The Dominion - terrorism

Abousfian Abdelrazik's Statement to the UN 1267 Committee

shainaagbayani — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 19:29:49 +0000

Abousfian Abdelrazik delivers a message to the UN 1267 list committee about the hardships he endures daily.

(video ID here: http://www.vimeo.com/25236316)

A Dark Anniversary

Tim McSorley — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 05:30:05 +0000

Abousfian Abdelrazik marks one year back in Canada, languishes under UN watch list

MONTREAL—“There are certain anniversaries that should never take place. The lack of action by the Harper government is unacceptable. Why is Abousfian still waiting for his name to be cleared?” asks Mary Foster, an organizer with the Abousfian Abdelrazik support committee "Project Fly Home."

On June 4, 2009, Federal Court Judge Rossel Zinn issued a stern ruling that Minister of Foreign Affairs Lawrence Cannon had been acting in bad faith and that the Canadian government would need to bring Abdelrazik back to Canada from Sudan. One year later, Abdelrazik continues to wait for his name to be removed from the United Nations Security Council Committee 1267 "Consolidated List," colloquially known as the Al-Qaeda and Taliban Terrorist List, or, for short, the "1267 List." Being on the list impedes Abdelrazik from functioning in the most basic of ways.

Abdelrazik recently sat down at a busy coffee shop in downtown Montreal to speak with The Dominion about what he has dubbed "living in a prison without walls."

A victorious grassroots movement brought Abdelrazik home last fall after six years of forced exile and imprisonment in Sudan. Abdelrazik tried to establish the cornerstones of a regular life—reconnect with family; find an apartment; see what work was available; and get through administrative tasks such as opening a bank account.

“It was very confusing and shameful how I was treated. Less than a week after depositing a small amount in my new account, I was contacted by Caisse Desjardins and told my account had been frozen and that they were unsure as to why but that there was nothing they could do. So no pension and no money and what I am supposed to do?” Abdelrazik asks quietly.

His legal team quickly learned that the reason behind the freeze was that he is still on the 1267 List. Beyond the complete asset freeze, Abdelrazik is also subjected to a total flight ban, and it is illegal for any employer to hire him or for him to receive social assistance, making it difficult to cover his and his children’s basic expenses. Listed individuals face vague allegations; they have no right to a hearing before they are placed on the list; and they are provided with no evidence to support the claims against them. In response, Project Fly Home launched a “Break the Silence” campaign to have him de-listed and to create a surge of popular support.

“Once again it is Lawrence Cannon and his department who have the ability to take me off the list. They refuse to tell me why I am on it, and why they have not worked to take me off of it,” Abdelrazik explains.

Break the Silence has been gaining momentum, with major unions and labour federations such as the Canadian Labour Congress, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, the Canadian section of the International Machinists and most recently the Canadian Association of University Teachers publicly endorsing the initiative and agreeing to hire Abdelrazik for short term contracts. Despite large labour organizations engaging in acts of civil disobedience, Cannon continues to reject responsibility for de-listing Abdelrazik and claims it is up to Abdelrazik himself to get off the list. So far there have been no legal repercussions for unions and organizations actively working to oppose the sanctions against Abdelrazik.

While individuals can apply to be de-listed, says Foster, the process is highly politicized and nearly impossible to get through without state support. But the Canadian government could lift the sanctions itself. “Cabinet could immediately pass an Order in Council to modify or repeal the regulations which implement the 1267 regime in Canada,” Foster explains.

The Dominion received no response from Cannon or Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAIT) by the time of print, but on May 18, Canwest Global quoted Cannon as saying: “All I can say is that in the past I tried to make sure that Mr. Abdelrazik had the support he needed to be removed from the UN list. That attempt, unfortunately, failed.”

A precedent backs Abdelrazik’s assertion that the responsibility for de-listing falls upon Cannon and the Department of Foreign Affairs. On June 3, 2002, on a recommendation from the then-Liberal Minister of Foreign Affairs, the regulations implementing the 1267 regime in Canada were modified to exempt Liban Hussein, an Ottawa citizen who was arrested November 7, 2001, at the request of the United States. The US accused him of supporting terrorism. The exemption effectively ended the sanctions against the only Canadian on the list at the time, and his name was subsequently removed from the Security Council’s 1267 List.

In the first week of June, Abdelrazik’s legal team filed to the Federal Court of Canada a challenge against the United Nations 1267 List. Comparable challenges have been filed in Switzerland and Belgium; both countries saw their federal courts strike down the 1267 regime as unconstitutional and undemocratic. “It is quite risky for countries to put people on the 1267 List because it will undoubtedly be challenged in the high courts because it is so starkly against basic due process,” says Foster.

In his judgment that forced the Canadian government to bring Abdelrazik back to Canada, Federal Court Judge Zinn wrote, "I add my name to those who view the 1267 Committee regime as a denial of basic legal remedies and as untenable under the principles of international human rights. There is nothing in the listing or de-listing procedure that recognizes the principles of natural justice or that provides for basic procedural fairness...It can hardly be said that the 1267 Committee process meets the requirement of independence and impartiality when, as appears may be the case involving Mr. Abdelrazik, the nation requesting the listing is one of the members of the body that decides whether to list or, equally as important, to de-list a person. The accuser is also the judge."

University of Ottawa Law Professor Amir Attaran has been closely following the case of Abdelrazik and cautions against putting the responsibility solely on the Canadian government. “While Canada’s almost certainly illegal error has been to follow an unjust UN system, the deeper problem lies with the UN, which created and administers the 1267 sanctions system, and which oddly believes it is consistent with human rights law. It is time to call into question the belief, too frequent and trusting on the political left, that the UN are good guys. They are not: Abdelrazik’s unjust persecution amply proves it.”

The 1267 List was established as a sanctions regime measure “to deter terrorism” by the United Nations Security Council in 1999 after the 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya. In 2001, after the 9/11 attacks in the United States, the list was broadened to target Al Qaeda as well as the Taliban. The resolution has been widely understood to be serving a political agenda to target countries the United States deems problematic. However, it seems to have evolved to become a tool numerous states are using to stifle political dissent and internal sovereignty movements, including Russia against Chechnyans and India against members of the Khalistan movement.

When asked what he would like to see happen next, Abdelrazik smiles softly and with quiet determination states, “The government could revoke the regulations entirely. This step would send a clear signal to the United Nations Security Council that Canada will no longer participate in this unjust regime and will let me continue on with my life. Until then we will continue with the campaign.”

Amy Miller is a media maker and community organizer who resides in Montreal.

Fly home

"You Will See..."

hillarybain — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:36:47 +0000

Bearing the scars of Canadian intelligence

HALIFAX – Abousfian Abdelrazik toured Canada this fall after six long years spent in forced exile in Sudan where he was detained and tortured. He has returned to Canada, despite the efforts of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), or as Abdelrazik calls them, the Canadian Muhkabarat. Mukhabarat is an Arabic word meaning "intelligence," and refers to state security intelligence agencies known for their brutality, torture, arbitrary detentions and human rights violations.

He related his story of the Canadian Muhkabarat at a public presentation in Halifax in September.

“Between 1997 and 2003, [CSIS] started to follow me everywhere. They started bothering my [sick] wife, they even went to her family and to her father at work. 'Give us information about your husband, and we will give you better treatment for your cancer,' they said.”

In 2003, On the eve of his departure from Canada to Sudan to see his mother who had fallen ill, Abdelrazik, a Canadian citizen who had never been charged with a crime, had an encounter with CSIS in Montreal.

“Two days before leaving for Sudan, two agents from CSIS came to my apartment and asked me about my travel. One of them said, 'We know you're planning on going to your country, Sudan.' I went back inside and called the police. The police arrived in the parking lot, and asked the CSIS agents to leave. While they walked away, one of them turned to me and said to me, 'You're going to Sudan, you will see.'”

While in Sudan in September of 2003, he was detained by Sudanese state security and initially held in prison in Khartoum. In Sudan, where he was being interrogated and tortured, the same CSIS agents visited him.

“One evening, the same men who arrested me, came and took me. They said 'Your friends, the Canadian Mukhabarat, have come to talk to you.' They brought me to the office, where I found the same two guys who visited me my last night in Montreal, sitting at a table, with nice drinks, cakes, and coffee. One of them, the one who turned to me in Montreal and said 'you're gonna see', said to me, 'Remember what I said to you in Montreal? Now you're going to see! Sit down!' And they interrogated me for two days.”

