SFSC had table at the Just Film Festival at Langara College last weekend (both Saturday the 21st and Sunday the 22nd) and sponsored two films: “The Koch Brothers” on Saturday at noon, and “Vessel” (about abortion rights) Sunday at 1:30.
Films on Palestine/Israel at the festival included: The People and The Olive, Al Helm: MLK in Palestine and The Lab
http://justfilm.ca/films-topic-2014/palestine-israel/
Lots of people dropped by the table to see our leaflets and books.
Brian Campbell, Canadian Library Association (CLA) Advancement of Intellectual Freedom Award Acceptance Speech, 2015
I would like to begin by thanking the CLA Intellectual Freedom Advisory Committee, and Alvin Schrader, Chair and former recipient, for choosing me for the prestigious CLA Advancement of Intellectual Freedom in Canada Award. It is an honour to follow in the footsteps of June Callwood, Les Fowlie, the Toronto Public Library Board, and other exemplars of intellectual freedom in Canada.
This award does not represent the work of one person but the work of many. Thank you to all those involved in the work of the BCLA Intellectual Freedom Committee, and the BCLA and CLA Information Policy Committees. I would especially like to thank everyone who wrote such generous letters of recommendation about my work.
The early years of the BCLA Intellectual Freedom Committee focussed, like many, on defending individual authors and books from censorship. We participated in Freedom to Read Week and developed educational materials, but our work was primarily defensive. However, a climate was developing, following the example of the Reagan Administration, to reduce government collection of data and access to it. The suppression of information access through self-censorship and government regulation was growing.
The BCLA Intellectual Freedom Committee began to take on projects broader than cases of individual defence. In conjunction with and under the leadership of Les Fowlie we participated in the 1988 fight against Bill C-54 (proposed amendments to the Criminal Code and the Customs Tariff regarding pornogaphy). As BC libraries distributed postcards, Toronto Public Library, in an heroic act of defiance, shut down most of its branches for a half day study session. Continue reading
Comments Off on SFSC Article: Bill C-51 (Anti-Terrorism Act 2015) is the culmination of repressive government legislation
Posted in SFSC
Tagged C51, SFSC article
Forum Research: One half of those aware of it disapprove of Bill C51
TORONTO March 14th, 2015 – In a random sampling of public opinion taken by the Forum Poll™ among 1370 Canadian voters, just more than half now agree Canada needs stiffer anti-terrorism legislation (56%) compared to 7-in-10 who took this position in November, when the Iraqi mission was in its infancy (70%). Agreement stiffer legislation is needed is common to the oldest (62%), the wealthy ($80K to $100K – 62%), in Quebec (72%), among Conservative voters (84%), Bloquistes (76%), the least educated (74%), mothers of children under 18 (65%), Catholics (72%) and Evangelicals (82%).
More than two thirds aware of Bill C51
More than two thirds of Canadian voters are aware of the anti-terrorism Bill C51 (69%), and this is especially common to boomers (55 to 64 – 78%), males (77%), the very wealthiest ($100K to $250K – 79%), in Alberta (80%), among New Democrats (74%), the best educated (post grad – 84%), Protestants (76%) and the non-religious (74%).
One half disapprove of Bill C51
One half of Canadian voters disapprove of Bill C51 (50%) when they are asked without being prompted on any of the details of the bill, and just more than a third approve (38%). One tenth have no view (12%). Disapproval of the bill is characteristic of the youngest (64%), in Atlantic Canada (60%), the prairies (58%) and BC (61%), among Liberals (66%) and New Democrats (77%), the best educated (65%) and the non-religious (70%).
Most disapprove of tracking environmentalists, etc, lack of parliamentary oversight
When asked their approval of a number of specific provisions of bill C51, the majority disapprove of the Bill allowing security services to infiltrate and track environmentalists, First Nations and pipeline protesters (61%), and the lack of parliamentary oversight included in the bill (52%). In each of these cases, about one quarter approve (28% and 27%, respectively), and this is especially common in Alberta (32% and 34%, respectively) and among federal Conservatives (56% and 46%, respectively). Continue reading
SFSC Flyer
A spectre is haunting Canada, the spectre of so-called “anti-terrorism legislation”, raising fear in order to enable control.
The Harper Conservative government, supported by the Liberals, is about to pass Bill C-51, the 2015 Anti-Terrorism Act, that substantially expands the already-considerable powers of CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service), the RCMP, border services and other agencies.
