The new Anti-terrorism and the new *anti-Semitism*

Six months ago while Israel's Protective Edge was reducing 100,000 homes in Gaza to rubble, a delegation of Canadian Conservative and Liberal MPs and senators flew to Israel to demonstrate their support ... for Israel. Here they are shown leading a singalong at a Canada Israel Solidarity Rally at the David Citadel Hotel in Jerusalem. 
There were speeches.

"The book of dealing with terrorism is being written here in Israel," said the mayor of Jerusalem in his speech to the rally. "Terror is not just Israel's problem; it's a problem for democracies around the world."

In her speech, the Canadian Ambassador to Israel repeated Harper's phrase : "Canada stands with Israel through fire and water", while John Baird delivered a pre-recorded message of support about "standing shoulder to shoulder with Israel" and "doing the right thing".

Three weeks ago Baird was in the West Bank getting egged and in Jerusalem updating the 2014 "Memorandum of Understanding between Canada and Israel regarding a Canada-Israel Strategic Partnership". From one of the new Canada-Israel 2015 MOUs signed January 18 :

• Reaffirming their dedication to the shared values of freedom of expression and assembly, democracy, and the rule of law
• Deeply concerned by efforts to single out the State of Israel for criticism and isolate the State of Israel internationally including calls for a boycott of the State of Israel, for the divestment of investments, and for sanctions to be imposed on Israel
• Recognizing that the selective targeting of Israel reflects the new face of anti‑Semitism

On the same day on their website, Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada addressed the new MOU and "the challenge posed by terrorism", including more "standing with Israel through fire and water" and concluding  :

"Whether the fight against violent extremism is conducted over the skies of Iraq or in the tunnels under Gaza, Canada and the State of Israel are fighting enemies whose hateful ideologies and goals threaten all peaceful, democratic societies. That’s why we are committed to enhancing our collaboration on security and defence, especially in the increasingly important area of cyber-security."

Concern has already been voiced over whether the new Anti-terrorism Act 2015 can or will be used to attack or chill pipeline protest, given one definition of "activities" included in the Act is (f) "interference with critical infrastructure".  

But given :

• the Cons' unhinged devotion to Israel, 
• the Libs' stated intention to vote in favor of Bill C-51 to pass the Anti-terrorism Act, and
• the 2015 Canada/Israel MOU's language targeting the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement and once again conflating *selective* criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, 

will part (i) below in the anti-terrorism bill be used to advance clandestine activity against critics of Israel's occupation policies? Page 3 : 

From Part One : Security of Canada Information Sharing Act

"An Act to encourage and facilitate information sharing between Government of Canada institutions in order to protect Canada against activities that undermine the security of Canada"

"Whereas Canada is not to be used as a conduit for the carrying out of activities that undermine the security of another state"

and where the last of nine definitions of "activities" is : 

(i) an activity that takes place in Canada and undermines the security of another state

Con terrorism logic here could conceivably argue that criticism of Israel is helping the terrorists, therefore it becomes a terrorism/boosterism issue - another possible use of an expanded secret police force with scant oversight and the power to break the law and violate the Charter.

G&M editorial : Anti-terrorism bill will unleash CSIS on a lot more than terrorists

"Bill C-51 is not an anti-terrorism bill".

The Star : Bill C-51: Tories cynically surf panic wave for political ends

Craig Forcese on vid

The Tyee : Elizabeth May : Harper's Police State Law

Typo fixed; h/t Waterbaby .

Bomb bomb bomb Iran Syria

Three days ago Mint Press News out of Minneapolis published a story written by MidEast AP reporter Dale Gavlak based on eyewitness accounts from relatives of Syrian rebels killed in the Aug. 21 chemical 'attack'. They contend that what actually occurred was an accident caused by the rebels mishandling their Saudi-supplied chemical weapons cargo : 

EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack

Rebels and local residents in Ghouta accuse Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan of providing chemical weapons to an al-Qaida linked rebel group.

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions.”

That it could have been the rebels who set off the chem *attacks* is not without precedent. The Independent, May 6, 2013 : 

UN's Carla Del Ponte says there is evidence rebels may have used sarin in Syria.

A United Nations inquiry into human rights abuses in Syria has found evidence that rebel forces may have used chemical weapons, its lead investigator has revealed.

Carla Del Ponte, a member of the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on Syria, said that testimony gathered from casualties and medical staff indicated that the nerve agent sarin was used by rebel fighters.“This was used on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities,” she added.

The White House immediately issued a statement that if chem weapons were used in Syria the Assad regime was responsible. Both sides have accused the other of the use of such weapons since the US-backed civil war began two years ago.  