“He said to me 'You're not Canadian, you're Sudanese. You're going to stay forever in Sudan, my country doesn't need you!'” said Abdelrazik, relating some of the verbal harassment.

Abdelrazik was released from his first detention in 2004, but was detained again in 2005 for nine months.

In 2006, he was added to the UN no-fly list, under regulation 1267, and all his assets were frozen.

The RCMP reviewed their files in 2007, and found there was “no substantive evidence to indicate that Abdelrazik is involved in any criminal activity.” Nonetheless, CSIS maintained “he is an important Islamic jihad activist.” In April 2008, Abdelrazik took refuge at the Canadian embassy for fear of continued detention, torture and possible death at the hands of Sudanese security.

In 2009, 116 Canadians broke federal law and purchased a plane ticket for Abdelrazik's return home. Mere hours before his flight, Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Foreign Affairs, used his discretionary powers to bar his return.

In his June 4 ruling, Federal Court Judge Russell Zinn ordered the Canadian government to repatriate Abdelrazik to Canada within 30 days, stating, "[Mr. Abdelrazik] is as much a victim of international terrorism as the innocent persons whose lives have been taken by recent barbaric acts of terrorists."

Judge Zinn found that CSIS was complicit in the original detention of Mr. Abdelrazik by Sudanese authorities; that by mid 2004 Canadian authorities had determined that they wouldn't seek to assist Abdelrazik's return to Canada, and would consider refusing him an emergency passport that was required to ensure he could return to Canada; that the UN Resolution (regulation 1267) does not impede Abdelrazik from returning to his own country, and Canada's assertions to the contrary was a way to ensure he would not return to Canada; and that the denial of an emergency passport on April 3, 2009, was a breach of his Charter right to enter Canada.

Due in part to Judge Zinn's ruling and partly to mounting pressure on the government, Mr. Abdelrazik finally touched Canadian soil again on June 27, 2009, and was heralded by his supporters.

On September 21, three days before launching a Canada-wide speaking tour with Abousfian Abdelrazik and Project Fly Home—an advocacy and campaign network—Mr. Abdelrazik's lawyers submitted a lawsuit against the Attorney General of Canada and Minister Cannon. Abdelrazik is claiming $24 million in damages from the Attorney General on the basis of false imprisonment, torture, negligence, intentional infliction of mental suffering, breach of fiduciary duty, and breaches of his Charter Rights. He is also claiming $3 million in damages from Lawrence Cannon for misfeasance in public office, intentional infliction of mental suffering, and breach of Charter Rights.

Abousfian Abdelrazik's case is similar to those of Maher Arar, Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin, all of whom were jailed on the recommendation of CSIS. Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen jailed in Syria and later repatriated to Canada, described the situation in a Globe and Mail column.

"Canadians deserve to know why so many of this country's citizens, all of Muslim background, have been imprisoned and tortured abroad," he wrote. "Human-rights organizations, activists and national-security experts have been calling for the current government to establish the credible oversight agency that was recommended by Judge O'Connor several years ago."

Sarah Todd, a member of Project Fly Home, toured with Mr. Abdelrazik across Canada and helped in the public presentations. "You have to call into question the privilege, and the structures of class, race, religion, and highlight who is targeted," she told The Dominion. "This couldn't necessarily happen to any Canadian citizen, [and] it's important to highlight the two-tiered citizenship rights.”

Abdelrazik spoke of the fear among the Muslim community, in Montreal and across Canada. "I have so many friends in Montreal, who are Muslims, and they live in fear of CSIS, and wherever the Muslims are [in Canada], they are living the same thing.”

"With Stephen Harper, [exporting torture has] become a reality that people accept, and it violates human rights and creates a climate of fear that is totally unacceptable," Project Fly Home member Emilie Breton told The Dominion. "[It] has also made people believe that arbitrary measures should be used in the name of national security. This is a slow move towards a police state, where rights don't exist for citizens. It's important to denounce this and resist it."

Project Fly Home is an initiative of The People's Commission on Immigration and “Security” Measures. The Project came together under the increased harassment of immigrant and racialized communities, Indigenous people, radical groups and political organizations. Its goal is to monitor this harassment, to oppose it, and to challenge the whole idea of the national security agenda.

In an interview with The Dominion, Mr. Abdelrazik stated that the mobilization of Canadian civil society was an instrumental factor in pressuring the government to repatriate him. One hundred and sixteen Canadians broke federal law to purchase the April 3 plane ticket for Mr. Abdelrazik's return, despite UN regulation 1267, which makes it an offence to donate or give any financial aid to the listed person.

"I want to thank them a lot, for what they have done for me," he said. "I think if they hadn't stood up for me, and without the pressure on the government, I would have been forgotten in Sudan for so long. And I would tell them to continue, as there are many cases just like mine. Let us all continue doing the same thing, and bring justice for them.”

Lawrence Cannon, Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs, was contacted by phone and email to request an interview for this article, but his press secretary declined to comment due to the current lawsuit.

-----

David Parker is an independent journalist and Spoken Word Coordinator at CKDU 88.1 fm in Halifax.

Abousfian Abdelrazik

Did Canada Help Dismantle Sri Lanka’s Peace Process?

Stuart Neatby — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 22:00:28 +0000

"Collective grief" of Tamil community paralyzes Ottawa

OTTAWA–Canada’s 300,000-strong Tamil community, the largest Tamil diaspora on earth, has been mobilizing for months in major cities in Canada to draw attention to the dire situation in Sri Lanka.

“There is a collective grief amongst the Tamil community in Canada right now,” says David Poopalapillai, national spokesperson for the Canadian Tamil Congress (CTC). In recent months this "collective grief" has brought sections of at least two Canadian cities to a standstill.

Since Sri Lanka’s military captured the port city of Kilinochchi, a stronghold of the rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the country’s northern region, the death toll within the mostly Tamil region has risen to alarming levels.

In response, Tamil-Canadians have organized fasts, parliamentary meetings, vigils, protests, and acts of non-violent civil disobedience to draw attention to what many see as a campaign of deliberate killings of Tamil civilians by the Sri Lankan government. This campaign included a march of more than 45,000 through downtown Toronto on January 30, the biggest march in Canada against an international conflict since Israel’s bombardment of Lebanon during the summer of 2006.

These actions form one of the largest and most coordinated acts of international solidarity in recent Canadian history.

On March 16, activists formed a human chain around busy streets surrounding Toronto’s Union Station, bringing swathes of the downtown core to a halt. Smaller demonstrations have taken place in most major Canadian cities.

Last Tuesday, April 7, in tandem with similar actions in England, Norway and other international communities, busloads of Tamil-Canadians converged upon Ottawa, arriving from Toronto, Montreal and elsewhere.

After a rally on Parliament Hill, approximately 500 protesters broke off into several coordinated groups and proceeded to squat several intersections in Ottawa’s small downtown throughout the afternoon and evening.

Rush hour traffic was largely brought to a halt.

Demonstrators, many of whom waved flags bearing the emblem of the LTTE, continued to block the intersections until 7:30 pm, when they were pushed back by police to the corner of Wellington and Metcalfe streets in front of Parliament Hill.

There they have remained, their numbers swelling to thousands over the Easter weekend.

“Our community is dying there, it’s going to be wiped out if we let this happen,” said Kumughan Nallarhenm, who drove from Toronto to Ottawa with his family last week to protest in front of parliament. “So I cannot sit idly reading at my home or going to the office.”

Nallarhenm’s sentiments were shared by most of the Tamils who have clogged Wellington Street in front of Parliament Hill over the last week. Many either have family in Northern Sri Lanka or know individuals trapped in the area.

Sahabthan Jesuthasan, a student at York University and member of the Coalition to Stop the War in Sri Lanka, has several family members in Kilinochchi.

“When the government ‘freed’ the area, we stopped hearing from them. We found out later that their house had been shelled and bombed,” he explained, adding that the lack of independent monitors in the most heavily affected areas of the conflict have made identifying the whereabouts of his relatives impossible.

“What’s worst is not knowing what happened to them. Nobody knows what’s going on.”

Until very recently, Canada has played a small role in Sri Lanka’s conflict.