Among other things, it lowers the bar for “preventive detention” if an agency thinks someone “may” (changed from “will”) commit a crime. It lowers standards for putting someone on a no-fly list, and broadens the definition of “terrorism”.
Under Bill C-51, you would break the law “by speaking, writing, recording, gesturing or other visible representation, knowingly advocate or promote the commission of terrorism offenses in general”.
Terrorism includes “undermining the security of Canada”, “interference with critical infrastructure” or “the economic or financial stability of Canada”. Continue reading
Comments Off on SFSC Article: BILL C-51: SHUT IT DOWN BEFORE IT SHUTS US UP!
Posted in SFSC
Tagged C51, SFSC article
By Alyssa Stryker and Carmen Cheung | The Tyee
At over 60 pages, Bill C-51 — the Anti-Terrorism Act — is a heavy read. The bill proposes a myriad of radical changes to Canadian law and to Canada’s national security apparatus, many of which seriously jeopardize the rights and freedoms of Canadians while promising little improvement to public safety.
Canada’s privacy commissioner, ex-CSIS officials, former prime ministers and international whistleblower Edward Snowden have all raised alarm about the bill’s impacts on Canadians’ freedom and privacy. Lawyers at the B.C. Civil Liberties Association have gone over the bill paragraph by paragraph, and we’ve outlined the parts of this document that concern us most.
1. Bill C-51 drastically expands the definition of ‘security.’
When you think of being secure, you likely think of being safe from physical danger. But Bill C-51 defines security as not only safeguarding public safety, but also preventing interference with various aspects of public life or “the economic or financial stability of Canada.” With this definition, a separatist demonstration in Quebec that fails to get a proper permit, a peaceful logging blockade by First Nations, or environmentalists obstructing a pipeline route could all be seen as threats to national security.
2. It gives the government too much discretion to pick and choose which individuals and groups to target for further scrutiny.
Bill C-51 gives the government the ability to designate an extraordinarily broad range of activities as potential security threats. The government claims it will use good judgment when deciding which individuals and groups constitute true threats. Whether or not a group is deemed a national security threat may hinge on whether their cause is politically popular or in line with the views of the government. Continue reading
Comments Off on Tyee: Six Things Protesters Need to Know about Bill C-51
Posted in Media, Other Campaigns
Tagged C51
By Paul Weiberg, rabble.ca
One of the less discussed questions of the Harper government’s anti-terror bill, Bill C-51, is whether Palestinian rights advocates and advocates of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) will be targeted by CSIS agents armed with new powers to target and disrupt, courtesy of a judicial warrant.
Admittedly, the legislation and its intended objects are vague, except that what constitutes “terrorism,” seems to be broadening beyond wanton acts of violence.
So, we need to be on guard when Public Safety minister Steven Blaney, the author of Bill-C-51, also talks about “zero tolerance” for promoters of the international BDS campaign against Israel.
What does that exactly mean? We know that Harper and his Conservatives have cozied up so close to Israeli government and policy that there appears to be little daylight between them at the moment. Continue reading
By Jeremy J. Nuttall, TheTyee.ca
Canada’s privacy commissioner says the country’s proposed anti-terror legislation is excessive and provides no judicial recourse for those who are victims of improper use of parts of the legislation by authorities.
Daniel Therrien’s submission to the House of Commons public safety committee regarding Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Act, was made public Friday morning. In it, Therrien said the bill is not clear on a number of points, particularly in relation to activities that “undermine” the security of Canada.
Therrien said the bill does not strike a balance between security and safety which is something Canadians “want and expect” from such legislation.
“I have repeatedly heard that Canadians understand the need to share their information with the government, but that they have concerns about how this information is going to be used,” he writes in his conclusion. “They are particularly concerned with the issue of government surveillance.
“Bill C-51 does nothing to assuage those fears.”
Concern that Bill C-51 would give the go ahead for law enforcement to harass legitimate protesters has been at the forefront of the controversy over the legislation. Continue reading
Voices/Voix Case study
What Happened
Since the fall of 2014, the Harper government has introduced two significant bills to amend the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and other national security related legislation, identified as Bill C-51 and Bill C-44. At the time of writing, Bill C-44 has been passed by the House of Commons and is awaiting approval by the Senate while Bill C-51 (introduced in Parliament in January 2015) is entering its second reading in the House. The amendments proposed, especially through Bill C-51, represent the most sweeping changes to the powers of CSIS since its inception in 1984 and create far-reaching, vague and controversial changes to anti-terrorism legislation that potentially criminalize now lawful activity, create new vaguely defined speech crimes, and increase the scope for CSIS to engage in secret judicially-approved counter-terrorism actions in Canada as well as in foreign countries.
