Did it ever occur to you to look up the definition of the word?A LITIGANT is simply someone engaged in legal action.Might want to look up the word IDIOT while you're at it!
"Sigh.....all this could have been settle with a letter to the editor!!! "Sigh.....all this could have been settle with a dictionary or a basic junior high level education!!!
So? The word is a complement and not an insult?One more thing...if i LOOK FOR THE WORD Coward Jerkface?I should find your name right idiot?:P
My name is Scott Agnew Charles. Do with it what you want and call me any names you please. Fact remains, I'm not the one who declared war on a person and organization based on my own lack of understanding of the English language and inability to even bother to look in a dictionary when I don know the meaning of a word.Nope, no need to inform yourself. just go with the tried and true, in your face, ignorant and misinformed Charles Leblanc style.
What???? You're still around??I remember you?You were the coward I was suppose to meet at tim years ago but you never showed up!!!Yes...Scott Agnew < strange name > you are the cowards of all cowards.I taught Jamie Irving fired you years ago!!!
charles you and scott agnew seem to be having a lovers spat.lmao JAG
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/litigantLitigant is simply someone involved in a lawsuit. It is neither a compliment nor an insult. It is simply a descriptive word.Calm down and use some common sense before you fly off the handle. If you find a word you don't know/understand simply look it up. You obviously have access to the Internet and a wealth of web sites that provide dictionary services.
The word litigant is pretty broad, this should help in understanding the meaning and the context.litigant n. any party to a lawsuit. This means plaintiff, defendant, petitioner, respondent, cross-complainant, and cross-defendant, but not a witness or attorney.litigant noun adversary, adverse party, appellant, appellee, claimant, complainant, contender, contestant, controversialist, correspondent, defendant, disputant, intervenor, legal adverrary, legal opponent, litigationist, litigator, opponent, opponent in a lawsuit, party, party to a lawsuit, party to a legal action, party to a proceeding, party to a suit, party to an action, party to legal proceeding, petitioner, plaintiff, suitor, the defense.Redneck Comment --> Don Macpherson should do something about his above average weight because of the additional health care cost that is associated with obesity health related issues, which can be just as costly as it is for smokers. F@#kin smokers.
I don't believe so because Don MacPherson always used this word as negative in his report to the Irvings...
I agree, Charles knows how to use the internet, so look it up-especially before writing a letter to the editor about it! As the above poster points out, a litigant is somebody involved in a LAWSUIT-meaning civil court. So Charles is right to be upset, because he has NEVER been involved in a lawsuit. I don't see why it means a 'low life' or anything like that, but its not the proper term for what Charles was (is?). So while you are belittling charles and calling him an idiot for not knowing what the term means, and not looking it up, just keep in mind that there is another person who fits that description, and he works as a reporter for the only print media in the province. Which puts them on about an equal footing when it comes to news.
Mikel,I'm aware of several community newspapers that the Irving's dont own in this province.Plus anyone can start a print media anytime they want.
The Gleaner has reported self represented litigants very negatively recently and has not provided any balanced reporting on the issue of members of the public representing themselves in court, so Charles is right to take this as a negative comment about him. and Mikel is right - Charles did not "choose" to go to court for charges against him. He had no choice and when lawyers bail you have to keep going.
MacPherson used "Litigant" which means you're involved in lawsuits (or legal matters)What I think Charles is confusing it with is "Litigious", which means you are "unreasonably prone to go to law to settle disputes."Although they are similar, there's a big difference between the two, how they are used and what they mean.
He is using his newspaper for other reason than (just the facts) and putting him in with Andre Murray who has been denied any justice whatsoever and that's from a impartial viewpoint. This journalist is trying to put Charles in some sort of bad light light,like a disgruntled person with no point.What a pile O crap!
Anybody CAN, but that's irrelevant, and its pretty much the only print media of note, and certainly the only one in Fredericton (and that's really besides the point I think).
The courts are getting hit with a wave of self represented people who dont have to follow court protocol and they are purposely frustrating people from further action.They put up low level crap judges like Clendenning as gate keepers on the bottom rung,then at the higher level chief justices pretend to care by nodding so nicely at the litigants all the while their shredding the case in their minds before the trials begun.
