Greens claim TV debate spot
Bruce Campion-Smith | Ottawa Bureau Chief | August 31, 2008
OTTAWA -- Green Party Leader Elizabeth May has raised the stakes in the expected fall election with a dramatic move that gives the party its first-ever MP.
In a key strategic move yesterday, May announced that Independent MP Blair Wilson was joining the party's ranks.
But more importantly for May, it dramatically boosts her chances of getting a spot in the televised leaders' debates in a possible fall election and a shot at nationwide exposure.
"With a Green MP sitting in the House of Commons, it will now be impossible to exclude the Green Party from the televised leaders' debates in the next election," May said. While a place in the debates isn't guaranteed, May said the broadcast media consortium that sets the ground rules for the French and English debates has no choice but to ensure she is included now that the party has an MP.
"We believe that under all the criteria that have been put forward ... we now have made thoroughly the case that I must be included," May said.
That includes fielding candidates nationwide, receiving federal funding and now having a seat in the Commons.
"We have established ourselves as a party that cannot be described as fringe," said May. "We are a party whose ideas and policies are now in the mainstream."
With its 664,068 votes, the party garnered 4.5 per cent of voter support in the 2006 election. A Toronto Star poll put the Greens at about 9 per cent and May herself came second in a November 2006 by-election in London, Ont.
If successful, May's participation would mark the first time in 11 years that a woman political leader was in the televised debates. Then NDP leader Alexa McDonough took part in 1997.
Already, May is promising to put the heat on the other leaders – especially Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government's stance on the environment – if she's allowed on stage.
May acknowledged that participating in the debates would give the party a huge boost with nationwide exposure to French and English audiences.
"If they decide not to allow me in the debates, what they're really doing is telling voters: `Don't take that party seriously,'" she said.
Yesterday, Harper spokesperson Kory Teneycke said the overtures of co-operation between May and Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion should mean only one of them gets to participate in the debates.
"Ms May and Mr. Dion have an agreement for electoral co-operation ... you can't have two candidates from essentially the same party in the debate," Teneycke said.
The media consortium is due to meet Tuesday and May's fate in the debates could be discussed then.
A beaming May called it an historic day as she pinned a Green Party button on the lapel of Wilson's suit jacket at an Ottawa news conference yesterday.
Wilson, the MP for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country, resigned from the Liberal party under a cloud almost a year ago after questions were raised about his personal finances. He has sat as an Independent since then.
He said he has been cleared of improprieties after an eight-month Elections Canada probe, which did highlight oversights made by the rookie MP during his campaign.
Wilson, first elected in 2006, said he has written Commons Speaker Peter Milliken requesting that he be officially recognized as a Green Party MP.
Wilson said the environment is the most important issue in his sprawling riding and predicted his move to the Greens would be well-received by constituents.
After Harper's meeting yesterday with NDP Leader Jack Layton and Friday with Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe, Teneycke said a fall election was "more likely." There's speculation that Harper will visit Governor General Michaëlle Jean a week from today, seeking her approval to dissolve Parliament for an Oct. 14 election.
Showing posts with label Canada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canada. Show all posts
Toronto Star : Greens claim TV debate spot
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Filed under
Blair Wilson,
Canada,
Elizabeth May,
environment,
Green Party
by Winter Patriot
on Sunday, August 31, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
Toronto Star : Pull out or else, Taliban warns Canada
Monday, August 18, 2008
Pull out or else, Taliban warns Canada
Letter from militants vows more Canadians will die unless troops go
Tobi Cohen | The Canadian Press | August 18, 2008
KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN–The Taliban are threatening to kill more Canadian aid workers unless Ottawa pulls out of Afghanistan.
The threat, issued in an "open letter" addressed to "the Canadian people," comes just days after two Canadians, Shirley Case and Jacqueline Kirk of the New York-based International Rescue Committee, were shot to death along with an American woman and their Afghan driver in a Taliban ambush Wednesday in Logar province.
In the letter dated Aug. 15, the Taliban said while they don't want to kill Canadians, they have no choice as long as Canada continues following the "American" agenda.
"Events such as Logar will happen again, because occupied Afghanistan looks at all actors that are established in the interest of America with an eye of hostility," said the letter sent on behalf of the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan."
"You have to convince your government to put an end to the occupation of Afghanistan so that the Afghans are not killed with your hands and so that you are not killed with the hands of the Afghans."
The letter says Canada "sacrificed" its national and international self-respect by not following a "neutral agenda."
The Taliban blame Canada for injuring and killing many Afghan men, women and children. They suggest the attack that killed Kirk, a 40-year-old Canadian-British citizen from Montreal, and Case, 30, of 100 Mile House, B.C., was motivated by revenge.
The attack on the aid workers came about two weeks after Canadian troops accidentally shot two children to death in the Panjwaii district of Kandahar, fearing the vehicle they were riding in was going to attack them.
"The Afghans did not go to Canada to kill the Canadians. Rather, it is the Canadians who came to Afghanistan to kill and torture the Afghan, to please the fascist regime of America," it said.
"The Canadian people have to realize if their sisters, their brothers and their children are being killed in Afghanistan, it is because of the wrong policy of the government of Canada and their falling under the influence of others when they sent occupation soldiers to Afghanistan."
Neither Canadian Forces officials in Kandahar nor the embassy in Kabul would comment on the letter. But a spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the threat "a propaganda exercise."
"We're not going to respond to threats, and certainly it will have no effect on Canadian policy," said Kory Teneycke. "It's not surprising the Taliban are targeting aid workers; they're targeting their own civilians," he said.
In an interview with The Canadian Press, Taliban spokesperson Qari Muhammad Yussef restated the Taliban position that it does not wish to harm Canadians or be harmed by Canadians.
"Canadians are working under the policy of America. It is a big mistake," he said. "Don't sacrifice your politics for America."
In reality, Canada is among some 40 countries taking part in NATO's UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force.
While the United States is part of the force, it is also part of Operation Enduring Freedom, a parallel mission involving the United States, Afghan forces and several other countries. Since February 2002, 90 Canadian soldiers and one envoy have been killed in Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, security was beefed up yesterday in both the capital Kabul and in the volatile southern province of Kandahar, where most of Canada's 2,500 troops are based.
The boosted security comes as the country prepares to celebrate tomorrow's 89th anniversary of its independence from Britain. Any breach of security during the celebration would be a huge embarrassment for Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government.
Spokesperson Zemarai Bashary said 5,000 extra police had been drafted for what he described as the biggest operation of its kind in Kabul since 2001, when U.S.-led forces ousted the Taliban government.
Kabul has so far been spared the level of violence that has afflicted other parts of the country, though it suffered spectacular bomb attacks this year against a hotel and the Indian embassy.
In April, gunmen fired on Karzai at a military parade in Kabul, killing three people, including a member of the Afghan National Assembly.
Bashary declined to discuss whether officials are worried that militants are now at the city's gates.
In Kandahar, provincial police chief Matiullah Khan said there will be additional police officers and checkpoints both within Kandahar city and outlying areas. Many of the checkpoints will be on roads travelled by coalition forces.
Meanwhile, British officials acknowledged yesterday that British troops accidentally killed four civilians and wounded three others with rockets during an operation against insurgents in Helmand province.
The International Security Assistance Force said women and children were among the casualties in the Saturday operation, but it did not detail the dead and injured.
It said a patrol spotted insurgents on the roof of a compound and launched three rockets without knowing civilians were inside.
With files from the Star's wire services
Letter from militants vows more Canadians will die unless troops go
Tobi Cohen | The Canadian Press | August 18, 2008
KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN–The Taliban are threatening to kill more Canadian aid workers unless Ottawa pulls out of Afghanistan.
The threat, issued in an "open letter" addressed to "the Canadian people," comes just days after two Canadians, Shirley Case and Jacqueline Kirk of the New York-based International Rescue Committee, were shot to death along with an American woman and their Afghan driver in a Taliban ambush Wednesday in Logar province.
In the letter dated Aug. 15, the Taliban said while they don't want to kill Canadians, they have no choice as long as Canada continues following the "American" agenda.
"Events such as Logar will happen again, because occupied Afghanistan looks at all actors that are established in the interest of America with an eye of hostility," said the letter sent on behalf of the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan."
"You have to convince your government to put an end to the occupation of Afghanistan so that the Afghans are not killed with your hands and so that you are not killed with the hands of the Afghans."
The letter says Canada "sacrificed" its national and international self-respect by not following a "neutral agenda."
The Taliban blame Canada for injuring and killing many Afghan men, women and children. They suggest the attack that killed Kirk, a 40-year-old Canadian-British citizen from Montreal, and Case, 30, of 100 Mile House, B.C., was motivated by revenge.
The attack on the aid workers came about two weeks after Canadian troops accidentally shot two children to death in the Panjwaii district of Kandahar, fearing the vehicle they were riding in was going to attack them.
"The Afghans did not go to Canada to kill the Canadians. Rather, it is the Canadians who came to Afghanistan to kill and torture the Afghan, to please the fascist regime of America," it said.
"The Canadian people have to realize if their sisters, their brothers and their children are being killed in Afghanistan, it is because of the wrong policy of the government of Canada and their falling under the influence of others when they sent occupation soldiers to Afghanistan."
Neither Canadian Forces officials in Kandahar nor the embassy in Kabul would comment on the letter. But a spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the threat "a propaganda exercise."
"We're not going to respond to threats, and certainly it will have no effect on Canadian policy," said Kory Teneycke. "It's not surprising the Taliban are targeting aid workers; they're targeting their own civilians," he said.
In an interview with The Canadian Press, Taliban spokesperson Qari Muhammad Yussef restated the Taliban position that it does not wish to harm Canadians or be harmed by Canadians.
"Canadians are working under the policy of America. It is a big mistake," he said. "Don't sacrifice your politics for America."
