Editorials

By Dana Gabriel

With the release of a U.S. Congressional report that found only a small fraction of the border with Canada was being adequately monitored, there is now more focus being placed on the northern border. As a result of increased scrutiny, there are efforts to militarize and expand surveillance on the Canada-U.S. border. The new found attention is also attributed to a proposed trade and security perimeter agreement between the two countries which promotes a shared approach to border management.

A report released by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in February of this year, found that a substantial portion of the northern border lacked any effective monitoring and surveillance. It concluded that only 32 of the 4,000-mile border was under operational control. The findings were largely based on failures to better coordinate border cooperation and information sharing among the various agencies. A Press Release by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security stated that according to the study, “the risk of terrorist activity across the northern border is higher than across the southern border because there are active Islamist extremist groups in Canada that are not in Mexico, it is easier to cross the northern border because it is twice as long as the southern border, and DHS has a fraction of the law enforcement officers and surveillance assets on the northern border than it has in the south.” It went on to say, “The border with Canada is also dotted with large population centers and criss-crossed by numerous highways and roads, making it harder to detect illegal activities amid the large volume of legitimate trade and travel between Canada and the U.S. that is so important to both countries.”

There are many who would argue that not enough is being done to secure the southern border and with drug violence in Mexico showing no signs of letting up, somehow we are to believe that the northern border is now more dangerous. This appears to be another attempt to portray Canada as a terrorist haven. Despite what one might think really happened on 9/11, some have perpetuated the myth that the terrorists entered the U.S. from Canada reinforcing the belief that the northern border is not secure enough. It is interesting to note that the GAO report was made public just days before U.S. President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued the declaration, Beyond the Border: A Shared Vision for Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness. The agreement will work towards establishing a North American security perimeter and will focus on easing travel and trade, increasing information sharing, as well as further integrating cross-border law enforcement operations.

full article http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24513

Torture has been a grim component of nearly every aspect of the current war in Afghanistan. Setting aside the behaviour of the Taliban regime and their Afghan opponents, the warlords of the Northern Alliance, which included grievous violations of human rights, US forces were involved in torture from almost the moment of their arrival in Afghanistan in late 2001.

In the years after 2001, the US government attempted to justify its invasion and occupation of Afghanistan through narratives of the 9/11 terrorist attacks that were based almost entirely on confessions elicited by torture from actual or suspected associates of Osama bin Laden.

And torture has been an integral part of the counterinsurgency tactics employed by the US, its NATO allies, and the Karzai regime. These tactics—involving infantry sweeps through communities in whose vicinity resistance has been encountered, more or less indiscriminate arrests, and the handing over of prisoners to the Afghan police or to the National Directorate of Security, whose ‘intelligence’ (based on torture) then serves as a guide to further arrests—have victimized large numbers of civilians, most of them people with no connection to the Afghan resistance.

Canada, as a practitioner of these tactics, has been implicated for at least the past six years in a detainee-torture scandal, one of whose consequences has been very serious damage to Canada’s international reputation. There is evidence that this scandal reaches to the very highest levels of the Canadian government.

full article http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24473

By Ian Mulgrew

CTV News Staff

Canadians continue to pay significantly more for consumer goods than Americans, despite a high-flying loonie that is expected to float higher than the greenback for months to come.

A new analysis by a Bank of Montreal economist predicts that the Canadian dollar will remain above par until at least the end of 2012, if not longer.

The BMO report authored by Douglas Porter says "Canadians should get accustomed to a lofty loonie," which will restrain inflation and dampen the prices of imported goods.

But the climbing currency has yet to close a price gap with the United States, which may leave Canadians scratching their heads as to why they have to pay more for the same consumer items.

full article http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110414/loonie-prices-bmo-110414/

Does the Ethyl Corporation's successful suit against the Canadian government regarding the ban of the chemical MMT illustrate that corporate profits trump a sovereign state's ability to protect their citizens under NAFTA, or does this case provide an example of a law that was rushed to take advantage of political optics and as a result was poorly crafted and subsequently overturned?

The continuing anti-democratic behaviour of the Harper Conservatives is disturbing.  Canadians are going to have to consider if they are facing a neo-Fascist movement in formation.  Defence of Democracy by ordinary Canadians demands they consider the worst-case scenario ... and act on their conclusions.

By Dana Gabriel

Without much fanfare and overshadowed by Canadians heading to the polls on May 2 for the fourth election in seven years, a controversial bill that would further comply with U.S. aviation security practices became law. The measure supports plans for a North American security perimeter and illustrates how the Canadian government is more interested in appeasing U.S. interests than protecting the privacy and freedoms of its own citizens.

In November of 2007, the Conservative government expressed concerns over privacy implications associated with the U.S. Secure Flight Program and filed objections with the Department of Homeland Security. They were urging an exemption on a measure that would require Canadian airlines to turn over information on passengers flying over the U.S. en route to other destinations. Despite their grievances being dismissed, they eventually caved in to U.S. demands. In a move to further bring Canada in line with American air travel security rules, Bill C-42, An Act to amend the Aeronautics Act was introduced in Parliament on June 17 of last year. With little media attention, it passed through the House of Commons on March 2, 2011, by a vote of 246 to 34. On March 23, it received royal assent and became law. Under Bill C-42, Canadian airlines are required to send traveler information through the Secure Flight Program 72 hours before departure. The Transportation Security Administration checks the data against security watch lists which could result in passengers receiving extra screening or even being barred from boarding their flight.