Sri Lanka’s civil war began in 1983, following the destruction of many Tamil-run businesses during riots by Sinhalese nationalists on the eve of local elections. Tamils responded at first with non-violent protests, which were largely ignored by the Sri Lankan government. The LTTE subsequently managed to harness the frustrations of the country’s Tamil minority. Since then, violence on both sides has been responsible for over 70,000 killings along with other human rights abuses over the course of the 27-year war.

Assassinations of political leaders and bombings of heavily crowded urban areas have become a characteristic of the conflict. Prior to January, the LTTE had managed to function as a quasi-state entity in several northern cities, operating courts, tax administrative offices and even a bank.

A peace process, brokered by the government of Norway, began in 2002. By 2006, in the midst of already fragile negotiations, Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapakse began a concerted international public relations campaign focused upon casting the LTTE as the main barrier to peace.

Backed by former US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Donald Camp, the campaign overlooked the Sri Lankan government’s own history of discrimination of ethnic Tamils and its funding of paramilitaries in the North. The campaign included the launching of a pro-government website modeled after the Tamil website tamilnet.com.

Canada was the first country to respond to this campaign, following the advice of lead editorials by the Globe and Mail and the National Post.

The newly-elected Harper government officially placed the LTTE on its list of terrorist organizations in April 2006. Then Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day announced that LTTE supporters were “not welcome” in Canada during the press conference announcing the ban.

“The LTTE’s repeated use of violence,” said former Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Mackay, “is unacceptable and seriously calls into question its commitment to the peace process.”

Mackay made no mention of any use of violence carried out by the Sri Lankan government over the course of the civil war. The ban was followed by several RCMP arrests of Canadian citizens, who were alleged to have aided in fund raising for the LTTE.

No such actions have been taken to censure other nationalist elements in Sri Lanka, such as the Buddhist National Sinhala Heritage Party, which many international observers credit with pushing the Rajapakse government to adopt a more hard-line nationalist vision.

Subsequent to Canada’s decision, the EU placed the LTTE on its own terror list in May 2006.

In June 2006, the peace talks collapsed. The Rajapakse government began a renewed offensive against the Tamil Tigers. Despite UN calls for a ceasefire, the Sri Lankan government resumed its military campaign early this year.

This campaign has included aerial and artillery attacks of so-called “safe areas” into which civilians fleeing the conflict have been sequestered.

UN Human Rights chief Navi Pillay has estimated that 2,800 civilians have been killed since January, although some have claimed the toll has reached 3,500.

The Sri Lankan government has barred entry of journalists and humanitarian organizations such as the Red Cross into the region. UN officials have warned for months of a food crisis in the northern region that may affect hundreds of thousands of people. It is estimated that between 150,000 and 190,000 civilians have remained in the inappropriately named “safe areas.”

"Sri Lanka's so-called 'no-fire zone' is now one of the most dangerous places in the world," said Brad Adams, the Asia director for Human Rights Watch, in a recent report.

“What actually happened was that the LTTE ban brought about by the Canadian government and also by other governments gave a strong boost to the Sri Lankan government to go for a military solution,” says Poopalapillai.

Poopalapillai said that Canadian Tamil organizations were not consulted prior to the LTTE ban.

The CTC, along with other Tamil organizations, have called upon Canada to impose economic and political sanctions upon Sri Lanka, and to remove its consular officials from the country until a ceasefire is declared. Many in North America have also begun a legal campaign to declare an injunction against a $1.9 billion International Monetary Fund loan to the Sri Lankan government. Many Tamils believe that part of the loan would be used to finance the Sri Lankan government’s war effort.

The international protests have begun to have an effect.

The Sri Lankan government declared a two-day ceasefire over the Easter weekend, and both Conservative Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon and the leaders of the NDP and Liberal parties have made statements in recent days calling for stronger action to support a ceasefire.

Organizers say the protests, which have included several hunger strikes, will continue until Canada adopts a major shift in its policy towards Sri Lanka.

Stuart Neatby is a former managing editor of The Dominion.

Tiger and Tower

Tamils protest parliament

A Letter from the RNC 8

Lia Tarachansky — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:23:15 +0000

Dailymail co uk.jpg

Dear Friends, Family, and Comrades:
We are the RNC 8: individuals targeted because of our political beliefs and work organizing for protests at the 2008 Republican National Convention, in what appears to be the first use of Minnesota’s version of the US Patriot Act. The 8 of us are currently charged with Conspiracy to Commit Riot in Furtherance of Terrorism, a 2nd degree felony that carries the possibility of several years in prison. We are writing to let you know about our situation, to ask for support, and to offer words of hope.

A little background: the RNC Welcoming Committee was a group formed in late 2006 upon hearing that the 2008 Republican National Convention would be descending on Minneapolis-St. Paul where we live, work, and build community. The Welcoming Committee’s purpose was to serve as an anarchist/anti-authoritarian organizing body, creating an informational and logistical framework for radical resistance to the RNC. We spent more than a year and a half doing outreach, facilitating meetings throughout the country, and networking folks of all political persuasions who shared a common interest in voicing dissent in the streets of St. Paul while the GOP’s machine chugged away inside the convention.
In mid-August the Welcoming Committee opened a “Convergence Center,”a space for protesters to gather, eat, share resources, and build networks of solidarity. On Friday, August 29th, 2008, as folks were finishing dinner and sitting down to a movie the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Department stormed in, guns drawn, ordering everyone to the ground. This evening raid resulted in seized property (mostly literature), and after being cuffed, searched, and IDed, the 60+individual inside were released.

December in Review

Stuart Neatby — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:32:31 +0000

Halted deportations, Lakota secession, and social tension in Latin America

In Vancouver, 1500 demonstrators effectively paralysed the Vancouver International Airport and halted the planned deportation of 48-year old paralysed Punjabi refugee Laibar Singh on December 10-- international Human Rights Day. The vast majority of the supporters were members of Vancouver’s Sikh community, who had been mobilizing and campaigning against Singh’s impending deportation to India for months, while he lived in sanctuary within a Sikh temple. On January 9, a second attempt by the Canadian Border Services Agency to deport Singh was thwarted after officials showed up at the Nanak Sikh Temple in Surrey at 4AM to find 300 of Singh’s supporters blocking the entrance to the temple. Singh’s supporters have argued that he should remain in Canada on Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds due to his medical needs.

The Canadian Supreme Court ruled that the Safe Third Country Agreement-- legislation that has cut refugees' eligibility to remain in Canada-- was illegal. The STCA, enacted by the Martin government, prohibits political refugees from remaining in Canada if they have landed first in the US. The ruling declared that the United States could not be deemed a “safe” country for refugees due to its violations of the UN Convention Against Torture and the Refugee Convention.

The Lakota Sioux nation made steps to legally secede from the United States on December 20 in Washington after Lakota representatives withdrew from all treaties signed with the US. Following years of discussions amongst treaty representatives within the various Lakota communities throughout Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana, the notice of withdrawal from the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie Treaties was hand-delivered by a four-member Lakota delegation to Daniel Turner, Deputy Director of Public Liaison at the US State Department. According to delegation members, the legal basis for this withdrawa stands with the continuous violation of the 1851 and 1868 treaties by the United States, as well as the conditions of extreme poverty that exist within the Lakota communities.

Environmentalists have perhaps won a partial victory after the United States and Canada both backed down from their obstructionist positions at the UN Climate Change Summit in Bali. After the summit was extended an extra day, Canadian Environment Minister John Baird, who had been dogged by a delegation of Canadian youth activists throughout the week, reversed his original position against a binding target of 25 to 40 per cent reductions of carbon emissions from wealthy countries by the year 2020. The United States also agreed in the end to endorse the “Bali roadmap,” although only after the section requiring binding targets for all nations to collectively reduce carbon emissions was removed. Some environmentalists have argued that the summit’s key failing was the “single-minded focus on getting Washington on board,” to the detriment of actually achieving firm carbon-reduction targets.

In Haiti, grassroots leader Rene Civil was released after spending 20 months in prison. Civil was a member of the Lavalas party of former Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide and was also a leader of the Popular Power Youth (JPP), a grassroots organization of youth from poor communities. Civil was arrested in August 2006, shortly after organizing a demonstration calling for the release of political prisoners and the return to the country of Aristide. However, another grassroots activist, Wilson Mesilien, acting director of the September 30th foundation, a human rights organization, was recently forced into hiding after receiving death threats. Mesilien’s predecessor, Lovinsky Pierre-Antoine, remains at large after he was kidnapped by unknown figures last August. The US and Canadian governments took part in the military overthrow of Aristide in 2004, and Canadian RCMP officials currently head the UN training program for the Haitian National Police, which is accused by Haitians and international observers of human rights abuses including mass murder, sex trafficking and rape.