Background
In 1984, CSIS was created as a response to the McDonald Commission, which recommended a separation between national security policing and intelligence functions. National security intelligence would be limited to information gathering, and CSIS’ performance of its duties and functions would be subject to the review of the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC). Unlawful disruption tactics, including barn burnings, property destruction, break-ins, thefts, and abusive investigation techniques by the RCMP were strongly condemned. In the aftermath of the McDonald Commission Report, the government created CSIS as a legally more constrained, domestic, civilian intelligence collection service. Indeed, later in that decade, an important reform removed the controversial area of “subversion” from the RCMP’s mandate. Continue reading
Comments Off on Voices: Case Study of Bill C-51: Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015
Posted in Media, Other Campaigns
Tagged C51
By Michael Keefer, SFSC Member
The Harper government’s Bill C-51, or Anti-Terrorism Act, has been in the public domain for over a month. Long enough for us to know that it subverts basic principles of constitutional law, assaults rights of free speech and free assembly, and is viciously anti-democratic.
An unprecedented torrent of criticism has been directed against this bill as the government rushes it through Parliament. This has included stern or at least sceptical editorials in all the major newspapers; an open letter, signed by four former Prime Ministers and five former Supreme Court judges, denouncing the bill for exposing Canadians to major violations of their rights; and another letter, signed by a hundred Canadian law professors, explaining the dangers it poses to justice and legality.
As its critics have shown, the bill isn’t really about terrorism: it’s about smearing other activities by association―and then suppressing them in ways that would formerly have been flagrantly illegal. The bill targets, among others, people who defend the treaty rights of First Nations, people who oppose tar sands, fracking, and bitumen-carrying pipelines as threats to health and the environment, and people who urge that international law be peacefully applied to ending Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territories. (Members of this latter group include significant numbers of Canadian Jews.)
But the Anti-Terrorism Act is more mortally dangerous to Canadian democracy than even these indications would suggest. A central section of the act empowers CSIS agents to obtain judicial warrants―on mere suspicion, with no requirement for supporting evidence―that will allow them to supplement other disruptive actions against purported enemies of Harperland with acts that directly violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and other Canadian laws.
The only constraints placed on this legalized law-breaking are that CSIS agents shall not “(a) cause, intentionally or by criminal negligence, death or bodily harm to an individual; (b) wilfully attempt in any manner to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice; or (c) violate the sexual integrity of an individual.”
The second of these prohibitions―occurring in the midst of a bill that seeks systematically to obstruct citizens in the exercise of their rights, pervert justice, and defeat democracy―might tempt one to believe that there is a satirist at work within the Department of Justice. (Note, however, that CSIS agents can obstruct, pervert and defeat to their hearts’ content, so long as they do so haphazardly, rather than “wilfully.”)
But the first and third clauses amount to an authorization of torture. Continue reading
Comments Off on SFSC: Harper’s Anti-Terrorism Act isn’t about Terrorism: it’s a Torture Act
Posted in SFSC
Tagged C51, SFSC article
The futility of war
Leaders see the invasion of another country as an easy short-term policy. Canadians don’t seem to understand the political manipulation underway.
Gar Pardy, Embassy Magazine
It is to be regretted that historian Barbara Tuchman is no longer with us. If she was, there is some certainty she would add the “war on terror” and its offshoots to her catalogue of political follies she intelligently identified in her book The March of Folly.
The book has been described as “meditation on the historical recurrence of governments pursuing policies evidently contrary to their own interests.” As Western powers stumble around the battlefields of the Middle East and Central Asia, there is overwhelming evidence supporting the conclusion that today’s policies are contrary to their own interests.
Since the start of our third millennium, the back-to-back wars against so-called terrorism are really wars against ourselves. Bill C-51, the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act, is but the latest misdirected attempt by the government to fight a war it wants it to be, not the one we read about each morning. Continue reading
Comments Off on Embassy: Anti-terrorism and war-mongering. Canadians don’t seem to understand the political manipulation underway
Posted in Media, Other Campaigns
Tagged C51