In reality, Canada is among some 40 countries taking part in NATO's UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force.
While the United States is part of the force, it is also part of Operation Enduring Freedom, a parallel mission involving the United States, Afghan forces and several other countries. Since February 2002, 90 Canadian soldiers and one envoy have been killed in Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, security was beefed up yesterday in both the capital Kabul and in the volatile southern province of Kandahar, where most of Canada's 2,500 troops are based.
The boosted security comes as the country prepares to celebrate tomorrow's 89th anniversary of its independence from Britain. Any breach of security during the celebration would be a huge embarrassment for Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government.
Spokesperson Zemarai Bashary said 5,000 extra police had been drafted for what he described as the biggest operation of its kind in Kabul since 2001, when U.S.-led forces ousted the Taliban government.
Kabul has so far been spared the level of violence that has afflicted other parts of the country, though it suffered spectacular bomb attacks this year against a hotel and the Indian embassy.
In April, gunmen fired on Karzai at a military parade in Kabul, killing three people, including a member of the Afghan National Assembly.
Bashary declined to discuss whether officials are worried that militants are now at the city's gates.
In Kandahar, provincial police chief Matiullah Khan said there will be additional police officers and checkpoints both within Kandahar city and outlying areas. Many of the checkpoints will be on roads travelled by coalition forces.
Meanwhile, British officials acknowledged yesterday that British troops accidentally killed four civilians and wounded three others with rockets during an operation against insurgents in Helmand province.
The International Security Assistance Force said women and children were among the casualties in the Saturday operation, but it did not detail the dead and injured.
It said a patrol spotted insurgents on the roof of a compound and launched three rockets without knowing civilians were inside.
With files from the Star's wire services
Filed under
Afghanistan,
Canada,
Taliban
by Winter Patriot
on Monday, August 18, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
CBC : Canadian military acquiring new helicopters, drones
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Canadian military acquiring new helicopters, drones
August 7, 2008
After years of "hitchhiking" rides with allies and relying heavily on dangerous land convoys, Canadian soldiers will soon have new helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles at their disposal.
On Thursday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay confirmed plans to purchase and lease new equipment. Some of the new helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) will be made available immediately to the soldiers serving in Afghanistan, while other equipment will arrive in the next few years.
"Our government is determined to give the Canadian Forces the tools that they need to do the important work that we ask of them," MacKay said, speaking to reporters at an airport in Saint-Hubert, Que.
"Our Canadian Forces have been in the unfortunate position of not having any other option than hitchhiking rides with allies to move personnel in countries like Afghanistan."
The equipment will meet one of the conditions required for extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan by two years, to 2011. Parliament voted in March to extend the mission, but said the extension can only happen if the military receive new large helicopters and new UAVs.
MacKay said the helicopters will allow the Canadian military to transport troops and deliver supplies more frequently by air. Land convoys have proven dangerous in Afghanistan — 88 Canadian soldiers have died in Afghanistan since the mission began in 2002, many of them killed by roadside bombs.
MacKay said the UAVs, also known as drones, will also help keep Canadian soldiers off the ground, since the equipment allows surveillance work to be done remotely.
Bolstering Arctic sovereignty
MacKay stressed that the new equipment won't just help in Afghanistan and other military overseas, but will assist the Canadian Forces' efforts to protect Canada's sovereignty in the High Arctic.
The equipment is part of the multibillion-dollar Canada First Defence Strategy that the Conservative government launched in June.
In terms of helicopters, MacKay said Canada plans to:
* Lease six Russian-made commercial helicopters for up to $36 million. The helicopters, which can transport troops and supplies, will be in service later this summer.
* Purchase six used U.S.-made Boeing D-model Chinook helicopters with medium-lift capabilities from the United States, to be in use by February 2009. The helicopters, and the training and support needs associated with them, will cost up to $292 million.
* Purchase 16 new F-model Chinook helicopters Boeing for medium and heavy lifting, to be in service by 2013. The deal has been cited at $4.2 billion.
Regarding the unmanned aerial vehicles, known as UAVs or drones, Canada's military will:
* Lease small UAVs (Scan Eagles) from Boeing for work in the Afghan region of Kandahar over the next nine months. The first small UAVs arrived in Afghanistan in June as part of the contract that is valued at up to $14 million.
* Lease a tactical Heron UAV for two years, and possibly three, for use in Afghanistan starting in early 2009. The contract, worth $95 million, has been awarded to British Columbia's MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates.
* Secure some sort of long-term UAV solution, with details still to be worked out.
No further details on the UAV deals were immediately provided.
August 7, 2008
After years of "hitchhiking" rides with allies and relying heavily on dangerous land convoys, Canadian soldiers will soon have new helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles at their disposal.
On Thursday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay confirmed plans to purchase and lease new equipment. Some of the new helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) will be made available immediately to the soldiers serving in Afghanistan, while other equipment will arrive in the next few years.
"Our government is determined to give the Canadian Forces the tools that they need to do the important work that we ask of them," MacKay said, speaking to reporters at an airport in Saint-Hubert, Que.
"Our Canadian Forces have been in the unfortunate position of not having any other option than hitchhiking rides with allies to move personnel in countries like Afghanistan."
The equipment will meet one of the conditions required for extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan by two years, to 2011. Parliament voted in March to extend the mission, but said the extension can only happen if the military receive new large helicopters and new UAVs.
MacKay said the helicopters will allow the Canadian military to transport troops and deliver supplies more frequently by air. Land convoys have proven dangerous in Afghanistan — 88 Canadian soldiers have died in Afghanistan since the mission began in 2002, many of them killed by roadside bombs.
MacKay said the UAVs, also known as drones, will also help keep Canadian soldiers off the ground, since the equipment allows surveillance work to be done remotely.
Bolstering Arctic sovereignty
MacKay stressed that the new equipment won't just help in Afghanistan and other military overseas, but will assist the Canadian Forces' efforts to protect Canada's sovereignty in the High Arctic.
The equipment is part of the multibillion-dollar Canada First Defence Strategy that the Conservative government launched in June.
In terms of helicopters, MacKay said Canada plans to:
* Lease six Russian-made commercial helicopters for up to $36 million. The helicopters, which can transport troops and supplies, will be in service later this summer.
* Purchase six used U.S.-made Boeing D-model Chinook helicopters with medium-lift capabilities from the United States, to be in use by February 2009. The helicopters, and the training and support needs associated with them, will cost up to $292 million.
* Purchase 16 new F-model Chinook helicopters Boeing for medium and heavy lifting, to be in service by 2013. The deal has been cited at $4.2 billion.
Regarding the unmanned aerial vehicles, known as UAVs or drones, Canada's military will:
* Lease small UAVs (Scan Eagles) from Boeing for work in the Afghan region of Kandahar over the next nine months. The first small UAVs arrived in Afghanistan in June as part of the contract that is valued at up to $14 million.
* Lease a tactical Heron UAV for two years, and possibly three, for use in Afghanistan starting in early 2009. The contract, worth $95 million, has been awarded to British Columbia's MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates.
* Secure some sort of long-term UAV solution, with details still to be worked out.
No further details on the UAV deals were immediately provided.
Filed under
Afghanistan,
Canada,
drones,
GWOT,
militarization
by Winter Patriot
on Thursday, August 07, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
CBC : Federal government quietly releases $490B military plan
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Federal government quietly releases $490B military plan: Details posted online Thursday night
June 20, 2008
The Conservative government has quietly released the details of its extensive plan to beef up the military, including spending $490 billion over the next 20 years to ensure Canadian soldiers are well-equipped, well-trained and highly active.
Details of the plan, known as Canada First Defence Strategy, were posted Thursday night without fanfare on the Department of National Defence's website.
The posting comes almost six weeks after Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced at a news conference that his government had a strategy for the military but provided few details about it. Critics at the time said the strategy was nothing more than a speech, since Harper offered no document to back it up.
Speaking in Halifax on Friday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay defended the nighttime posting of the plan, saying the government was simply striving to provide more specifics about the strategy to Canadians.
Military analyst Rob Huebert told CBC News that he can't understand why Harper would release the document so quietly, and why he would do so the day before the House of Commons is expected to adjourn for the summer.
Still, he praised the document's contents, saying the strategy appears to be a well-balanced assessment that juggles the military's commitments at home and overseas.
"I'm hard-pressed right at this point, looking at it, to be really overtly critical," said Huebert, associate director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies in Calgary. "I do think they've got a good balance on this particular aspect."
The opposition also questioned the timing and delivery of the announcement in Parliament Thursday.
Liberal MP Rodger Cuzner said posting the information online in the "dead of night" sounded like the actions of "a government with something to hide."
But Laurie Hawn, MacKay's parliamentary secretary, pointed to Harper's previous announcement, saying the information had already been posted on the government website and that Canadians "wanted more details on it."
$60 billion on equipment
The document, which stresses the importance of giving the Canadian Forces predictable and stable funding, says $60 billion must be spent on much-needed military equipment, such as helicopters, patrol ships, planes, destroyers, frigates, land combat vehicles and weapons.
A total of $15 billion of these equipment purchases has already been confirmed and announced publicly.
Other military spending over the next 20 years is to include:
* $250 billion on personnel, with the military's numbers increasing to 70,000 regular members and 30,000 reserve members. (Currently, there are 62,000 regular members and 25,000 reservists.)
* $140 billion on training and maintenance of equipment.
* $40 billion on military buildings and infrastructure.
The document suggests that in the next 20 years, the international community will be coping with failed states, rogue nuclear nations and the increasing threat of terrorism. It also notes that the military needs to enhance its ability to operate alongside U.S. forces.
"The Canada First Defence Strategy will enable the Forces to … address the full range of defence and security challenges facing Canada now and into the future," the document states. "This strengthened military will translate into enhanced security for Canadians at home as well as a stronger voice for Canada on the world stage."
