Butt Farce

Today, Steve's partisan puppet Speaker Andrew Scheer punted a decision about Brad Butt lying to the House twice about personally witnessing vouching election fraud back to the House for debate. Because you can lie in the House, apparently - you just can't use the words "lie" or "liar".

You'll recall this bs about vouching encouraging voter fraud was the excuse the Cons gave to explain why they want their Fair Elections Act to prohibit vouching in future elections. And Butt sits on the committee studying it - PROC, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, consisting of 6 Cons, 3 NDPers, and a Lib. 

So a motion on whether to send the matter of Butt making shit up over to the committee Butt sits on for further study was debated until House Leader Peter Van Loan signalled he would call closure on it. So that's that - end of story. 

Part of the debate on Butt's calandra-ing consisted of nutter Con MP Steven Fletcher, himself a former Minister for Democratic Reform, trying to bring a motion he termed "contempt of Canada" against the NDP because they declined his invitation to stand up as one and proclaim Canada's political system is better than Russia's.

Unlike the Cons, at least people in the Ukraine already know that.
.
Tuesday vote : 
That the question of privilege related to the statements made in the House of Commons by Butt be referred to PROC : Yes - 110 ;  No - 152

- with 1/5 of NDP and 1/3 of Libs not present for the vote, not that it would have made a difference to the outcome.

So there we have it - lying in the House now officially approved .

.

The Combating Terrorism Act vs Justin Trudeau

On Thursday, three days after the Boston Marathon bombings, the Cons still had scheduled an opposition day for Monday - a day on which the opposition parties set the day's agenda. But then on Friday, an hour after learning that Justin Trudeau would spend it introducing his Backbenchers' Spring motion, Government House Leader Peter Van Loan suddenly announced that opp day was cancelled due to the vital national importance of debating the Combating Terrorism Act on Monday instead ... because of the Boston Marathon bombing.
Sure, whatever.

Notable that the S-7 Combating Terrorism Act would have passed already in its previous incarnations as Bill C-17 and C-19 if Steve hadn't prorogued Parliament. On September 22, 2010 the entire Liberal Party but one voted along with the Cons to pass C-17. Then on October 23 2012, the entire Liberal Party save 5 voted in favour of S-7.

Dear Libs : and this is why you can't be taken seriously as a credible opposition to Steve or a partner in any coalition against Steve. Prior to the last election, you expected to be given a pass for voting along with Steve hundreds of times owing to the fact you couldn't afford to bring down the government because you weren't ready to have an election. You don't have that excuse any longer. Really looking forward to hearing your cautious mousy noises against innocent citizens being incarcerated without trial before you all vote along with Steve once again, just so no one can call you soft on terrorism :

Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia said that the Liberals will be supporting Bill S-7 and noted that many of the original measures were first introduced by the Chretien government in 2001.

S-7. Let's suppose you know someone, perhaps your landlord or a colleague at work, that the government suspects may one day in the future commit an act of terrorism. You can be detained for up to 3 days without charge while being questioned. You don't get to hear, let alone challenge, any evidence given against you or your colleague, even if it's tortured out of someone you've never heard of in Syria, and you can be held without trial for a year if you don't co-operate.

Sure, you're a model citizen but are you sure you don't know any of these suspected terrorists for instance? ...

Building Resilience Against Terrorism : Canada’s Counter-terrorism Strategy
Public Safety Canada 2012 , introduced by Vic Toews :

"...domestic extremism that is “based on grievances – real or perceived – revolving around the promotion of various causes such as animal rights, white supremacy, environmentalism and anti-capitalism."

which is merely a rehash of the language in :
2010 G8 Summit - Integrated Security Unit Joint Intelligence Group 
but minus the reference to "First nations' resource-based grievances" :
1a The Terrorist Threat
     1b The Public Order Threat

"The 2010 G8 summit in Huntsville ... will likely be subject to actions taken by criminal extremists motivated by a variety of radical ideologies. These ideologies may include variants of anarchism, anarcho-syndicalism, nihilism, socialism and/or communism. These ideologies may also include notions of racial supremacy and white power ... 

"The important commonality is that these ideologies ... place these individuals and/or organizations at odds with the status quo and the current distribution of power in society. 

In addition to these generally held tenets, a variety of grievances exist: These grievances are based upon notions/expectations regarding the environment, animal rights, First nations'(sic) resource-based grievances, gender/racial equality, and distribution of wealth etc."

 The G8/G20 - in which thousands of people got locked up for days for no reason whatsoever.

So who wants to see the G8/G20 pilot project experiment in "terrorism" law enforcement expanded into law right across Canada? 

The Cons have had this version of the terrorism bill lying around for months, just waiting for a day when they needed to change the channel, and today is that day - they've decided to have the third reading on embedding preventative arrest and secret trials in law for no other reason than to change the channel on Justin Trudeau. 
.
10:45 Update : 
After watching the proceedings for an hour and a half now, I must apologize for writing re the Libs:

Really looking forward to hearing your cautious mousy noises against innocent citizens being incarcerated without trial before you all vote along with Steve once again, just so no one can call you soft on terrorism.

I take it back - they are not even bothering to do that much. 
Aside from the two Lib MPs questioning the timing of bringing this bill forward now to offset Trudeau's backbencher freedom motion, the only debate going on is among NDP MPs regarding provisions of the act. After opening remarks from Con Public Safety parlsec Candice Bergen, the Cons have not responded once. 

2pm Update : So "Operation Smooth", carried out by Homeland Security, FBI, and Canadian law enforcement, thwarted the Trainspotter Two without the benefit of the Combating Terrorism Act. Huh.
.
Wednesday April 24 2013 Update : S-7 passes into law.

Libs and Cons - 183 Yes     vs      NDP, Bloc and Green - 93 No

Feb 2 2014 Update : C-44 - An Act to amend the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and other Acts   Passed
Libs and Cons - 174 Yes       vs        NDP, Green - 81No
.

