Steven Blaney calls a cat a cat

"The Holocaust," intoned Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney today, "did not begin in the gas chamber; it began with words."  

He's right, of course. It began with a government capitalizing on a disaster event to demonize a segment of the population and suppress civil rights - including freedom of expression, assembly, and the expectation of privacy in personal communications - while hurriedly implementing a legal basis for the secret imprisonment of anyone considered not friendly to the government's agenda of security over democracy.

So it began with a law something like Bill C-51.

Press Progress is already all over Blaney's peculiar mention of the Holocaust to justify certain measures of Anti-terrorism Act 2015 at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security studying Bill C-51 today, but I noticed it was a somewhat leading - dare I say, planted - question from Con MP Rick Norlock that preceded and provoked it.

Norlock awkwardly read a question off his prepared question sheet regarding the takedown of internet sites :

 Norlock at 49:35:

 "Can you explain the gap in the legislation you're trying to fill and I'm referring mainly to the promotion and and takedown threshold with regards to internet sites. We've heard some folks say that this portion of the legislation is an attack on our freedom of speech. I don't believe it is but I do believe, I do not believe, that promoting the commission of terrorism acts is acceptable. Can you explain the legislation and how it is different than the current hate speech laws that are focused on certain groups."

Certain groups? I hadn't realized we had "current hate speech laws that are focused on certain groups".

After JustMin Peter MacKay's response, Blaney signalled he wished to speak to the question also:

At the 53:45 mark, Blaney : 

"As you know our government has tabled a counter-terrorism strategy that has four pillars - to prevent, detect, deny, and response. And the fact that as a government , as a society, as we will be able to shut down those websites who are promoting hatred and violence is a tool helping us in the first pillar of prevention of radicalization because as we know, we've heard it, the Holocaust did not began in the gas chamber, it began with words. So we have to be careful and that's why this measure I feel is so important and I also am committed as Minister of Public Safety to work with my partners such as Minister Bernard Cazeneuve of France, our European partners, American - so that websites that could be hosted in other countries could also be shut down if they are promoting hatred, extremist ideology, and violence. So I believe this measure, C-51, is part, is helping the four pillar of our counter-terrorism strategy. Thank you."

Randall Garrison (NDP - Esquimalt- Juan de Fuca, BC) protested Blaney's rhetorical trivialization of the Holocaust and Blaney doubled down in the portion Press Progress posted :




Asked about possible abuses of C-51, Blaney explained he was not worried because he would be the one signing off on the warrants.

Gosh was it only six weeks ago that Blaney gave a speech to the UN General Assembly on the Holocaust and Canada's efforts to combat anti-Semitism in the form of the BDS movement? :

"One year ago our Prime Minister Harper stood in the Knesset in Jerusalem to declare that through fire and water Canada would stand with the people of Israel and all the Jewish communities in the face of anti-Semitism. ... That is why Canada plays a leading role in the fight against the Islamic State. Prime Minister Harper spoke at the Ottawa conference on combating anti-Semitism, clearly outlining the real threat of anti-Semitism and Canada's duty to respond. He said " We must speak clearly, remembering the Holocaust is not merely an act of historical recognition - it must also be an understanding and an undertaking - an understanding that the same threats exists today and an undertaking of a solemn undertaking to fight those threats."

.... Canada has a zero tolerance to anti-Semitism in all forms of discrimination, including in rhetoric towards Israel and attempts to delegitimize Israel such as the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement. This is because that those who threaten the existence of the Jewish people are a great threat to us all. More works needs to be done to combat the scourge of discrimination inherent to anti-Semitism and under Prime Minister Harper's leadership, Canada will continue to be a leader in those efforts."

And just a couple of weeks before that, John Baird was in Israel signing a new MOU:

• 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

while another MOU (there were five) promised Israel and Canada would develop "a coordinated, public diplomacy initiative" to combat such criticism.

Meanwhile the website of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada addressed the new MOUs 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."