Six core duties for the military
The document says the Canadian Forces will have six core duties over the next 20 years and will often have to juggle more than one duty at once in Canada and overseas.
The duties are:
* Conducting daily domestic and continental operations, including protecting Arctic sovereignty.
* Supporting a major international event in Canada, such as the 2010 Olympics.
* Responding to any major terrorist attacks.
* Providing aid to civilian authorities during natural disasters and other crises in Canada.
* Conducting a major international operation for an extended period, such as the Afghan mission.
* Have enough troops remaining to deploy to other international crises for shorter periods of time.
NDP defence critic Dawn Black questioned why the document does not stress the peacekeeping work of Canadian soldiers.
"The more and more we become meshed with American foreign policy… the less and less ability we have to be independent and have a clear Canadian voice on the international stage."
June 20, 2008
The Conservative government has quietly released the details of its extensive plan to beef up the military, including spending $490 billion over the next 20 years to ensure Canadian soldiers are well-equipped, well-trained and highly active.
Details of the plan, known as Canada First Defence Strategy, were posted Thursday night without fanfare on the Department of National Defence's website.
The posting comes almost six weeks after Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced at a news conference that his government had a strategy for the military but provided few details about it. Critics at the time said the strategy was nothing more than a speech, since Harper offered no document to back it up.
Speaking in Halifax on Friday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay defended the nighttime posting of the plan, saying the government was simply striving to provide more specifics about the strategy to Canadians.
Military analyst Rob Huebert told CBC News that he can't understand why Harper would release the document so quietly, and why he would do so the day before the House of Commons is expected to adjourn for the summer.
Still, he praised the document's contents, saying the strategy appears to be a well-balanced assessment that juggles the military's commitments at home and overseas.
"I'm hard-pressed right at this point, looking at it, to be really overtly critical," said Huebert, associate director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies in Calgary. "I do think they've got a good balance on this particular aspect."
The opposition also questioned the timing and delivery of the announcement in Parliament Thursday.
Liberal MP Rodger Cuzner said posting the information online in the "dead of night" sounded like the actions of "a government with something to hide."
But Laurie Hawn, MacKay's parliamentary secretary, pointed to Harper's previous announcement, saying the information had already been posted on the government website and that Canadians "wanted more details on it."
$60 billion on equipment
The document, which stresses the importance of giving the Canadian Forces predictable and stable funding, says $60 billion must be spent on much-needed military equipment, such as helicopters, patrol ships, planes, destroyers, frigates, land combat vehicles and weapons.
A total of $15 billion of these equipment purchases has already been confirmed and announced publicly.
Other military spending over the next 20 years is to include:
* $250 billion on personnel, with the military's numbers increasing to 70,000 regular members and 30,000 reserve members. (Currently, there are 62,000 regular members and 25,000 reservists.)
* $140 billion on training and maintenance of equipment.
* $40 billion on military buildings and infrastructure.
The document suggests that in the next 20 years, the international community will be coping with failed states, rogue nuclear nations and the increasing threat of terrorism. It also notes that the military needs to enhance its ability to operate alongside U.S. forces.
"The Canada First Defence Strategy will enable the Forces to … address the full range of defence and security challenges facing Canada now and into the future," the document states. "This strengthened military will translate into enhanced security for Canadians at home as well as a stronger voice for Canada on the world stage."
Six core duties for the military
The document says the Canadian Forces will have six core duties over the next 20 years and will often have to juggle more than one duty at once in Canada and overseas.
The duties are:
* Conducting daily domestic and continental operations, including protecting Arctic sovereignty.
* Supporting a major international event in Canada, such as the 2010 Olympics.
* Responding to any major terrorist attacks.
* Providing aid to civilian authorities during natural disasters and other crises in Canada.
* Conducting a major international operation for an extended period, such as the Afghan mission.
* Have enough troops remaining to deploy to other international crises for shorter periods of time.
NDP defence critic Dawn Black questioned why the document does not stress the peacekeeping work of Canadian soldiers.
"The more and more we become meshed with American foreign policy… the less and less ability we have to be independent and have a clear Canadian voice on the international stage."
CBC : Ottawa seeking helicopters, drones to extend Afghan mission
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Ottawa seeking helicopters, drones to extend Afghan mission
February 21, 2008
The federal government is currently in negotiations to acquire large helicopters and unmanned surveillance drones in an attempt to satisfy two conditions set out in the Manley report for extending the Afghanistan mission, CBC News has learned.
The government is trying to secure a deal with at least two American helicopter manufacturers to either lease or buy helicopters that would provide transport for Canadian troops in Kandahar, CBC News has learned.
Earlier this week, the government released a tender for the surveillance drones.
The Manley report recommended that the government extend its mission in Afghanistan past the February 2009 deadline, but only if NATO was able to provide an additional 1,000 troops to bolster Canadian forces fighting in the south.
The Manley panel also demanded the government find access to unmanned surveillance drones and large helicopters to ferry Canadian troops around the region.
CBC News has learned the government intends to meet both of these requirements on its own, which would take pressure off its NATO allies, allowing them to focus on finding the additional troops the Manley panel recommended.
The news comes as Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in a rare speech Thursday to the Conference of Defence Associations general meeting, is expected to lay out his plan to extend the mission and what his government is doing to meet those conditions.
While it's traditional for defence ministers and senior commanders to address the group, a prime minister hasn't appeared before the influential organization since the 1970s.
Harper is also expected to signal how he will respond to the Liberal amendment on his government's Afghan motion. That response is expected to be tabled later Thursday.
The current government motion is to extend the Afghan mission until 2011, based on meeting those two conditions laid out in the Manley report.
The motion also states that "the results of progress in Afghanistan, including Canada's military deployment, will be reviewed in 2011."
The Liberal amendment calls for the mission to refocus on reconstruction and training, followed by a full withdrawal of Canadian troops by July 2011.
The amendment indicated the post-February 2009 mission could involve combat to protect reconstruction efforts.
February 21, 2008
The federal government is currently in negotiations to acquire large helicopters and unmanned surveillance drones in an attempt to satisfy two conditions set out in the Manley report for extending the Afghanistan mission, CBC News has learned.
The government is trying to secure a deal with at least two American helicopter manufacturers to either lease or buy helicopters that would provide transport for Canadian troops in Kandahar, CBC News has learned.
Earlier this week, the government released a tender for the surveillance drones.
The Manley report recommended that the government extend its mission in Afghanistan past the February 2009 deadline, but only if NATO was able to provide an additional 1,000 troops to bolster Canadian forces fighting in the south.
The Manley panel also demanded the government find access to unmanned surveillance drones and large helicopters to ferry Canadian troops around the region.
CBC News has learned the government intends to meet both of these requirements on its own, which would take pressure off its NATO allies, allowing them to focus on finding the additional troops the Manley panel recommended.
The news comes as Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in a rare speech Thursday to the Conference of Defence Associations general meeting, is expected to lay out his plan to extend the mission and what his government is doing to meet those conditions.
While it's traditional for defence ministers and senior commanders to address the group, a prime minister hasn't appeared before the influential organization since the 1970s.
Harper is also expected to signal how he will respond to the Liberal amendment on his government's Afghan motion. That response is expected to be tabled later Thursday.
The current government motion is to extend the Afghan mission until 2011, based on meeting those two conditions laid out in the Manley report.
The motion also states that "the results of progress in Afghanistan, including Canada's military deployment, will be reviewed in 2011."
The Liberal amendment calls for the mission to refocus on reconstruction and training, followed by a full withdrawal of Canadian troops by July 2011.
The amendment indicated the post-February 2009 mission could involve combat to protect reconstruction efforts.
Filed under
Afghanistan,
Canada,
drones,
GWOT
by Winter Patriot
on Thursday, August 07, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
CBC : PM supports extension of Afghan mission with conditions
Thursday, August 07, 2008
PM supports extension of Afghan mission with conditions
January 28, 2008
Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Monday he "broadly" supports recommendations by John Manley's panel on the Afghanistan mission that call for Canada's military to remain in the region beyond February 2009 only if more NATO troops and equipment are provided.
"The government accepts the panel's specific recommendation of extending Canada's mission in Afghanistan if, and I must emphasize if, certain conditions are met," Harper said.
"That is the securing of partners in Kandahar province with additional combat troops and equipment capabilities.
"While the case for the Afghan mission is clearly compelling, the decision to allow our young men and women in uniform to continue to be in harm's way demands the responsibility to give them a strong chance of success."
But Harper reiterated that the House will vote on the issue this spring.
The five-member panel, which released its report last week, said Canada needs to remain in Afghanistan provided two conditions are met:
* The assignment of an additional battle group of about 1,000 soldiers to Kandahar by NATO and/or other allies before February 2009.
* That the government secure new, medium-lift helicopters and high-performance unmanned aerial vehicles for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance before that date.
Harper agreed with the panel that if those conditions are not met, Canada should not proceed with the mission.
"We really do have two choices. We do everything better. We do everything right or we don't do it. But we can't do half a mission that might not succeed."
Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion said he wanted to hear more from Harper on issues ranging from development in Afghanistan, Afghan detainees, diplomacy and troop rotation.
"I think we need to know more what the prime minister has in mind. He has been very vague today. In the way he described it, is like a recipe for a never-ending mission," he said.
But Dion also repeated that the Liberals "don't want a combat mission after February 2009."
In contrast, NDP Leader Jack Layton has called for the troops to be immediately withdrawn from the region.
PM to discuss report with NATO allies
Harper said the panel made a clear case that there can be no definitive timeline for when the mission should end.
But Canada's contribution should be reviewed based on benchmarks of progress that the panel advocated, Harper said.
Harper also said the government will undertake a diplomatic effort with its allies before the next meeting of NATO leaders in early April. He said he hasn't yet spoken with Canada's NATO allies about the report, but will do so in the coming days.