Gutter politics, you say?

So the government which used the private medical records of Vets activist Sean Bruyea and Vets Review Board member Harold Leduc to smear them, and the private government correspondence of diplomat Richard Colvin to smear him - the same government which defended its dirty phone tricks campaign as "vital free speech" according to Conservative House Leader Peter Van Loan - is now going all Angry Baird that someone twittered already publicly available info about Toews in response to his Awful Access internet spying Act.

Really?

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews wants an investigation into someone repeating stuff about him that was already published in the MSM nearly four years ago?

What an absolutely awesome example of how they would use their Awful Access Act.
.

Saturday. Updates from my betters :
CBC : Online surveillance bill opens door for Big Brother
Canadian Privacy Law Blog : The hidden gag order of Bill C-30

The very funny Tabatha Southey : If only Tory caucus walls could talk 

Jeff Jedras : Vikileaks and the death of the journalist as news gatekeeper

Not Quite Unhinged : Stop This Amateur IP Tracing Bullshit Now 

404 System Error : #OpKillBillz C-30


Dave and Boris , Dr. Dawg , Montreal Simon, Jeff Jedras , Dammit Janet!, Jymn, and Jymn 

.

Harper's very own "Mission Accomplished"

As already noted by Pogge, Campbell Clark at the Globe and Mail is just awesome proud of Steve winning his first ever war of his very own  : 
 With Libyan liberation, a political victory for Harper

"Stephen Harper’s first war victory was clinched in a few sudden hours when Moammar Gadhafi was captured and killed and his last bastion of Sirte fell.  

Although Mr. Harper has led a nation with forces in combat since he took office in 2006, this was not a war he inherited but one he chose ..."

 Clark then quotes from Steve's victory speech :  

“Our government shall be speaking with our allies to prepare for the end of our military mission in the next few days,” he said.

Although as is clear from the clip above (full speech here), what Steve actually said was :

"Our government shall be speaking with our allies to pretend to prepare for the end of our military mission in the next few days."

Just an unfortunate slip of the tongue surely. 
Like when Government House Leader Peter van Loan told CBC's The House last month that the Conservative government wants to extend Canada's military role in Libya beyond the scheduled end date, a statement 'government sources' quickly denied the next day.

War in Africa is an investment.
As returning US Ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz put it last month " in a State Department conference call with about 150 American companies hoping to do business with Libya" :

“We know that oil is the jewel in the crown of Libyan natural resources, but even in Qaddafi’s time they were starting from A to Z in terms of building infrastructure and other things” after the country had begun opening up to the West six years ago, he said. “If we can get American companies here on a fairly big scale, which we will try to do everything we can to do that, then this will redound to improve the situation in the United States with respect to our own jobs.”

R2P - the responsibility to protect investments.


Of course we don't talk about our humanitarian intervention like that up here when we're sponsoring regime change we can believe in! - in countries with the bad luck to be situated on top of what is clearly NATO's stuff to fight over.

"Never again," said Steve yesterday, will Gadhafi "be in a position to support terrorism or to turn guns on his own citizens."
Sure. Here's a list of 10 things likely to be missing from any future G&M account of Steve's war.

Rather heartening however is the G&M readers' response to Clark's article, with the majority of the 960 comments under it using terms like "delusional" and "jingoistic" and "colonialism".
.

The liberation of Libya

WikiLeaks cable 07TRIPOLI967, Nov. 15, 2007, from the US Embassy in Tripoli :
GROWTH OF RESOURCE NATIONALISM IN LIBYA

1.(C) Summary: Libya has a long history of resource nationalism linked to the policies and rhetoric of the Qadhafi regime. Beginning in the 1990's, many of these practices were scaled back; however, the removal of U.S. and UN sanctions and Libya's attendant opening to the world have prompted a resurgence of measures designed to increase the GOL's [Government of Libya's] control over and share of revenue from hydrocarbon resources. End Summary.

The cable goes on to laud the new "investment surge" of "more than forty international oil companies toil to discover marketable quantities of oil and gas", but warns of "nationalist rhetoric, policies" :

3.(C) With this inflow of capital, and in particular the return of international oil companies (IOCs), there has been growing evidence of Libyan resource nationalism. The regime has made a point of putting companies on notice that "exploitative" behavior will not be tolerated. In his annual speech marking the founding of his regime, Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi in 2006 said: "Oil companies are controlled by foreigners who have made millions from them -- now, Libyans must take their place to profit from this money." His son, Seif al-Islam al-Qadhafi, said in March 2007 that, "We will not tolerate a foreign company to make a profit at the expense of a Libyan citizen."

4.(C) There is a growing concern in the IOC community that NOC, emboldened by soaring oil prices and the press of would-be suitors, will seek better terms on both concession and production-sharing agreements, even those signed very recently. -- Libyan labor laws have also been amended to "Libyanize" the economy in several key sectors, and IOCs are now being forced to hire untrained Libyan employees.

7.(C)  But those who dominate Libya's political and economic leadership are pursuing increasingly nationalistic policies in the energy sector that could jeopardize efficient exploitation of Libya's extensive oil and gas reserves. Effective U.S. engagement on this issue should take the form of demonstrating the clear downsides to the GOL of pursuing this approach ....

Fast-forward two years ...

WikiLeaks cable 09TRIPOLI867, Oct. 27, 2009, from the US Embassy in Tripoli
PETROCANADA CAUGHT IN QADHAFI'S CROSS-HAIRS

1.(C) Summary: According to the xxxxxxxxxxxx of PetroCanada, xxxxxxxxxxxx the Libyan government demanded PetroCanada cut its oil production due to misunderstandings between Libya and Canada over Muammar al-Qadhafi's aborted trip to Canada in late September. 

FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH: PETROCANADA GM DETAILS RECENT ORDEAL

¶2. (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx of PetroCanada, shared with Econoff his company's recent ordeal in Libya that began with a threat of nationalization, but which was pared down to an order by the National Oil Corporation (NOC) to cut production by 50 percent. He said PetroCanada and Hrouj, its NOC-owned partner, had actually surpassed production quotas for the past six months but the NOC had never asked them to cut back. Although the NOC never gave PetroCanada a clear reason for the production cuts (and may simply have been passing down an order from PM-equivalent al-Mahmoudi), xxxxxxxxxxxx believed they were linked to the diplomatic row surrounding Libyan Leader Muammar al-Qadhafi's aborted trip to Canada. xxxxxxxxxxxx noted that press reports had "spun out of control," alleging that the Canadian FM had planned to see al-Qadhafi on his stop-over in Newfoundland to complain about Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi's "hero's welcome."

¶3. (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx said the Canadian company was suddenly threatened with nationalization during the week of September 27 which was then pared down to the required decrease in production.

¶6. (C) In spite of the current dispute, xxxxxxxxxxxx said PetroCanada still planned to continue with its plans to drill 49 new wells starting in the first quarter of 2010.

¶10. (C) Comment: Libya's moves against PetroCanada, set against the backdrop of an escalating conflict with Switzerland, have left the expatriate business community on edge. Libya's willingness to explicitly link commercial contracts to political disputes has only added to the international energy companies' growing frustration with the Libyan business climate.

Happily the international energy companies' growing frustration has now been resolved ...

Guardian : The race is on for Libya's oil, with Britain and France both staking a claim

The starting pistol has been fired on bids by Britain and other western powers to secure a slice of the oil prize in Libya ...

Rebel leaders had already made clear that countries active in supporting their insurrection – notably Britain and France – should expect to be treated favourably once the dust of war had settled.

although there has been the odd wrinkle ...

NYTimes : Files Note Close C.I.A. Ties to Qaddafi Spy Unit

Documents found at the abandoned office of Libya’s former spymaster appear to provide new details of the close relations the Central Intelligence Agency shared with the Libyan intelligence service — most notably suggesting that the Americans sent terrorism suspects at least eight times for questioning in Libya despite that country’s reputation for torture

Libya rebel commander contends was tortured, rendered by CIA

The top Libyan rebel military commander in Tripoli, Abdel Hakim Belhaj, dropped something of a bombshell in an interview with the New York Times yesterday: In  2004, he said, two CIA agents tortured him in Thailand and then "rendered" him to Libya. From that point on, he maintains, he was held in solitary confinement for the next six years.

Belhaj, known as "Abu Abdullah al-Sadiq" in jihadi circles, is the previous commander of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), "a jihad organization with historical links to al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Egyptian al-Jihad organization".

Never mind all that now. At least NATO got rid of that awful Qaddafi, who gassed his own people, was building a nuclear arsenal, threw babies out of incubators onto the floor, was behind 9/11 threatened to maybe nationalize Libyan oilfields sometime in the future.

Government House Leader Peter van Loan told CBC's The House yesterday that the Conservative government wants to extend Canada's military role in Libya beyond the scheduled end date.
.
Update : Chris Hedges : Here We Go Again
.

On coalitions, mergers and aquisitions

Liberal MP Martha Hall Findlay stood three separate times in the House on Friday to beg the Cons for recognition of the "important work" the Liberal Party had done to ensure the expected passage of the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement at third reading today.

MHF to TradeMin Peter Van Loan :

Mr. Speaker, could the minister speak to the participation of Liberal Party, in particular of my colleague from Kings—Hants, [Scott Brison] that resulted in an addition to this free trade agreement with respect to human rights, of which Liberals are very proud? I believe it was singularly important in being able to get our support for it.
Could the minister speak to Liberals' very constructive participation in the process?

Well we didn't really need your unnecessary figleaf of a human rights amendment that allows Colombia to do its own year-end reports on its human rights atrocities, Peter Van Loan did not quite answer, but then Van Loan's Parliamentary Secretary Con MP Gerald Keddy graciously acceded to her request that the Libs be given credit for it :

I would say that I appreciated the intervention by [LibCon Scott Brison] ... We were, quite frankly, stymied at committee. We were not moving forward. It enabled us to move forward.

Martha Hall Findlay pressed ahead for more pats:

I will point out that earlier, the minister had said that the addition in terms of human rights was not necessary. I am glad to hear my colleague now acknowledging that in order to move this through and to get approval, in fact, the work by my colleague from Kings—Hants [Brison] and the Liberal Party was instrumental in getting this to the point of getting it through the House, so I thank my colleague for that.

Bloc MP Jean-Yves Laforest :

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the hon. Liberal member a question. How can she explain such a drastic change in the Liberal Party's position since last fall, both in committee and in the House, regarding possible support for a free trade agreement with Colombia?
This support was very clearly expressed at the Standing Committee on International Trade. Unanimous consent was reached regarding the need for an independent study—before Canada ratifies the agreement—on the Colombian government's respect for human rights and what it is doing to prevent human rights abuses. Why such a difference between the Liberals' position last fall and their current position?

Martha Hall Findlay now moves into full on Brison fluffer position :

In the end, we determined that it was better to adopt this position for Canada and for people elsewhere.
I would also like to say that the speeches given by my hon. colleague from Kings—Hants [Brison] on human rights greatly helped convince other Liberals that, as a party, we can now support that position.

Brison's speeches! LOFL.
NDP MP Peter Julian points out the very long list of Canadian and Colombian unions and aboriginal and African-Colombians that

"the Liberal Party systematically obstructed and refused to hear from. It shut off all debate before the committee. Two years ago, when we went down to Colombia, the trade committee came back with a unanimous recommendation to not proceed with this agreement."

Martha Hall Findlay says some more things about "the hard work and the excellent work" of Scott Brison and at least the Libs are trying to get along with the Cons, you know? Windows not doors, going forward and all that.