In Pakistan, in the midst of political turmoil in the week following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the United States government announced it would approve the nearly five-hundred million dollar sale of eighteen Lockheed Martin fighter jets to the regime of Pervez Musharraf. Although no definitive investigation has been carried out of Bhutto’s murder (the Pakistani President has refused to allow a UN investigation of the killing), many of Bhutto’s supporters, as well as Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, have expressed belief that elements of Pakistan’s military may have been behind the assassination, and have criticized the continued sale of arms to the regime.

A new report issued by the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade has found that Canadian arms sales reached $700 million, the highest levels ever recorded, in 2003. This figure did not include sales made to the US which, if counted, would have brought the total sales of Canadian arms to over $2 billion. According to Ken Epps, an arms control researcher with Project Ploughshares, many of these sales were made to countries with dubious human rights records, such as Colombia, China, and Saudi Arabia. Epps also noted that the Pakistani military purchased $250 million worth of helicopters from Canada between 2004 and 2005.

The Bush administration’s case for war with Iran was dealt a severe blow after sixteen different US intelligence agencies concluded that the country had ended its nuclear weapons more than four years ago. Despite this, George W. Bush, claimed publicly that he still believed Iran to be a threat to the United States. The completion of the report by the National Intelligence Agency had reportedly been held up and postponed by vice-President Dick Cheney for two months.

In Toronto, a new report by the provincial government has found that, despite crackdowns, 31,000 people currently receive a "special diet" supplement designed for welfare recipients with medical dietary needs. The supplement, valued at $250 extra dollars for food per month, is an obscure and often overlooked government program. The Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP) has publicly set up special diet clinics throughout the city and province in recent years, arguing that individuals on welfare live in conditions of state-sponsored poverty, which limits their dietary health. Over the last two years, this campaign effectively redirected over $30 million of provincial revenue into the hands of the province's poorest residents.

Recent reports from human rights organizations in Chiapas, Mexico indicate that the Mexican government is ramping up its military presence in regions under heavy influence of the indigenous Zapatista Liberation Army. According to the Centre for Political Analysis and Social and Economic Research, a human rights NGO based in Chiapas, there has been a marked increase in the presence of military and paramilitary deployments within this Southern Mexican state which, coupled with an increase in expropriations of land occupied by indigenous Mayan sympathizers of the Zapatistas, has prompted IPS News to dub this escalation “the worst onslaught by state forces in the last 10 years.” Since the 1994 uprising by the Zapatistas, indigenous self-rule has been quietly built within the region, as the Zapatistas have established their own health, education and development programmes, while forming their own governing “caracoles,” or good-government councils.

In Bolivia, clashes continued between middle- to upper-class supporters of the the Democratic and Social Power (PODEMOS) political party and the social movements and indigenous communities united under the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) of current president Evo Morales. Partisans of the right-leaning PODEMOS, which include the governors of four eastern departments, have been staging blockades, strikes, and demonstrations for months against the proposed constitutional changes championed by Morales and the social forces united under the MAS, largely movements of the country’s majority poor and indigenous peoples. The constitution would grant the central government greater control over the country’s rich natural resources, but would also guarantee expanded autonomy for departmental governments and indigenous communities. The opposition disagrees with the limitations on land ownership established in the document, as well as the redirection of departmental gas revenues to a new National Pension Fund for all citizens of the country over the age of sixty. Late last month, the opposition has declared autonomy from the central government for the city of Santa Cruz, establishing a new police force, television station and special ID cards.

The Ontario government finally announced that the province will be returning the Ipperwash Provincial Park lands to the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nations. This announcement follows the conclusion of the Ipperwash inquiry into the 1995 Ontario Provincial Police killing of Dudley George last May. The land was originally expropriated from the Stony Point band in 1942 to allow the federal government to build a military base.

First Nations survivors of the Canadian residential school system received their first cheques as part of a $2 billion compensation settlement for the collective experience of mass sexual and physical abuse suffered by indigenous children at Catholic-run schools between the 1950s and 1980s. Eighty thousands First Nations people are eligible for this compensation, which is paid in lump sums, and which amount to an average of $28,000. This amount, however, only accounts for the federal government’s portion of the settlement; The Catholic church is also responsible for paying 30% of the settlement. Although viewed by residential school survivors as an important milestone in the process of achieving justice, the size of the settlement pales when compared to a similar settlement given to Australian aboriginals of the “Stolen Generation,” whose treatment at the hands of their government throughout the twentieth century bears many striking similarities to that of the Canadian aboriginal experience.

In New Orleans, police attacked, tazered and pepper-sprayed public housing residents who had arrived at city hall to take part in a “public hearing” about the proposed demolition of 5000 public housing units in the city. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, there remains a homeless population of 12,000 within New Orleans. City Hall and private developers have nonetheless intensified efforts to demolish public housing in order to make way for commercial property and high-priced condominiums. Police had initially erected a metal gate around city hall, prohibiting public housing residents from entering the building. Fifteen were arrested in total as the council passed the motion in favour of the demolitions. Residents have pledged to continue fighting, and have called for supporters to travel to the region and take part in a campaign of direct actions against these home demolitions.

Officials in India have conceded that the construction of the World Bank-backed Narmada Dam is illegal. Shri Afroz Ahmad of the Narmada Control Authority admitted that the construction of the dam to the height of 121.9 metres has led to the illegal submergence of houses and farms, particularly those of the Bhil tribal people, many of whom have been struggling against the construction of this mega-dam for more than twenty years. Critics of the dam have demanded that its size be reduced in order to avoid flooding still further indigenous communities, and continue to fight for land for those who have been displaced by the dam’s construction.

Hundreds of trade union demonstrators gathered in Toronto to protest the proposed Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, while approximately 30-40 activists with the Canadian Union of Public Employees picketed the office of former Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Mackay in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia. Critics from trade unions, human rights organizations, and ecumenical organizations in Canada have argued that this trade deal has been negotiated in complete secrecy, after a dramatically similar trade deal between the US and Colombia met with overwhelming opposition within Congress due to human rights concerns. Colombia currently has the worst human rights record of any country in the Western Hemisphere, and more trade unionists are killed in the region than in the rest of the world combined. Little has been made public about this trade agreement, nor of the timeline for its implementation, but public officials have speculated that the trade pact could be completed within the next few weeks. Many Colombian activists have argued that this trade agreement encourages para-military political violence against indigenous peoples, trade unionists, afro-Colombian communities, and poor people within resource-rich territories, and also provides the framework to “legalize and legitimize” this economic and political terrorism. Meanwhile, reports of increased military and para-military attacks upon indigenous protests against land expropriation have emerged from the Southwest Cauca in recent weeks.

African political leaders have rejected a neo-liberal trade agreement with the European Union, which would have forced punitive duties upon imported goods from the continent, such as sugar, meat and bananas, which would have competed with European producers. The “Economic Partnership Agreements” have been the subject of protests by trade unions and social movements throughout the continent, and were voted down during an EU-Africa summit in Lisbon. The increased amount of investment from China in Africa has likely provided the subcontinent with a greater amount of breathing room in negotiating such trade deals in recent years.

Lakota Map

Laibar Singh and Supporters

Endorsing Death Squad Economics

Stuart Neatby — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:36:37 +0000

Canada's Lightning Speed Trade Negotiations with Colombia

“Why is it ridiculous to ask that human rights be respected in order to do free trade with Colombia?” asked award-winning Colombian journalist Hollman Morris during an interview on national public radio in Canada a couple of weeks ago.

Morris was reflecting on Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s comments made in Bogotá this past July where he announced the launch of three-way free trade negotiations with Colombia and Peru.

During a press conference with President Alvaro Uribe, Harper said that Canada is prepared to negotiate with Colombia despite being facing the worst humanitarian disaster in the hemisphere according to the UN. Alluding to US Democrats currently blocking approval of the US-Colombia free trade agreement, he stated, “We are not going to say, 'Fix all your social, political and human-rights problems and only then will we engage in trade relations with you.'” His negotiating team has proved its determination to sign a deal and may have wrapped up fast track talks in Lima this week. The negotiations between Colombia and the US took 21 months.