"Canada has done what it said it would do and more. We now say we need help," Harper said. "I think if NATO can't come through with that help, then I think, frankly, NATO's own reputation and future will be in grave jeopardy."
Other panel recommendations include that:
* Canada's civilian reconstruction and development concentrate more on aid that directly benefits the Afghan people.
* The government conduct a full-scale review of the performance of Canadian civilian aid programs.
* Effectiveness of Canada's military and civilian activities, and progress of Afghan security and government, be tracked.
* The federal government improve its communications about the Canadian mission.
January 28, 2008
Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Monday he "broadly" supports recommendations by John Manley's panel on the Afghanistan mission that call for Canada's military to remain in the region beyond February 2009 only if more NATO troops and equipment are provided.
"The government accepts the panel's specific recommendation of extending Canada's mission in Afghanistan if, and I must emphasize if, certain conditions are met," Harper said.
"That is the securing of partners in Kandahar province with additional combat troops and equipment capabilities.
"While the case for the Afghan mission is clearly compelling, the decision to allow our young men and women in uniform to continue to be in harm's way demands the responsibility to give them a strong chance of success."
But Harper reiterated that the House will vote on the issue this spring.
The five-member panel, which released its report last week, said Canada needs to remain in Afghanistan provided two conditions are met:
* The assignment of an additional battle group of about 1,000 soldiers to Kandahar by NATO and/or other allies before February 2009.
* That the government secure new, medium-lift helicopters and high-performance unmanned aerial vehicles for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance before that date.
Harper agreed with the panel that if those conditions are not met, Canada should not proceed with the mission.
"We really do have two choices. We do everything better. We do everything right or we don't do it. But we can't do half a mission that might not succeed."
Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion said he wanted to hear more from Harper on issues ranging from development in Afghanistan, Afghan detainees, diplomacy and troop rotation.
"I think we need to know more what the prime minister has in mind. He has been very vague today. In the way he described it, is like a recipe for a never-ending mission," he said.
But Dion also repeated that the Liberals "don't want a combat mission after February 2009."
In contrast, NDP Leader Jack Layton has called for the troops to be immediately withdrawn from the region.
PM to discuss report with NATO allies
Harper said the panel made a clear case that there can be no definitive timeline for when the mission should end.
But Canada's contribution should be reviewed based on benchmarks of progress that the panel advocated, Harper said.
Harper also said the government will undertake a diplomatic effort with its allies before the next meeting of NATO leaders in early April. He said he hasn't yet spoken with Canada's NATO allies about the report, but will do so in the coming days.
"Canada has done what it said it would do and more. We now say we need help," Harper said. "I think if NATO can't come through with that help, then I think, frankly, NATO's own reputation and future will be in grave jeopardy."
Other panel recommendations include that:
* Canada's civilian reconstruction and development concentrate more on aid that directly benefits the Afghan people.
* The government conduct a full-scale review of the performance of Canadian civilian aid programs.
* Effectiveness of Canada's military and civilian activities, and progress of Afghan security and government, be tracked.
* The federal government improve its communications about the Canadian mission.
Filed under
Afghanistan,
Canada,
GWOT
by Winter Patriot
on Thursday, August 07, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
Toronto Star : Perjury: Is it different for cops?
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Perjury: Is it different for cops?
Cases show double standard, critics say
Betsy Powell and Peter Small | Staff reporters | August 2, 2008
A Toronto judge acquits two men of firearms charges, finding that police testimony was "unreliable, likely false." In another courtroom, a judge convicts a prominent community activist of perjury, ruling that she deliberately misled the court.
These two recent court cases highlight the rarely prosecuted offence of perjury. For some in the legal community, they also raise questions about double standards, how often police lie on the stand and how infrequently they face charges.
This past week, supporters of activist Valarie Steele, found by a judge to have lied to get her son released from custody, wondered aloud if she should have been charged at all.
Also this week, the province's Special Investigations Unit announced it is probing the case of Shayne Fisher, 24. Fisher and another man were acquitted after Superior Court Justice Brian Trafford ruled in June that the men were "physically abused" by Toronto police drug squad officers during a raid.
"Important parts of the evidence tendered against the defendants, at the preliminary hearing and at trial, have been found by the court to be unreliable, likely false," Trafford wrote.
Defence lawyers point to other examples of judges acquitting people because of unreliable testimony from police. It even has a name: testilying.
A case often cited is that of Kevin Khan, acquitted on drug charges by Justice Anne Molloy in 2004. She found two Toronto police officers, including Det. Glenn Asselin, used racial profiling when they stopped Khan and later "fabricated" evidence.
"I quite simply do not believe the evidence of the officers," she wrote in her judgment.
Asselin was investigated internally and cleared. He remains with the force as a detective.
Then there's the high profile case of the three officers who testified at the 2005 assault trial of Toronto police officer Roy Preston.
Ontario Court Justice Peter Wilkie convicted Preston after finding him to be "neither credible nor reliable."
Wilkie also found the evidence of the three officers who testified on Preston's behalf to be "vague," "contradictory" and "fundamentally unreliable."
Preston went to jail after losing his appeal. He is suspended without pay and faces disciplinary charges and could be fired.
The three officers were investigated and cleared by their superiors.
In the Steele case, police wiretaps caught the activist saying her son, a witness in the Jane Creba murder case, wasn't adhering to his bail conditions on unrelated charges. In court, she had indicated the opposite and was subsequently convicted of perjury.
Supporters argued she was being punished for her son's unwillingness to co-operate.
Academics throughout North America have found the police culture encourages lying.
"When officer self interest, and/or the bond of the `thin blue line is challenged,' as in a disciplinary proceeding, overt lying is widely recognized as a common occurrence," Dianne Martin, the late Osgoode Hall law professor, wrote in a 2001 paper.
Defence Lawyer Edward Sapiano says police knowingly commit perjury because of what he calls "noble-cause perjury."
"Police knowingly give false testimony to facilitate the prosecution and to ensure the conviction of persons the police 'know' are guilty. Because police so easily get away with noble-cause perjury ... police quite reasonably believe they are being encouraged to lie by the administration of justice itself."
An assistant Crown attorney, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, didn't disagree.
"You would expect ... police witnesses to have a stronger regard for the oath but people lie in court all the time, police officers included."
"There is an attitude that the legal system is just a bunch of bulls--- invented by lawyers and ... the oath doesn't really bind anyone's conscience, in some quarters. I'm not saying every cop is like that but I've certainly had the impression over the years that there are many that do feel that way."
Gary Clewley, a defence lawyer who often represents police officers charged with crimes, says it's "ridiculous" to suggest that judges and Crowns tolerate police perjury because officers perceive it to be a legitimate means to an end.
And just because a judge finds an officer "likely" gave false testimony, doesn't mean he or she lied.
"There's a world of difference between saying `I'm not satisfied sufficiently to deprive somebody of their liberty based on the evidence' and the officers are outright liars."
Sapiano says it's rare police are charged either internally or criminally, "even when sufficient evidence exists, and apparently only ... when a defence lawyer catches them lying and it makes the front page of the newspapers."
Christopher Downer, a former Toronto detective who used to investigate allegations of misconduct against court officers, remembers a case where two police "buddies" of a court officer charged with assault lied on the stand. "I sent a package off to internal affairs: nothing was ever done.
"No one's aggressively going after anyone and at the end of the day nothing happens."
"That's not the case at all," responds George Cowley, director of legal services for the Toronto Police Service. He points to the case of Amar Katoch, a veteran Toronto officer charged with assault, perjury and attempt to obstruct justice by his employer after a videotape of an anti-poverty protest in 2003 showed him punching a protester.
"There's no apathy at all. We're very concerned about comments made by judges," Cowley said.
Katoch was acquitted by a jury last fall. The Crown is appealing.
In the Khan case, Molloy's comments about Asselin were "troubling," Cowley says. "We thoroughly looked into the entire matter and it was determined that there was no evidence to support either criminal or Police Services Act charges."
While the Ministry of the Attorney General failed to respond to questions about the number of perjury charges laid against police, two Ontario police officers facing perjury charges will be in court this fall.
This month, OPP Det. Sgt. John Cavanaugh goes on trial in Toronto. In September, a preliminary hearing is scheduled in the case of Peel Region Const. Sean Osborne.
Despite these cases, the reason so few perjury charges are laid is because "it's only in the most clearest of cases when the evidence is there" that it's worth pursuing, says Avtar Bhangal, the lawyer who represented Sunny Bains, who Osborne is alleged to have assaulted.
"There are lots of cases where people are found to fudge the truth – it's a different standard to actually prove that they intentionally did perjure themselves."
Cases show double standard, critics say
Betsy Powell and Peter Small | Staff reporters | August 2, 2008
A Toronto judge acquits two men of firearms charges, finding that police testimony was "unreliable, likely false." In another courtroom, a judge convicts a prominent community activist of perjury, ruling that she deliberately misled the court.
These two recent court cases highlight the rarely prosecuted offence of perjury. For some in the legal community, they also raise questions about double standards, how often police lie on the stand and how infrequently they face charges.
This past week, supporters of activist Valarie Steele, found by a judge to have lied to get her son released from custody, wondered aloud if she should have been charged at all.
Also this week, the province's Special Investigations Unit announced it is probing the case of Shayne Fisher, 24. Fisher and another man were acquitted after Superior Court Justice Brian Trafford ruled in June that the men were "physically abused" by Toronto police drug squad officers during a raid.
"Important parts of the evidence tendered against the defendants, at the preliminary hearing and at trial, have been found by the court to be unreliable, likely false," Trafford wrote.
Defence lawyers point to other examples of judges acquitting people because of unreliable testimony from police. It even has a name: testilying.
A case often cited is that of Kevin Khan, acquitted on drug charges by Justice Anne Molloy in 2004. She found two Toronto police officers, including Det. Glenn Asselin, used racial profiling when they stopped Khan and later "fabricated" evidence.