After QP, Transport Minister John Baird had one thing to say in response as debate on Canada-Colombia FTA resumed :

"Unanimous consent to resolve that Jack Layton is the leader of the official opposition, agreed."

Ouch.
I know - not quite the coalition/merger post you were expecting.
But it's the only one that's going on, as the Cons continue to ride the Libs for it.
.
Tuesday Update : Libs and Cons - 188 votes ... NDP and Bloc - 79

Scant news coverage today of what amounts to Canadian complicity in a death sentence for trade unionists, small farmers, aboriginals, Afro-Colombians, and the 4 million displaced inside Colombia. In 2009, half the assassinations of trade unionists world wide - 48 out of 100 - took place in Colombia.

Oh wait. Canadian Business Online has something :
House of Commons passes controversial Colombia FTA :

A Human Rights Watch report last year on a massacre in Colombia, and an Amnesty International report, concluded that things have gotten worse in Colombia.

In December 2008, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights criticized the Colombian government for its public stance against human rights advocates on its own soil. The stigmatization of such groups puts their ``life, security and valuable work at risk,'' it said.

Thank you for that, Canadian Business.
I am past disgusted with the fools and knaves and opportunists who represent Canada today.
.

2010 Olympics spawns a further armouring of NAFTA

Well, colour me surprised. Who could have guessed that security arrangements for the 2010 Olympics would spawn a further militarization of North America and U.S.-Canada security integration?

G&M :

Canada and U.S. authorities are talking about extending cross-border security measures that were implemented for the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver and were to end with the closing of the Winter Games.
The joint patrols [RCMP and the U.S. Coast Guard] will end with the Paralympics but spokesmen from the two agencies said yesterday legislation that would allow joint maritime policing on a permanent basis is on the agenda of both the U.S. and Canadian governments."

That's just an Olympic rebranding of Bill C-60, the amusingly named Keeping Canadians Safe (Protecting Borders) Act, tabled in Parliament in November.

The Cons actually sidelined C-60 when they prorogued Parliament, but as The Library of Parliament helpfully points out, not passing parliament didn't prevent its implementation during the Games because C-60 is but the legislative arm of the earlier Security and Prosperity Partnership inspired Shiprider Projects and the Canada-US Framework Agreement on Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations signed in May 2009 by Canadian Minister of Public Safety Peter Van Loan, and the US Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet "9/11 terrorists entered the US from Canada" Napolitano.

Fun quote from that 2009 signing :

Van Loan said the pact shouldn't be viewed as Americans encroaching on the jurisdiction of Canada because it's a joint effort.
"Because of the integration of our North American economies ... effective management of the border is essential to the health of both of our countries' economies."

At the time we were advised that the Canadian border proved an unmanageable obstacle to the US ability to pursue bad guys into Canada, conjuring up memories of old movies in which a car chase ends in an obligatory squeal of tires and a cloud of dust before a government road sign that reads "You are now entering ....".
It was always crap of course as even Stockwell Day acknowledged back in October 2006 that "U.S. agents carry out investigations in Canada without the knowledge or approval of the Canadian government" but we just retroactively approve them anyway.

C-60 seeks to embed part of that practise into Canadian law. Clause 11 :

"In the course of an integrated cross-border operation, every designated officer is a peace officer in every part of Canada and has the same power to enforce an Act of Parliament as a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police."

In every part of Canada. Same power as the RCMP.

The Library of Parliament page on C-60 also advises that passing C-60 will necessitate changes to "the Criminal Code, the Customs Act, the Export and Import Permits Act, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act."
I'll bet.


Then there's that big fat Homeland Security Olympic Coordination Center in Bellingham built to augment NorthComm's bi-lateral Civil Assistance Plan, which already "allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency."

The collaboration of "40 U.S. federal, state and local agencies, including military intelligence groups, the navy, national guard, air force, coast guard" and assorted Canadian security agencies was mandated to "specifically co-ordinate the U.S. response to any terrorist attack or domestic emergency during the Winter Games."

They'd like to extend that now too.
Well we knew that.
As the FBI Special-Agent-in-Charge announced back in Sept. 2008 :

"This facility will provide a strategic response platform to facilitate critical response efforts during the Olympic Games and beyond."

And beyond. We've now reached 'and beyond'.

h/t Dave : Told ya so.
.

Orange Alert! Orange Alert! now with shiny things!

"Vigilance is at a medium level. This is not 9/11, but the information we have
received is of concern and we need to have heightened vigilance," said Mr. Baird.

But the attempted airliner bombing on Christmas Day could be a "pilot project" for attacks on North America and represents the first time al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula has attempted to strike this part of the world, Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan said.

CTV, the G&M, the Star, and NaPo are all reporting on the Transport Canada "heightened alert" for Canadian airports this last weekend, a full two weeks after the Detroit underwear bomber told of 20 more guys in Yemen planning attacks on North America.
And apparently there's also the other terrorists ...

"But sources say Canadian intelligence also had credible information of other terrorists planning to come to Canada.
Federal authorities say the terrorists did not pose a direct threat to Canada. They were not planning to blow up a Canadian airliner, nor were they planning terrorist attacks at the Olympic Games in Vancouver and Whistler, or some other target in Canada."
The terrorists want to use Canada as a jumping-off point to get into the U.S."

So we should be scared, but not too scared?


Robert Fife wastes no time getting to the point : The Canada-US border would be shut down immediately, he said - a disaster because 75% of our trade is with the US.

Then CTV, the Star, and the G&M all end their reports with :

In addition to the heightened security already in place, Transport Canada said it will install full-body scanners at major Canadian airports by the spring.

even though full-body scanners would not have stopped the underwear guy anyway.

Say, will we be buying the scanners promoted by former Homeland Security czar Michael Chertoff, who now represents Rapiscan, "one of the leading manufacturers of whole-body-imaging machines"?

Security theatre plus expensive new shiny things.
Scanners might not be any good at detecting whatever device the next Detroit bomber is carrying; what they will do is keep our trucks rolling across the Detroit River.
.

