and if a tip on pirating illegal software means one more computer is sold then this employee shows no qualms about it. He knows that his “This Boxing Day only” $599 laptop will increase by almost $1000 if I'm considering buying Photoshop CS4. On top of that, Microsoft Office retails from $159-$599 and he doesn't want the accumulated costs to scare me away. “Just download it,” he assures me.

When a Future Shop employee himself is recognizing the ridiculous costs of computers and is telling me to steal from another company so that he can make a sale on the hardware, we have a problem. This is not just one sole employee – after speaking to other employees at popular tech retailers from Best Buy and London Drugs, and admittedly coaxing them a little, they admit they're not entirely against the idea of pirating either.

About 41% of all software worldwide is pirated, according to the Business Software Alliance (BSA), which comprises of software corporations such as Apple and Microsoft. The BAS claims that pirated software has cost these companies more than $50 billion a year: "The retail value of unlicensed software — representing revenue 'losses' to software companies — broke the $50 billion level for the first time in 2008. Worldwide losses grew by 11 percent to $53 billion. Excluding the effect of exchange rates, losses grew by five percent to $50.2 billion." Yet, some of these same companies in the alliance haven't set out to completely prevent piracy. Bill Gates once pointed out to a room full of business students at the University of Washington: “As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours.” Gates was referring to the rampant piracy of Windows that occurs in China and how Microsoft would rather have their software pirated than a competitor's.

When both the consumer and the sales-people are justifying what they themselves deem as illegal activity towards larger corporations, there is a problem. To solve the ideological difference between the producers, middle man, and consumers, we need to visit the root of the problem.



Who controls the prices?


What you pay for a computer can be divided into three elements: the hardware, operating system, and the software. In our global free market, the hardware element is represented relatively well compared to the other elements. That is, computer hardware has a competitive market where different manufacturers, from Intel in USA to Panasonic in Japan, can compete to provide you a suitable service. These companies are represented well by large computer retailers such as Future Shop and Best Buy. The same can be said about software, although 'out of the box,' consumers are left with what the operating system and retailers chose to run natively (such as Internet Explorer or Safari). The control of what is on your computer is left to the operating system.

For operating systems there are one two main contenders: Apple and Microsoft. With Microsoft holding a monopoly on about 90 percent of the market share and Apple holding about nine percent. So what's the alternative one percent? Future Shop and Best Buy do offer one alternative: GNU/Linux. But after speaking to their employees, it was surprising to find that most of them were unaware of what exactly GNU/Linux is other than it being a third alternative. One of their Apple representatives incorrectly stated that it's what the Apple OS runs off.

Their ignorance of the GNU/Linux OS not only benefits Microsoft and Apple but it is the raison d'etre of the piracy of their own product: “It's easier for our software to compete with [GNU]-Linux when there's piracy than when there's not” Gates tells a group of students at Washington University. “Outside of Windows on PCs, it's hard to see other examples of software and hardware decoupled and working well yet.” Steve Jobs chimed to a forum in 2007. Often, Jobs neglects the amount of reliance Apple has had on the open source community and GNU/Linux. What are these two men hiding? What is this third operating system, GNU/Linux, that they fear?

With these questions I approached the father of GNU/Linux OS, Richard Stallman. He is to GNU/Linux what Steve Jobs is to Apple or Bill Gates is to Microsoft. Visiting university to university and forum to forum, this man is asking for us to look differently at software. Not only is he a computer programmer for his own OS (something which neither Gates nor Jobs is) but he is also a hacker and a freedom activist. After graduating Harvard magna cum laude he went on to MIT for his graduate studies while programming for MIT's AI laboratory. This was where his new operating system began to take root.

When MIT's computer laboratory installed a password system, Stallman decoded how to get around it – not out of malice, but to prove a lesson. The other users in the lab received a message from Stallman which revealed their decoded passwords and a suggestion: that they basically shouldn't bother with passwords. Stallman holds a slight smile as he retells this story and is perhaps boasting. But his point was clear: closed systems aren't as secure as they seem to the average user. And as the MIT admins continued to re-secure their system, Stallman continued hacking and leaving messages to users. One message he left read: “There has been another attempt to seize power. So far, the aristocratic forces have been defeated.”

If this analogy seems dull, consider the fact that Stallman left his MIT account open for all users to access his system. Other hackers from as far off as California were able to use Stallman's computer. And this wasn't just any computer, this was ARPAnet- The foundation for what is now the Internet. The symbolism is more complete when we consider that Stallman was allowing the world to access ARPAnet before there even was an Internet for the world to access. During this time of battling “aristocratic forces” Stallman announced, in 1983, that it was time for a new, free, and open operating system. As Stallman was finishing the operating system, another programmer, Linus Torvalds, created the kernel so that the OS could work properly with computer hardware. The final product was the GNU/Linux OS.

This operating system, whose founder fought the securities of other systems, has now evolved to be what many consider as the most secure operating system for computers. In 2008, Vancouver was host to a hacking competition, “PWN to OWN,” where hackers competed by trying to hack into computers running Mac's OSX, Microsoft's Windows and GNU/Linux. Mac lost first and was hacked into in about two minutes, Windows was hacked into on the third day and GNU/Linux was left standing unscathed and unhacked for the three-day competition. In 2009, the same contest was held but this time it was focused on web browsers. Once again, open software lasted longer than closed software. Mac's browser, Safari, was hacked into within a couple of minutes and then IE8 followed. The open browsers Firefox and Chrome lasted the longest, though they did finally fall later in the contest. From browser to operating system, open systems were the most secure.

But these impressive results for open software are merely a by-product in the eyes of its father, Richard Stallman. Although GNU/Linux is open, the more important aspect is that it's free as in freedom. “I am an activist in the free software movement, which is totally different at the level of spirit.” To be brief, the difference between open and free software is that while they are both generally the same thing “free” software adds an ethical spirit to open software. The ethic is that users should be free to “run it, to study and change it, and to redistribute copies with or without changes.”


A flower power outlet

With his long hair and beard, he stands in stark contrast to his clean shaven contemporaries, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. To put it bluntly, Stallman reminds me of hippies from the '70s. And his views chant “power to the people” just as much as a Lennon album. Views that are revolutionary in so much as they require almost a paradigm shift in our current understanding of software.

Take, for example, when I ask him about piracy: “When talking about sharing I refuse to label it as 'piracy'. I say, 'Piracy means attacking ships.'” Stallman explains that when a user provides their friends or family with a piece of software they're sharing it, to label users that do so as pirates “is propaganda; it assumes that copying and sharing is wrong.”

So what of Gates' statement that China's “sharing” of Windows software was helping Microsoft keep an edge over China? Stallman interprets it as such: “What Gates said has an explicit statement, 'the sharing we forbid is ironically good for us,' and an implicit assumption, 'Microsoft is entitled to forbid sharing.' I think the explicit point is a side issue; what I really want to reject is the implicit assumption. 'If I were writing an article to criticize his statement, I would make the assumption explicit, and attack that.”