With the help of corrupt Irving press the courts are attacking self represented parties for many reasons, including that: members of the public can stand up in court and tell the truth on the record without lawyers there to misrepresent the facts, to show; to show people they "need" lawyers to "win" in court (to keep charging big fat fees) and to prevent justice to cover up the serious corruption in the "establishment" of New Brunswick and Fredericton. I notice the Irving press has never informed the public of the judges' duty to direct and assist the self-represented, written by Beverly McLachlin, Chief Justice of Canada and endorsed by the Canadian Judicial Council.
Irving not only owns the major news papers but owns most of the major printing presses/shops in the province.So to try and produce your own paper you have to go out of province, but that takes time, by the time you send your layout flats, now day's is digital, the produce the paper and send it back the news is obsolete.Yes in theory you produce your own paper but practically highly unlikely.The other issue that happens if you try to produce your own news paper is advertisement to cover the cost of production. Irving has a very aggressive sales team, that as a small operator you can't compete with.If you think Irving is bad look at the SUN news network, Corporate Harper's own propaganda machine. Look at this connection here is old Kory Teneycke, who is currently vice-president of Sun News Network.Interestingly enough He was the former director of communications for the Canadian Prime Minister's Office.Lets turn the hand of clock back to 2010 for the CRTC licensing of Sun News. Konrad von Finckenstein (not Frankenstein) as Chair of the CRTC opposed the application, Harper forced him to his position as chair of the CRTC, as a Plum Harper offered him the position of ambassador. There is a lot more to this story as well, when you look at the backgrounds of the journalist working under the Suns banner, for example Ezra Levant, well known Sun Personality,, look at his background, Educated at the University of Calgary, where Harper was educated, was a key organizer for the reform party, advocated for the petroleum industry an has has declared to special interests groups such as aboriginal and bilingual groups. I could go through each the Suns media staff and for most show connections between Industry, Harper. the reform and the Conservative party. Enough said .. lolContents
How come that journalist can't call Charles a litigant, but he sees nothing wrong with using in internet, an even more widely accessible format, to call people fascists, racists, cowards, jerkfaces, sexual perverts, and any other manner of insult?Steve P
"How come that journalist can't call Charles a litigant, but he sees nothing wrong with using in internet, an even more widely accessible format, to call people fascists, racists, cowards, jerkfaces, sexual perverts, and any other manner of insult?" That's a VERY good point-again provided that you expect no more from your 'mainstream media' than you expect from a blogger.
John Swinton on the Free PressOne night, probably in 1880, John Swinton, then the preeminent New York journalist, was the guest of honour at a banquet given him by the leaders of his craft. Someone who knew neither the press nor Swinton offered a toast to the independent press. Swinton outraged his colleagues by replying:"There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with.Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”
AndreThe Irving press is for hire, with competitive rates for this province.You can digitally send your paper Tuesday to the presses in Moncton, and have the paper available for pickup or however you want to have it delivered by Wed AM,Granted you won't be able to print at 4am and have 7am delivery time like the Irivngs do as they have those slots on their presses.But you can have next day copy, at competitive rates.So you know why the Irivings have all the print media? Because they bought the competition, you know who that makes bad in my mind? The people that sold their papers to the Irvings that gave them the monopoly.You want to blame someone for the sad state of print media in this province? Have the decency to blame the people that caused it. That's the people that sold and gave the power to the Irving's.It's all stupid and unimportant anyways. Print media is dead. Who cares who owns it. It's not how most people in this province get their news.But don't let logic stop your rant. Logic never had for you in the past, why tart now.
That's a pretty ignorant 'rant' itself. We've had detailed commentary in the past from those competing against Irving, and the idea that it is 'easy' and that Irving has no problem with competition is simply ridiculous. It IS important, because if you want news about New Brunswick, you HAVE to go there. If you want accurate news with context, you have to go with print. Fact is, most people don't care about news-period, but that doesn't mean you ignore it. Canadians are quickly becoming like americans and have very little knowledge of how their society functions. As for Sun, its bad, but very few take it seriously, and it has plenty of competition.
Post a Comment