From Part One of Bill C-51 : Security of Canada Information Sharing Act :

"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

So I ask again : how much of Bill C-51 is about the Cons soppy infatuation with the current rightwing government of Israel?
.
Wednesday Update : The first use I can find of the phrase "The Holocaust did not begin in the gas chambers - it began with words" is from Liberal MP Irwin Cotler writing for the Jerusalem Post five years ago. It's the title of his article.
.

G20 investigation: RCMP spies vs conspiracy group

The JIG is up. 
An RCMP 'joint intelligence group' - comprised of federal, provincial and municipal police - infiltrated activist groups prior to the G20 and Vancouver Olympics in what they call "one of the largest domestic intelligence operations in Canadian history".


Constable Bindo Showan of the Ontario Provincial Police, one of the two principal undercover Ontario spies, is a stunning example of their intelligence at work.

Earlier this fall, Showan told the court about how he attended a meeting prior to the Toronto summit. There, a protest-planning group that included several of the 17 main G20 defendants was discussing whether to lend their support to a First Nations rally.
Adam Lewis, one of the 17 accused conspirators in the G20 case, interjected, “Kill whitey!”   The group chuckled. Lewis, like all but one of his co-accused, is white.

When a Crown lawyer asked the officer what he thought Lewis meant, Showan said in complete seriousness, to "kill white people." 

Apparently we do not have the right not to be spied and reported on by morons or covert operatives pretending to be morons.


This 2009 RCMP 'joint intelligence group' statement defines their mission :

"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' resource-based grievances, gender/racial equality, and distribution of wealth etc."

And it is apparently still in operation :

RCMP records suggest that the reconnaissance continues. Report logs indicate at least 29 incidents of police surveillance between the end of the G20 summit and April 2011 — more than nine months after world leaders departed Toronto.

The same document indicates that the RCMP-led intelligence team made a series of presentations to private-sector corporations, including one to "energy sector stakeholders" in November 2011.

Good to know.


After millions of dollars and 70,000 pages of Crown evidence, conspiracy charges have been dropped against the 17 activists held in jail or under house arrest for the last 18 months, but 6 of them will serve jail time for counselling mischief, with an additional charge of counselling to obstruct police leveraged against Alex Hundert and Mandy Hiscocks. 


Toronto Star : Behind the G20 plea deal 


A Message from the So-Called "G-20 Main Conspiracy Group" below. 
Their written statement regarding the charges can be read here. 

Combating Terrorism Act passes 2nd reading

On the same day the nation was preoccupied with the national Con/Lib competition for votes to kill/preserve the long gun registry, the Libs and Cons got together to slip the Combating Terrorism Act through second reading in the House - 220 votes to 84 in a classic Con/Lib vs NDP/Bloc split -just ten minutes before the long gun vote.

The Libs and Cons may disagree on whether it is either useful or an egregious invasion of privacy and civil liberties that Canadians should have to spend a few minutes registering a long gun online, but when it comes to locking Canadians up for 12 months without a warrant or compelling them to appear before a court based on some anonymous tip, they're both just fine with that.

The right to remain silent, the right not to be jailed without charge, the right to know what the charges are against you - pfft!

In reintroducing Bill C-17 for the third time on Monday - to reinstate provisions from the Anti-terrorism Act of 2001 - Justice Minister Rob Nicholson emphasized a fabulous new feature:

"The key here is that the person required to attend an investigative hearing is treated as a witness, not someone who is accused of a crime."

True, as long as your definition of "witness" includes being arrested if you don't comply and being detained for 72 hours if you do.

But what if you are also suspected of being likely to commit a terrorist crime some time in the future. Well, then :

"a judge can order the person's detention for up to 12 months."

But no worries. A brand new civil rights safety provision in this regurgitated version of 9/11 law stipulates that every 12 months the Attorney General and the Public Safety Minister - that would be Nicholson himself and Vic lock-'em-up Toews respectively - must "provide their opinions, supported by reasons, as to whether the operations of these provisions should be extended."

Liberal critic for Public Safety & National Security Mark Holland made some noises about balancing national security with individual liberty and how :

"the government has completely ignored most of the key recommendations that came from Justice O'Connor [re Maher Arar], which were supported by Justice Iacobucci and were repeated by the RCMP Public Complaints Commissioner Paul Kennedy"

but then two days later, he voted for it along with the rest of the Libs.