So let's make it explicit: Is Microsoft entitled to forbid the sharing of their product? Although Bill Gates could not reply by press time, a Microsoft developer gave me a resounding: “Yes, because Microsoft owns the copyright.” Microsoft's and Apple's position on piracy of software is quite clear as both have a paperwork of legal trials against pirates. But GNU/Linux has a different approach, as Stallman had one main goal: To keep it free. From GNU's equivalent of Photoshop to their version of a word processor to the entire operating system itself, the code is left completely open and free to the user. And to ensure that his OS and software remain free, Stallman created his own license known as the General Public License (GPL). The license protects the freeness of popular software such as Firefox, VLC, and Gimp.

But what of the sharing of products that are not under the GPL, like Windows? I ask Stallman if this will hurt GNU/Linux as Gates has claimed? “The direct practical effect of unauthorized copying of proprietary software is to somewhat reduce the pain of the proprietary software social system. The result could be that fewer people feel motivated to escape to freedom. Conversely, when the masters of proprietary software carry out unusual or spectacular acts of repression against people who made unauthorized copies, that can rebound to our benefit. But we must never encourage or endorse such repression, because that would make us morally responsible for the repression. We must not act like unethical people who only want to 'win' and never mind how they do it.”

The ethics he speaks of are expanded on in Stallman's book “Free as in Freedom” that he is selling. It's under a similar license as the GPL. Noticing the $34.95 price tag of the book, I put it up to the test of his license and question whether I'm allowed to copy and distribute the book for free, much like the free software under his license. “All published works should be sharable, and these articles are sharable. Each article comes with permission to share exact copies, and the articles are available [at] gnu.org,” Stallman tells me. Sure enough, his entire book is there to read on the Internet for free. “I am very careful to practice what I preach,” he reminds me.

He passed the test, but I have one last question. I inform him that Capilano U's library lacks computers running GNU/Linux and ask for a personal recommendation: “I recommend the distros that are totally free software ... I have heard that Trisquel works pretty well.” Trisquel is free for downloading at gnu.org/distros."

To date the Business Software Alliance that Apple and Microsoft belong to has issued out 2.4 million takedown notices to networks facilitating “piracy.” GNU/Linux has issued zero and chooses to recognize the activity of copying and distributing software as “sharing.”

[Author's Note: In spirit with the Free Software Movement, this article, although not software, was made open and free to the GNU/Linux community of Reddit.com. Much like open software, this article was parsed by GNU/Linux users for inaccuracies. A total of around 80 edits and 30,000 reviews were made by the community. The author would like to thank the community for their participation.]

//Alamir Novin

Editor

FROM THE EDITOR: THE IMPORTANCE OF MATERIALISM

Print is dying? We should be so lucky. Journalism is dying. Or to be more specific, journalists are dying... literally. Last year marked the highest number of deaths related to journalism this millennium. A total of 137 people involved in media gave their lives to their line of work. Combine that with the continuing censorship of media and the dismembering of both print and television. We enter the year of 2010 following the worst-ever year for journalism.

The fact that saying “Print is dying” has become a common phrase should be alarming. Why? Because we shouldn't allow that phrase to linger long enough to become a cliché. What should also be alarming is how much of an understatement it is. Of the 137 people killed, 68 were journalists while the remainder worked for media in some other form. More than half of the journalists killed were print journalists. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CJB) have said that this statistic is “indicating that print media continue to play a front-line role in reporting the news in dangerous situations.” I agree. Print can be just as powerful of a medium as the Internet or television.

News servers can be taken down, websites can be altered, and television is only accessed temporarily by the user (unless you record it). It is only print which is fully palpable. For example, the Chinese government can broadcast new television reports that avoid the topic of Tienanmen Square and block virtual images of it on the Internet. But what they can't alter is the actual photograph of the events.

If you don't find this argument very convincing, then take into account what actions the richest man in the world is doing with print media. Bill Gates is using a bomb shelter that is 70 metres deep in a mine to store print media. Although he's more famously known for creating Microsoft, Gates also owns Corbis, a corporation which licenses photographs. Since the beginning of this millennium, Gates has reocated over 65 million photographs to place in his bomb shelter. You have mostly likely seen many of these photos, as they've documented a variety of topics – from the photo-journalism of the United Press International (including 10 million photos from the Hearst, Scripps and Chicago Tribune newspapers) to the Bettman archive of 7 million photographs. The point I want to drive home is that Corbis licenses millions of these photographs virtually over the Internet. It is possible to find many of these photographs online – so why protect the print versions? Gates understands the power of the print. The original, unalterable, material source of information.

The deconstructionalist philosopher Jacques Derrida once argued that the truth behind an archive of information, whether it be by bomb-shelter or library, will always be subject to what the archiver chooses not to archive. If I may extrapolate on Derrida's theories: with the existence of virtual servers holding information, it also depends on who controls the server which archives the information. A single server may hold the archives of thousands of other corporations. To exemplify this on a personal level, consider how many of your personal photographs have been deleted from your computer's hard-drive and left to be stored by a social network such as Facebook. The control of that entire archive is not in your hands, not even in your own government's hands, but in the hands of a few people in Palo Alto, California (Facebook's headquarters). When they turn off their servers, you use lose access.

Now, an image of you getting drunk on Facebook is a small thing to worry about having control over, but you can imagine the problems that arise if that photograph was a unique one of the events of Tienanmen Square and the servers hosting such images were blocked. That's exactly what happened in China.

In Orwell's 1984, the main character was a journalist. He began as a re-writer of newspaper articles, altering news just like the same talking heads we find on television, except he had to put in the extra effort of destroying print media. As soon as the main character did some actual independent print journalism by writing down “two plus two makes four,” he was killed. Another dead print journalist.

These days, cloud computing usage is rising. “Cloud” is the term used for a virtual storage system. That is, your files and data are not held on a physical hard drive that you control but a hard drive that is most likely miles away and only accessible through the Internet. Don't get me wrong, it's a great service and I use it. The benefits of digital information on the Internet are incredible – there's no reason for me to waste print on the topic. But equally true is that cloud computing will have facilitated the continuing detachment of the user from the physical copy as it becomes more common. A few months ago, one of my cloud services shut down after years of service. The Silicon Valley corporation erased all my photos and documents that were held there for over a decade. I had relied on their servers so much that I didn't require my files' physical copies for the entire decade, and I eventually lost them. It wasn't a complete loss – I gained a reminder in the importance of controlling print.

Here's to hoping 2010 brings a much safer year to all journalists – including the vital print journalist.

//Alamir Novin

Editor In Chief

DON'T BREATHE THIS Report Refutes Government and Industry Tarsands Claims

LETHBRIDGE, Alta. (CUP) – A report published in December from the U.S.-based National Academy of Science says that industrial pollution from Alberta’s tarsands operations is five times greater than industry and the government has claimed.