Obviously I can't assess the credibility of Gavlak's report but I'm posting a link to it because Canadian media has been happy enough to report on John Baird's support for the US position two days ago :

"U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry publicly outlined details of how they concluded that the Assad regime flagrantly used chemical weapons against its own people, causing wide-scale death and devastation in the suburbs of Damascus on August 21, 2013.  Along with its international partners and allies, Canada has condemned this despicable and abhorrent act."

but has yet to mention Gavlak's report.

Very good article from FAIR : Which Syrian Chemical Attack Is More Credible?
ending with this :

This humility about the difficulty of reporting on a covert, invisible attack in the midst of a chaotic civil war actually adds to the credibility of the Mint account. It's those who are most certain about matters of which they clearly lack firsthand knowledge who should make us most skeptical.

Tangental fun facts : 
In 2011, Saudi Arabia received one-third of Canada's total $12-billion in arms exports . 

"The total in government-approved arms export licences for Saudi Arabia was more than 100 times the $35 million approved in 2010."

Up until Aug 2011, the Government of Canada Canada-Syria Relations webpage read : 

"Canada is now the 3rd largest foreign direct investor in Syria due to a $1.2 billion Suncor/Petro Canada gas project."

Canada's reluctance to make public last week's military co-operation agreement with China is possibly due to Beijing's close ties to Assad's regime.
.

The rules for censoring the Afghan detainee docs

On Wednesday, Airshow and Baird announced their success in killing off any further investigation into the abuse of  those Afghans it pleased them to refer to as "Taliban detainees" - the farmers and taxi drivers  handed off to the CIA-funded NDS on political orders from the Canadian government.

The release of a small percentage of heavily redacted docs reviewed by the three judges of the Panel of Arbiters completely vindicated the Canadian Forces, they read nervously from their notes. As if anyone other than them had insinuated allegations about "the troops" into what was their responsibility to comply with international law on the treatment of prisoners of a country we invaded.

Reading the panel's many restrictions on unredacting the documents, you might wonder how Speaker Milliken's order to release the docs to Parliament 18 months ago got watered down to whatever survived the following censorship :

REPORT BY THE PANEL OF ARBITERS ON ITS WORK AND METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING WHAT REDACTED INFORMATION CAN BE DISCLOSED , excerpted

The Panel of Arbiters can determine, at the request of the government, that certain information should not be disclosed due to the solicitor-client privilege.

The Panel of Arbiters, after consultation with the Clerk of the Privy Council, can also determine, at the request of the government, that information constituting Cabinet confidences should not be disclosed.

Also not to be released :

... information relating to the characteristics, capabilities, performance, potential deployment, functions or role of any defence establishment, military force or unit; and information obtained or prepared for the purpose of intelligence relating to the defence of Canada or an allied state.

 ... communications and documents obtained in confidence from third parties, generally allied states, should not be disclosed without the prior consent of the providing third party.

... information not widely known or accessible, where the authenticity of the information is neither confirmed nor denied, and where the information was inadvertently disclosed.

Government officials expressed serious concern about the disclosure of intergovernmental communications. They told us that all diplomatic communication is undertaken with the expectation of confidentiality and that disclosure of confidential communications would cause serious harm, regardless of the substance of the communication, and whether the “speaker” is Canada or a foreign government.

Certain documents referred by the Committee contain Canadian criticism of, or candid negative commentary about, Afghan institutions or officials. Some documents also contain Canadian reporting about criticism by one Afghan institution or official of another.

If the assessment appears to be merely speculation by a non-senior Canadian official, we generally either leave it redacted or summarize it at a very high level, making it clear in doing so that the assessment is the view of the individual, and not the government of Canada.
We exercise our judgment in each case to decide whether the information at issue is truly critical, and therefore would be harmful if released.

Generally speaking, we do not disclose any information or communications flowing from Canada to the ICRC [Red Cross]. We do not disclose any information, even in summary form, about or from the ICRC that is directly attributed to the ICRC or that it can be inferred comes from the ICRC.

...where information is not attributed to the ICRC, that the ICRC is the source of this information. Where that is the case, we leave the information redacted.

... information from third parties, such as foreign governments or intergovernmental organizations like NATO or NATO’s International Security Assistance Force. ... our approach is to not disclose or summarize third party information.

... the names of Afghan officials, including senior Afghan officials. Our approach is not to disclose these names except where the information, including the name, has already been widely disclosed.

