I received a mountain of emails concerning my last editorial about PROPORTIONAL VOTING. Just about every letter was in favor, even from people who would have just a 2-vote equivalent out of 4.
Then there were the few emailers who were nothing short of apoplectic at the idea that some votes should have a greater value than others. I could actually hear their breathlessness in what they wrote.
I am more fed-up than just somewhat with the Something-For-Nothing Bunch, who for some unfathomable reason believe they are the equals to those who pay for the benefits they would never have without the MAKERS.
I use this definition (MAKERS and TAKERS) quite often, since I think it is BRILLIANT. I wish it was me who came up with it, but I’m not that smart.
This definition . . . MAKERS & TAKERS that divides our culture, is simply perfect. I don’t recall how I came to it. But, if memory serves me correctly, it was in an email I received from one of the visitors to Galganov.com.
So, whoever coined this phrase – Congratulations and thank you.
TO MY AMERICAN VISITORS – THINK SPANISH:
Those of you who have been following this Web Site for a while, already know that I am embroiled in an epic battle over FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION in Canada.
There are several small communities just East of Ottawa, Canada’s capital, where there are significant concentrated numbers of French speakers.
In all of Ontario, even if we tweak the statistics, there are no more than 4% of the population who can under the MOST Liberal definition be considered to be French Speakers.
Yet, in Ontario, French speakers have a virtual lock-on MOST government jobs, including, and especially at the highest levels. You see, when your community is concentrated in several voting areas, the politicians pay very close attention.
It’s not as if this isn’t happening in many places within the USA, where politicians pander to the Hispanic vote whether they agree with the Hispanics or not. VOTES ARE VOTES! And politicians are politicians.
BACK TO FRANCO-ONTARIO:
As I previously wrote, a few of these communities with a substantial French presence have decided that it MUST be ILLEGAL for private merchants to put up a sign that is ONLY in English, as they DEMAND that their language be displayed as well.
So, when you have enough concentrated votes to control Town Councils, it isn’t all that hard to pass any kind of bylaw you want; even a bylaw that abrogates FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.
SO I WENT TO COURT AND SUED THIS TOWNSHIP:
We lost round one in Superior Court, as I assumed we would, since we faced a French Judge (Monique Metivier) who had already RULED against another similar challenge a few years previous. So, we knew that our best shot was to take this to the Court of Appeal, and then onto the Supreme Court.
This past Thursday, I was informed that Metivier made her ruling on costs, since in Ontario; costs are awarded to the winner. But that’s under the same Appeal.
In the first case that Metivier ruled against, the award for costs was $50 thousand dollars. This time, the award against us is $180,000. And in her judgment, Metivier makes a very prejudicial comment to justify her decision.
She says that it is well known that in Quebec I was against bilingual signs.
NOTHING could be further from the truth – NOTHING! I have to consider a law suit against this Judge for defamation.
As a matter of published record, while living in the Separatists and Ethnocentric English-Hating Province of Quebec, I was against language laws that made the unrestricted use of the English language against the law.
I NEVER suggested or hinted or whispered anything negative about bilingual signs other than to fight against a Quebec government law that says that any and all English signs where PERMITTED, have to be at least half the size of French language signs.
HOW SICK AND RACIST IS THAT?
Effectively, what this judge is attempting to do in her ruling for costs against us is simple:
1 – Punish us for standing-up for our RIGHTS.
2 – Ignore the part in the constitution that guarantees FREEDOM of Expression.
3 – Recognize a non-existent linguistic right for her own linguistic community.
4 – Use her powers from the Bench to intimidate any and all who will dare to challenge the system, especially when it concerns specific GROUP Rights opposed to INDIVIDUAL Rights.
In her previous finding she wrote in her judgment that she is ONLY holding the CLF (Canadians for Language Freedom) responsible for $50 thousand in costs so as not to intimidate others who feel the need to challenge the system.
Well – $50,000 is a long way from $180,000 for an incredibly similar case.
BUT – It doesn’t make a difference to me. This fight is not about costs and lower Court Challenges. IT IS ABOUT OUR BASIC FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.
If I have to beg and borrow to fight this case all the way to the Supreme Court, then that’s what I’ll do. That’s what I’ve already done to bring it this far.
And I will NOT be intimidated, not by an ACTIVIST Judge who thinks that I will simply give up and walk away because of her, or because of threats and derision. All of which just makes me more determined.
WITHOUT FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, we might as well live in China, Cuba, Venezuela, or the Arab Middle East.
My dad, like so many other World War II dads, gave everything he had to keep this world FREE. Our soldiers are fighting day in and day out all over this world for people who wouldn’t know or couldn’t appreciate Democracy if that was their only choice. But our men and women are sacrificing nonetheless.
So, what choice do I and any other FREEDOM LOVING person have but to get into the fight and do whatever we CAN, not to lose those FREEDOMS our forefathers fought and died for, so we could all be FREE?
If you’ve ever wondered why I’m always asking for financial support, there you have it. I’m willing to get knocked down and take a bloody nose, and then get up and keep fighting.
My question to you is this – ARE YOU WILLING TO HELP?
There’s no audio editorial associated with this commentary.
Best Regards . . . Howard Galganov