"I quite simply do not believe the evidence of the officers," she wrote in her judgment.
Asselin was investigated internally and cleared. He remains with the force as a detective.
Then there's the high profile case of the three officers who testified at the 2005 assault trial of Toronto police officer Roy Preston.
Ontario Court Justice Peter Wilkie convicted Preston after finding him to be "neither credible nor reliable."
Wilkie also found the evidence of the three officers who testified on Preston's behalf to be "vague," "contradictory" and "fundamentally unreliable."
Preston went to jail after losing his appeal. He is suspended without pay and faces disciplinary charges and could be fired.
The three officers were investigated and cleared by their superiors.
In the Steele case, police wiretaps caught the activist saying her son, a witness in the Jane Creba murder case, wasn't adhering to his bail conditions on unrelated charges. In court, she had indicated the opposite and was subsequently convicted of perjury.
Supporters argued she was being punished for her son's unwillingness to co-operate.
Academics throughout North America have found the police culture encourages lying.
"When officer self interest, and/or the bond of the `thin blue line is challenged,' as in a disciplinary proceeding, overt lying is widely recognized as a common occurrence," Dianne Martin, the late Osgoode Hall law professor, wrote in a 2001 paper.
Defence Lawyer Edward Sapiano says police knowingly commit perjury because of what he calls "noble-cause perjury."
"Police knowingly give false testimony to facilitate the prosecution and to ensure the conviction of persons the police 'know' are guilty. Because police so easily get away with noble-cause perjury ... police quite reasonably believe they are being encouraged to lie by the administration of justice itself."
An assistant Crown attorney, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, didn't disagree.
"You would expect ... police witnesses to have a stronger regard for the oath but people lie in court all the time, police officers included."
"There is an attitude that the legal system is just a bunch of bulls--- invented by lawyers and ... the oath doesn't really bind anyone's conscience, in some quarters. I'm not saying every cop is like that but I've certainly had the impression over the years that there are many that do feel that way."
Gary Clewley, a defence lawyer who often represents police officers charged with crimes, says it's "ridiculous" to suggest that judges and Crowns tolerate police perjury because officers perceive it to be a legitimate means to an end.
And just because a judge finds an officer "likely" gave false testimony, doesn't mean he or she lied.
"There's a world of difference between saying `I'm not satisfied sufficiently to deprive somebody of their liberty based on the evidence' and the officers are outright liars."
Sapiano says it's rare police are charged either internally or criminally, "even when sufficient evidence exists, and apparently only ... when a defence lawyer catches them lying and it makes the front page of the newspapers."
Christopher Downer, a former Toronto detective who used to investigate allegations of misconduct against court officers, remembers a case where two police "buddies" of a court officer charged with assault lied on the stand. "I sent a package off to internal affairs: nothing was ever done.
"No one's aggressively going after anyone and at the end of the day nothing happens."
"That's not the case at all," responds George Cowley, director of legal services for the Toronto Police Service. He points to the case of Amar Katoch, a veteran Toronto officer charged with assault, perjury and attempt to obstruct justice by his employer after a videotape of an anti-poverty protest in 2003 showed him punching a protester.
"There's no apathy at all. We're very concerned about comments made by judges," Cowley said.
Katoch was acquitted by a jury last fall. The Crown is appealing.
In the Khan case, Molloy's comments about Asselin were "troubling," Cowley says. "We thoroughly looked into the entire matter and it was determined that there was no evidence to support either criminal or Police Services Act charges."
While the Ministry of the Attorney General failed to respond to questions about the number of perjury charges laid against police, two Ontario police officers facing perjury charges will be in court this fall.
This month, OPP Det. Sgt. John Cavanaugh goes on trial in Toronto. In September, a preliminary hearing is scheduled in the case of Peel Region Const. Sean Osborne.
Despite these cases, the reason so few perjury charges are laid is because "it's only in the most clearest of cases when the evidence is there" that it's worth pursuing, says Avtar Bhangal, the lawyer who represented Sunny Bains, who Osborne is alleged to have assaulted.
"There are lots of cases where people are found to fudge the truth – it's a different standard to actually prove that they intentionally did perjure themselves."
Filed under
Canada,
justice,
lawyers,
noble perjury,
police
by Winter Patriot
on Saturday, August 02, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
Toronto Star : Bus beheading ‘a mystery’
Friday, August 01, 2008
Bus beheading ‘a mystery’
Winnipeg RCMP say they don’t know what prompted vicious attack on Greyhound bus
Steve Lambert | THE CANADIAN PRESS | July 31, 2008
PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, Man. – Police said this afternoon that they don’t know what prompted a passenger on a Greyhound bus heading to Winnipeg to viciously attack the man sitting next to him.
Passengers said the man repeatedly stabbed his seat-mate before beheading him and carrying the victim’s head around the bus.
RCMP Staff Sgt. Steve Colwell wouldn’t confirm those details but did say a 40-year-old suspect was in RCMP custody and police were planning to interview him.
No charges were immediately laid.
Colwell said the behaviour of the passengers and driver probably prevented anyone else from being hurt.
“It’s not something that happens regularly on a bus,” he said. ``You’re sitting there enjoying your trip and then all of a sudden somebody gets stabbed. I imagine it would be pretty traumatic ... the way they (the passengers) acted was extraordinary.”
Colwell said they “were very brave. They reacted swiftly, calmly in exiting the bus and as a result nobody else was injured.”
Shocked passengers described the horrific attack as something incomprehensible.
One moment, the quiet man near the back of the bus was minding his own business. The man hadn’t talked to anyone around him, and seemed to pay no attention to the younger fellow sitting next to him, who was listening to music on headphones.
The next moment, witnesses said, the older man stood up, still quiet, and repeatedly stabbed, then beheaded his younger victim.
“We heard this blood-curdling scream and turned around, and the guy was standing up, stabbing this guy repeatedly, like 40 or 50 times,” Garnet Caton said today from a hotel in Brandon, Man., where he and other passengers had been taken to rest.
“There was no rage or anything. He was like a robot, stabbing the guy.”
Caton said the bus stopped and everyone scrambled to get out while the attacker started methodically carving up the victim’s body, not paying attention to anyone else.
Caton and the driver shut the bus door from the outside while they waited for police to arrive.
“We put our bodies up against the door, waiting for him to come out ... and he went back and brought the head to the front and pretty much displayed it ... and dropped it on the ground in front of us,” Caton said.
“All very calmly. He was wearing sunglasses. It was no big deal to him.”
Fellow passenger Cody Olmstead from Kentville, N.S., also recalled the chilling scene.
“The guy came to the front of the door with buddy’s head in his hands, decapitated. He dropped the head and went back and started cutting the body back up,” Olmstead said.
When police arrived, the victim and his attacker were the only ones left on the bus, Colwell said.
“When attempts were made to have him exit and surrender to police were unsuccessful, additional resources including the RCMP emergency response team and negotiator team were called in to assist.”
The man eventually tried to flee by breaking a bus window and jumping out, Colwell said.
“He was immediately subdued and arrested without incident and is currently in RCMP custody.”
Both Olmstead and Caton said the attacker and the victim appeared not to know each other.
They said the attacker boarded the bus in Brandon last night. The victim, who Caton said appeared to be about 19, had been on the bus since Edmonton.
Police would not confirm the victim’s age and said his name would not be released until his family had been notified. The suspect’s name wasn’t released either.
Federal Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said the full weight of the law must be brought to bear on the perpetrator.
“We want to make sure the process is followed as aggressively as possible, the full legal process ....” Day said from Levis, Que., where Conservative MPs are gathered for a summer planning session.
“This particular incident, as horrific as it is, is obviously extremely rare. Certainly the horrific nature of it is probably one-of-a-kind in Canadian history.”
Greyhound called the event tragic but isolated.
A company spokeswoman said bus travel is the safest mode of transportation, despite the fact bus stations do not have metal detectors and other security measures used at airports.
“Due to the rural nature of our network, airport-type security is not practical. It’s a very different type of system,” Abby Wambaugh said from Greyhound’s corporate offices in Texas.
The bus was carrying 37 passengers and the driver to Winnipeg from Edmonton.
A portion of the east-bound Trans-Canada Highway was closed overnight as officers remained on the scene.
Passengers had no explanation as to what might have prompted the attack. The suspect had been on the bus for only about an hour and didn’t even sit near his victim, at first.
“He sat in the front at first, everything was normal,” Caton said.
“We went to the next stop and he got off and had a smoke with another young lady there. When he got on the bus again, he came to the back near where I was sitting.
“He put his bags in the overhead compartment. He didn’t say a word to anybody. He seemed totally normal. About a half an hour later, we heard this blood-curdling scream.”
Winnipeg RCMP say they don’t know what prompted vicious attack on Greyhound bus
Steve Lambert | THE CANADIAN PRESS | July 31, 2008
PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, Man. – Police said this afternoon that they don’t know what prompted a passenger on a Greyhound bus heading to Winnipeg to viciously attack the man sitting next to him.
Passengers said the man repeatedly stabbed his seat-mate before beheading him and carrying the victim’s head around the bus.
RCMP Staff Sgt. Steve Colwell wouldn’t confirm those details but did say a 40-year-old suspect was in RCMP custody and police were planning to interview him.
No charges were immediately laid.
Colwell said the behaviour of the passengers and driver probably prevented anyone else from being hurt.
“It’s not something that happens regularly on a bus,” he said. ``You’re sitting there enjoying your trip and then all of a sudden somebody gets stabbed. I imagine it would be pretty traumatic ... the way they (the passengers) acted was extraordinary.”
Colwell said they “were very brave. They reacted swiftly, calmly in exiting the bus and as a result nobody else was injured.”
Shocked passengers described the horrific attack as something incomprehensible.