... our approach is not to disclose or summarize information about Special Forces activities

...the use of gunshot residue (“GSR”) testing in Afghanistan ...disclose information indocuments relating to the use of the test and results obtained ... leave redacted other information to avoid compromising national defence.

... solicitor-client privilege is close to absolute ... extends to communications between government officials and government lawyers just as it does to any other lawyer-client communications. Unless it is waived by the client, solicitor-client privilege generally lasts forever.

Cabinet confidentiality may extend beyond Cabinet documents per se ; it may, for example, apply to communications between or involving Ministers.

So what was left to disclose on Wednesday after all the above censorship?
Just enough to shut it down.  Apparently.
.

Blindsided by science

So we've all been suitably appalled at this news by now :

NaPo : Environment Canada scientists told to toe the line
"Environment Canada has "muzzled" its scientists, ordering them to refer all media queries to Ottawa where communications officers will help them respond with "approved lines."

Anyone remember George Deutsch?
Deutsch was a young Texas college student who was rewarded for his work on George Bush's campaign with a post as a press secretary at NASA. His job was to water down whatever science was deemed to be inconvenient or embarrassing to the Bush administration. It all went sideways when leading NASA climatologist James Hansen complained that he was being "muzzled", that his reports and studies were modified and censored in order to be more in line with the administration’s political policies, particularly on global warming.

Back to NaPo : "The new policy, which went into force in recent weeks and sent a chill through the department research divisions, is designed to control the department's media message and ensure there are no "surprises" for Environment Minister John Baird and senior management when they open the newspaper or turn on the television"

It is not the job of Environment Canada to ensure that Mr.Baird is not "surprised" by chance encounters with science on TV, and it sure as hell is not the job of "communications officers" and the George Deutsches of the world to interpret that science for us with "approved lines".

Bah.

Blogging Bali and Baird's ballyhoo

Local eco-activist Tzeporah Berman blogs the Bali conference and spars with Minister Baird over a beer. Some quick quotes :

"Shall we hold off having democratic elections until China does as well?"

"Tomorrow we'll be doing a press conference and panel discussion on Canada's forests here at Bali. There is a lot of discussion here about tropical forests but few people know that Canada's forests store more carbon than any other terrestrial ecosystem or that our logging contributes as much greenhouse gas emissions as all the cars on the road."

"It turns out that there is one thing to admire about Baird. His chutzpa. With full recognition of how disgusted some of the most committed and informed people from around the world are at him, he waltzed into the non-governmental groups' reception and had a beer. Obviously I couldn't pass up the moment. After debating the issues with him for half an hour I can safely say that the chutzpa is all I found to admire and unfortunately that alone is not enough to make a great leader. We live in a time that calls for courageous and thoughtful leadership. Talking to Minister Baird tonight was a little like debating Bill O'Reilly. You have to be quick and he is clever but he doesn't listen for a second and he is more interested in scoring points than actually leading."

Continue reading at Berman's blog or The Tyee

Update : Stop the Climate-Wrecking at Bali Avaaz Petition:

"We call urgently for the US, Canada and Japan to stop blocking serious 2020 targets for emissions reductions, and for the rest of the world to refuse to accept anything less."

Your name here

62,823 signatures in 12 hours so far......Thank you, Holly Stick

Mr Baird goes to Bali

The Star : No climate deal without U.S., Baird says.

Shorter Baird : If we don't succeed in finding new excuses to continue trashing the environment, ultimately there will be no economy left to worry about.

As other nations discuss whether the Climate Change Conference in Bali will be successful in getting "rogue nations like China and the US to sign on to real targets", Canada throws up roadblocks to progress. Well, not Canada exactly, just our government according to Germanwatch :

"China's ranking on Germanwatch's 40th annual index, which ranks 56 industrialized and emerging countries, was an improvement of four places over last year, the group said Friday.
The United States and Saudi Arabia were the worst on the list, at 55th and 56th places, respectively.
Canada placed 53rd on the list, down two spots from last year's survey. It has prompted concern that the country lacks credibility on the international stage."

Ya think? In preference to Kyoto, "Baird uses the 1987 Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances as an example of what the world should strive for. "

Sure, let's ban hairspray again - we were great at that! But wait :

Matthew Bramley, director of the climate change program at the Pembina Institute, said :

"The Germanwatch ranking was developed by analyzing each country's emission levels, emission trends, and greenhouse gas reduction policies and combining the information to create an overall climate change performance target.
While Canada placed 46th and 43rd in terms of emission levels and trends, its governmental policies were ranked 55th, making them the second-weakest in the study.
"The people that compiled the whole survey have explained to me that if Canada substantially strengthened its policy, it could rise as much as 20 places in this ranking," he said."