The National Academy of Science report found that the amount of toxic chemicals Syncrude and Suncor deposit into the surrounding environment each year is equivalent to a major oil spill.

The report, co-authored by University of Alberta ecologist David Schindler, contradicts claims from the Alberta government and the oil industry, which assert that the levels of toxic chemicals in the Athabasca River water system and in surrounding soils are a natural occurrence.

It also revealed that known toxic chemicals increase in intensity by 50 times when monitored downstream from oilsands operations. It also says that oil companies are releasing 34,000 tonnes of toxic particulates each year into the nearby environment, which contradicts industry figures that suggest development is responsible for 6,000 tonnes of particulate pollution.

The report is yet another peer-reviewed study challenging the Alberta government’s estimates of pollution and environmental destruction in the region from tarsands projects.

//Keith McLaughlin

The Meliorist

NEWS BRIEFS

CSU Elections

Nominations are currently open for the CSU executive positions of International Students Liaison and Social Justice Liaison. Any student may pick up a nomination form, and due to a recent policy change, they only require 5 signatures to be nominated instead of 15.

The International Students Liaison coordinates the International Students committee, and has in the past organized events such as laser tag and movie nights. The Social Justice Liaison is in charge of the CSU’s largest committee, which has put on events such as Hip Hop Versus War, Five Days for Homelessness, and various documentary screenings.

As well as coordinating their respective committees, these Liaisons become a part of the CSU Executive Committee, which allows them to vote on a variety of issues as a representative of the student body.

Nominations close on January 22, and campaigning begins on the 24. Elections take place from February 1-3, and all students are encouraged to cast their vote. Students can get informed about the candidates at the all-candidates forum on Thursday January 28, at which time they are also welcome to pose questions to the candidates.

ChatLive

ChatLive groups provide an opportunity for students to have informal, academic discussions about a variety of interesting topics. They are free to register for, and no marks are involved, but participation is noted on transcripts. This year, the groups offered are “Alternative 'What If' History”, “The Last Film I Saw Rocked (or Not So Much)”, and “Change Pilots”.

U-Pass Surcharge Exemption

When using the Canada Line, customers purchasing tickets from the
Ticket Vending Machines will be charged an additional five dollars to
travel from YVR-Airport, Sea Island Centre and Templeton Station to
Bridgeport Station, on top of the standard fare. However, as of a state-
ment released by Translink on January 8, anyone holding a pre-paid fare
will be exempt from this charge. This means that all U-Pass holders will not
have to pay a surcharge on travel on transit from the airport.

// Natalie Corbo,
news editor

U-PASS ARRIVALS DELAYED Students forced to shell out lunch money for transit fare

As the spring semester at Capilano commences, many students have found themselves without a U-Pass, despite having been charged for it alongside their Spring 2010 tuition. The Capilano CapCard Centre informs students to wait the full first school week, until Friday, January 8,  to see if their U-Pass is mailed to them. Meanwhile, no alternative method of paying for transit fare has been issued, and students are left in the dark and having to additionally pay out of pocket, as the previous semester’s U-Pass expired at the year’s end.

Reza Naghibi, a second-year Creative Writing student, received his U-Pass two days after his classes had begun. He also had problems getting his U-Pass during the previous term, when he changed his address. The U-Pass was mailed back to the CapCard Centre, and they did not contact him about his pass being kept on file. Amelie Segur, a first-year psychology student, also received her pass three days late, and had to pay out of pocket to get to school. She also registered and paid for her courses days before the deadline.

Some bus drivers have been understanding and lenient in allowing students on the bus without paying. Amelie brought bus fare change just in case, and there were some drivers who would let her on without paying when she explained her situation.

Jane Callow, supervisor at the CapCard Centre, reveals exactly what went wrong this term.

Firstly, unrelated to the school’s control of the situation, Canada Post had delays in mailing the U-Pass because of the seasonal crunch – the holiday period is extremely busy for couriers.

Secondly, Capilano does not mail out U-Passes – Translink has outsourced the printing and distribution to a company in Edmonton called DATA Group. They claimed that the passes were mailed out December 29.

However, Capilano was not entirely faultless in the fiasco. The reason why the U-Passes were printed and mailed out at the very last minute, less than a week before classes started, was due to payment deadlines set by Capilano. The deadline for tuition payment was December 21, as set by the Financial Services department, meaning DATA Group got the list of students and their photographs late as well.

Callow says that the issue is going to be resolved as soon as possible to avoid recurrence, by making the deadline for tuition payments earlier. Should students have problems, Callow advises that "it is the responsibility of the Capilano Students' Union to represent their interests," adding students should voice their concerns to the CSU.

The U-Pass costs students 128 dollars a term and was initiated by a partnership between the Capilano Students' Union, Translink, and Capilano University. The CapCard Centre has stated on their website that students should have expected their U-Pass in their mail last Friday, one school week after classes have already commenced. If they have not received their U-Pass, they can pick it up starting Monday, January 11, 2009 at no charge. No information is given on how students are expected to make their way to school without a U-Pass.

//Keith Van

Writer

WHY I AM... GETTING TWO WEEKS OFF Olympic contract revealed to Capilano students

It is easy to notice the gigantic “Why I Am” signs that have been plastered all over the University Campus, that state the reasons why professors, current students, and alumni are excited about getting involved with the Olympic Games in February.

However, it has been somewhat unclear to students why Capilano agreed to extend the school year for two weeks. It is easy to make assumptions that the University did this purely for economic benefit, or they simply wanted to jump on the Olympic bandwagon. However, the real reason behind Capilano deciding to convert our campus into a parking lot for athletes and Olympic fans are provided in a contract which the Courier received.

The details behind this decision are outlined in the agreement Capilano signed with VANOC (Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games) in October of 2008. The agreement states that the involvement of community contributors has ‘the potential to create a legacy for the community contributor’.

According to the agreement, one of the main attractions for students is the training benefits they will receive by becoming either staff or volunteers for the 2010 Games, and the recognition these students will receive as a result of that work. The agreement does not indicate the extent or nature of this recognition.

For Capilano, the agreement does state clearly what the benefits are – the University will be able to reference its association with the 2010 Games in all of its promotions from this time onward, in order to draw in more students and raise the profile of the University. 

According to a recent Capilano University Global Stewardship student, Penny Elliott, although she doesn’t believe that the contract is entirely fair, it doesn’t seem to be overly abusive to Capilano. “If students are forced to take the two weeks off anyways because of the Olympics, it makes sense to have the opportunity to work for VANOC during those two weeks. It could be a good option for a lot of people.”

As Elliott mentioned, VANOC has provided Capilano students with the option of working during the Olympics. This is because Capilano is required to make a minimum value contribution of $250,000 to the Games, which is not simply a cheque written out to VANOC, but rather, the assigned value of all the things Capilano is handing over for Olympic use, such as parking facilities, training areas, and of course, the students who are able to work as staff or volunteers.

