T Nation

Canadian Laws Crush Dissent?

Interesting stuff – I know Canada doesn’t have as much protection of freedom of speech as the U.S., but I wonder if there is anything to the letter at the top here in which the writer claims the journalist could be prosecuted for being involved with bringing President Bush to Canada? Probably not – but I don’t know enough about Canadian law.

This link contains a letter written to a journalist, basically saying the journalist could be prosecuted under Canadian laws:


Canada Free Press threatened with jail for supporting Bush

Cover Story
Canada Free Press threatened with jail for supporting Bush

November 27, 2004

Re: your article in the free press.
( By your tone, and obvious despisal of the anti-Bush protestors, you and your free press is no more independent and fair than the corporate owned media. If you and your editors want to affiliate yourself with them, and should you have any say in Bush’s visit here, as such you and your colleagues could be personally liable to prosecution under the Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act by virtue of section 21 of the Canadian Criminal Code, for crimes so serious that they are punishable in Canada by up to life imprisonment.)

Here are two articles you may wish to educate yourself by (sic):

Gloria Bergen

If you follow the link above, below this letter are two letters written to the Canadian government by Canadian law professors, citing incorrect “facts” and misrepresenting things such as White House Counsel Alberto Gonzalaze’s memorandum on treatment of detainees, that make the argument that Canadian government officials could be prosecuted for extending the invitation to Bush to speak – the letter writer extends the prosecution to the journalist, should she have had anything to do with the invitation.

Interesting stuff – follow the link and read the whole think for yourselves.

It seems to me that the professors are trying to use the laws to stifle debate and to control government policy – and that it’s quite a stretch to apply it that way.

However, one can see why the U.S. has been very reluctant to sign off on the ICC treaties, which would give foreign courts jurisdiction to pursue claims such as these.

Gee…I don’t think those Canadians are living very free…oh my.

That’st the way those ultra-left-wing-liberals such as vroom like it up here.

Hahahaha. Nitwits.

There was an article in the paper not too long ago that discussed the fact that it might be possible for Canada to arrest Bush during his visit for war crimes.

It was interesting, but it ended on the note that heads of state on official visits are immune to this. Otherwise however, it is theoretically possible, so I’d advise Bush not to plan any fishing trips here after his term ends.

As for any other suggestions or nonsense being discussed, I can only guess what kind of quackery is available out there if you choose to go and look for it.

A little more that slightly touches on the topic – and good sentiments for our Canadian friends – from today’s WSJ Editorials:

Canadian Warm Front
November 30, 2004; Page A18

Snow is not predicted for Ottawa until Thursday, but watch for President Bush to receive a frosty reception from at least one quarter when he arrives in the Canadian capital today for a state visit. Some 15,000 anti-Bush protesters are expected to march up Parliament Hill. One group – Lawyers Against the War – wants the U.S. President arrested and charged with war crimes.

All this makes for good television – as did MP Carolyn Parrish’s theatrics on Canadian TV this month, when she stomped merrily on a Bush doll during an appearance on a “comedy” show. The parliamentarian had earlier offered such pleasantries as “Damn Americans, I hate the bastards.” So it goes with much of “elite” Canadian opinion about us Yanks – at least among the few who vacation in the south of France rather than in Florida.

So it’s refreshing to learn that Canada’s hoi polloi (i.e., the silent majority) take a far different view of the U.S. According to poll results released yesterday, some 71% of Canadians identify the U.S. as their country’s closest friend. In addition, 60% say they have “positive” feelings about America, while a further 25% say their feelings are “somewhat positive” – adding up to a grand total of 85% with good vibes about the U.S. The main reason given for the close ties is trade and economic relations.

The poll was commissioned by the non-profit Friends of America, itself a name to take note of. Friends of America says it is “funded by ordinary Canadians who want to strengthen the friendship between our countries and are tired of watching Canada being labeled anti-American because of a vocal minority.”

If this sounds schmaltzy, we suppose it is. But it highlights an important point: Despite occasional disagreements, the two countries have a better relationship than any other border states in the world – starting with the $1.2 billion in trade that crosses the border every day. Many Americans would be surprised to learn that Canada – not Saudi Arabia – is the biggest oil exporter to the U.S.

The U.S.-Canada relationship has been strained in recent years by disputes over Canadian exports of softwood lumber and beef and by Canada’s decision not to participate in the war on Iraq. It didn’t help that until a year ago Canada had a prime minister who was openly scornful of America. But now there’s a new PM, a new attitude and a new commitment to improving ties with the U.S.

For his part, Mr. Bush’s promise last week to work to lift the absurd ban on Canadian beef will also help. The ban was put in place in 2003 after a solitary Canadian cow tested positive for mad cow disease. The President’s visit to Halifax, Nova Scotia, to thank Atlantic Canadians for their assistance on September 11 is an important gesture. Some 250 aircraft carrying 44,000 people were diverted to Canadian airports that day; many of the displaced travelers were welcomed into Canadian homes.

There’s one question on the Friends of America poll where we think the respondents got it wrong. Asked about Americans’ views of Canada, only 33% of our friends to the North thought they were positive. Take it from us, the real number is far higher.

There are ambulance chasers and scum lawyers everywhere. It is just too easy to take an issue like this and twist it to fit an adgenda to enrich these idiots more. The only thing they care about is billing hours… What better way to get some but to force some lilly livered politician to ‘justify himself’ legally… read thru hundreds of hours of billable hours for some lawyer to say what the politican should have if he had the balls to stand up for what is right. Lawyers have wayyy too much power here(most of our scum politicians are lawyers)