Peter Van Loan's "recent days"

On Thursday, a reporter doggedly tried to wring from Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan exactly how long he sat on the RCMP's Firearms Commissioner's Report in favour of keeping the long-gun registry so that MPs would not have that info prior to passing the bill to scrap it. The report was released two days after the vote.

I've omitted PVL's initial 12 responses here as they bore no relation to the question asked but the entire interview is a quite extraordinary read:

"How long have you had the report from the Commissioner of Firearms?
How long have you had it?
So how long have you had it?
How long have you had it?
How long have you had the Commissioner of Firearms report?
How long have you had the Firearms Commissioner's report, sir?
This isn't a news conference, these are questions. How long have you had the Firearms report?
We're asking you a question. How long have you had this report?
How long have you had it?
Has it been weeks?
How long have you had this report?
How many days?

Peter Van Loan: It's - I received it and looked at just recently, in recent days."

Saturday : Firearms database popular with police

"Responding by email to questions from the Star, RCMP Sgt. Greg Cox said late Friday the force submitted its 2008 firearms report on Oct. 9, four weeks ago."

As the dogged reporter - who was that woman? - put it : "That was totally useless. Thank you."

.

Good article from Harper Index : Gun control politics revised Canada's political map

.

Van Loan : Oh noes - activist judges on the bench!

Oh noes - activist judges on the bench, some of them appointed by Cons!

Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan says he fears for the government's ability to fight terrorism because of "an increasingly complex legal environment" in which judges are no longer deferring to the government in its efforts to deport foreign suspects.

"It raises questions about whether we can protect national security and I can tell you I am concerned," Van Loan told Canwest News Service. "I spend a fair bit of time thinking about it."

"It" presumably being the Supreme Court's efforts to balance our rights and freedoms against your crap cases based on hearsay and intel derived from torture.

Think again, Bucko.

.

Meanwhile - oh noes for Cons again - Russkies!

A Lutheran church in Vancouver has been providing sanctuary since June to a former Russian KGB translator who is now facing immanent deportation to Russia for ... wait for it ... admitting to being a former KGB translator on his application for permanent residence in March 1999.

The federal court has found the government does have the right to deport Mikhail Lennikov back to Russia but, as CBC points out, is not required to do so :

The issue, then, is why Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan thinks Lennikov is "detrimental to the national interest."

The public safety minister adopted as his reasons a ministerial briefing note by Stephen Rigby, appointed to be the head of the Canada Border Services Agency in 2008.

CBC debunks the CBSA's "factual errors" intended to discredit Lennikov here.

.

Cannon and Van Loan tell Abdelrazik to piss off

.

Abdelrazik wants the federal government to help him get his name removed from a United Nations terror watch list so he can lead a normal life again.

You know - get a job, go to a doctor, get on a plane, have a bank account, accept anything from anyone without risk of their being charged with being in violation of the UN's 1267 shunning regulations.

.

Above are the responses to Abdelrazik's lawyers from Minister of Public Security Peter Van Loan and Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon telling them to piss off.

Click em to read em, courtesy of The Peoples Commission via the indefatigable Toe at BnR.

.

Cannon adds further insult to injury by advising Abdelrazik to go ahead and try to get off the list himself although to date no one has ever been removed from that list without a supporting submission from their government.

Indeed the Chairman of the UN Security Council’s Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee noted two weeks ago that although Abdelrazik went on the list in 2006 - some 3 years after Canada had him arrested in Sudan - the committee has not gotten around to an indepth assessment of his case yet.

The list of 513 people currently includes 38 people presumed dead.

.

The Canada-US border : thicker but fuzzier

For all the wringing of hands in the national press about how US security concerns are resulting in a "thicker Canada-US border", scant attention is paid to how that border is also getting blurrier, unless to repeat government assurances that it is not.

Case in point is yesterday's announcement of the Shiprider program, signed Monday by Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano - an agreement "designed to increase border security by allowing the RCMP and the U.S. Coast Guard to team up and ride in each others' vessels during border patrols."

Van Loan said the pact shouldn't be viewed as Americans encroaching on the jurisdiction of Canada because it's a joint effort between both countries.
And he stressed that security and trade between the two countries can be mutually beneficial.
"Because of the integration of our North American economies ... effective management of the border is essential to the health of both of our countries' economies," said Van Loan.

According to former diplomat Paul Frazer, Canadians shouldn't be alarmed by the prospect of foreign officers policing Canada's waters.
"It's not a one way kind of operation," he told CTV's Power Play from Washington on
Tuesday.
Frazer stressed that the new plan is a quid-pro-quo deal for Canada.
"You will have Canadian authorities aboard American boats, going into American waters, and the reverse coming into Canadian waters."

Right. That sounds fair : the flea will ride on the elephant and then the elephant will ride on the flea.
A couple of points not covered by our enthusiastic media but clearly stated in the agreement :

COMMITTED to the prevention, detection, suppression, investigation, and prosecution of any criminal offence or violation of law related to border enforcement including, but not limited to, the illicit drug trade, migrant smuggling, trafficking of firearms, the smuggling of counterfeit goods and money, and terrorism

based on joint Canada-United States threat and risk assessment and coordinated with existing cooperative cross-border policing programs and activities.

That seems rather ... broad, considering that any "integrated cross-border maritime law enforcement operation" may also continue "on land" and include "aerial support".

But where it gets weird is the section called Information Sharing.
Info is not to be "further shared" with "a non-participating government agency or a foreign country" without "the consent of the participating agency sharing the information" ... "unless the use or further sharing is required by its domestic laws" or there are "exigent circumstances".

Exigent circumstances.

All of which is merely fleshing out the details of last year's Canada-US pact allowing cross-border military activity , following the disclosure two years earlier that 30% of FBI agents operating in Canada do so without the knowledge or approval of the Canadian government.

