StoneMtn

I agree with you, Sugarmegs. I have always been much more of a Kantian than a Nietzschean ethicist. I believe that Immanuel Kant had it right with his concept of the objectively metaphysically true "categorical imperative", which tells us (among other things) to never treat people as "means", rather as "ends" in themselves. Using young girls for one's own sexual gratification is exactly opposite to this idea.

Okay, I forgot the obvious.

One of my favourite books, Watership Down, by Richard Adams is all rabbits. Although you can choose from the whole bunch, I think the obvious choice is "Fiver", the young mystic-rabbit whose visions of pending doom drove the story.

I update my vote to "Harvey" or "Fiver" (or possibly any other character in Watership Down, if you have a different favourite rabbit from the story.) Seems like a good choice for a librarian, too.

One of the greatest movie rabbits of all time was from an old movie called Harvey. (The rabbit's name was Harvey.)

This is a description from an online store selling the DVD:

Elwood is a good-natured, slightly sloshed man whose faithful companion is a 6-foot 3-1/2 inch rabbit that only he can see. When his sister Veta (Josephine Hull) tries to have him committed, she's taken in instead. It's up to Elwood and Harvey to straighten out the mess. James Stewart stars in his most amiable, bumbling mode. The film is based on Mary Chase's Pulitzer Prize-winning play. Academy Award Nominations: 1, including Best Actor: James Stewart. Academy Awards: 1, Best Supporting Actress: Josephine Hull.

I vote for naming the new rabbit "Harvey", in this proud, albeit drunken, tradition.

(This is what happens when you post before you read others' replies, it appears someone has already made this suggestion.)

Of John Coltrane and Kenny G...

Garaj Mahal bass player Kai Eckhardt brings Whistler up to speed

Pique News Magazine - Whistler

Published Date: 2004-10-07 Time: 09:42:14

Who: Garaj Mahal

Where: Boot Pub

When: Oct. 15 & 16

Tickets: $20

Enigmatic jam band Garaj Mahal is popping up in Whistler for a pair of shows next weekend – their first visit back since last New Year’s Eve.

With their expert individual musicianship and astounding, almost telepathic cohesiveness as an improvisational quartet, the band has a dedicated corps of local fans. Many will be wondering how many more gigs they will see in the intimate Boot Pub, which is slated for redevelopment.

On the eve of their current tour up the West Coast from California through the Pacific Northwest to Vancouver and ending here in Whistler, Pique entertainment writer Shelley Arnusch caught up with bass player Kai Eckhardt, who talked politics, all night recording sessions and playing to the point of hyperventilation.

Just another day in the Garaj...

PIQUE: Since you were here last New Year’s, I need to make sure the band is still together. No big fights or band-breaking dramas?

Kai Eckhardt: We’re going strong but we just took a six-week break. We all did side projects and other projects. I went to Europe and worked with a jazz trio. Fareed worked with the Fareed Haque Group, the band he had even before Garaj Mahal. Alan Hertz worked a lot with Bobby Vega, the bass player that used to play with Jefferson Starship. Eric Levy was working with his band Eric Levy’s Love Lounge. Everyone was off doing our own thing.

PIQUE: Is that the secret of your cohesiveness? That you take these breaks and do your own thing?

KE: It’s more of a necessity because we have different circumstances. Fareed and I both have children. We have a certain economic bottom line. Before we formed Garaj Mahal we all had our connections in Europe, teaching, studio gigs. We have to take time off to honour those connections or else they die. Garaj Mahal ends up being the only breadwinner and it’s comparable to a monoculture in agriculture. If you only have one type of tree in a forest and there is a parasite it will take everything down. But if there is diversity then you have stronger trees. Diversity makes life strong. One-sided-ness weakens.

It’s a philosophical point of view but what it boils down to is that we have to keep a balance between being together as a band and doing our own thing. Where that balance lies has to be negotiated from year to year. Garaj Mahal right now is still everyone’s priority because it’s growing and doing better and getting publicity all over the U.S. Next year it looks like we’re going to make the international leap over to Europe.

PIQUE: It’s an advantage then that you and the other members have maintained your European connections.