“Prime Minister Harper’s statement is quite offensive,” said Morris, pointing out that “Colombia is the country in which trade unionists are the most endangered in the world [and] in the last couple of years there has been a phenomenon of the dismantlement of trade unions. I’m wondering, is it ridiculous to protect them?”

In 2006, there were 72 reported killings of trade unionists. Over the course of the Uribe administration, four hundred union officers and rank-and-file members have been murdered and of these crimes there have been only seven convictions, says a statement released this month by the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC).

Morris added that Uribe also continues attacks on the press. He says that he has recently “delegitimized journalists [such that] a number have left the country within the last month.” Morris himself has previously been accused by Uribe of having ties to left-wing guerrillas, comments later revoked, but which still put Morris’ life in jeopardy.

Harper’s comments are a strong endorsement for Uribe at a time when his administration faces a grave crisis of legitimacy. The “para-politics scandal” has shaken even his key alliance with the US as a substantial block of US Congress holds up approval of the US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement. Forty congress people, including senators, governors and mayors representing the President’s political coalition, are under investigation for alleged relationships with paramilitary chiefs and collusion in elections fraud. Seventeen are already in jail including the former head of secret services under Uribe. As well, marked failures in Uribe’s paramilitary demobilization program have been demonstrated as paramilitaries are observed to be reorganizing, also sustaining their political influence following recent local elections.

Considering what might be motivating the Canadian Government’s lack of concern for the deep rooted corruption, human rights abuses and impunity in Colombia, Morris proposed, “I think what Canada is trying to do is to put pressure on the democrats in the US to support the FTA with Colombia, which fortunately won’t be signed during the Bush administration and we are very happy for this.”

In fact, the Harper Index reported in late November that President Bush has indeed been taking advantage of Harper’s policy toward Colombia. Speaking with the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce in October, the Harper Index quotes Bush as having stated, “As Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada said, if the United States turns its back on its friends in Colombia, this will set back our cause far more than any Latin American dictator could hope to achieve. By its bold actions, Colombia has proved itself worthy of America's support – and I urge Congress to pass this vital agreement as soon as possible.”

As to why Harper can get away with such offensive statements despite Canada’s image of itself as a human rights champion, Manuel Rozental says a key reason is that the Canadian public hasn’t really responded. Rozental recently completed a CLC-sponsored, cross-country speaking tour about the trade negotiations, urging Canadians to demand that the deal be stopped until a full debate take place in the Canadian Parliament. In July he commented that “Harper wouldn’t even dare to behave the way that he’s behaving and go to [visit] this regime if there was any political reaction from the majority of Canadian people, but there isn’t.”

Harper’s trip to Bogotá sparked minimal critique within the Canadian press and failed to trigger any response in the streets. However, this is not an indication that Canadians do not mobilize. When the crisis in Burma erupted, the Canadian public was infuriated. Canadian media coverage of the situation was extensive and numerous protests took place.

However, resistance to Canada’s overdrive free trade talks with Colombia and Peru is evident, as several labour and human rights organizations released statements opposed to a Canada-Colombia FTA in late November. The CLC, in addition to their statement, held a march of several hundred in Toronto on November 29th and called for public support of delegates participating in labour conventions across the country at which they will “consider this issue and demand an end to trade negotiations.” The CLC rejects that such negotiations could be remedied by “ineffective labour and environmental side agreements with no teeth on rights or standards will do nothing to improve the situation.”

In defiance of Canadian labour demands, and despite the general secrecy that usually surrounds bilateral free trade negotiations, it appears that the current Canadian negotiating team has been taking special efforts this time to ensure that labour organizations have no say in the process. Rick Arnold, Coordinator of Common Frontiers Canada, reported this month that “A Colombian trade negotiator recently let slip that the Canadian government told Colombian negotiators to keep the draft labour text secret, well away from Canadian unions and non-governmental organizations.”

According to the Harper Index, in order “to inoculate itself against criticism, earlier this month Federal Labour Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn announced $1 million being given to Colombia under the International Program for Professional Labour Administration (IPPLA).” The Index quoted the Minister as saying that “this funding will help the Colombian Government to strengthen and enforce labour laws on behalf of workers here, and will support good governance by building capacity for the effective administration of labour legislation.”

However, a joint statement released in July by the CLC and a national Colombian labour organization, the Central Unitaria de Trabajadores de Colombia (CUT), says that addressing the potential threats of a free trade agreement to workers needs to start before any negotiations take place. They call for a thorough and prior assessment of risks to workers noting in particular the great asymmetry between the Colombian and Canadian economies. They outline additional concrete measures that would help address the systematic dismantlement of Colombian labour. During 2006, just over 60,000 workers, of an economically active population of twenty million, were able to benefit from collective bargaining.

RECALCA, the Colombian Action Network Against Free Trade and the Free Trade Area of the Americas, also points out that Colombia’s negative trade balance with Canada amounted to $225 million dollars in 2006. According to RECALCA, this agreement is likely to reinforce Colombia’s orientation as a producer of tropical and mineral products in exchange for manufactured goods and machinery. They note that the themes being addressed by these trade negotiations are the same as those covered by US-Colombia talks and conclude that an FTA with Canada would “lock Colombia into free trade, paralyzing the state’s capacity to promote development, leading to abandonment basic food staple production in the country, and leaving aside industrialization while integrating Colombia into the global economy through over-exploitation of cheap labour.” Rural livelihoods are already seriously compromised in Colombia with internal displacement at around 3.8 million.

However, much remains to be seen from the Canadian public. If the CLC campaign catches on, their demands for real change in the situation in Colombia also implicate serious changes to the current Canadian model; “An international business deal with Colombia or any other country,” according to the CLC, should “foster “fair-trade”, and not only benefit international investors while worsening widespread conditions of poverty and social exclusion.”

The Harper government, in its rush to complete this free trade deal, is unlikely to do this on its own. A serious and vigorous public debate in Canada is urgently required.

A previous version of this article was published at ALAI.

No Colombia FTA Rally

Who is the Terrorist? A Critical Conversation on Hezbollah.

Stefan Christoff — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:09:43 +0000

48709085_f7751cc376.jpg

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 17th, 6:30pm

Leacock Building, Room 232
McGill University, 688 Sherbrooke St.
Montreal, Canada

A public event hosted by Tadamon! Montreal & the Quebec Public Interest Research Group (QPIRG) at McGill University within the context of the campaign to challenging Hezbollah’s listing as a ‘Terrorist’ Group in Canada…

Presentations from:

Bilal Elamine: Currently living in Beirut, originally from Southern Lebanon, the former editor of Left Turn Magazine, Elamine will outline the current and historical role of Hezbollah in Lebanon from a progressive perspective. Critical recent events in Middle East history will be addressed within the presentation, as Elamine will speak about the 2006 Israeli attack on Lebanon, the 2007 general strike and opposition protests within the context of Hezbollah’s role in Lebanese society.

Brian Aboud: Presenting on Tadamon!’s campaign to challenge the listing of Hezbollah as a ‘terrorist’ organization in Canada. Today, Canada is one of only three countries world-wide to designate Hezbollah as a ‘terrorist’ organization. The other two are Israel and the United States.

Film Screening:

A Summer Not to Forget: A film by Lebanese film maker, Carol Mansour. Using powerful and disturbing images, the film tells a story of yet another war on Lebanon: 1,200 killed, 4,000 injured, one million displaced, 78 bridges destroyed, 15,000 homes damaged, 15,000 tonnes of oil spilled on 80km of the Mediterranean coastline, 57 collective massacres and much more. Director Mansour takes you into the harsh realities of a nation devastated by war and a people caught under siege.

Navajo Caravan Detained for 48 Hours by Ontario RCMP

dru — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 18:21:54 +0000

According to this story, it appears that a group of Navajo were detained without a warrant or arrest by the RCMP using antiterrorism legislation.

were on their way to Deseronto in nine vehicles with 10 horses in tow to show support and respect for a group of Tyendinaga Mohawks, said Spata Desareau, 64, a member of the tribe. They travelled across western Canada without incident, but once in Ontario, were stopped by law enforcement three times - Wawa, Sault St. Marie and finally Kaladar, where they were taken into police custody Sunday, he said.