One moment, the quiet man near the back of the bus was minding his own business. The man hadn’t talked to anyone around him, and seemed to pay no attention to the younger fellow sitting next to him, who was listening to music on headphones.
The next moment, witnesses said, the older man stood up, still quiet, and repeatedly stabbed, then beheaded his younger victim.
“We heard this blood-curdling scream and turned around, and the guy was standing up, stabbing this guy repeatedly, like 40 or 50 times,” Garnet Caton said today from a hotel in Brandon, Man., where he and other passengers had been taken to rest.
“There was no rage or anything. He was like a robot, stabbing the guy.”
Caton said the bus stopped and everyone scrambled to get out while the attacker started methodically carving up the victim’s body, not paying attention to anyone else.
Caton and the driver shut the bus door from the outside while they waited for police to arrive.
“We put our bodies up against the door, waiting for him to come out ... and he went back and brought the head to the front and pretty much displayed it ... and dropped it on the ground in front of us,” Caton said.
“All very calmly. He was wearing sunglasses. It was no big deal to him.”
Fellow passenger Cody Olmstead from Kentville, N.S., also recalled the chilling scene.
“The guy came to the front of the door with buddy’s head in his hands, decapitated. He dropped the head and went back and started cutting the body back up,” Olmstead said.
When police arrived, the victim and his attacker were the only ones left on the bus, Colwell said.
“When attempts were made to have him exit and surrender to police were unsuccessful, additional resources including the RCMP emergency response team and negotiator team were called in to assist.”
The man eventually tried to flee by breaking a bus window and jumping out, Colwell said.
“He was immediately subdued and arrested without incident and is currently in RCMP custody.”
Both Olmstead and Caton said the attacker and the victim appeared not to know each other.
They said the attacker boarded the bus in Brandon last night. The victim, who Caton said appeared to be about 19, had been on the bus since Edmonton.
Police would not confirm the victim’s age and said his name would not be released until his family had been notified. The suspect’s name wasn’t released either.
Federal Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said the full weight of the law must be brought to bear on the perpetrator.
“We want to make sure the process is followed as aggressively as possible, the full legal process ....” Day said from Levis, Que., where Conservative MPs are gathered for a summer planning session.
“This particular incident, as horrific as it is, is obviously extremely rare. Certainly the horrific nature of it is probably one-of-a-kind in Canadian history.”
Greyhound called the event tragic but isolated.
A company spokeswoman said bus travel is the safest mode of transportation, despite the fact bus stations do not have metal detectors and other security measures used at airports.
“Due to the rural nature of our network, airport-type security is not practical. It’s a very different type of system,” Abby Wambaugh said from Greyhound’s corporate offices in Texas.
The bus was carrying 37 passengers and the driver to Winnipeg from Edmonton.
A portion of the east-bound Trans-Canada Highway was closed overnight as officers remained on the scene.
Passengers had no explanation as to what might have prompted the attack. The suspect had been on the bus for only about an hour and didn’t even sit near his victim, at first.
“He sat in the front at first, everything was normal,” Caton said.
“We went to the next stop and he got off and had a smoke with another young lady there. When he got on the bus again, he came to the back near where I was sitting.
“He put his bags in the overhead compartment. He didn’t say a word to anybody. He seemed totally normal. About a half an hour later, we heard this blood-curdling scream.”
CBC : House votes in favour of extending Afghan mission
Friday, March 14, 2008
House votes in favour of extending Afghan mission
CBC News | March 13, 2008
A confidence motion to keep Canadian soldiers in Kandahar until 2011 has passed easily in the House of Commons.
The Conservative motion passed by a vote of 198 to 77. It was the second confidence vote the government survived Thursday, and carried the possibility of triggering an election if it hadn't passed.
Defence Minister Peter MacKay saluted the vote, saying will bolster the men and women serving in Afghanistan.
"It shows confidence in everything they're doing, as well as aid working shoulder to shoulder with our forces," MacKay told reporters outside the House following the motion's passing.
Revised following consultations with the Liberal party, the motion calls for the mission to be renewed past 2009, but with a focus on reconstruction and training of Afghan troops.
It also includes a firm pullout date, calling for Canadian troops to leave Afghanistan by December 2011.
'Strong mandate'
Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier said the vote will give Prime Minister Stephen Harper a "strong mandate" heading into the upcoming NATO meeting in Bucharest, Romania, to appeal to allies for more troop support for the Kandahar region.
The mission's extension is contingent on whether NATO allies provide 1,000 extra troops and Ottawa secures access to unmanned surveillance drones and large helicopters.
"Now we have a mission that is not a Conservative mission, not a Liberal mission, but a Canadian mission," Bernier said.
The Liberals voted in favour of the motion Thursday, following a series of confidence votes in which the party has abstained or sent only a handful of MPs to vote.
Both the Bloc Québécois and the NDP voted against it, having consistently rejected any extension of the mission.
"There are millions of Canadians who don't want this strategy to continue," NDP Leader Jack Layton said following the vote. "The population prefers a road to peace."
Former Liberal MP Blair Wilson, who currently sits as an independent, voted against the motion, while Quebec independent MP André Arthur supported it.
Liberals at ease with move
Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre said earlier in the day that it wouldn't be difficult for the Opposition to back the government.
"We wanted the mission to change, wanted to have an end date. And we wanted to do otherwise besides a solely military level. So, when you're looking at it and reading it, it's clear," he said.
An earlier vote on an NDP amendment to the motion that called for Canada to immediately begin diplomatic efforts to withdraw troops from Afghanistan did not pass Thursday evening.
Reporting from Parliament Hill, the CBC's Rosemary Barton said the Bloc didn't support the amendment because it believes the mission should continue until its current mandate ends in 2009.
Canada has 2,500 troops participating in the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, mostly around Kandahar province in the country's volatile south.
In another development, the House of Commons passed a budget motion — also a matter of confidence — Thursday afternoon that effectively sidelined a Liberal-sponsored bill promising an education savings plan.
CBC News | March 13, 2008
A confidence motion to keep Canadian soldiers in Kandahar until 2011 has passed easily in the House of Commons.
The Conservative motion passed by a vote of 198 to 77. It was the second confidence vote the government survived Thursday, and carried the possibility of triggering an election if it hadn't passed.
Defence Minister Peter MacKay saluted the vote, saying will bolster the men and women serving in Afghanistan.
"It shows confidence in everything they're doing, as well as aid working shoulder to shoulder with our forces," MacKay told reporters outside the House following the motion's passing.
Revised following consultations with the Liberal party, the motion calls for the mission to be renewed past 2009, but with a focus on reconstruction and training of Afghan troops.
It also includes a firm pullout date, calling for Canadian troops to leave Afghanistan by December 2011.
'Strong mandate'
Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier said the vote will give Prime Minister Stephen Harper a "strong mandate" heading into the upcoming NATO meeting in Bucharest, Romania, to appeal to allies for more troop support for the Kandahar region.
The mission's extension is contingent on whether NATO allies provide 1,000 extra troops and Ottawa secures access to unmanned surveillance drones and large helicopters.
"Now we have a mission that is not a Conservative mission, not a Liberal mission, but a Canadian mission," Bernier said.
The Liberals voted in favour of the motion Thursday, following a series of confidence votes in which the party has abstained or sent only a handful of MPs to vote.
Both the Bloc Québécois and the NDP voted against it, having consistently rejected any extension of the mission.
"There are millions of Canadians who don't want this strategy to continue," NDP Leader Jack Layton said following the vote. "The population prefers a road to peace."
Former Liberal MP Blair Wilson, who currently sits as an independent, voted against the motion, while Quebec independent MP André Arthur supported it.
Liberals at ease with move
Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre said earlier in the day that it wouldn't be difficult for the Opposition to back the government.
"We wanted the mission to change, wanted to have an end date. And we wanted to do otherwise besides a solely military level. So, when you're looking at it and reading it, it's clear," he said.
An earlier vote on an NDP amendment to the motion that called for Canada to immediately begin diplomatic efforts to withdraw troops from Afghanistan did not pass Thursday evening.
Reporting from Parliament Hill, the CBC's Rosemary Barton said the Bloc didn't support the amendment because it believes the mission should continue until its current mandate ends in 2009.
Canada has 2,500 troops participating in the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, mostly around Kandahar province in the country's volatile south.
In another development, the House of Commons passed a budget motion — also a matter of confidence — Thursday afternoon that effectively sidelined a Liberal-sponsored bill promising an education savings plan.
Filed under
Afghanistan,
Canada,
drones
by Winter Patriot
on Friday, March 14, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
NYT : Panel Questions Canadian Role in Afghanistan
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Panel Questions Canadian Role in Afghanistan
By IAN AUSTEN | January 23, 2008
OTTAWA — A government panel said Tuesday that the Canadian military should withdraw from a combat role in Afghanistan next year unless it is reinforced with 1,000 additional troops from other NATO countries.
Canadians are divided about the role their military should play in Afghanistan after legislative approval for the country’s current combat mission in the province of Kandahar ends in February 2009. The deaths of a diplomat and 77 soldiers, most of which have occurred since mid-2006, have caused some politicians to call for a return to a reconstruction role or even a complete troop withdrawal.
Canada has a combat force of about 2,400 soldiers in the country.
The report from the panel, a five-member group led by John Manley, a lawyer and former deputy prime minister, emphasized the importance of continuing the Canadian combat mission. But it also echoed popular resentment in Canada that other NATO countries are sending troops to the region under orders to avoid combat.
“We are going to need to see more troops in Kandahar Province or this mission will not succeed,” Mr. Manley told reporters after giving the report to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a Conservative who appointed the panel. “We’ve heard it again and again: ‘This is NATO’s most important mission.’ Well, it’s time for the rhetoric to end.”
During their three months of study, the panel members said, they heard criticism of the efforts of some other NATO countries, including comments from unidentified NATO commanders.