That'll be our job - getting rid of these hairspray policy activists.

Win the Nobel and lose your funding

And as Scruffy Dan points out, the Canadian IPCC scientists are clearly pissed about it :
"Nobel Prize-winning scientists from Canada say the Harper government is failing to protect the country from the dangers of global warming because it has shut down a federal climate change research network and blocked new studies on the impact of rising greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere."

Andrew Weaver, UVic uses words like "vindictive" and "stupidity"
"Harper stands up and waffles on about trying to call for 50% emissions reductions. Where on earth is he getting those numbers from?" Weaver asked. "They're certainly not coming from Canadian scientists."

The government said that it closed the Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptation Research Network because it had completed its federal mandate. The network and the independent Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Science both sponsored peer-reviewed research that contributed to the award-winning IPCC report that is now being used by governments as a basis for international climate change negotiations.

It was in fact that very IPCC report which apparently caused Harper to adopt, um, a better appreciation of the dangers of AGW and climate change. I guess we know all we need to know about it now.

Environment Minister John Baird said suggestions that his department was cutting research spending were "totally unfounded," since the government was spending a "record amount" on climate research in various departments such as Natural Resources and Industry Canada.

Industry Canada? Please. According to their website, the Industry Canada mandate is : "a fair, efficient and competitive marketplace; an innovative economy; and competitive industry and sustainable communities."
I know - they also have sciencey links. I started to read the "Related links : Science and Technology" and got as far as "The Strategy is focused on creating a more competitive and sustainable Canadian economy with the help of science and technology" when I got distracted by "BizPals" on the sidebar. I get it, John, but I'm not exactly seeing Nobel here.

Back to Baird : "I can appreciate that some people would rather (have) more (spending) on this or on that, but it's a record amount and it's informed by some of the expert officials that we have in science in the public service," he said. "We don't need the politicization of science. That's for sure."

Damn straight, John. Can't have that.

CP : Audit slaps wrist of Natural Resources for lobbyist conflict-of-interest

Apparently Natural Resources Canada spent a cool million bucks last year buying its employees expensive memberships in groups that lobby the government. Conflict of Interest? The list of lobbyists isn't available but the CP story does provide us with this reminder :

"Natural Resources is primarily responsible for the $1.5-billion ecoEnergy program, announced in January by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to promote renewable energy."

As it turns out, promoting renewable energy is the precisely the business of the agri-biz astroturf group Canadian Renewable Fuels Association - you know, the guys who promote ethanol, the practice of feeding corn to cars to produce a 1% reduction in GHG. CRFA was headed by registered federal lobbyist Kory Teneycke up till Nov1 this year when he returned to the Harper fold as Director of the Conservative Resource Group. I say returned because prior to his stint as head of CRFA, Teneycke was a Reform Party activist and campaign strategist for Preston Manning.

Baird is right. We don't need politicization of science because we already have lots of it.

Dr. Gordon McBean, a review editor of the 2007 IPCC report and the volunteer chairperson of the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Science : "Canada likes to think of itself as a G8 country, and we should act like one occasionally."

Environment Committee scuttled

The Environment Committee appears to gone the way of other government committees who deviate from the Con party line.

Faced with the prospect of testimony hostile to the Con environment plan from a witness previously expected to be 'friendly', Environment Committee Chair and Con MP Bob Mills attempted to change the witness line-up, and when over-ruled by the rest of the committee he promptly resigned as committee chair. No other Con agreed to stand in for Mills, thereby effectively shutting down the hearings.

Another one for the growing list of sabotaged committees.
The silenced witness was Mark Jaccard, a Simon Fraser University economist who Environment Minister John Baird counted on to validate the Con non-environment plan right up til this week when Jaccard published a scathing review of the government's climate change targets via the previously supportive C.D.Howe Institute.

Now we all remember the 200 page Con dirty tricks manual with its suggestions on how to disrupt and terminate committees not holding to the Con party line, and the subsequent leak to NaPo's Don Martin a month ago that Con party whip Jay Hill leaned on committee chairs who didn't play along :

"A source at that meeting confided that [government whip] Mr. [Jay] Hill "lavished praise on the chairs who caused disruptions and admonished those who prefer to lead through consensus".

So it's more than a little interesting that following his resignation as Environment Committee Chair, Bob Mills refused all interviews and instead "referred all questions on the matter to the Conservative whip".

Con whip Jay Hill, apparently not yet informed of Mills' resignation, declined to be interviewed when questioned on it by reporters.