KE: What we’ve discovered is that people do remember. Even if it’s 10 years back, if people come to a show that really moves them, they’ll remember. That’s the beautiful thing about our profession. The best publicity that we can come up with is to really deliver and to provide an evening where everyone says: "I’m glad I came. This was time well spent." This is what we hope to achieve and we hope to do this again when we come back to Canada.

PIQUE: I would say you’ve achieved that in Whistler. People talk about and anticipate your shows. What do you think made the connection for the band with the Whistler audience?

KE: We just love Canada. We love Canada on many levels and of course Whistler is stunning in terms of location. The people are friendly. There’s a certain kind of "looseness" in Canada that we like – looseness combined with being politically and socially aware and awake. Right now, all of us in Garaj Mahal have to agree that we’re not happy with the way the United States government is leading the country and where things are going. We always look to Canada as a place that’s holding its own. It’s a little bit of a sanctuary when we come over there.

There’s the loyalty of the Upstream Entertainment people, bringing us over and continually delivering. We always stay at the Shoestring Lodge and it’s always nice if we have more than one day in a place. We get to rehearse during the day. We can socialize. We can be human. That’s why we always look forward to coming there again.

PIQUE: Are you aware Boot and the Shoestring have been bought and will likely be torn down?

KE: We heard. We actually thought our last gig was the last gig, so we’re excited the time has been expanded a little bit. The Boot is a funky little room because it has a lot of wood inside and a wooden room usually sounds good for the type of music we play. Glass, stone, metal – it hurts the ears. The frequencies bounce off the walls too hard. Wood absorbs. I just hope we can find a place where we can continue this. That it’s not dependent on that one place that we come to Whistler.

PIQUE: The last time you were here you were just getting ready to release the album Mondo Garaj. Where’s Garaj Mahal going now?

KE: If you think of the history of our music, the "jam band," where musicians improvise live in front of an audience, that goes back to Miles Davis, the album Bitches Brew with John McLaughlin on guitar...

Looking at the scene around us there’s not much going on in that direction. Fusion is a style that disappeared because it became too individualized and egocentric. Musicians can get so self-absorbed they lose the audience.

PIQUE: Do you think alienating the audience musically is a potential problem for Garaj Mahal?

KE: Let’s just say there’s a danger for that to happen.

Look at Kenny G and look at John Coltrane in his heaviest days. Both of them are musicians but John Coltrane’s music does not work as background music. Kenny G’s music works as background music. Background music became huge in the last 10 years because people’s lives are so ruled by the hustle that the only time they have for listening to music is on their way to their job in the car or while they’re doing chores at home, in the background.

There are, of course, a few hardcore music lovers that put on their headphones, get their glass of wine, sit down, and just tune in and trance out. Or the ones that go to shows and open their hearts to what’s going on. John Coltrane has the ability to provide someone with a spiritual revelation. Kenny G has the ability to soothe somebody and make someone feel comfortable in the space they’re in. It’s different music for different functions.

With Garaj Mahal we’re walking on that tightrope right now. We have access to the dance crowd. We love dance music. And we can also go for it and reveal our inner spiritual struggle in front of people, almost to the degree that it’s scary. We feel that energy when it gets really intense and we’re feeling that all four of us are really making it count. Sometimes we actually hyperventilate or our hearts start to skip. There’s a lot of intense energy that comes through and it’s very valuable. But it’s also like a very strong potion. You can O.D. on it and you have to watch out and use it sparsely.

In a way we’re experimenting with that right now. My goal is to be the next generation of musician that can balance this energy by also acknowledging the other side – the ambient side – to also be proficient at that. Why not have a song that leads you through different areas, like a suite? A song that starts ambient and goes into something very intense and comes back down? It requires the discipline of the musicians to have the tools and the power but not to use it when it’s not appropriate.

It’s hard because when you’re in the heat of things it’s like having an intense conversation with someone and then going back to smalltalk. You kind of need to resolve things. It’s like a person who goes to the mountaintop and proclaims, and then also puts the baby to sleep at the end of the evening. I want to be able to do that in this lifetime.

We just got out of the studio in Washington D.C. where we recorded the new Garaj Mahal record. It’s going to be amazing. It’s a few levels up from what we’ve done so far. We locked ourselves in this room for over a week and we slept in that room and we worked in that room around the clock. We saw the sun come up every day. We’re getting ready to release it next spring.