Well now we have yet another agreement to legalize the decline of Canadian sovereignty.
.

Welcome to the Banana Republic of Canada

In the wake of the O'Connor and Iacobucci public inquiries into the role CSIS played in the torture of Canadians overseas, a new government rulebook of guidelines was issued to CSIS and blandishments were offered by the ministers in charge.

What's in the new rulebook? Pogge blogged yesterday about a copy obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act that is so heavily censored it is impossible to tell whether the new guidelines adequately address the recommendations laid out by O'Connor and Iacobucci to prevent future torture such as that visited upon Maher Arar, Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati, and Muayyed Nureddin. As Pogge wrote :

"When representatives of government and its agencies assure us that they're playing by the rules, it's a little difficult to judge the accuracy of their claims when we're not allowed to know what those rules are."

This was also the position our elected representatives on the Committee on Public Safety and National Security found themselves in back in March during its Review of the Findings and Recommendations of the Iacobucci and O'Connor Reports. Despite persistent straightforward questions from the Liberals and Bloc members - Do we condone torture? Do we still use information derived from torture? - the dodging and weaving from CSIS lawyer Geoffrey O'Brian left these questions largely unanswered.

A brief media flurry resulted from his opening statements that there is no absolute ban on the use of information derived from torture when "lives are at stake", but this was immediately laid to rest the next day when the word "knowingly" was added by Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan", as in "we don't knowingly use info extracted by torture". It's the Don't ask, Don't tell Intel.

As O'Brian explained to the committee : "Three individuals are suing the government for several hundred million dollars, therefore we cannot discuss anything that would indicate that the government is in agreement with Iacobucci's findings."

He is aided in this avoidance of accountability by the six Con members on the committee running interference on tough questions from the Libs and the Bloc. From my notes of that session -not exact quotes :

Maria Mourani, Bloc : I'd like to ask about our questioning of Omar Khadr in Guantanamo ...
Dave MacKenzie, Con : Point of order : what's the relevance?
Mourani : Khadr was tortured and Canadians paid CSIS to contribute.
Chair Garry Breitkreuz, Con : I don't understand the relevance.
Mourani : I want to know did CSIS use information from Khadr obtained under torture?
MacKenzie : Point of order - Mourani is on a fishing trip.
I'll just give you a moment to let that one sink in.

Mourani : I'll rephrase the question : Is information obtained under torture?
Chair, Breitkreuz : Witnesses cannot comment on individual cases.
Mark Holland, Lib : But the questiuon is central to this inquiry.
Rathgeber, Con : Point of order. Not relevant. Stick to Iacobucci and O'Connor reports.

Which, you will recall, O'Brian has already said cannot be commented on due to ongoing litigation.

Menard, Bloc : Mourani is right. This is central to the O'Connor and Iacobucci reports. What we want to know is: Is torture still endorsed?
Mourani : Answer my question.

O'Brian, eventually : "I reject the premise of the question"

And thus CSIS informs elected members of parliament - the peoples' representatives - sitting on a committee whose mandate is to provide public oversight on intelligence agencies - to stuff it.


A couple of years ago I was sitting in a bar in the States discussing politics with some university students. "How are things up there after the coup?" one of them asked.
Me : *blink* *blink*
"Perhaps you don't call it a coup," said another helpfully.
We not only don't call it a coup, we don't even ever refer to it.
In 2006 as Liberal PM Paul Martin was set to be re-elected, RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli went public with a criminal investigation into rumoured leaks of the Liberal decision not to tax income trusts and that was the end of the Libs. Nothing came of the investigation save one lone bureaucrat pocketing some loot. No inquiry was ever launched into why the head of the national police force, himself later disgraced over Arar, in effect threw the outcome of a national election.

And exactly which intelligence agencies are responsible for the continued incarceration of Omar Khadr and the ongoing banishment of Abousfian Abdelrazik? Well we don't really know.

What we do know is that we have lost public oversight over our police and intelligence agencies. Isn't this the kind of thing we used to sneer at "banana republics" for?
.

Canada oks torture intel on Abdelrazik

G&M : "More than 16 months after Canada's security agencies cleared Abousfian Abdelrazik, government lawyers are now pressing him to admit to being a senior al-Qaeda operative, echoing American accusations apparently extracted from Abu Zubaydah, the al-Qaeda leader water boarded more than 80 times under the Bush administration."


POGGE : "While the rest of the world is coming to terms with the fact that the Bush administration was actually using torture to elicit false confessions in an effort to justify their invasion of Iraq, the Hapless Government™ is trying to use statements from a man who was waterboarded 83 times to prove that Abdelrazik is a terrorist."


In a March appearance before the public safety committee, CSIS lawyer Geoffrey O'Brian caused a media stir by refusing to unequivocally deny Canadian intelligence agencies' reliance on foreign intel obtained via torture. "Clarifications" were demanded and obtained, the media was apparently placated, and it all went away.

Indeed CSIS Director Jim Judd, appearing before the public safety committee on April 3, said :

"In the past we used information received obtained by torture. Such information is not to be relied upon. We've changed our policies. Our policy now is under no circumstances do we condone the use of torture for any reason."

and went on to emphasize that intelligence agencies take direction from the federal government. CSIS has also called for a formal probe into its role in the Abdelrazik affair to clear its name.

But here is what Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan actually said when he appeared before the same committee to offer his "clarification" on torture:

"We do not condone the use of torture in intelligence gathering and our clear directive to our law enforcement agencies and intelligence services is that they are not to condone the use of torture, practice torture, or knowingly use any information obtained by torture."

Knowingly. Also known as "don't ask don't tell intel".

The rest of us have known of Abu Zubaydah's torture just to provide a pretext for invading Iraq since April 19, so this is perhaps not the best week for the Canadian government to air its filthy laundry in a Federal court on its role in condoning intel possibly derived from torture to prevent a Canadian citizen from returning home after he has been cleared by CSIS, the RCMP, and Sudan.
And, as pointed out by Lib Andrew Kania at the same public safety committee cited above, this also sends out a message to other governments that if they're selling info derived from torture, we're buying.
.
Update : Dr. Dawg and James Bow
.