Some countries, the panel said in the report, notably the United States, Britain and Canada, “have borne more than a proportionate share of war fighting in Afghanistan.”
Mr. Harper, who has suggested that Canada should stay at least until 2011, said he would study the report. Canada’s Parliament, where no opposition party favors extending the combat mission, will vote on the country’s next move, probably by this spring.
By IAN AUSTEN | January 23, 2008
OTTAWA — A government panel said Tuesday that the Canadian military should withdraw from a combat role in Afghanistan next year unless it is reinforced with 1,000 additional troops from other NATO countries.
Canadians are divided about the role their military should play in Afghanistan after legislative approval for the country’s current combat mission in the province of Kandahar ends in February 2009. The deaths of a diplomat and 77 soldiers, most of which have occurred since mid-2006, have caused some politicians to call for a return to a reconstruction role or even a complete troop withdrawal.
Canada has a combat force of about 2,400 soldiers in the country.
The report from the panel, a five-member group led by John Manley, a lawyer and former deputy prime minister, emphasized the importance of continuing the Canadian combat mission. But it also echoed popular resentment in Canada that other NATO countries are sending troops to the region under orders to avoid combat.
“We are going to need to see more troops in Kandahar Province or this mission will not succeed,” Mr. Manley told reporters after giving the report to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a Conservative who appointed the panel. “We’ve heard it again and again: ‘This is NATO’s most important mission.’ Well, it’s time for the rhetoric to end.”
During their three months of study, the panel members said, they heard criticism of the efforts of some other NATO countries, including comments from unidentified NATO commanders.
Some countries, the panel said in the report, notably the United States, Britain and Canada, “have borne more than a proportionate share of war fighting in Afghanistan.”
Mr. Harper, who has suggested that Canada should stay at least until 2011, said he would study the report. Canada’s Parliament, where no opposition party favors extending the combat mission, will vote on the country’s next move, probably by this spring.
Filed under
Afghanistan,
Canada,
lawyers,
NATO
by Winter Patriot
on Wednesday, January 23, 2008
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
NYT : No Breakthroughs at Canada Talks
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
No Breakthroughs at Canada Talks
By THE NEW YORK TIMES | August 22, 2007
MONTEBELLO, Quebec, Aug. 21 — President Bush met with Prime Minster Stephen Harper of Canada and President Felipe Calderón of Mexico here on Tuesday at a gathering that focused primarily on strengthening ties and some thorny trade and border issues, but which produced no breakthroughs.
The three laughed off what they called conspiracy theories in the United States and Canada that they were planning to build an American Union with a common currency.
“A couple of my opposition leaders have speculated on massive water diversions and superhighways to the continent — maybe interplanetary, I’m not sure, as well,” Mr. Harper deadpanned.
Mr. Bush said he disagreed with Canada’s claim that the Northwest Passage was its sovereign territory, though he recognized its claims on the Arctic islands it says are its own.
By THE NEW YORK TIMES | August 22, 2007
MONTEBELLO, Quebec, Aug. 21 — President Bush met with Prime Minster Stephen Harper of Canada and President Felipe Calderón of Mexico here on Tuesday at a gathering that focused primarily on strengthening ties and some thorny trade and border issues, but which produced no breakthroughs.
The three laughed off what they called conspiracy theories in the United States and Canada that they were planning to build an American Union with a common currency.
“A couple of my opposition leaders have speculated on massive water diversions and superhighways to the continent — maybe interplanetary, I’m not sure, as well,” Mr. Harper deadpanned.
Mr. Bush said he disagreed with Canada’s claim that the Northwest Passage was its sovereign territory, though he recognized its claims on the Arctic islands it says are its own.
CBC : Undercover cops tried to incite violence in Montebello: protesters
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Undercover cops tried to incite violence in Montebello: protesters
YouTube video shows union leaders trying to push back masked men
CBC News | August 22, 2007
Police disguised as masked demonstrators tried to incite violence at the North American leaders' summit in Montebello, Que., on Monday protesters say, after footage of the incident was posted on YouTube Tuesday.
The organizers of the protest planned to hold a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday afternoon to talk about the incident shown in the video titled Stop SPP Protest — Union Leader stops provocateurs.
In it, three burly men with bandanas and other covers over their faces push through protesters toward a line of riot police. One of the men has a rock in his hand.
As they move forward, union leaders dressed in suits order the men to put the rock down and leave, accuse them of being police agents provocateurs, and try unsuccessfully to unmask them.
In the end, they squeeze behind the police line, where they are calmly handcuffed and arrested.
The RCMP has refused to comment, while Quebec provincial police have flatly denied that its officers were involved in the incident.
Meanwhile, a retired Ottawa police officer formerly in charge of overseeing demonstrations for the force said after viewing the video, he questions who the masked men really are.
"Were they legitimate protesters? I don’t think so,” said Doug Kirkland.
"Well, if they weren't police, I think they might well have been working in the best interests of police."
He added that if the situation was as it appeared, he did not approve of the tactic. "It's pretty close to baiting," he said.
About 1,200 protesters were in Montebello Monday during a two-day summit attended by U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Felipe Calderon and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
The leaders were to discuss the Security and Prosperity Partnership treaty signed in 2005, that many protesters oppose. The treaty is intended to forge closer trade and security links between the nations, but opponents say negotiations about the agreement are secretive and undemocratic, and treaty itself erodes Canada's control over its natural resources, security and defence.
YouTube video shows union leaders trying to push back masked men
CBC News | August 22, 2007
Police disguised as masked demonstrators tried to incite violence at the North American leaders' summit in Montebello, Que., on Monday protesters say, after footage of the incident was posted on YouTube Tuesday.
The organizers of the protest planned to hold a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday afternoon to talk about the incident shown in the video titled Stop SPP Protest — Union Leader stops provocateurs.
In it, three burly men with bandanas and other covers over their faces push through protesters toward a line of riot police. One of the men has a rock in his hand.
As they move forward, union leaders dressed in suits order the men to put the rock down and leave, accuse them of being police agents provocateurs, and try unsuccessfully to unmask them.
In the end, they squeeze behind the police line, where they are calmly handcuffed and arrested.
The RCMP has refused to comment, while Quebec provincial police have flatly denied that its officers were involved in the incident.
Meanwhile, a retired Ottawa police officer formerly in charge of overseeing demonstrations for the force said after viewing the video, he questions who the masked men really are.
"Were they legitimate protesters? I don’t think so,” said Doug Kirkland.
"Well, if they weren't police, I think they might well have been working in the best interests of police."
He added that if the situation was as it appeared, he did not approve of the tactic. "It's pretty close to baiting," he said.
About 1,200 protesters were in Montebello Monday during a two-day summit attended by U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Felipe Calderon and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
The leaders were to discuss the Security and Prosperity Partnership treaty signed in 2005, that many protesters oppose. The treaty is intended to forge closer trade and security links between the nations, but opponents say negotiations about the agreement are secretive and undemocratic, and treaty itself erodes Canada's control over its natural resources, security and defence.
Edmonton Sun : Harper dismisses 'sad' summit protest as police fire tear gas
Monday, August 20, 2007
Harper dismisses 'sad' summit protest as police fire tear gas
Protesters and riot police face off at North American Leaders' Summit
August 20, 2007
MONTEBELLO, Que. — As riot police fired tear gas and pepper spray to hold back demonstrators outside the Montebello summit Monday, Stephen Harper shook hands with George W. Bush and dismissed the protest as a “sad” spectacle.
The prime minister welcomed Bush to the North American Leaders’ Summit as the U.S. president stepped off his helicopter on to the lush grounds of the posh — and heavily guarded — Chateau Montebello. “I’ve heard it’s nothing,” the prime minister said when asked whether he’d seen the protesters. “A couple hundred? It’s sad.”
Bush looked over his shoulder and smiled mischievously when asked the same question, but remained silent and walked with the prime minister into the building.
The men discussed border issues, trade, and Canada’s sovereignty over the Arctic, said officials from the Canadian government.
Harper drew the president’s attention to comments made last weekend by the former U.S. ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, who said it makes sense to recognize Canadian sovereignty over the Arctic waters.
The president offered little reaction and certainly did not reverse his country’s longstanding official view — that the northern islands belong to Canada but the waters are international territory.
Harper said he regretted a U.S. withdrawal from talks to establish border pre-clearance rules that would speed up traffic at land borders, and added that he hoped to relaunch them.
Harper and Bush are to meet Tuesday with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who arrived later Monday afternoon, to discuss the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP).
Sources have told The Canadian Press that the leaders will wrap up their summit Tuesday with a call for a new border disaster protocol to avoid a repeat of the crippling tie-ups that occurred after 9-11.
While the meetings inside were cordial, it was far less cozy outside the Nordic-style log cabin and the surrounding estate.
A line of police in riot gear jostled with dozens of demonstrators — the vanguard of hundreds who marched on the front gate of the summit compound shouting taunts. Officers used pepper spray and tear gas to hold off the protesters, who responded by flinging rocks and branches. Two people were hauled away in handcuffs.
The confrontation settled into a face-to-face standoff between a hardcore group of protesters and police before demonstrators began to drift off in the late afternoon. But as about 200 demonstrators lingered, police pushed them back, firing many rounds of tear gas to clear the road.
Angry anarchists and family-friendly activists converged on Montebello on Monday to protest the summit, but concerns about huge, violent demonstrations fizzled.
About 20 busloads of protesters from Ottawa spilled on to the highway running through the hamlet. More than 500 people marched along the road toward the gate of the summit compound which is ringed by a four-metre-high steel security fence. They chanted slogans and carried banners, including one reading: “Say No To Americanada.”
Police stood guard along the perimeter and patrolled the area in cars, motorcycles, ATVs and helicopters.
Riot police lined up in front of the front gates as the marchers — some wearing anarchist red-and-black flags and carrying signs condemning Bush as a war criminal — approached.