PIQUE: Will you be playing the new material on the upcoming tour?

KE: Yes, all of our latest compositions. And we’re always writing so we’ll probably have new stuff that is not on any record yet. That’s cool, you know? We have to keep moving.

Tickets to Garaj Mahal are available through TicketMaster, the Boot Pub and at www.upstreamentertainment.com. For more info call 604-932-3338.

It's been an eclectic day:

Started out this morning with the Wailing Souls, then some Fred J. Eaglesmith and the Flying Squirrels, Grateful Dead, Ani Difranco, really old Bruce Cockburn, the Necros, and finally some Stan Rogers.

(Wow, do I sound indecisive or what?)

Bokonon's right re this thread.

I'd hate to ever think it were dead.

We must all strive

To keep it alive

Whatever else on this board might get said.

We must stay a positive force

On this board and maintain our course

Of creating a piece

In which we release

Our good thoughts 'til our throats are hoarse.

Anyone planning to come up here for those shows?

You were bored at their show? That sort of surprises me, but to each his own...

oh ya. awesome band, and mindblowing live! they're playing two shows next week here in Whistler. Woo hoo!

Okay, I should again comment that I am not a criminal defence lawyer, rather a civil litigator. I can shed some light, though.

Section 1 from the Charter is applied pursuant to the "Oakes Test". That is the case in which it was said under what conditions a Charter right can be breached by legislation. The point of the test is to decide whether a particular statute is constitutional.

“The Oakes Test” is:

1. Pressing and Substantial Objective:

Is the Government’s objective in limiting the Charter protected right a pressing and substantial objective according to the values of a free and democratic society? If no, the law is unconstitutional. If yes, apply branch 2.

2. Proportionality Test:

Examine the proportionality between the Parliament or the Provincial legislature's objective and the means used to further that objective:

a) Rational Connection:

Is the legislation’s limitation of the Charter right have a ''rational connection to Parliament’s objective? The means used must be carefully designed to achieve the objective. They must not be arbitrary, unfair or based on irrational considerations.

Minimal Impairment:

Does the legislative means to achieve the objective impair the Charter protected right in question as minimally as possible? Are there alternative modes of furthering Parliament’s objective that infringe the right to a lesser extent? The legislation cannot not be overbroad or unduly vague.

c) Proportionality between effects and objective:

Are the measures that are responsible for limiting the Charter right proportional to the objective? Does the benefit to be derived from the legislation outweigh the seriousness of the infringement? The legislation may not produce effects of such severity so as to make the impairment unjustifiable.

If the legislation fails any of the above branches, it is unconstitutional. Otherwise it passes the Section 1 Oakes test.

Now, the legislation we are talking about here, is called the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The following is an excerpt from a publication by the BC Civil Liberties Association addressing this point:

This discussion on extending police powers arose as the result of the 1999 decision of R. v. Campbell and Shirose (1999) 133 CCC (3d) 257, where the Supreme Court of Canada held that the investigative techniques employed by the police were illegal. In that case, the police engaged in a "reverse sting" money laundering scheme with a view to gaining evidence against persons who were suspected of being involved in the trafficking of narcotics. Effective as the technique was in that particular case, the finding of illegality meant that investigative method was no longer available for use by the police. And while the Court rejected any notion of a "general law enforcement justification" for flouting the law (Campbell and Shirose, at.283-284), the Court at the same time recognized that law enforcement is difficult and that in order to be effective, "the ingenuity of criminals must be matched by that of the police" (at 522).

In response to this case, the government enacted regulations to specifically permit the police to engage in conduct which is otherwise criminal by exempting the police, in these circumstances, from the application of specified provisions of law. In particular, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Police Enforcement) Regulations exempt police officers from the application of various sections of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. For the more serious activities of trafficking and making controlled deliveries, an officer will be exempt if (1) he or she has been issued a certificate, (2) the officer is an active member of the police force, and (3) the officer "is acting in the course of the member's responsibilities for the purposes of a particular investigation."

As far as the specific issue of searches goes, I am not entirely confident to provide an opinion, but I will tell you what I do know. There are relaxed standards when it comes to searching a vehicle over searching a home. You are correct that the Court does weigh factors such as the smell of marijuana, apparent drug-induced state of the inhabitants of the car, and other factors to decide if the search is warranted under the circumstances. To my knowledge, a Steal Your Face sticker is not grounds for such a search, however, I speculate that a bumper sticker saying "Smoke All You Want, We'll Grow Some More" and other similar stickers, would be a factor that the court would take seriously.