Canada as a northern banana republic

Good opinion piece in the Star from Jim Travers today : The quiet unravelling of Canadian democracy.
It's not often one reads in the press about our slow slide towards becoming a northern banana republic and I can't remember the last time anyone mentioned the quiet coup perpetuated on an unwitting electorate by Canada's premier paramilitary organization or the failure of our three main parties to address it.

To Jim's points I would add the following three conditions that also qualify Canada for banana republic status :

The Security and Prosperity Partnership
Rumours of its demise have been greatly exaggerated and mostly by its fans. A government assisted corporate plan to free up the movement of capitol and labour without public participation or oversight within a militarized North America, it has scarcely received mention since the last big Three Amigos bunfest. Yet on Thursday Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan appeared before the public safety committee to announce some princely sum in the millions "towards further implementation of the SPP".

Dispensing with the bother of elected representation
In addition to the first-past-the-post electoral system in which only a handful of votes in a few swing ridings actually count, there is the matter of both the prime minister and the leader of the opposition holding office by fiat. Harper dissolved parliament rather than face an election and Iggy was just simply crowned after the Liberal Party executive voted last year not to give the actual rank and file members of the Liberal Party the vote.

Media concentration
Canadians are more likely to know the names of Sarah Palin's grandchildren than they are to know that they probably got this news from just three Canadian media corporations.

Banana republic stuff - all of it.

Travers' column previously noted today by Jennifer, Chrystal, and Chet.
.

Torture intelligence - it all hinges on the word "knowingly"

When I read the media accounts of the public safety committee testimony on torture on Tuesday and Thursday, I'm not at all sure they watched the same proceedings I did.

Big hullaballoo on Tuesday following CSIS lawyer Geoffrey O'Brian's testimony before the public safety committee that Canadian intelligence agencies would make use of information obtained by torture from foreign agencies in the "one-in-a-million" eventuality that "lives were at stake". In fact, said O'Brian, who has been with CSIS since its inception in 1984, "we would be bound to do so."

Under further questioning from aghast committee members, he admitted that agencies often "have no idea under what conditions info received from foreign agencies is obtained" and "just because a country has a questionable or even abysmal human rights record does not mean info received from them is necessarily extracted by torture".

That would be the old don't ask don't tell Syria defence. CSIS Director Jim Judd used it back in November 2006 to defend using Syrian intel on Maher Arar.
So are we still trading info with Syria and Egypt? Yes we are, but now "with caveats".

The committee members pressed on : "What Canadians want to hear is that we do not condone the use of information derived from torture."

O'Brian : "I would love to give you a simple answer. The simple answer is that we will never use info from torture. I cannot say that because recipients of info do not know how that info was obtained. I can say we do not knowingly" - and he stressed this again -"knowingly use info extracted by torture."

Huge stink in the Star, G&M, and CBC.

Today CSIS Director Jim Judd and Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan appeared before the public safety committee. Judd :

"I think it's unfortunate that Mr. O'Brian may have been confused in his testimony. He will clarifying that via a letter to this committee. I know of no instance where such information has been made use of by our service."

and

"He [O'Brian] ventured into the hypothetical. In the past we used information received obtained by torture. Such information is not to be relied upon. We've changed our policies. Our policy now is under no circumstances do we condone the use of torture for any reason."

He went on to explain that the intelligence agencies are directed in this by the federal government.
Ok that seems pretty straight forward, right?

Next up - Minister Van Loan, from whence intelligence agencies are directed, responding to MP Mourani - italics mine :

"We do not condone the use of torture in intelligence gathering and our clear directive to our law enforcement agencies and intelligence services is that they are not to condone the use of torture, practice torture, or knowingly use any information obtained by torture."

Uh -oh. There's that "knowingly" again.
And here's the relevant quote from O'Brian's "clarification" letter - again, italics mine :

"I wish to clarify for the committee that CSIS certainly does not condone torture and that it is the policy of CSIS to not knowingly rely upon information that may have been obtained through torture."

So we're pretty well back to O'Brian's "knowingly" on Tuesday again, aren't we?
Which is that because we can claim to have no clue how the info we get is obtained, we're free to go ahead and use it.

I'd also like to point out that the RCMP got a completely free ride here in the media coverage.
In his opening statement to the commitee on Tuesday, RCMP spokesman Gilles Michaud rejected the use of information obtained by torture as unreliable but explained in regards to the RCMP's use of intelligence obtained from foreign agencies :

"I want to be clear here - there is no absolute ban on the use of any information by the RCMP."

Uh huh.
O'Brian caught shit for losing control of the spin for a moment, and that's all that happened here.
.

George Galloway runs smack into the Canada-Israel border

Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, has stated repeatedly that the banning of George Galloway from Canada is not his responsibility.

Well of course it isn't.

It's the responsibility of the Canadian Border Services Agency under Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan.

Say, how's that Canada-Israel "homeland security" border coming along?

State of Israel - Ministry of Public Security :

"On November 17-26, a delegation from the Ministry of Public Security visited the United States and Canada on an official visit. The visit was within the framework of the joint work team with the American Department of Homeland Security on Science and Technology.

In March 2008 a Declaration of Intent was signed between the Israeli Ministry of Public Security and the Canadian Ministry of Public Safety in order to promote mutual interests in the fields of the battle against organized crime, human trafficking, terrorist financing, managing crisis situations, border security, crime prevention and other aspects of homeland security.

The first work meetings of the two sides were held on November 24-26 in Ottawa, Canada, with the aim at forming a framework for the implementation of the agreement signed between the two countries.
The meetings were attended by the Deputy Director General of the Ministry, the Chief Scientist, representatives of the Israel Police and the Israel Prison Service, a representative of the Counter Terrorism Division in the Office of the Israeli Prime Minister, and representatives of the Canadian Ministry of Public Safety, the Canadian Police and Canadian Prison Service.