The Roots of Rage

Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:04:36 +0000

Terror and Repression in Canada

Canada has charged five Muslim Arabs under "Security Certificates," a provision of national legislation that allows for indefinite detention of non-citizens without any presentation of evidence or a public trail. photo: Justice Coalition for Adil Charkaoui

In June 2006, Canada was thrust into the spotlight of the "War on Terror" when over 400 state security officials and military officers staged a pre-dawn raid on the outskirts of Toronto. Seventeen Canadian Muslim men were arrested in this high-profile operation and are currently being held in a maximum-security prison in Ontario.

Major accusations toward the suspects have been publicly pronounced by Canadian officials, who have charged the accused under Canada's "Anti-Terrorism Act," a highly controversial piece of legislation drafted and institutionalized after the events of 9/11.

International media outlets like the BBC have reported Canadian authorities claim that those arrested in the operation were "inspired by al-Qaeda" and planned to target Canada's Parliament Buildings and the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service [CSIS], among other government institutions.

According to Canadian officials, the recent Toronto events were the "largest anti-terror operation in recent history."

The follow-up response of the Canadian state has been unprecedented. Armed officers patrolled the streets and perched on the rooftop of an Ontario courthouse during a recent court hearing for the accused. Imprisoned in windowless isolation cells lit 24 hours a day, the Canadian Muslims arrested have been denied the right to meet their lawyers in private.

When vandals smashed more than 30 windows of a major Toronto mosque in the days after the Toronto raids, Canadian officials voiced little condemnation against the apparent hate crime.

Racist backlash in response to the Toronto raids commenced in the hours preceding the arrests, an illustration of the ugly realities of bigotry faced by Arabs and Muslims today in Canada.

As the Toronto terrorism plot continues to unfold in Canada's largest city, critical questions regarding the roots of growing discontent toward Canada's domestic and foreign policy relating to the "War on Terrorism" are not being posed.

Canadian Terror & Afghanistan

Addressing the direct correlation between the recent Toronto events and Canada's major role in supporting the U.S.-led "War on Terror" is a necessity.

Canada currently maintains over 2,300 military troops in Afghanistan under the umbrella of N.A.T.O [the North Atlantic Treaty Organization], who are today entangled in a war against an armed indigenous opposition throughout the country.

During recent N.A.T.O.-led military operations, hundreds of Afghanis have lost their lives. The Associated Press reported that recent military violence in Afghanistan claimed the lives of more than 500 people in June, the majority having been Afghani fighters and civilians who perished in military battles with N.A.T.O. armed forces led by U.S. and Canadian military forces.

Canada's current Conservative government led by Steven Harper has fuelled a major military and political boost to the highly contentious N.A.T.O military operations. In February 2006, Canada established a major military base in Kandahar, cementing a long-term military role in the country.
Canada's thousands of military troops in the country have been continuously cited by Muslim voices in Canada and internationally as a central reason for growing hostility toward the Canadian government at home and abroad. Recent surveys in Canada indicate that upwards of 60-70 per cent of people across the country do not support Canada's current military role in Afghanistan.
Ehab Lotayef, a respected community activist, recently wrote in the Montreal Gazette that, "Internationally, Canada's policies have been shifting and continue to shift away from peace, justice, UN resolutions and international law, particularly in causes dear and close to Muslims."

Lotayef continued: "Whether we speak of Palestine, Iraq or Afghanistan this is clear, and despite the Muslim community's lobbying efforts, political meetings and protests, the response is comforting words, at the best."

War creates political enemies and Canada's major combat role in Afghanistan must be understood as a central reason for the growing international hostility toward the maple leaf.

Major Media & Muslims in Canada - Guilty Until Proven Innocent

Response to the June 2006 Toronto terror raids by all mainstream political parties and major media has revolved around a repetition of common themes: the thundering approval for the Canadian state security forces and the criminalization of the accused.

To date, none of the vast allegations against the 17 suspects have been proven in a Canadian court of law. Despite this fact, Canada's Muslim community -- today numbering in the hundreds–of thousands -- has once again been placed at the centre of a national political debate and put on trial by the major media. While the word "alleged" continues to appear, a presumption of guilt has underscored most media coverage both of the accused and also of Arab and Muslim communities across the country. Major publications in Canada have been saturated with articles expounding on the domestic threat of terror in Canada whereas media coverage attempting to contextualize the recent Toronto events is obscenely absent.

The Economist magazine published a feature article with the headline, "The plan to behead the prime minister", the National Post featured a front page article entitled, "PM says terror suspects represent only hatred," while the Toronto Star ran an editorial titled, "Time to challenge Muslim extremists."

Maclean's published a feature article entitled "Homegrown terror: It's not over." The article details how Canadian security forces were "vigilant" and how recent events in Toronto should be viewed as "a wake-up call for trusting citizens, a reminder of just how vulnerable we are to attack."

The Maclean's article attempts to sanctify the actions of Canadian authorities, concluding with an indictment of the Muslim and Arab community across the country. "In the uproar following the Toronto raids," the article concludes, "it's been difficult at times to tell a moderate from a radical, a jihadi from a hormonally challenged high-schooler."

In Ontario, The London Free Press published an opinion column linking the supposed threat of domestic terrorism to the migration of immigrants and refugees to Canada. "Tens of thousands of immigrants and refugee applicants from terrorist-exporting countries" enter Canada each year, the Free Press article said, "without proper screening." The author went on to underline the fact that "20,000 immigrants have entered Canada from the terrorist-beset Afghanistan-Pakistan region alone since 2001."

It is a fact that thousands of refugees have claimed asylum in Canada from Afghanistan in recent years. However, the obvious connection to the U.S.-led and Canadian-supported military invasion was not drawn.

War creates refugees and in the case of the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, Canada's military has been directly involved in the reality of forced migration at the hands of military warfare.

Major media within the country has failed to pose hard questions to Canadian authorities regarding the country's growing role in the "War on Terror," which is increasingly unpopular among the majority of people living in Canada.

It is the current Conservative government of Canada who should be forced to answer for the creation of the social and political climate in which the very discussion and potential reality of "domestic terrorism" has become a reality.

Terrorism, Law & Democracy

Arabs, Muslims and racialized communities in Canada have experienced a legislated and legalized form of state repression since 9/11 and before. Racism in Canada is an institutionalized reality.

Canada has charged five Muslim Arabs under "security certificates," a provision of national legislation that allows for indefinite detention of non-citizens without any presentation of evidence or a public trial.

Security certificates in Canada have become a central issue of debate relating to the "War on Terror" and its domestic face.

In recent years, broad sections of Canadian society have publicly demanded the dismantling of this legislation, which many say has become a legalized tool of repression directed toward the countries Arab and Muslim community. Security certificates have been widely condemned and have been questioned by legal associations in Canada, notably the Canadian Bar Association [CBA].

Recently the constitutionality of security certificates was brought to the Supreme Court of Canada and the Canadian Bar Association attained intervening status during the legal proceeding, adding legal weight to growing grassroots demands to halt the Canadian government's use of security certificates.

The CBA called the legitimacy of the legislation into question, focusing on the fact that security certificates don't allow "effective representation," because hearings take place "in secret, without participation of the detainees or their lawyer."

Also, the CBA outlined that the use of security certificates "interferes with a person's right to liberty, because the detained person cannot effectively challenge the lawfulness of the detention if he or she is prohibited from participating in the process."

In recent years the security certificate has been used solely against Arabs and Muslims in Canada, producing a strong sense of resentment, distrust and opposition toward the Canadian government among sectors of the Arab and Muslim community throughout the country.

The use of law to institutionalize repression in Canada has become a growing reality since 9/11. The legislation used to charge the suspects in the recent "anti-terror" raids in Toronto was the "Anti-Terrorism Act," introduced after September 11.

Since its creation, this post-9/11 "anti-terror" legislation has been criticized by social activists and civil liberties organizations within Canada as an assault on basic civil liberties and a legal tool to counter domestic political dissent.

Under this legislation, the Canadian government defines terrorism as: "actions that are taken for political, religious or ideological purposes that threaten public or national security," going further in defining terrorism as an act that "disrupts an essential service, facility of system." In this context, the concept of "terrorism" can be widely applied, encompassing acts of political dissent or public protest.

According to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), "the legislation gives police sweeping new powers, including the power to arrest people and hold them without charge for up to 72 hours if they're suspected of planning a terrorist act. It also made it easier for police to use electronic surveillance in their investigation of suspects."