In an Action Alert from December 2010, the Council of Canadians described how Bill C-42, “requires that a large amount of your personal information be transmitted to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security even if your flight only passes through U.S. airspace. It's not just name, gender, age and destination as government sources claim. Any and all information contained in your travel records will be transmitted to U.S. security officials, who may use it for whatever purposes they see fit.” It goes on to say, “Canada has made many steps to harmonize airline security with U.S. programs but none has been good enough to prevent ever more draconian demands. Our severely flawed made-in-Canada ‘no fly’ list was supposed to prevent the imposition of the U.S. list on Canada. But the benchmark has moved again to the point the U.S. must issue travel permissions to Canadians.” The Conservative government has failed to sufficiently safeguard the privacy of Canadians. Personal information collected could be used for immigration, as well as law enforcement purposes and could also be shared with other countries. Bill C-42 surrenders Canadian authority to the Department of Homeland Security.

full article http://beyourownleader.blogspot.com/2011/04/us-dictating-north-american-air-travel.html

By MARK BROWNLEE

A border security agreement reached between Canada and the United States in February would weaken the Canadian government's ability to protect its citizens from food diseases, say the NDP and Liberals.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama announced in February they were beginning negotiations to look at ways of harmonizing the two countries' border security arrangements and come up with mutual plans for inspection procedures and information sharing.

The two leaders established the Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council, a new council to work towards creating a security perimeter around the two countries. The council is supposed to examine issues of trade and security. Mr. Harper said at the time that the plan is to harmonize many of Canada's border rules and to increase the sharing of information. The hope is to alleviate some of the United States' security concerns and remove barriers to trade of goods, such as food, between the two countries.

At a joint press conference in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 4, Mr. Harper said "Not to replace or eliminate the border, but where possible, to streamline and decongest it. There is much work to do. The declaration marks the start of this endeavour, not the end."

Few details about the negotiations, including the costs, have been released.

The NDP is opposed to the Conservatives negotiating the deal because NDP incumbent Paul Dewar, who is running for re-election, said the party is worried an agreement could create less stringent regulations for ensuring safety in food products.

"What are the standards we're employing? Are they going to be stricter? Are they going to be laxer? If they're laxer, we have a problem with that," said Mr. Dewar.

full article http://www.hilltimes.com/page/view/foodsafety-04-11-2011

By Emily Gilbert

On Feb. 4, 2011 a joint declaration on border security perimeter was announced by Prime Minister Harper and President Obama. No debate took place in the House of Commons. There has been no public debate. So far, border security is not an election issue.

Yet the declaration on border security demands broader engagement. Not only will it reshape Canada-U.S. relations, but it will formalize Canada's deepening securitization.

Already, numerous agreements have been signed between the U.S. and Canada that develop information-sharing and interoperability. The Canada-U.S. Smart Border Declaration of Dec. 2001 gave an official mandate to Integrated Border Enforcement Teams (IBET). IBETs provide coordinated security between U.S. and Canadian agencies: the RCMP, the Canadian Border Services Agency, the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement.

The Civil Assistance Plan of 2008 allows the military of one country to respond to a cross-border domestic civil emergency, at the request of the other country. The Shiprider Agreement of 2009 enables jointly-crewed RCMP and Coast Guard vessels to patrol shared waterways and seaways, with cross-border jurisdiction. Canada has even proposed Bill C-60: Keeping Canadians Safe (Protecting Borders) Act, which would bestow authority similar to the RCMP to all designated foreign officers, all across the
country.

We have ample evidence of the pernicious effects where there is interoperability of across police, military and private security forces. The brutal use of force against peaceful protesters at the G20 is a case in point.

full article http://rabble.ca/news/2011/04/north-american-security-perimeter-should-be-election-issue-0

As protester is acquitted of charges from 2007 Montebello protest, questions resurface about police

By Tim Groves

A Quebec court ruling in January 2011 found police acted illegally in trying to shut down a protest in Montebello, Quebec, in 2007, when they arrested two women on a downtown street. This ruling has led to renewed calls for an inquiry into another police action—one now well-known, thanks to Youtube—at that same protest: the alleged use of undercover officers to incite violence.

So I took the Voter Compass survey on the CBC website just for kicks.  After answering the questions the application took a few seconds and then told me that my ideals most closely aligned with the Liberal Party.  To say that I was dismayed would be an understatement.  So I went and looked at where I diverged and aligned with both the Conservatives and Liberals.  I found that statistically, I diverged more than 1 degree from the Conservatives on 7 items, and the Liberals on 9 items.  I agreed completely with the Liberals on 9 and the Conservatives on 12 positions.  I diverged strongly with both parties on 3 postions.  And then I looked even deeper.

The "tidy-up" hearing in the Basi, Virk, and Basi case [the BC Rail Scandal] in the B.C. Supreme Court opens more questions than it answers.  What to do with the (expensive) thousands upon thousands of pages, tapes, etc. brought together at great cost and with great diffuculty over more than four years?  Was the judgement on the matter credible?  Did Associate Chief Justice Anne MacKenzie serve the people of B.C. ... and "justice"?

By Dana Gabriel

Canada and the U.S recently issued a joint threat and risk assessment as part of ongoing efforts to further enhance security on the northern border. This initiative supports a declaration by the leaders which will work towards facilitating the movement of travel and trade between the two countries. The Canadian government has announced that they are seeking online public consultation on the security perimeter arrangement. Meanwhile, the country has been thrust into an election with the defeat of the ruling Conservative party in a non-confidence vote. During the campaign, sovereignty concerns associated with the proposed trade and security deal could become a hot-button issue.