In exchange for this, VANOC has agreed to implement a volunteer program – which was the ability for students to sign up non paid volunteer positions – at the University, as well as a workforce program, which allows students to sign up for paid working positions with VANOC during the Games. The University also receives recognition for its involvement with the Games, as well as the opportunity to purchase a minimal number of tickets at retail value, in priority to other ticket purchases. With the breadth and complexities of this document, it is, however, nearly impossible to tell what the tangible benefits of Capilano’s Olympic involvement are for the average student.

//Krissi Bucholtz

Writer

REMEMBERING L’ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE Sombre Ceremony Commemorates the Montreal Massacre

MONTREAL (CUP) – A single white rose lay on one of the 14 monuments that honour each of the women who were shot and killed 20 years ago at École Polytechnique in Montreal. Aside from the rose, the Place du 6 décembre 1989 showed little sign of visitors or mourners on Dec. 5, one day before the anniversary of what has come to be known as the Montreal Massacre.

The scene at Polytechnique’s commemorative plaque was similar. Though flowers had been placed in the area reserved to remember the 14 women, no mourners were in sight.

The library buildings on the school’s campus seemed to have the most traffic, somewhat understandably, with the date of the anniversary coinciding with the end of the term.

The school held a private ceremony at the Notre-Dame Basilica on Dec. 6 to mark the milestone anniversary of the day that also saw 13 people injured at the hands of Marc Lépine, who was 25 years old at the time.

“The school administration sent out an e-mail inviting current students to the ceremony," said Georges Hage, a Polytechnique student since 2007.

But Hage, who was one year old when Lépine opened fire at Polytechnique in 1989, admitted he was more affected by the Dawson College shooting in 2006, where a gunman claimed one victim before allegedly turning the weapon on himself.

“We have to remember everyone of course, but the mood at the school is normal, I think," he said, noting students were talking more about the upcoming break and holidays, rather than what happened two decades ago.

An estimated 1,000 people attended the ceremony at the basilica last month, including 300 university staff and faculty members, some of whom were witness to the 45 minutes of terror Lépine brought to the school. Families of victims, survivors, and current students were also in attendance.

Though the service was open to the press, no photography, filming, or recording was permitted in an effort to respect the victims and the privacy of the mourners.

Lépine had planned his attack. With the semi-automatic rifle he had purchased in hand, he entered a classroom and ordered the men out.

Before ending his own life that afternoon, Lépine targeted women, shouting that he hated feminists, killed 14 women, and injured another 10. Four men were also injured. A suicide note found on his body said that feminists had ruined his life.

Since that day, classes at Polytechnique, one of Canada's largest engineering schools, have been cancelled on each Dec. 6. Some security changes have been made over the years, such as an enhanced system of collaboration with police.

But, according to Polytechnique spokesperson Annie Touchette, the struggle lies in finding a balance between students' freedom, security, and peace of mind.

"Schools are places of learning," she said. "The school isn't a fortress, students aren't in bunkers."

//Chris Hanna

The Concordian

BUREAUCRATIC REGIME OR STUDENT MOVEMENT? The Jury is Still Out

The Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) at the end of November became a forum for heated debate, following the release of a controversial reform package.

The Post-Graduate Society of McGill collaborated with the Kwantlen Student's Association, the Alberta College of Art and Design Students' Association, Graduate Students' Association (GSA) of the University of Calgary, University of Regina Students Union, the Concordia Students Union, and Graduate Students Association (GSA) of Concordia University to release this document,
which suggests forty-three motions they want the CFS to consider for reform.

It proposes motions telling the CFS to increase the transparency of the organization and maintain more accountability to its members, as well as several structural reforms related to creating a separate judicial board for the CFS and preventing conflicts of interest.

Erik Chevrier, Vice-President External of the GSA of Concordia, helped write the reform package.

He said one of the specific motions from the package he wanted passed, 

"[was] to separate the Board of Directors of the CFS and the CFS-Services."

"They share the same Board of Directors, which are the national executive," Chevrier said, "We felt that this should be a conflict of interest to have ... this board of directors for a service corporation that is for a group that is starting
to look at putting in anti-commercialization campaigns, and services are commercial ventures."

The CFS-Services branch
is a legally separate entity from the CFS, although still connected
as they use the same bylaws and have the same Board of Directors. CFS-Services
deals specifically with the services the CFS provides, like Travel CUTS,
the International Student Identity Card, and the Studentsaver Discount
Card.

Chevrier cites himself and Adrian Kaats, VP external for the Post-Graduate Student's Society of McGill University, as contributing influences in the call for CFS reform.
They have been involved with the organization for the past two years.

"It's coming out now because ... [we] have challenged these ideas, and did so formally when a lot of people kept quiet about it just because they didn't want to disrupt what they considered a student movement [to be]," says Chevrier. "We found it very problematic that this is taking place and we want to sort of stray from the student movement by putting in these reforms and trying to change the organization for the better."

Groups of students from different student societies across Canada have been circulating petitions asking their student bodies if they want to leave the CFS. We made efforts to contact the schools, to find out why there were thirteen schools looking to leave the CFS now.

In many situations, however, the student societies at the aforementioned schools are not officially trying to defederate from the CFS - a fact that wasn't always portrayed in previous media coverage.

"To assume that anyone who's signing a petition to the national executive ... is doing it solely because they would like to leave or because they would like to stay is a little presumptuous," said David Molenhuis, the National
Treasurer for the CFS. "So rather than seeing this as a defederation
movement, it looks to me more like there are students on some campuses
who would like to petition the national executive to hold a referendum
on continued membership."

Gavin Armstrong, Communications Commissioner for the Central Students’ Association (CSA) at Guelph University, clarified the situation at his school: "The CSA is actually not the group that filed for de-federation. It was organic, from a group of students."

He went on to say that the CSA understands that a large number of students signed the petition on continued membership.

"To respect the views of all students here at Guelph," Armstrong said, "we are going to facilitate the process in a fair, open, and safe way."

Although there are thirteen schools listed as looking to leave the Federation, some students' unions are hesitant to acknowledge the discontent existing within their student body.

Rick Telfer, president of the Society of Graduate Students at the University of Ontario (SOGS), stated that Western's student union "is not seeking to defederate. We have been proud and active members of the Federation since 1987."

However, he added in additional correspondence that "my understanding is that a small group of students within our students' union is seeking to defederate. I do not know who they are, and I have not seen their petition. Likewise, neither the SOGS Executive nor the SOGS Council has seen their petition."

Armstrong mentioned that the executives he spoke to, who were in attendance at the AGM, said there were "student groups on both sides of the debate who were very heated, and it seemed this took away from the purpose of the AGM."

Chevrier added: "I just think people were probably told ... false stories, a lot of people believe stuff that's not true. For example, they perceive the reform package coming from a right-wing conspiracy, which is not the case whatsoever."

"It seems that everybody was kind of lobbied beforehand so most of the people seemed to already have their minds made up no matter what was said at the AGM. And I think that's a little bit problematic."