This legalized lexicon of fear, persecution and repression is also essential to understanding the reality of growing discontent and rage within Arab and Muslim communities in Canada.

Social Solidarity Against Repression

Canada today is infused with a climate of fear, fuelled by the corporate media and top officials. Given the dominant political discourse revolving around the "War on Terror," marginalized political voices stressing social solidarity in opposition to the current Canadian government's foreign and domestic policy must be stressed.

Amina Sherazee, an immigration lawyer based in Toronto, addressed the arrests in an interview on CKUT Radio in Montreal, outlining that the arrests "serve the political interests of the Canadian government as they renew the threat of terrorism fuelling fear that Canada is some how at risk and therefore justify repressive laws."

A mutually reinforcing relationship of domestic social repression and international military conquest between the current Canadian government and current U.S. Administration must be opposed. In the face of growing domestic repression against Arabs and Muslims in Canada, voices articulating social solidarity must be highlighted by independent media.

The present Conservative government has used the recent Toronto events as justification for the country's growing role in the "War on Terror."

"This country is as much a [terrorist target] as the United States," Harper said in a radio interview in June. "That's why not only is the government acting nationally against terror threats, but we're working globally in Afghanistan and all over the world to deal with this problem."

Threats of terrorism in Toronto have been used to justify a domestic assault on the rights of Arabs and Muslims and an increased military role in an international war, which to date has undermined the security and self-determination of people in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.

In response, those who stand for a just society and against oppression at home and abroad must be vigilant and unequivocal.

As the media circus around the alleged terrorism plot in Canada subsides, Stefan Christoff asks why critical questions are not being posed.

Terrorist proceedings "a show trial for political ends"

Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:50:45 +0000

Defence lawyers representing the 17 men being held as terrorist suspects in Southern Ontario since June 2 are protesting the recent publication ban levied by justice of the peace Keith Currie.

Rocco Galati, the defence lawyer representing 21-year-old Ahmad Mustafa Ghany, told reporters, "I want the public to see the bail hearing, I want the public to assess for itself and have confidence in the administration of justice and the only way to do that is with a live feed."

Galati accused "confidential police sources" of unfairly leaking selected information to the media "to ensure the denial of a fair bail hearing and the denial of a fair trial."

Aljazeera quoted Galati, condemning what he described as "a show trial for political ends," noting the intention was "to influence the vote in the House of Commons on extending the anti-terrorism provision and to influence the Supreme Court ... in its constitutional review of anti-terrorism provisions."

According to the Toronto Star, defence lawyers said their clients' cell lights are being left on 24 hours a day, they're being forced to keep their eyes on the floor and are being woken every 30 minutes. The lawyers said that amounted to "cruel and unusual punishment," and a breach of their clients' Charter rights.

A Novel Cause

Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:43:32 +0000

"North of 9/11" is a book about war, racism, and hysteria - and the people who fight against them

The events themselves may be fictional, but the world of "North of 9/11" will be familiar to Montreal activists.. photo: The cover of "North of 9/11"

Something has been missing from the portrayal of the political landscape in North America. While there are plenty of statistics on the impacts of corporate globalization, war and racism, there are few stories about the people who risk injury, imprisonment and even their lives to fight against them in North America. Activist, academic, and now author David Bernans, attempts to address this omission with his new novel North of 9/11.

Set in Montréal, Québec, North of 9-11 describes the idealism and determination of many of the young would-be revolutionaries in the city. The novel revolves around the Murphy family: Sarah - the 19 year-old raging granddaughter –and her parents: a reactionary father who works in public relations for military contractors, and a liberal mother, sympathetic to her daughter's beliefs.

Bernans' main storyline involves a group of activists plotting direct action in response to the prevailing climate of panic and warmongering post September 11. The target of the action is chosen based on information that young Sarah Murphy gleans from her right-wing American father. The tense exchanges between activists help the reader understand the risks of and reasons for taking direct action.

The events themselves may be fictional, but the world in which they take place will be familiar to Montreal activists. Details of the Concordia University campus and student union will jump out at activists who spend their days there--the effect is less compelling however for readers who haven't taken part in Montréal political battles.

These descriptions do not detract from a story that moves smoothly from family dinners where daughter and father debate US imperialism, to debates between student activists and engineering students on the moral implications of a University hosting corporations that profit from war, to arguments between privileged white activists and their Arabic and Muslim counterparts about tactics post 9/11.

To the uninitiated, the true value of the story is the insight into the hearts and minds of young activists who have cut their teeth during the era of "anti-globalization." Along the way, the reader also learns about the personal motivations and internal conflicts of some of the other elements in the leftist landscape: of fence-sitters like her mother, of student radicals of 35 years earlier, and of members of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights. The story is punctuated with dialogue-driven history lessons about the US backed coup that overthrew democracy in Chile and the 1982 massacre of thousands of Palestinian men, women and children in Lebanon. Through Bernans' characters, we start to see the faces – and not just the fists - of those fighting for justice.

By bringing characters, people and movements to life, David Bernans has given readers an opportunity to understand why so many choose a life of struggle over a life of ease. In doing so, Bernans offers a valuable perspective. He also provides something far more important: hope - and perhaps a reason for the reader herself to join the struggle.

Macdonald Stainsby reviews David Bernans' first book: a novel about war, racism, and hysteria - and the people who fight against them.

Refugees and Citizens

Tue, 06 Sep 2005 23:50:29 +0000

Displaced Louisianans settle in Houston's Astrodome. photo: Houston Indymedia [video]

Jesse Jackson and Bruce Gordon are just two of many high-profile Black leaders who have expressed indignation at the description of those displaced by Hurricane Katrina as 'refugees'. 'It is just wrong', Jackson said, 'they are citizens displaced by a disaster'.

After 9/11, 2001, some victims of war and of bombing campaigns wondered, in writing, whether the experience of being bombed would increase America's empathy towards the rest of the world.

There was, of course, no single response of America to 9/11. It did increase the empathy of some Americans and caused many to question the relationship of the US to the rest of the world. But the net effect was to accelerate the march towards militarism and to strengthen, rather than weaken, the idea that America was different from the rest of the world. The 'War on Terror' was launched, and it featured bombing Afghanistan, a country full of internally displaced people long before 2001 - those people were referred to as 'refugees' in the media. It featured domestic legislation that tightened borders and deported international migrants - some of whom were referred to as 'immigrants', others as 'refugees'. It featured support for Israel in its own military campaigns against the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza, many of whom were refugees, though they weren't referred to that way. And ultimately, it featured the invasion and occupation of Iraq, which turned much of the population of Fallujah, among other places, into internally displaced people who, when they are referred to at all, are referred to as 'refugees'.

Nationalism in America did not come from 9/11. It was forged over hundreds of years of conquest of indigenous territories, a process of growth into the greatest power on the continent and then in the world. Racism was built into the ideology from the start, but it was complex as well. Within America, there was a hierarchy that left Black people at the bottom - first slaves, then second- or third-class citizens. But there were also those who were outside America: non-citizens, or to use the legal term, aliens. These people too were victimized by racism, of a xenophobic sort. So there have been two different kinds of racism, and they play out differently. Tragedies bring out the best and the worst in communities. After 9/11 there were many tales of heroism and self-sacrifice in saving lives, and there are countless such tales about Katrina as well. But after 9/11 elites sponsored a cruel nationalism, an impulse first to blame foreigners, and then to strike out at them, expel them, and bomb them. With Katrina, there was no foreigner to blame, only poor and Black people who needed evacuation, water, food, and resources to repair their lives. The government's response to Katrina was a different kind of racism: not hatred of foreigners, but contempt and utter disregard for Black people's lives, and for the extraordinary city they had made.

If 9/11 showed Americans the horrors of being bombed, after Katrina many Americans have the experience of being displaced. The horrific scenes of refugee camps that are the lot of millions of people in different parts of the world are on display in America. Americans also have the experience of a government that is unable or unwilling to help them or protect them, a government that is arbitrary and violent and unresponsive. For Black Americans this isn't new, but it is also much more stark than it has been in a very long time. It seems that the American government is treating Black Americans on the Gulf Coast with the contempt that it normally reserves for the citizens of other countries. After decades of struggle and sacrifice for the right to be full American citizens, Black people are being treated like the rest of the world is treated - as problems to be solved as cheaply as possible, not fellow citizens and human beings with dignity.