I imagine Bob Mills, an apparently decent guy by all accounts, actually expected to get a little work done when he came to Ottawa. I don't imagine he saw resigning his position as a way of achieving that.
Just how much pressure are these committee chairs under to entirely discredit the whole concept of government?
This entirely ridiculous experiment in being governed by people who hate government has been an unmitigated disaster.

Link

Cartoon Ethics

Go on - click it.

Ottawonk provides us with this, um, refreshingly simple example of cartoon ethics right off the government's Public Service Human Resources Management Agency website.

Uh huh, it really is a cartoon extolling the public service employee's obligation of whistleblowing.

And just in case said public service employees are unable to grasp the cartoon in all its mindblowingly awesome simplicity, the Office of Public Service Values and Ethics also provides a little transcript of it as well.

Here at Creekside, we would like to make one or two small adjustments to that transcript, in keeping with the Con gnogov's recent record on whistleblowing :

Panel 1 : An Environment Canada employee sees John Baird virtually stealing money for Alberta's oil industry in his upcoming Environment Canada legislation.

Panel 2 : Yo, public service employee! People should know about this! Do da right thing!

Panel 3 : Lulu looks on as the hapless Environment Canada employee is persuaded to reveal Baird's regulatory shenanigans to the Canadian press and public, here rather aptly represented by a somewhat small and insignificant-looking figure way off in the background.

Panel 4 : Not shown. Hapless Environment Canada employee led off in handcuffs by the RCMP.

Our new transcript more accurately reflects the experience of Can Enviro employee X, arrested and handcuffed at his Environment Canada desk for his act of whistleblowing. He was released a couple of hours later without charges, presumably because he had not broken any laws.

We eagerly look forward to the government's next "Window on Values and Ethics" cartoon and strongly suggest it should be about employee intimidation. They could include this handy reaction to the day's events from John Baird, as caught by1337 hax0r :

“The arrest is a signal to other government employees that future leaks of information won't be tolerated," suggests Environment Minister John Baird.”

Conservatoon ethics.

UPDATE : CBC : The EnviroCan employee is Jeff Monaghan, news reader temp at EC, member of a collective that recently opened an anarchist bookstore in Ottawa, and the drummer in a punk band :

One of these is not like the others...

Take your time. Don't rush it.

Baird : Pull my finger again!

John Baird : "At some point, it's sort of like the planet's on fire, we've got to throw water on it. We don't need to research it, we need to act."

Environment Minister Angry McPointy™ continues to treat his portfolio as if it's a burning paperbag full of dogshit that's been left on his porch.
While John is cleaning off his shoes, he might consider some alternative "actions".

He could, for instance, meet with Gordon McBean, chair of the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, who, along with other climate research scientists, have seen their repeated requests to meet with McPointy declined, along with their climate research funding.
McBean described McPointy's avoidance of addressing long term solutions as "sadly misinformed".

Angry McPointy™ - My Blahg

Sing Us A Song, JimBobby

From Ross in the comments below, a link to JimBobby Sez :

Sing Us a Song, You're Enviro-Man
It's nine o'clock up in Ottawa,
Most of the MPs are there,
They're all in their seats, except Steve's on his feet,
Tryin' to prove that he cares.

Now, Steve is an egghead Prime Minister,
There's a pit bull named Baird at his side,
Who snarls and snaps about emission caps,
While his limousine's idling outside.

And the Speaker is practicing politics,
As the insults and taunts fill the air.
While the climate is changing, they're just rearranging,
The Titanic's three hundred deck chairs.
La la la, de de da
La la, de de da da da

Sing us a song, you're Enviro-Man,
Tell us another one, Steve.
We're all in the mood for Kyoto compliance,
So, what have you got up your sleeve?

This is just an excerpt. If you go over to JimBobby's you can hear the whole thing.
Sing along. Sing really loud! It'll do ya good.

CathiefromCanada likes it too.

John Baird - Pull my finger

because it's a far far better thing to light even one fart than to curse the darkness.

Waving that stubby little finger around, Environment Minister John Baird proclaimed yesterday that, in addition to not even trying to meet our Kyoto goals lest we wind up like Russia or something, we also wouldn't be going in for any funny business like implementing a carbon tax on industry or joining the international carbon trading market.

Huffing the high moral ground, Baird said buying credits in the international market would be a bad investment for Canada and that the government would rather spend the money at home. For Canadian families.

Actually there is a connection between not meeting our targets and not trading in emissions but John neglected to mention what that was and no one called him on it. Signatories to Kyoto who don't show any progress in attempting to meet their emissions targets by 2012 - and at this rate that would seem to be us - aren't allowed into the international emissions trading market anyway.