There were hours and hours of speeches in the House this Monday and Tuesday :

Lib Marlene Jennings said right off the bat on Monday that the Libs would be voting for C-17 to proceed to committee.

NDP Joe Comartin noted "there is no crime related to terrorism not already included in the Criminal Code."

Bloc Maria Mourani : Arar. CSIS supports info gained via torture. Why would we give them even more secret powers?

NDP Wayne Marston worried we were regressing to pre Magna Carta sensibilities.

Con Colin Carrie accused "the coalition" of being "soft on terror".

Bloc Serge Ménard noted that under the War Measures Act "almost all candidates who ran against Mayor Drapeau [in the Montreal elections] were incarcerated. A law which goes so far as to incarcerate political opponents has already been used once in our history," he said.

NDP Don Davies brought up the "preventative arrest of 1,100 Canadians arrested at G20 for simply walking in the street" and asked why a government so against turning people into criminals for refusing to answer the long form census was at the same time happy to lock people up for refusing to answer questions based merely on suspicions?

Lib Derek Lee said Canadians already don't have the legal right to remain silent. (he's wrong about that.)

NDP Bill Siksay noted that security certificates were intended to expedite deportation of non-citizens yet they have been used instead to jail people for up to eight years without a trial. Slippery slope.


As I said - hours and hours of debate.
But then NDP Libby Davies wondered why there were hundreds of pages in newspapers across the country dealing with the gun registry but not one mention of the debate on the Combating Terrorism Act.

Good question, Libby.
The papers were full of the return of the House and Slagging Period, in which C-17 was not mentioned, yet whenever the Cons and Libs get together to pass something really draconian, like the Canada Colombia FTA or this Bill C-17, suddenly the media loses all interest.

Here's another question. After much initial fanfare about how important this bill is in the fight against 'terrists', and with the Libs onside since June 2009, the Cons have allowed it to languish in limbo for the last 15 months. Now it's the first government order to be put before the House this week. Why is that?
.

Beware the coming police state

Part One : Paul Jay interviews constitutional/criminal lawyer Clayton Ruby, who is defending satirist Charlie Veitch, the second person charged at G20 under the Public Works Protection Act. Because that act was amended in secret just for the G20, there was no way for the public to know how to obey it.

Part Two : So do we have the right to protest, to peaceful assembly, at events like G20?

Yes. Unfortunately, we have no effective way of enforcing that right.

Hence, as Ruby says : "Beware the coming police state."

.

G20 Ten Most Wanted

At this morning's presser, the Toronto Police media guy announced their "G20 Most Wanted Individuals" list :

"They are individuals who are not suspects - they are people who are wanted for criminal offences and the only difficulty that the investigative team has is at this point we don't know who they are so we're seeking the assistance of the public to identify them to us ."

He further advised they have "over 14,000 still images of individuals and over 500 videos", which they will be sharing with the Canadian Banking Association to run through their facial recognition software. Keep those citizen CDs and vids coming, he said.

So after ignoring the rioters for an hour and a half on June 26th in favour of taking their pictures, and then rounding up, IDing and photographing over a thousand hapless random citizens the following day, you will now use the banks' software tools to look for a match between the two groups.
Got it.
Well at least we know the point of the Sunday bucket detainments now - it was just their bad luck to be chosen to act as the control group.
.

G20 Martial Law - a few questions

We have always known in Canada that laws lying in wait to trash the Charter of Rights hover just beyond the sight lines of the courts. The Public Works Protection Act is just such a law, allowing, albeit for a limited time, otherwise illegal searches and seizures and arrests.

Here, constitutional lawyer Paul Cavalluzzo, lead commission council at the Walkerton and Maher Arar inquiries, goes through the act with Paul Jay of The Real News. Transcript here.

I have some further questions.

If I live within an arbitrarily designated "public works area", can Blackwater or a mall rent-a-cop or any other appointed "guard" legally enter my home and arrest me for attempting to deny them entry? Will they be armed?