Are Jackson and Brown right, then, in bristling when they hear Black Americans referred to as 'refugees'?

The reason the term 'refugee' has a stigma attached is not because of what the refugee is - it isn't like the label 'criminal', for example - but because of how the refugee is treated. A refugee is someone who is kicked around, disregarded, made invisible, someone with no protection and nowhere to go for help. Someone who, in other words, is being treated as those who have been displaced by Katrina have been treated. Calling them 'refugees' is accurate: treating them that way - or treating any human being that way - is unconscionable.

The idea that America is unable to bring its awesome wealth and power to bear to save its own citizens or one of its major cities is one that is shocking to the rest of the world. But beneath that shock there is also a glimmer of hope - hope that, before it is too late for all of us, the idea that Americans rate more than non-Americans will disappear.

Hope that the idea might arise that 'citizens' and 'refugees' deserve the same treatment.

Justin Podur is based in Toronto. He can be reached at justin (at) killingtrain.com

Justin Podur asks what it means to be a refugee, and why the title is considered disparaging in the USA

What's in a Name?

Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:51:18 +0000

An interview with "Being Osama" director Mahmoud Kaabour

This interview originally appeared on Qantara.de.

Despite the positive message of the film and its call for tolerance, its director was made to answer unfriendly questions about his personal political stances.

"Being Osama" is a close observation of the Arab-Canadian community in the aftermath of 9/11, told by six of its members who share the name 'Osama'. In this interview, director Mahmoud Kaabour talks about how 9/11 affected tolerance in Canada.

How did you come up with the unusual concept for "Being Osama"?

Mahmoud Kaabour: Months after 9/11 I was working at video store in Montreal, where my Italian boss not so politely asked me to change my name to Moe. His argument was that an Arabic name was not the best way to charm clientele during that period. My name also happens to be my grandfather's, a renowned violinist who played with the likes of Um Kalthoum, so I was naturally proud of it. I walked out on the job the same day and dozed off in front of the TV. CNN was on, and I think they mentioned the name of Osama Bin Laden like 20 times in ten minutes. I got up from my nap wondering how much more awful it must be to be called "Osama".

A week or so later I advertised in various Montreal classifieds looking for people called Osama. I thought it would be enlightening, entertaining and probably horrific to find out what kind of experiences these people must have had after 9/11. It took a year of research to come across 17 Osamas whom I trimmed down to the six most unique and diverse. I picked my Osamas based on their differences in conviction, looks, and faith. Each challenged an Arab stereotype in a way or another, and the juxtaposition of their realities next to each other seemed to be a good way to challenge the idea of a monolithic Arab experience.

Each Osama also served as a vehicle to discuss an important theme: the Iraqi helped us understand the tribulations of the Iraqi diaspora during the invasion, the Lebanese Osama helped us understand the aftermath of the Lebanese war, the activist Osama shed light on the unfairness of legal system and the clampdown on civil liberties in Canada, and "big " Osama had a charming quest of finding his own identity which just had to be shared.

Canada is often perceived as the friendly, tolerant, cosmopolitan little brother of the US -- however your film is about prejudice and racism and you yourself have experienced hostilities because of your Arab Muslim background. In how far would you say is this image of a tolerant society still valid and in how far does mainstream Canada identify itself with the US after 9/11?

Kaabour: Canada continues to be a more tolerant society, I find. However, 9/11 still had some serious repercussions: Canadians are not so worried from international terrorism, but they've definitely become scared of any negligence that might enable terrorism against the US – keeping in mind of course that the border is open between the two countries. For that, Montreal and other cities witnessed a clampdown on civil liberties of Arabs and Muslims, simply because they are the center of US premonitions. Canada is no longer the 'tolerant' brother but the obedient one that also believed the myth of the 'Arab/Muslim threat'.

In practice, this heightened sensitivity towards Arabs and Muslims translated into a suspicion towards visible Arab clichés: turbans, beards, veils, spoken Arabic and, well...Arabic names! Canada even activated a long forgotten practice called ' security certificates' where an individual can be arrested and detained without any evidence being shared with the detainee or his lawyers! To our surprise, the five people detained on security certificates currently are Muslim Arabs.

And even when "Being Osama" was broadcast, and despite its positive message and its positive portrayal of Canada in the eyes of most of its subjects – it still generated suspicions. I was summoned for a casual "interview" with a few officials who just wanted to make sure that I was "never approached by fanatic Muslims to make films about them in the future…"

Your film is about prejudice and injustice and your protagonists are all, in a sense, "victims". "Being Osama", however, is not an angry film. Were you at one point of the project thinking about making it more emotional and sharp-edged?

Mahmoud Kaabour receiving the "Best Documentary" award at the Canadian National Youth Film Festival.

Kaabour: I didn't want "Being Osama" to be a polemic film. Nor a statistical listing of the atrocities against Arabs. The film is meant to engage and create sympathy. That is why the theme of "backlash" is dealt with early on in the film before the project becomes an observation of the lives of six interesting Arabs whose humanity, quirks, and petty problems will help remind that an Arab is much more than a simple political caricature.

Did the Arab migrant community in Canada and non-Arab Canadians view your film differently? What was the different kind of feedback like? Was there a "public interest" for such an unusual theme?

Kaabour: "Being Osama" was equally acclaimed by both Arab and non-Arab Canadians. Arabs felt vindicated to finally have a voice on network television, a film about them and, in a way, by them about how they are often wrongly perceived after 9/11. Non-Arabs seemed so appreciative of being allowed into the intimate world of the Arab community.

I toured with the film in high schools and colleges and it was touching to listen to students compare their perceptions of Arabs prior and post watching the film.

Unfortunately the film did not hit a similar chord with Canadian authorities. Despite the positive message of the film and its call for tolerance, some officials were concerned that the film might be giving voice to Muslims. I was made to answer unfriendly questions about my personal political stances vis-à-vis terrorism and the West. Also one of the Osamas was hassled and interviewed quite a few times about his convictions and his religiosity. That was really frustrating to me and a further proof that Islamophobia was prevalent in the country.

A few weeks before the unofficial interrogations took place, Immigration officials refused to facilitate a trip I was invited to make to Harvard University to speak about my film in connection to civil liberties post 9/11. Given I was not a Canadian citizen, immigration officials threatened that I will face difficulties returning to the country if I go to Harvard, despite how welcoming the Americans were of me and the stealth in which they issued my entry visa.

The story made headlines across Canada but alas that didn't change the hearts of immigration officials. I ended up scraping the trip and joined my audience at Harvard by phone.

The tight grip that officials in Canada were placing on this film got me feeling so unwelcome. I had been waiting for my Canadian residency for four years at that point, and had been living in Canada for seven years as a stranger. That was my cue to leave. I abandoned my Canadian dream and joined my parents in Dubai after a seven year absence. I live in Dubai for three weeks now and am intensifying my efforts to bring "Being Osama" to people all around the world.

Born in Lebanon in 1979, Mahmoud Kaabour directed his first film at the age of seventeen. In Canada, he studied film production at Concordia University, Montreal. "Being Osama" is his first film.

In this interview, director Mahmoud Kaabour talks about how 9/11 affected tolerance, the making of "Being Osama", and why he left Canada.

"Heroine" of Sandinista Revolution Branded Terrorist by US State Department

Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:42:32 +0000

Dora Maria Tellez, considered by many to be a heroine for her role in the Sandinista overthrow of the Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua in 1979, has been refused entry to the US on the grounds that her role in the revolution constituted terrorism.

Tellez, who had intended to immigrate to the US to take a teaching post at Harvard University, told the Guardian that she is confused by the decision as she has visited the US on several occasions without any trouble.

This announcement comes off the heels of US President Bush's appointment of John Negroponte as his administration's director of intelligence.

According to one organization, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, Negroponte, who was US ambassador to Honduras from 1981-85, "was a key player in organizing training for the Contras and procuring weapons for the armies that the United States was building in order to topple the socialist Nicaraguan government."

Many in the academic community are outraged by the decision. In an interview with the Guardian, Toronto-based Nicaraguan sociologist Andres Perez Baltodano questioned the US State Department's definition of terrorism, arguing that "Dora Maria is as much a terrorist as George Washington."

Guardian: US bars Nicaragua 'heroine' as terrorist

Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR): Media Omissions on Negroponte's Record

Harvard Crimson: Would-Be Prof Denied Entry Visa