In Alberta Queen's Bench Associate Chief Justice J. D. Rooke's fight to take back the legal system, perhaps he should be reminded self-rep OPLCAers are far from the only problem and, in fact, may be a very small part. Reference parasitic lawyers running from courtroom to courtroom, sometimes ill-prepared causing unnecessary adjournments as they attempt to maximize billables. Or those who file silly lawsuits on behalf of clients (e.g. SLAPPs - Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) and accompanying ridiculous, nonsensical motions, motion briefs, examinations for discovery, affidavits ..... ad nauseam.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Alberta judge fights to take back legal system Kirk Makin
Friday, September 28, 2012
Gavel (Frances Twitty/iStock photo)
An exasperated Alberta judge has issued a call to arms against legal
“parasites” who hijack court proceedings with nonsensical motions and bizarre
spiritual and legal principles of their own making.
Mr. Justice J.D. Rooke of Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench said these people,
who are usually self-represented, assert aggressive claims to be above the law,
create courtroom filibusters and present convoluted legal motions that waste
valuable time and cause immense frustration to court officials.
Many of them undertake frequent court challenges.
“The growing volume of this kind of vexatious litigation is a reason why
these Reasons [for Judgment] suggest a strong response to curb this misconduct,”
Judge Rooke said in a 155-page divorce judgment.
He dubbed them Organized Pseudo-legal Commercial Argument (OPCA) litigants,
and gave them further classifications such as De-Taxers, Freemen-on-the-Land,
Sovereign Citizens, Strawmen and adherents of Moorish Law. Judge Rooke said he
is determined “to uncover, expose, collage and publish” their tactics to send an
unmistakable message to the “gurus” who inspire them.
Although some of these litigants are not affiliated with a group, Judge Rooke
said, others have bought tracts or DVDs from other frequent users of the court
system that explain their methods. The belief systems are typically based on a
highly conspiratorial sense that they are being cheated or deceived by the
“hidden hand” of the state, the judge said.
The case in question involved Dennis Larry Meads, who Judge Rooke said is an
intelligent, obstinate adherent to a set of wingy beliefs and legal precepts
that have no place in the courtroom. At his initial court appearance, the judge
said, Mr. Meads asserted that he was not a child of the state, but “a child of
the almighty God Jehovah; a living, flesh and blood sentient-man.”
Mr. Meads claimed a right to address custody and support issues with his wife
based on his own reading of biblical imperatives, U.S. commercial regulatory
codes, and principles of “universal law.”
In documents featuring multi-coloured ink, ornate language and blue
thumb-prints, he demanded that his wife cease and desist from “an Enticement in
Slavery,” and warned that she risks being subject to “full commercial liability
and your unlimited civil liability.”
Far from being an isolated oddity, this sort of presentation is permeating
courtrooms in almost all areas of the law across the country, Judge Rooke said.
He suggested the courts take strong action to block such tactics.
Postscript
Gavels have never been part of Canadian courtrooms they're an American thing.
The combined cost of the components for the iPhone5 is estimated at $197 or only $5 more than for the iPhone 4S. Arik Hesseldahl reports on Digits. (Photo Getty Images)
Caveman: "Mitt will be the "harvestee" on November 6th ....."
New Romney Video: In 1985 he said, "Bain would harvest companies for profits"
By David Corn
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Campaigning for the presidency, Mitt Romney has pointed to his stint as the
founder and manager of Bain Capital, a private equity firm, as proof he can rev
up the US economy and create jobs at a faster clip than President Barack Obama.
Last year, while stumping in Florida, Romney declared, "You'd have a president who
has spent his life in business—small business, big business—and who knows
something about how jobs are created and how we compete around the world."
His
campaign spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, has said that Romney's Bain days afford him
more expertise than Obama to "focus on job creation and turn around our nation's
faltering economy." Romney has even claimed that during his tenure at
Bain, "we were able to help create over 100,000 jobs." In his acceptance speech at the Republican
convention, Romney smacked Obama for having "almost no experience working in a
business" and tied that to the sluggish recovery.
But at Bain, Romney's top priority wasn't to boost employment. As the Wall Street Journal recentlynoted, creating jobs "wasn't the aim of Bain or other private-equity firms, which measure success by returns produced for investors." And, the newspaper reported, Romney's 100,000-jobs claim is tough to evaluate.
Mother Jones has obtained a video from 1985 in which Romney, describing Bain's formation, showed how he viewed the firm's mission. He explained that its goal was to identify potential and hidden value in companies, buy significant stakes in these businesses, and then "harvest them at a significant profit" within five to eight years.
The video was included in a CD-ROM created in 1998 to mark the 25th anniversary of Bain & Company, the consulting firm that gave birth to Bain Capital. Here is the full clip, as it appeared on that CD-ROM (the editing occurred within the original).
This clip shows the young CEO focusing on businesses as targets for his investors not as job creators or community stakeholders.