There was additional controversy over the press representation at the AGM. Emma Godmere, Editor-in-Chief of the Fulcrum and Ottawa Bureau Chief for the Canadian University Press (CUP), was the only journalist with media credentials present at the meeting.

"Because of general regional and economic posterity between newspapers ... we felt that ... having a reporter at the meeting is important, but that reporter [should] speak on behalf of a number of associations, that that reporter [should] be a representative of the body ... that represents students across the country."

Molenhuis said that a single observer was superior to a small group representing various views, representing the "student body of only those newspapers that are closest to the meeting place," said Molenhuis. Once more, only two journalist applications were received by the CFS for coverage, and so the CFS approved the CUP application.

Ben West, past CSU Chair, CFS rep and Green Party candidate, presently with the Wilderness Committee, said that defederating from the CFS is actually a fairly daunting task, comparing their structure to that of a large, multinational corporation.
"There is no such thing as defederating," he stated.

He believes that overall, the CFS is of great use to students due to its values and powerful lobby and services, such as some of the packaged health programs it offers.

Still, he mentions that these services tend to "be more useful for small, rural student societies," rather than massive urban institutions like McGill
and UBC. The CFS can provide a complete package of support options to
a small school that might otherwise be unattainable with their limited
funding, if they embrace their style. Alternately, a larger institution
may find the services too limited to service their students' interests.

West believes the CFS has amazing potential, but is not surprised at news of reform and defederation.

"That was a really positive experience for me," said Molenhuis. "[It] reinforces the need for unity within the student movement in Canada, that we're far more effective as one united national student organization."

"There are a number of benefits [of retaining membership in the CFS], but very simply it is because of the feeling that in Canada ... we're far more effective as one united student movement ...  even the largest students"
union, acting on its own, can only accomplish so much in the way of
lobbying, research, services and campaign," said Molenhuis.

//Samantha Thompson

Assistant News Editor

DUH, STAY OUT OF RIVERDALE ACTA Puts Canadian Copyright Law At Risk

FREDERICTON (CUP) – When I crossed the border to the U.S. in September with my brother and his girlfriend, we had a relatively painless experience. Although we were questioned inside the border office while our car was being searched, the whole ordeal took less than 20 minutes and we continued on our way no problem. Could you imagine how long the wait time at the border would be if the officials had the prerogative to search iPods and mp3 players for pirated material?

While wait time at the border is arguably the least pressing of the issues that could become a reality following implementation of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), it is perhaps the best example to demonstrate one of the most significant themes of ACTA – privacy invasion.

The agreement is currently being discussed and drafted by a number of countries including the United States, Japan, the European Union and Canada in response to the increased trade of counterfeit goods and copyright piracy.

It should be made clear that ACTA is being crafted under extremely tight security and as a result, information circulating the internet on ACTA (and by extension, this article) is largely based on a handful of miraculous leaks, with little confirmation by the governments involved. Efforts to formally obtain information on ACTA in the United States were denied on the grounds of national security, though Canada has allegedly requested the right to disclose its own nation-specific documents in the future. Another glimmer of hope came on Dec. 2, when Industry Minister Tony Clement said that ACTA, as it is not Canadian law, would be “subservient” to domestic law.

One of the most important things to understand about ACTA is that the civil and criminal enforcement provisions of the agreement do not deal exclusively with counterfeited or pirated property intended for profit. That rare EP you downloaded by your favourite band for personal use? Pirated. 

Congratulations, you are a criminal. And although we don’t yet know the specifics, there is a list of penalties in ACTA including financial charges and even prison sentences – though I doubt possession of a downloaded Lil Wayne album will land you in the slammer.

Under ACTA, customs and border officials would find their powers drastically strengthened, possibly giving them the ability to search, seize and/or destroy, without compensation, what they believe to be counterfeited or pirated property.

In addition, current information on ACTA says that the information disclosure provisions in the agreement would require countries to openly share information on alleged counterfeiting operations and specific individuals suspected to be involved to other countries conducting investigations.

As if this wasn’t troubling enough, the Internet provisions are perhaps most disturbing part of this whole mess. If ACTA is passed, Internet service providers may be required to enforce what's become known as "graduated response" or "notice-and-termination" procedures similar to current Internet laws in France.

This means that under ACTA, Internet service providers would be responsible for the content stored or transmitted using their service. If you’re caught three times storing or transmitting content that infringes on the intellectual property rights of others – like, say, a pre-release of Tha Carter IV – your Internet service will be shut down for one year.

While ACTA is still in the drafting stages, Dr. Michael Geist of the University of Ottawa speculates that ACTA could be in effect by 2012 unless something is done. Geist, a leading expert on copyright law and ACTA, has plenty of information on his blog, michaelgeist.ca. Various Canadian and international organizations have taken stances against ACTA, including the Pirate Party of Canada and Creative Commons, but these people and organizations cannot do it alone. Visit pirateparty.ca and creativecommons.org to learn more about the threat of the ACTA and the much less oppressive alternatives.

//Andrew Olsvik

The Brunswickan (University of New Brunswick)

GROUP RAISES $140K BY PLAYING THE WORLD'S MOST BORING VIDEO GAME Donations to Child’s Play forced them to play Desert Bus for 135 hours straight

 

KELOWNA, B.C. (CUP) – After more than five straight days of gaming, Internet sketch comedy group LoadingReadyRun were wracked with exhaustion in their Victoria, B.C. headquarters at the end of November.

At 10:30 a.m. on Nov. 25, the troupe completed its 135th consecutive hour of playing what is widely regarded in gaming communities as the most boring video game ever made – Desert Bus. Many of LoadingReadyRun’s members had been up for more than 24 hours by the time their quest was over.

The task was not aimless though: the comedy group raised close to $140,000 through the event, called “Desert Bus for Hope” (DBfH), for Child’s Play – a charity that donates video games, books, money and other goodies to sick children in hospitals around the world.

“The success of DBfH this year was so beyond what we were expecting, I barely have words for it,” said Kathleen de Vere, a member of LoadingReadyRun. “We are all so incredibly proud and happy to have been able to do this, and be so successful.”

The challenge of DBfH was simple: the more people donated to Child’s Play, the longer the LoadingReadyRun team had to play Desert Bus. Money was also raised through charity auctions and by accepting dares for donations such as singing, re-enacting scenes from webcomics, and going to see New Moon in theatre while wearing eyeliner and tight pants.

Child’s Play benefits children’s hospitals around the world, including the B.C. Children’s Hospital, the Hospital for Sick Children in Ontario, and the Janeway Children’s Hospital in St. John’s, N.L.

It was formed in 2003 by the founders of the webcomic Penny Arcade, Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins, to provide the video game community a chance to give back and change negative perceptions of gamers in the community.

Desert Bus, a mini-game from Smoke and Mirrors, a Penn and Teller video game that was never released, was a commentary on overly realistic video games. In it, the player must drive a bus from Tucson, Ariz. to Las Vegas, Nev. in real time.