If I don't consent to being ID'd and searched on my way to work, can I legally be prevented from going to work? I cannot prove this, as it is only anecdotal, but during the Vancouver Olympics, a contractor told me he lost an employee due to said employee being denied passage through Vancouver by the police for the duration of the Olympics for having written an anti-Olympics letter to the local paper that was never published.

If any of the protesters/shoppers/citizens arrested and detained in handcuffs for 24 hours and jammed in a 10 by 12 by 20 foot cage along with 40 other men are not formally charged and given their day in court, will there be no other opportunity to challenge these arbitrary Charter-free zones until the next time they are dusted off for a globalization bunfest?

And finally, why is Chief Bill Blair on the hot seat for having been given these extraordinary powers he didn't ask for when it was presumably the PMO that told the Ontario cabinet to ask for them?

Any responses from legal experts gratefully accepted.
In the meantime, the Toronto's Police Services Board, the public body which holds Toronto Police to account, predictably sees no need for a public inquiry.

Please support the Canadian Civil Liberties Association's petition to "repeal or amendment of the Public Works Protection Act to meet basic constitutional standards"
.

This is what real journalism looks like

On June 26th Toronto Mayor David Miller exhorted Torontonians to put the previous day's G20 violence behind them and get out into the streets to enjoy their city. Theatre director Tommy Taylor took Miller's words to heart.

This is his story of his day. Arrested with his girlfriend for singing "Give Peace a Chance", held for more than 24 hours in handcuffs in a 10 by 12 by 20 foot cage along with 40 other men, wet and cold, standing room only, no phone call, having to beg for a few sips of water, eventually passing out on the filthy floor.
One of the most compelling accounts on any subject I've read in some time, not least of all for his sympathy for the police forced into this position. This is what real journalism looks like :

How I Got Arrested and Abused at the G20 in Toronto, Canada
by Tommy Taylor

via Back of the Book and Boris.

Sign the Canadian Civil Liberties Association Petition calling for an independent inquiry and "Law reform to ensure that the Criminal Code provisions relating to “breach of the peace”, “unlawful assemblies” and “riots” are brought in line with constitutional standards.
.
Canadians Demanding a Public Inquiry into Toronto G20 - 41,000 members
.

G8 Free Speech Farm/G20 Charter-free zone

The G8 Free Speech Farm - only a short leisurely 8 kilometer hike from the G8 site.

.

Meanwhile at the G20 downtown, the government of Ontario has designated the sidewalks and public spaces five meters from the security fence a Charter-free zone.

How's your legalese?

A guard or peace officer,

(a) may require any person entering or attempting to enter any public work or any approach thereto to furnish his or her name and address, to identify himself or herself and to state the purpose for which he or she desires to enter the public work, in writing or otherwise;

(b) may search, without warrant, any person entering or attempting to enter a public work or a vehicle in the charge or under the control of any such person or which has recently been or is suspected of having been in the charge or under the control of any such person or in which any such person is a passenger; and

(c) may refuse permission to any person to enter a public work and use such force as is necessary to prevent any such person from so entering.

Every person who neglects or refuses to comply with a request or direction made under this Act by a guard or peace officer, and every person found upon a public work or any approach thereto without lawful authority, the proof whereof lies on him or her, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $500 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than two months, or to both.

OK, help me out with (b) here.

If you're a passenger in a car more than 5 meters from a "Public Work" fence but the driver is suspected of having previously driven inside that 5 meter perimeter, you have a choice of two months in jail or being searched by a "guard" for the crime of being in a public place. Is that right?

Is. That. Right?

.

Saturday Update : Well, here's the answer from Walkom

"But once the erosion of rights starts, it’s hard to stop. On Friday, Toronto police were stopping and searching people entering Allan Gardens, a public park about three kilometres from the fenced off-zone where the G20 leaders are due to arrive Saturday."

.

Indefinite detention : "Twenty minutes into the future"

In the late great dystopian tv show Max Headroom, whenever a crime was committed, suspects were arrested, profiled, and then the most likely perp was sentenced via a big spinning wheel of "consequences" on the tv game show that had replaced the courts.

Canadian content : Hey, David Emerson, how's your "one security perimeter" Project North America coming along?

.