I hope this helps a little bit.

No. You cover your own costs. Cost awards are only made in civil actions.

That being said, in extraordinary cases, you can later commence a civil action and sue the police, government, Queen, etc. for "malicious prosecution", however, that is an extremely difficult standard to meet. (On the upside, if you win that action, you are more likely to get an order in your favour for costs that you had to incur for that lawsuit, but that award would only cover a small portion, if any, of those costs. How's that for irony?)

Hey Paisley:

The Patriot Act would have no force or effect in England, as American jurisdiction only extends to American territory. Even if that was the statute under which they proceeded proceedings could still only occur on US land.

The Court Order, however, was against Rackspace, the service provider to IndyMedia, and that company exists in both the US and England. The order was against that company's branch in the United States, where the FBI do have jurisdiction to enforce.

To make a long story short... this means that the Court could order the local branch of the company to do something, anywhere in the world, and failure to do so would mean a breach of the Court Order within the United States, and that the FBI could then take enforcement measures against the company as it exists in the US. If Rackspace had no presence in the US, the FBI could not touch the servers in England without cooperation from the British authorities.

-But what do I know, as I am just a simple caveman.

That was a great song! Thanks, Esau, for sharing. Excuse my ignorance, but who was that?

Well, I'll depart from the rhyme just this once to cut and paste a definition:

chiv·vy or chiv·y

v. chiv·vied, or chiv·ied chiv·vy·ing, or chiv·y·ing chiv·vies or chiv·ies

v. tr.

To vex or harass with petty attacks

Here, in my province West Coastal,

I read of a guy going postal.

Is he pessimistic,

Or just narcissistic?

I pity him; as I think most'll.

He thinks he is well educated.

However it is obfuscated

As to why this would be,

But he is smarter than me,

Or so he said when us he berated.

Ten years of going to shows;

A small start, but as anyone knows

Only a start

But he does his part

To keep going and his knowledge grows.

One should never presume on this board

To know more than the rest of the horde.

I would suggest

That of all the rest

Many know more and are bored

With posts that are really so trivial.

We'd all rather be more convivial.

This online space

Should be a place

For discussion; not to be chivy-al.

I feel badly for this postal feller.

His anger - Will anything quell 'er?

I really hope so

But what do I know?

I am just a simple cave-dweller.

I've always said intellectual property law is exciting, contrary to what most people think. Finally, some proof!

ok.

With all due respect, I would suggest that your post would be better suited to a PM to the particular people you are impugning. It is inappropriate to insult innumerable people, publicly. Perhaps there is someone who truly deserves your "bile", but I doubt that everyone on this board falls into that category.

nice.

badams is rhyming now - outta sight!

Nice to have you on board

As you help rhyme toward

A master poem written day and night.

What's a sabbatical-chasm?

The thought of it makes my gut spasm!

nero's taking a break,

For goodness sake,

And will indefinitely no longer pizzazz 'em.

They cancelled their west coast tour dates.

The disappointment this news creates

Is too much to bear,

As we truly care,

So, for nero we sits and we waits.

How long will the chasm go on?

I refuse to believe that they're gone.

This country will miss

Their musical bliss

From Labrador to the Yukon.

We must all influence their plight

Through postings and emails we write

So they know that we care,

And we're all still 'out there',

Waiting for them to reunite.

Nope. I'll be at the two Whistler shows. C'mon up here!

I agree big time, Tim. The Skydiggers are a highly under-appreciated band. I am not sure why. Their music is, as you aptly described it, "beautiful", by any definition of the word; especially but not only "I Will Give You Everything". (I must admit, that song actually gives me a tingly feeling.)

This matter should not be a legal issue. This is truly a health issue. I am entirely in favour of complete legalization, essentially on civil-libertarian grounds. (Of course, being dealt with as a health issue, there would have to be considerable education, but also economic considerations such as taxing drugs based on their clinically, objectively proven detrimental effects on health, and apply those monies to provincial health coffers, to offset the harm done by those drugs.)