Listened to a fascinating interview with Brian Kelcy (cited below) who's now an Instructor of Civic Ethics at the University of Winnipeg. He called for Sam Katz's resignation one of the reasons being this latest revelation will consume his time and energy taking away from what he should be doing as Mayor.
Terry MacLeod, co-host of CBC Winnipeg's morning show, interviewed Mr. Kelcy. Checked earlier this morning but it was not yet posted on the network's Audio Archives (http://www.cbc.ca/inforadio/).
Time to focus exclusively on your business interests Mr. Katz.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Critics weigh in on mayor's Arizona house purchase Sam Katz should consider stepping down, says ex-adviser
Friday, September 28, 2012
Windgate Ranch, the house at bottom with the wavy-shaped pool, was purchased by by Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz in August. No documents disclosing the price paid are in the public record, but Katz said he paid more than $1 million US.(Google Maps).
Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz's purchase of a home from the sister of a Shindico executive has people talking, including a former adviser who suggests Katz should leave office.
Katz refused to give further details about the Arizona house purchase, other than to say he paid fair market value for it. (CBC)
The transaction is raising eyebrows because Shindico has been involved in some controversial real estate deals with the City of Winnipeg in recent months, including a land swap involving several fire hall properties.
"My advice would be pick a date and start figuring out how to go with as much dignity as you possibly can," said Brian Kelcey, who once worked as a policy adviser to Katz.
Katz has repeatedly stated that his relationship with the Shindlemans does
not constitute a conflict of interest.
On at least eight occasions, Katz was present when Shindico business was on
the city hall agenda, and he has never recused himself in public meetings due to
a conflict of interest involving the Shindlemans.
The audit will review the city's real-estate transactions and policies going
back at least five years, although Katz wanted the audit to cover the past 12
years.
Colin Craig of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation said council's unanimous
vote on Thursday for an audit of the city's real estate transactions is a good
step.
However, Craig said Katz should provide more information about his own real
estate deals in Arizona.
"This is different from most other transactions," he said.
"You don't expect to know every single thing about a politician's life. But
just given some of the other elements to this story, I think the public does
deserve more information."
Katz refused to give more details about the Arizona house purchase, other
than to say he paid fair market value for it.
Tighten conflict rules, says councillor
Meanwhile, at least one city councillor is calling on the Manitoba government
to tighten its conflict-of-interest legislation for city council members.
The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act does not require members of council to
disclose properties they own outside Winnipeg.
River Heights Coun. John Orlikow said he asked the province earlier this year
to amend the act to require disclosure of properties within Manitoba.
But now, Orlikow said he will ask the province to make council members
disclose properties they own anywhere in the world.
"It could be in Arizona, it could be in [the] Bahamas, it could be the Cayman
Islands, it doesn't matter. It's not just for the mayor, but for all
councillors," he said.
Earlier this month, it was revealed that Katz had purchased an Arizona-based company, Duddy
Enterprises, from Phil Sheegl, who is the City of Winnipeg's chief
administrative officer.
That transaction does not appear on the mayor's statement of assets and
interests, which has to be filed under the conflict-of-interest act.
While Katz owns 100 per cent of Duddy Enterprises, he said he did not need to
declare it because "if there's potential land to be owned outside the province,
you do not list it."
Katz said the company is currently not an active business, but he might use
it in the future.
No sooner do we learn today that the Judicial Conduct Committee of the Canadian Judicial Council appointed a new Independent Counsel to replace Mr. Guy "The Cat" Pratte who resigned recently, but his resignation is now being challenged in the Federal Court of Canada by Mr. Rocco "The Great Predictor" Galati.
This should not come as a total surprise given "Predictor's" comments in a recent The Lawyers Weekly article (Sparks Fly Over Douglas Case Resignation - Cristin Schmitz, September 21, 2012 Issue).
Suzanne is a partner and the head of the Montréal litigation practice. She
practises commercial litigation (breach of commercial contracts, representation
of banks, bankruptcy and insolvency, shareholder disputes, Competition
Act, various real estate matters including commercial leasing,
manufacturer’s liability, class actions) as well as litigation in civil and
administrative matters, such as judicial review before the Federal Courts and
the investigation conducted by the Québec Court of Appeal regarding the removal
from office of a judge of an inferior tribunal (Suzanne was then assisting the
Court of Appeal).
She pleads before all jurisdictions: Superior Court of Québec, Québec Court
of Appeal and the Federal Courts. She has also appeared before the Supreme
Court of Canada.