The game therefore consists of driving a bus for eight hours down a bare, straight desert road. Players can’t pause or put the controller down because the bus veers slightly to the right if not corrected. Once a player reaches Las Vegas, he or she earns one point, at which point the bus turns around to drive for another in eight hours.

The world record before 2009’s event was 6 points – also set by LoadingReadyRun – and was set this year at 14 points before driver Bill Watts lost control of the bus while trying to sing Queen’s “Don’t Stop Me Now” for a donation.

According to de Vere, the event, now in its third year, has been gaining steam ever since its inception.

“Our first year, people were sort of amused at what we were doing, but also very confused,” she said. “This year, the Internet basically cracked its collective knuckles and went wild.”

Fans of the comedy troupe organized a “craft-along” drive to make items for auction, and other donation items included custom sketches from Schuster-award-winning artist Ken Steacy, signed artist proofs of his work in comics, a prop Bionic Commando arm and a Fallout 3 Vault Dweller’s suit.

The link between the fans and the event, though, took it beyond a regular donation drive. It was filled with numerous side storylines, such as the instant Internet celebrity of the fan known only as “Octopimp,” who won several auctions by donating over nine thousand dollars, and the constant shaming of LoadingReadyRun member Matt Wiggins for refusing to accept a challenge (he later was forced by a challenge to see New Moon four times in a single day, which he has done).

One fan even used the event to propose, donating $20 to have his marriage proposal to another fan posted on event’s webcast overlay. She said yes.

“I think DBfH really shows how amazing gamers are,” de Vere said. “I truly believe that geeks like us are actually more generous and philanthropic than a standard issue human. After this year, I am starting to suspect that the people who helped, donated, watched and encouraged us are actually super human.”

“This year DBfH represented what a wonderful place the Internet could really be, and how generous and amazing individuals can be when they come together,” de Vere said. “DBfH really is about hope.”

The team comprised of many current and former students from the University of Victoria.

Although those who work with LoadingReadyRun full-time completed work beforehand to clear up their schedule, most of the volunteers took vacation to suffer exhaustion and constant Internet scrutiny by driving a virtual bus into the virtual horizon.

“What drove us?” asked de Vere. “It was for the children, the whole time.”

//Andrew Bates 

CUP Western Bureau Chief

YOU GOT TO FUNKIFIZE Breaking Into the Cover Band Circuit

For a band that has just started, scoring a gig for the opening ceremonies of the Olympics is a formidable achievement. But when the details come in to question, it seems the chance for The Phonix to win musical gold could turn into wishful thinking.

With rumors floating around the Fir building's Jazz program, The Courier had to find out if it was really true; were The Phonix going to be sandwiched between Nelly Furtado and Hedley for the Olympic Opening Ceremonies?

“I wish there was more to tell.” According to the bandleader, Reuben Avery, “Everything for the Olympics seems to be very last minute. I guess this is no different.” Avery was contacted by Rob Steel of Steel productions; “when he was talking to me originally it was at the Plaza of Nations, but I couldn’t find anything about it online.”

Without much more to go on than faith, the members of The Phonix are hopeful that the call to play in the big leagues comes through, but it's hard out here for a pimp.

Avery started The Phonix, a 10 piece funk band, in June 2009 to essentially be a “cover” band that could play casinos and  corporate gigs, with hopes that eventually they could begin writing original music. “It’s kind of a learning experience I’ve put onto myself. I was transcribing all the material, I had no idea how a funk chart worked. I was very ill-versed in even just pop music before all this.”

It hasn't been easy for the members of this funk juggernaut. The very thing that makes them stand out in a crowd—having a 5 piece horn section that plays nearly a dozen Tower of Power songs—also prevents them from getting many gigs. “A 10 piece band isn’t viable in a lot of cases, financially or just in terms of the space we need.” Their last gig at the Railway Club was evidence of that; the band barely managed  to fit on stage.

The world of corporate cover bands is a tough nut to crack. Although the gigs are pro and the pay is good, a new band must first pay their dues. Often this means playing for free, or next to it. As counterintuitive as that may seem to someone who wants to be a professional musician, the fact is music agents want to see a band perform before they will even think about hiring them. This means playing the “showcase”, a free performance that is supposed to be “great exposure.” But, as Avery says, “people die from exposure.”

Although The Phonix doesn't have any trouble getting people up and dancing, they  haven't yet been able to get the casino agents out to see a show, which would hopefully lead to a sweet casino gig. As far as agents go, Avery says “some respond, some don’t. it’s hard to get people on the phone.”

They have managed to obtain a weekly gig at El Barrio, a Hastings street restaurant that is beginning to feature live music regularly. They see it as “a glorified rehearsal space, with an audience and a little bit of pressure, but not much.” It does offer a  chance to hone their live sound without going out of pocket.

With graduation in sight, Avery and his band mates are trying to secure a musical future.  If you want to cheer them on in their quest for gold, drop in to El Barrio, 2270 East Hastings St., January 17, 23, 31, and February 7. Be prepared to bust a funky dance move.Don't forget your dancing shoes

//Mike Kennedy

Arts Editor

SNICKERING AT STIGMA Stand Up for Mental Health returns to Cap

A few years ago, I worked at a camp for disabled kids and adults. The camp hosted people with all ranges of disability, from low functioning autistics, to schizophrenics requiring total care and everything in between. Working closely with support workers and a medical team, I realized how society is struggling with the stigma of mental illness, as the authoritarian group home programs most of these people were living with were hopelessly antiquated and prohibitive, mostly focused on what people with disabilities could not do.

Now, years later, an upcoming event to be held on Wednesday, January 20 between 11:30 and 1:00 in the CSU lounge called Stand Up for Mental Health, is designed to showcase what folks with mental illness can do. In particular, they can make you laugh your ass off.

David Granirer is the man behind the green curtain in this case. The author of The Happy Neurotic: How Fear and Angst Can Lead to Happiness and Success, David is also a counselor, comedian and comedy instructor for 11 years at Langara. He is the driving force behind a wave of comedy troupes across the country that teaches how humour can be a great healer, for the audience as well as the performer, aiming to break down stigmas and stereotypes by the punchline. 

"We're actually expanding more and more. We're just starting up a group in Victoria and Montreal   . . . we have a group in Halifax, Ottawa, Guelph . . . we just keep on expanding."

David became inspired by the transformative power of comedy, as he noticed that his comedy class was a reliable producer of life-changing experiences for those brave enough to stand up. As he also worked as a counselor, "working with people with mental illness seemed a natural place to start."

His own mental illness helped to solidify his belief in the possibilities. He began experiencing debilitating depression in his late teens but wasn't diagnosed himself until his thirties. "Mostly it was just having periods when, for no reason, at all, I would feel horrible ... I thought it was normal."

He managed to transform his own limitation into a great possibility, by making his own depression a fuel source for his comedy. Now, years later, he sees this process as being "the major way people are finding an outlet to tell the truth about what is going on with them and a way of educating people that's really different and empowering." He says that comedy "erases the feelings of shame and inadequacy" that comes along with mental illness. 