The meetings focused on the following fields:
Security of strategic facilities
Border control
Emergency preparedness
Correction facilities and services
Crime and delinquency
Science and technology – including law enforcement and counter terrorism technologies.

During the meetings the two parties surveyed their primary activities in their fields and examined potential projects of mutual interest. The meetings concluded by deciding on primary principles of the operational and technological cooperation between the two countries in the above fields. "

Public Safety Canada :

Declaration of Intent Between the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness of Canada and the Ministry of Public Security of the Government of the State of Israel :

To establish a Management Committee that would:

• Be comprised of the Deputy Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness of Canada, and the Director General of Public Security for the Government of the State of Israel;
• Meet annually and as needed to develop and approve a program of work, consistent with the scope and objectives of this Declaration, for that upcoming year;

To achieve the following objectives:

• Build on their shared commitment to facilitate and enhance cooperation to protect their respective countries’ population, assets and interests from common threats;


• Integrate and coordinate of the identification, prioritization, and implementation of cooperative efforts between themselves in the area of public safety;

I'm guessing somewhere amongst all that "shared commitment" and "enhanced cooperation", George Galloway fell under the heading of "aspects of homeland security : projects of mutual interest".

.

Harper is seen above on Thursday "urging all Canadians to confront what he calls a 'rising tide of anti-Semitism' around the world" :

Harper, who was joined by Conservative MP Peter Kent, who represents the area, urged all Canadians to "confront" anti-Semitism as a "moral evil."

Speaking of "moral evil", Harper has previously joined George Bush in publicly attempting to blur the lines between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism.

.

Presumably he's referring in his speech above to people like this or this or this or this .

.

What can you do about it? L-Girl has a list of actions.

.

Harper slashes RCMP watchdog funding

because watchdogs have this annoying tendency to call you out.

Last June, RCMP watchdog Paul Kennedy issued a scathing report on the RCMP use of TASERs, citing the RCMP's over-reliance on the TASER™ manufacturer in developing their policies and training, sloppy reporting of TASER™ use, use of "the folk terminology excited delirium" as an excuse to deploy the TASER™, and failure to treat it as a "firearm".
The report from the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP recommended that TASERs™ be used only on suspects that present a clear physical threat.

Two weeks ago Mr. Kennedy told the public safety and national security committee that he is powerless to tell whether the RCMP have made the changes needed to prevent another Maher Arar affair.
Justice Dennis O'Connor's federal inquiry two years ago into the RCMP's role in the rendition and torture of Maher Arar called for an overhaul of the RCMP complaints commission that would give it new powers to keep an eye on the Mounties' intelligence activities.
Mr. Kennedy told the committee that because this recommendation was not implemented and he does not have full access to RCMP files, he is unable to determine whether the RCMP has cleaned up its act.

Yesterday : Feds slash RCMP watchdog funding

"The Harper government is slashing nearly half the funding for the watchdog agency that monitors the RCMP and recently helped pressure the national police to craft a new policy on Tasers."

Mr. Kennedy said the funding was supposed to produce more than a report on Tasers.

"The commission is close to completing a report on cases where RCMP officers have been involved in deaths and been investigated by their own colleagues.
A spokesman for Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan said the project is now over, and the government is consulting with the provinces about other ways to bolster the RCMP complaints process."

In his report last June Mr. Kennedy warned of the danger of the RCMP behaving like "a group distinct from the public" and following "a model in which officer safety takes precedence over that of the general public."

"The cumulative effect of these trends over time may reduce the degree of co-operation of the public that is essential to public safety in Canada."

Obviously. Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan evidently has other priorities.


Meanwhile over at Runesmith, Jennifer is on a mission to save another government watchdog, Kevin Page, who has issued a public plea for help. Go.
.

And they're back!

With pledges of renewed civility in the House.

"I agree that decorum has gone down somewhat,"admitted previous Speaker of the House Peter Millikin, in what must be described as an underunderstatement.

"We want to be very serious," pledged Jay Hill, the new Conservative House leader who took over the position from Peter Van Loan, famous, along with his compatriot Pierre Poilievre, for his fondness for using sign language in the House.

Gone will be the parliamentary practise of responding to the opposing party's arguments by making an L on one's forehead with thumb and forefinger. Never again will Con MP Royal Galipeau, himself a contender for Speaker of the House up till an hour ago, storm the Liberal backbenches to grapple with Lib MP David McGuinty.

Personally I think this proposed civility thing is a big mistake. Arm the buggers, I say! Break out the parliamentary catapaults! Build a moat in the aisle and fill it with green jello. I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries! Fetchez la vache!

Picture ripped off from Ottawonk

Mangling Question Period

Chet reports another "I know you are but what am I?" Hansard moment :

When questioned about transferring captured prisoners into Afghan hands, Government House Leader Peter Van Loan accused the Liberals of being Taleban sympathizers :
"What we will not do is what the agent for the Taliban intelligence agency wants us to do over here, which is release to them information on detailed operations in the field," he said in the House of Commons.

In addition to being the Government House Leader, Mr. Van Loan is also the Minister For Democratic Renewal.
Yes, that's what we thought too.

Still, for sheer idiocy, it would be hard to beat this "gotcha" moment from Health Minister Tony Clement, as caught by Accidental Deliberations :
"Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, we have heard everything from all sides from Liberal opposition members. One week they are saying we did not act soon enough and on another week they are saying we should have acted sooner..."

Apparently unaware he had made a sufficient ass of himself the first time, Mr Clement chose to repeat a variation of it a few moments later.

Ass est longa; vita brevis.

But wait! Suddenly another Contender appears on the horizon...this time in committee.
From Kady O'Malley : Putting the circus back in Pandora's toothpaste