Despite the jostling, the tear gas and the pepper spray, it was a far cry from previous meetings — such as the G-8, APEC and the Summit of the Americas — when thousands of people turned out and demonstrations turned violent.
Protesters are barred from the compound but their activities are being relayed to hotel lobby where they can be viewed on two video monitors.
There are seemingly as many causes as protesters, who condemn North American integration, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the leaders’ performance on the environment, the plight of aboriginals, and the human-rights abuses committed in the war on terror.
One common complaint echoed by all is the secrecy surrounding the meeting. Susan Howard-Azzey, a homemaker from St.Catharines, Ont., criticized what she called the lack of transparency and consultation in the SPP process.
“I’m not impressed that the SPP is making such big decisions on behalf of Canadians without consulting us and when we go out to the streets we’re criminalized.” A group of powerful business executives has been invited to make a closed-door presentation Tuesday at the summit on changes they believe the continent needs. No such invitation was extended to scientists, environmentalists, or other social activists.
Mandeep Dhillon, a spokeswoman for No One is Illegal, a group of immigration activists based in Montreal, said the aim of protesters was to disrupt the summit. “The ultimate thing would be for this conference to be halted. . . I can’t say who would be able to do this, but the walls that have been established in Montebello deserve to come down.” Other protesters were less confrontational. A few hundred labour activists from Ottawa called for a “family-friendly” demonstration and stood back from the police lines. In Ottawa, there were no demonstrators at the heavily-guarded U.S. Embassy and the only strangers on Parliament Hill were camera-toting tourists.
The final communique from the two-day summit will include an order from Harper, Bush and Calderon to their respective cabinet ministers to create new border regulations for emergencies, said sources in two countries.
The leaders want to see rules on who and what would be allowed to cross North American borders amid crises like a terrorist attack or an outbreak of avian flu.
The move is the latest effort to increase security while allowing goods to flow freely, and stems from the chaotic aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S. The security clampdowns and protracted lineups six years ago cost the North American economy billions of dollars and, by some estimates, has since reduced Canadian exports to the U.S. by more than $10 billion.
The border announcement is one of several expected at the summit. The leaders also plan to announce that they will recognize the research of each country’s food and drug regime in an effort to reduce costs and avoid duplication.
A Canada-Mexico deal is also brewing that would allow more Mexican migrant workers into Canada under an expanded program for agricultural labourers. U.S. Congress killed a similar attempt earlier this year to reach such an agreement between that country and Mexico. Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians said people shouldn’t be fooled about who really sets the agenda at these summits: the 30 business leaders who sit on the North American Competitiveness Council.
The group comprises leaders from 10 companies in each country and includes corporations like Wal-Mart, General Electric and weapons-maker Lockheed Martin. They advise the three national governments on facilitating trade.
Barlow called for a moratorium on the “profoundly anti-democratic” SPP until the citizens of all three countries are consulted and their elected representatives are given oversight over the business-driven initiative.
Flanked by U.S and Mexican opponents of the scheme and Canadian labour activists, Barlow told a news conference Monday that big business is trying to create a competitive North American trade bloc. “And for this they need regulatory, resource, labour and environmental convergence to the lowest common standards,” she said, predicting that it will ultimately include a common passport, common currency and free trade in resources, including oil, gas and water.
“This is not about security for people, social security, security for the poor, environmental security or job security. This is about security for the big corporations for North America.” Even before the summit began, it drew protests, including one Sunday that resulted in a commercial rail line being temporarily blocked in Montreal.
Protesters and riot police face off at North American Leaders' Summit
August 20, 2007
MONTEBELLO, Que. — As riot police fired tear gas and pepper spray to hold back demonstrators outside the Montebello summit Monday, Stephen Harper shook hands with George W. Bush and dismissed the protest as a “sad” spectacle.
The prime minister welcomed Bush to the North American Leaders’ Summit as the U.S. president stepped off his helicopter on to the lush grounds of the posh — and heavily guarded — Chateau Montebello. “I’ve heard it’s nothing,” the prime minister said when asked whether he’d seen the protesters. “A couple hundred? It’s sad.”
Bush looked over his shoulder and smiled mischievously when asked the same question, but remained silent and walked with the prime minister into the building.
The men discussed border issues, trade, and Canada’s sovereignty over the Arctic, said officials from the Canadian government.
Harper drew the president’s attention to comments made last weekend by the former U.S. ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, who said it makes sense to recognize Canadian sovereignty over the Arctic waters.
The president offered little reaction and certainly did not reverse his country’s longstanding official view — that the northern islands belong to Canada but the waters are international territory.
Harper said he regretted a U.S. withdrawal from talks to establish border pre-clearance rules that would speed up traffic at land borders, and added that he hoped to relaunch them.
Harper and Bush are to meet Tuesday with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who arrived later Monday afternoon, to discuss the North American Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP).
Sources have told The Canadian Press that the leaders will wrap up their summit Tuesday with a call for a new border disaster protocol to avoid a repeat of the crippling tie-ups that occurred after 9-11.
While the meetings inside were cordial, it was far less cozy outside the Nordic-style log cabin and the surrounding estate.
A line of police in riot gear jostled with dozens of demonstrators — the vanguard of hundreds who marched on the front gate of the summit compound shouting taunts. Officers used pepper spray and tear gas to hold off the protesters, who responded by flinging rocks and branches. Two people were hauled away in handcuffs.
The confrontation settled into a face-to-face standoff between a hardcore group of protesters and police before demonstrators began to drift off in the late afternoon. But as about 200 demonstrators lingered, police pushed them back, firing many rounds of tear gas to clear the road.
Angry anarchists and family-friendly activists converged on Montebello on Monday to protest the summit, but concerns about huge, violent demonstrations fizzled.
About 20 busloads of protesters from Ottawa spilled on to the highway running through the hamlet. More than 500 people marched along the road toward the gate of the summit compound which is ringed by a four-metre-high steel security fence. They chanted slogans and carried banners, including one reading: “Say No To Americanada.”
Police stood guard along the perimeter and patrolled the area in cars, motorcycles, ATVs and helicopters.
Riot police lined up in front of the front gates as the marchers — some wearing anarchist red-and-black flags and carrying signs condemning Bush as a war criminal — approached.
Despite the jostling, the tear gas and the pepper spray, it was a far cry from previous meetings — such as the G-8, APEC and the Summit of the Americas — when thousands of people turned out and demonstrations turned violent.
Protesters are barred from the compound but their activities are being relayed to hotel lobby where they can be viewed on two video monitors.
There are seemingly as many causes as protesters, who condemn North American integration, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the leaders’ performance on the environment, the plight of aboriginals, and the human-rights abuses committed in the war on terror.
One common complaint echoed by all is the secrecy surrounding the meeting. Susan Howard-Azzey, a homemaker from St.Catharines, Ont., criticized what she called the lack of transparency and consultation in the SPP process.
“I’m not impressed that the SPP is making such big decisions on behalf of Canadians without consulting us and when we go out to the streets we’re criminalized.” A group of powerful business executives has been invited to make a closed-door presentation Tuesday at the summit on changes they believe the continent needs. No such invitation was extended to scientists, environmentalists, or other social activists.
Mandeep Dhillon, a spokeswoman for No One is Illegal, a group of immigration activists based in Montreal, said the aim of protesters was to disrupt the summit. “The ultimate thing would be for this conference to be halted. . . I can’t say who would be able to do this, but the walls that have been established in Montebello deserve to come down.” Other protesters were less confrontational. A few hundred labour activists from Ottawa called for a “family-friendly” demonstration and stood back from the police lines. In Ottawa, there were no demonstrators at the heavily-guarded U.S. Embassy and the only strangers on Parliament Hill were camera-toting tourists.
The final communique from the two-day summit will include an order from Harper, Bush and Calderon to their respective cabinet ministers to create new border regulations for emergencies, said sources in two countries.
The leaders want to see rules on who and what would be allowed to cross North American borders amid crises like a terrorist attack or an outbreak of avian flu.
The move is the latest effort to increase security while allowing goods to flow freely, and stems from the chaotic aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S. The security clampdowns and protracted lineups six years ago cost the North American economy billions of dollars and, by some estimates, has since reduced Canadian exports to the U.S. by more than $10 billion.
The border announcement is one of several expected at the summit. The leaders also plan to announce that they will recognize the research of each country’s food and drug regime in an effort to reduce costs and avoid duplication.
A Canada-Mexico deal is also brewing that would allow more Mexican migrant workers into Canada under an expanded program for agricultural labourers. U.S. Congress killed a similar attempt earlier this year to reach such an agreement between that country and Mexico. Maude Barlow of the Council of Canadians said people shouldn’t be fooled about who really sets the agenda at these summits: the 30 business leaders who sit on the North American Competitiveness Council.
The group comprises leaders from 10 companies in each country and includes corporations like Wal-Mart, General Electric and weapons-maker Lockheed Martin. They advise the three national governments on facilitating trade.
Barlow called for a moratorium on the “profoundly anti-democratic” SPP until the citizens of all three countries are consulted and their elected representatives are given oversight over the business-driven initiative.
Flanked by U.S and Mexican opponents of the scheme and Canadian labour activists, Barlow told a news conference Monday that big business is trying to create a competitive North American trade bloc. “And for this they need regulatory, resource, labour and environmental convergence to the lowest common standards,” she said, predicting that it will ultimately include a common passport, common currency and free trade in resources, including oil, gas and water.
“This is not about security for people, social security, security for the poor, environmental security or job security. This is about security for the big corporations for North America.” Even before the summit began, it drew protests, including one Sunday that resulted in a commercial rail line being temporarily blocked in Montreal.
Filed under
Canada,
SPP,
Stephen Harper,
UK
by Winter Patriot
on Monday, August 20, 2007
[
link |
| home
]
| home
]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