"Doing stand-up comedy is cool, and making people laugh is a great thing to do ... people pay attention when you can make them laugh. In general, no one really want to hear about mental illness, but this way, people become curious about it."

David has all but quit his day job for comedy at this point, and currently only retains a couple of counseling clients as his travel schedule does not permit it. Despite the numerous articles that have been written across North America and the relative success of his book, he downplays his own success in favour of applauding his brave student comics. Still, he was featured in the CBC documentary Cracking Up, and his current tour will take him all across the continent this year.

In regards to the show that will land at Cap, David explains that some will "be doing storytelling, some will do one-liners, some are very dead-pan ... other are very animated and expressive." There will be something for every taste, coming from a range of comics with varying degrees of mental disability, from depression to schizophrenia. All are medicated, and all use their own predicament to break up the crowd.

Still, David mentions that comedy, to be done well, still takes a certain personality type for it to be funny. "Class clowns, people who kept shooting off their mouths and getting in trouble for it, people who are always saying the wrong thing at the wrong time, and also people who really like attention.
Whether or not they know it, they like having people pay attention to them and comedy is a great way to fulfill that need."

"What my course proves is that there is really no limit to what can be accomplished, even by those with mental illness. When you give people something that is meaningful to them they will do almost anything to make that happen. One of the problems with our mental health system is that it doesn't offer people enough things that they really want to do to get them motivated and moving."

The Capilano show will be "members of the 2009 class who just graduated".
The roster will feature David Slaughter, Adel Fitzpatrick, Randy Goodchild, Filomena Black, and Mike Coss. Stand Up For Mental Health is brought to Cap by the Students with Disabilities committee. 


For more information on
the organization, see www.standupformentalhealth.com. The show will take place in the
CSU lounge, Wednesday, January 20, from 11:30 - 1:00PM.



//Kevin Murray

Editor

CLIMATEGATE: WHO'S IN DENIAL NOW?

Recent responses to “Climategate” (the leaked e-mails from Britain's University of East Anglia and its Climatic Research Unit), remind me of the line “Are your feet wet? Can you see the pyramids? That's because you're in denial.”

Climate catastrophists like Al Gore and the UN's Rajendra Pachauri have downplayed Climategate: it's only a few intemperate scientists; there's no real evidence of wrong-doing; now let's persecute the whistleblower! Another good example of this comes from Calgary, where the latest fellow trying to use the Monty Python "nothing to see here, move along" routine is University of Calgary Professor David Mayne Reid, who penned a recent column denying the importance of Climategate.

Unfortunately for Reid, old saws won't work in the Internet age: Climategate has blazed across the Internet, blogosphere, and social networking sites. Even environmentalist writer George Monbiot has recognized that the public's perception of climate science will be damaged extensively, calling for one of the Climategate ringleaders to resign.

What's catastrophic about Climategate is that it reveals a science as broken as Michael Mann's hockey stick, which despite Reid's protestations, has been shown to be a misleading chart that erases a 400-year stretch of warm temperatures (called the Medieval Warm Period), and a more recent little ice-age that ended in the mid-1800s. No amount of hand-waving will restore the credibility of climate science while holding onto rubbish like that.

Climategate reveals skullduggery the general public can understand: that a tightly-linked clique of scientists were behaving as crusaders. Their letters reveal they were working in what they repeatedly labeled a “cause” to promote a political agenda.

That's not science, that's a crusade. When you cherry-pick, discard, nip, tuck, and tape disparate bits of data into the most alarming portrayal you can in the name of a “cause,” you're not engaged in science, but in the production of propaganda. And this clique tried to subvert the peer-review process as well. They attempted to prevent others from getting into peer reviewed journals—thus letting them claim skeptic research wasn't peer-reviewed—a convenient circular (and dishonest) way to discredit skeptics.

Finally, people know that a fish rots from its head. The Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia was considered the top climate research community. It was the source of a vast swath of the information then that was funneled into the supposedly “authoritative” reports of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

If scientific objectivity is corrupt at the top, there's every reason to think that the rot spreads through the entire body. And evidence suggests it has. A Russian think tank recently revealed that the climate temperature record compiled by the Climatic Research Unit cherry-picked data from only 25 percent of Russia's climate monitoring sites, the sites closest to urban areas, biased by the urban heat island effect. The stations excluded data from 40 percent of Russia's total land mass, which is 12.5 percent of all the Earth's land mass.

In his recent comments on the matter, Reid's indignation about Climategate went beyond ludicrous. “It is wrong,” intoned Reid, “to castigate people for things said in private, and often taken out of context.” He equated the response to Climategate with a “lynch mob.”

Funny, the professor seems to have highly selective indignation; he is apparently is unaware of the unremitting attacks on people skeptical of climate science or policy by climate scientists and politicians.

People skeptical of any aspect of climate change have long been called “deniers,” an odious linkage with Holocaust denial, and various luminaries have called for them to be drowned, jailed, and tried for crimes against humanity. One prominent columnist called skepticism treason against the very earth itself!

As for indignation about the release of private correspondence, where was Reid's indignation when Greenpeace, looking for something to spin into an incriminating picture, stole skeptic Chris Horner's trash? Where was his indignation a few years ago when scientist Steve Schroeder showed a routine letter of mine to another climate scientist (Andrew Dessler), who posted it to the Internet where it was spun into the scurrilous accusation that I was trying to bribe U.N. scientists? Reid's indignation is the chutzpah of a man who kills his family then wants pity because he's an orphan.

The Climategate scandal, like others in biology and medicine erodes the credibility of both the scientists involved, and the institution of scientific research. And it should: it has become evident that there is a lot of rot going on in the body of science, and too little effort made to fix it.

A start could be made: The scientists involved should start by practicing the scientific method: release all data, and release all assumptions and methods used to process the data at the time of publication. Make it available to researchers (even lay researchers) who are outside the clique so the work can be checked. Had the researchers involved in Climategate done this from the beginning, instead of circling their wagons and refusing to allow outsiders to check their work, they would have taken less hectoring. As a bonus for them, Climategate would never have happened.

Former IPCC reviewer Dr. Kenneth P. Green is an Advisor to the Frontier Center for Public Policy, (www.fcpp.org) and is a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

It's Show Time! Free Speech and Canadian “human rights” commissions

For those who have never taken the time to read dry legal documents, consider that Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act declares that hate speech is constituted by words that are likely to expose somebody to hatred or contempt – and what that has meant for Canadians.

In early October, Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant gave testimony before the House of Commons justice committee, currently considering whether section 13 should be repealed. Their remarks, available on You Tube, provide a short but thorough examination of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and its works.

They argue that the censorship implications of section 13 are an abomination in a constitutional democracy, that section 13 is the reason for so many complaints, and is why the entire administrative structure of this taxpayer-supported, government-backed human rights industry is broken past the point where it can be fixed. Any country, at least where freedom of expression and speech is truly valued, would have dissolved this outfit years ago.

Both Steyn and Levant have encountered Canada's human rights bureaucrats first hand and written about their hair-raising experiences. The larger story, of an out-of-control bureaucracy that transformed itself from an organization charged with conciliation of differences among citizens into a politically motivated attack organ, should also trouble Canadians.

Because most of us are in favour of human rights, Canadians have accorded the benefit of the doubt to anything calling itself a human rights commission. That favourable impression has depended on maintaining a veil of ignorance over how these bodies actually operate. After Steyn and Levant (among others) made their operations public, it is clear to all but the willfully blind that their reputation is entirely undeserved.

Instead of dealing with genuine civil liberties, Canada's human rights commissions have taken upon themselves such tasks as censoring cartoons and jokes, preventing RCMP instructors at Depot in Regina from raising their voices at recruits, or compelling a fast-food restaurant to keep an employee whose medical condition makes it impossible for her to comply with the company's hand-washing policy.

They have invented new categories of crime and imposed lifetime bans on uttering opinions that hurt the feelings of someone or other. Senior counsel for the CHRC has advanced the opinion that their job is to end hate, a very human, though not particularly, edifying emotion.

They aspire to become more than a thought or speech police; they seek to be an emotion police.

In order to achieve these ambitions, members of the CHRC have joined neo-Nazi websites and posted messages on them in the hopes of provoking some dim-witted hatemonger to post something equally vile. Then one of their friends or even colleagues would be able to lodge a complaint.

In a real court (and to common sense) this is entrapment by an agent provocateur. In the kangaroo courts of Canada's human rights commissions, it's standard operating procedure.

Moreover, the CHRC employees are perfectly aware that what they are doing cannot stand the light of day. On at least one occasion they hacked their way into a wi-fi account of an Ottawa woman and posted their musings from her account. Incidentally, all this malfeasance by your tax-supported servants has been documented in sworn testimony by CHRC staff.

With such procedures at their disposal, it is no wonder that, until last month, the CHRC had a 100 per cent conviction rate – the envy in this respect of North Korea and Cuba, which occasionally stumble in the administration of justice. Naturally the CHRC announced it would appeal this stain on its perfect record.

At the centre of the power of the human rights bureaucracy is a justification of the censorship provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act, namely section 13. It is based on a massive yet legally untested expansion of a nearly twenty-year-old decision by the Supreme Court of Canada, in the “Taylor case.” In that decision the Court decided that hate speech by a neo-Nazi meant “extreme feelings of opprobrium and enmity” against a group, and not “subjective opinion of offensiveness.” Today human rights officials have completely reversed the ruling.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the controversy over the human rights commissions is the response of the Chief Commissioner of the CHRC. She has complained long and loud of unfair criticism and announced: “I have a file” on her critics. “I'm a public servant . . . and I'm not going to sit by.” As Terry O'Neill, who is on the list, wrote in the National Post early in October: “Big Sister's been watching me.”

The duty of Parliament is clear. Remove not just the offensive section 13. Dismantle the entire Orwellian structure.

By Barry Cooper
Professor of Political Science
University of Calgary

Barry Cooper is the author of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy report, Schauprozess” – Show Trials: Free Speech and Canadian Human Rights Commissions, 

THE CAPLILANO CREEPER Question of the week: what was your worst experience with an instructor here at capilano?

Giles R.
Communications
My psychology professor would always ask me questions, even though I’d clearly been asleep. And everyone would be like, “Ugghhh, what an idiot”. I hate myself.
[What a character!-Ed.]




Kyla D.
English
I had a teacher that just mumbled on and on and on and went off topic all the time. It was hard to distinguish what he really wanted to get across to the class from what he
was just using as filler.





Samantha T.
Global Stewardship
One year, to celebrate some good work or something, our teacher brought in pizza and ice cream cake. Perhaps by way of his inspiration, everyone started putting ice cream cake on top of the pizza. And because of him I had to
endure watching people eat this horrible non-food.



Sarah V.
Creative Writing
I had a professor whose voice sounded like a mix between Sarah Palin and Bill Cosby. It made it very hard to keep a straight face.







Adrian / Stephanie
Business
I’ve never really had an actual one – so far so good at Cap. I haven’t had any problems where I wanted to drop a course or anything.







 
// Jordan Potter,
In pure creep mode

STRONG MALE-MALE RELATIONSHIPS MAKING A COMEBACK Isn’t it bromantic?

VICTORIA (CUP) – In Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Spock admits to Captain Kirk that emotions “play an important part in the richness of life.” This concession is very indicative of a “bromance,” a trendy term currently being passed around more than a pipe at a pro-pot rally.

Where would Kirk be without Spock? Would Butch Cassidy be so iconic if it weren’t for the Sundance Kid? Ben Affleck and Matt Damon are so buddy-buddy that they inspired the off-Broadway play Matt and Ben celebrating their fabled friendship.

Since Oscar and Felix first moved in together to form “The Odd Couple” there have been umpteen man-crush matchups in our culture. What societal changes have led to this?

In sociology, embracing same-sex relationships that aren’t of a romantic or sexual nature is called “homosociality.” It’s the type of bromance you would find in fraternities, the military, monasteries, prisons or exclusive male clubs, like the Loyal Order of Water Buffalos on The Flintstones.

It’s stirring how the capacity for same-sex emotional bonding is most clear-cut and least complex in children. Kids fall in love with their best friends in thrilling ways that don’t continue in later life. Maybe as we mature we lose this capacity to harmonize, as pubescence dictates who our friends are.

At the Australia Research Centre on Sex, Health, and Society at La Trobe University, Dr. Michael Flood has been researching homosociality extensively, especially with heterosexual relations. Flood found many male-male friendships take priority over male-female relations, and platonic friendships that men have with women can be fiercely feminizing – not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Flood also found that sexual activities are material to masculine status. As letters sent to Penthouse Forum prove, many a gentleman likes to kiss and tell. For many men, bonding occurs through sexual storytelling, which can strongly influence our sexual and social relations.

In the movie Fight Club, über-male Brad Pitt asks, “We’re a generation of men raised by women. I’m wondering if another woman is really the answer we need?”

Why can’t a grown man tell another grown man that he loves him? What do masculine ideas of love entail? These are not easy nuts to crack, considering what most men expect from their male friends usually involves less emotional baggage than what women expect from their female friends. 

And yet many men suffer from an identity crisis of profound proportions. Feminism has redefined what it means to be a woman in contemporary society but it has also redefined what it means to be a man.

“Sensitivity” has become a buzzword for a lot of politically correct groups, and it is suggested men possess less of it. Is this a fallacy of the phallus?

Maybe, but men, more often than women, have difficulty grieving, expressing love and showing vulnerability. Some consider such tender displays to be a dire weakness.

Like wearing track pants in public, showing emotion becomes a declaration that men have given up.

//Shane Scott-Travis

Nexus (Camosun College)