Affiliations
Québec Bar Association
Canadian Bar Association
Industry Recognition
Best Lawyers in Canada 2013 in Corporate and Commercial
Litigation
Benchmark Litigation Canada 2012: a Litigation Star – Québec
Named a BTI Client Service All-Star in 2011
Recognized by The Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory 2010, as a leading
practitioner in the areas of corporate commercial litigation, directors’ and
officiers’ liability and class action litigation
The Best Lawyers in Canada 2011 in corporate and commercial
litigation
Lexpert/American Lawyer Media publication, A Guide to the Leading
500 Lawyers in Canada 2010
The 2010 Chambers Global’s The World’s Leading Lawyers for Business,
as a recommended lawyer in Dispute Resolution in Québec
The 2010 Lexpert Guide to the Leading Canada/US Cross-Border Litigation
Lawyers in Canada, in the areas of Corporate Commercial, Class Action and
Securities
Le Monde Juridique 2008: "Litigator of the Year"
Featured in Lexpert magazine’s September 2003 article, “Canada’s Top 25
Women Lawyers”
Suzanne became a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers in March
2005
Pro Bono/Community Work
Member of the Board of Directors of the Fondation Jean Duceppe
Suzanne teaches evidence and civil representation at the École du Barreau du
Québec
She was for many years involved in the organization of the annual Moot Court
for the Guy Guérin Cup, which is the provincial competition leading to the
Sopinka Cup
Regarding the second. What will happen to Guy "The Cat" Pratte's application before The Federal Court of Canada that Inquiry Counsel George "The New Rocky" Macintosh's cross-examination of Thompson Dorfman Sweatman Senior Managing Partner Michael Sinclair and Jack "Polaroid" King be struck from the record plus "TNR" not be allowed to cross-examine any remaining witnesses?
Will she allow it to die a natural death or re-file? That will be a defining moment for the role of an "Independent" Counsel. Who won the power struggle - Committee Members or Independent Counsel?If you're a betting person place your money on the Committee.
Finally, how was Madame Cote selected? Were any other candidates interviewed? Unfortunately, these are questions to which taxpayers will never have answers.
Wonder what "The Cat's" thinking right about now?
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
New Independent Counsel appointed in the matter concerning the Honourable Lori Douglas
Ottawa, 27 September 2012 –The Canadian Judicial Council has announced the appointment of a new Independent Counsel in the matter concerning the Honourable Lori Douglas.
The Honourable Neil Wittmann, Vice-Chairperson of the Judicial Conduct Committee of Council, has appointed Ms Suzanne Côté, a partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, to serve as Independent Counsel in accordance with the By-laws of the Council. The appointment is effective immediately.
The mandate of Independent Counsel is to present the case to the Inquiry Committee reviewing this matter. This means ensuring all allegations made against the judge can be considered by the Inquiry Committee. All relevant evidence, both favourable and unfavourable to the judge, must be presented so that clear conclusions can be drawn about the judge's ability to discharge the duties of judicial office. All this evidence must be disclosed to the judge, who has a right to be heard at the hearing, to cross-examine witnesses and to adduce evidence on her own behalf.
Independent Counsel are expected to act within the parameters of the mandate given at the time of appointment. However, once appointed, they receive no instructions in regard to the allegations against the judge. They decide, in their own judgement, how to present the case and conduct themself, in keeping with the public interest.
To preserve the integrity of the process, and in accordance with our By-laws and policies, a certain number of Council members take no part in any of the proceedings leading up to, and including, the proceedings before the Inquiry Committee. Chief Justice Wittmann, who in his capacity of Vice-chairperson of the Judicial Conduct Committee of Council first reviewed this matter when a complaint was received by the Council, continues to be responsible for certain aspects of the procedure, including the appointment of Independent Counsel. In discharging his duties in this respect, Chief Justice Wittmann acts alone and takes no direction from the Inquiry Committee or from other Council members.
This clear division of responsibilities, within the Canadian Judicial Council, ensures that the review of allegations against judges remains fair at all times. When an Inquiry Committee completes its work, only Council members who have not participated in the process until that time are called upon to review the matter and make a report to the Minister of Justice.
Contact
Norman Sabourin
Executive Director and Senior General Counsel
(613) 288-1566 ext 313
Perhaps that's what Globe and Mail columnist Leah McLaren was thinking when
it came time to sell her home. In a recent column, she extols the charms of her "red brick
Victorian row house" in Toronto's Bell Woods Park area.
McLaren goes to great lengths describing how she whipped her "modest little
worker’s cottage" into a "sparkling jewel" — insulating the attic, building
firewalls, rebuilding the front porch, updating appliances, painting and
landscaping.
All for just $599,000.
But at what cost to her journalistic credibility?
"It would seem as though she is abusing her position of authority in the
press to further her own economic interests: selling her house," writes Michael MacDonald at Canada.com. "Unless, of course,
her home happened to be the most interesting home for sale that week."
To be fair, McLaren's column appeared in the Globe's real estate section,
entitled Home of the Week.
But it couldn't come at a worse time. The Globe is still reeling from a plagiarism scandal involving star columnist Margaret
Wente.
For McLaren, at least, there may be a happy ending with Twitter reports
suggesting her house has since sold — at more than the asking price.
Prosecutor on leave after accused of biting man at adult store
By Rosemary R. Sobol
Tribune reporter
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Prosecutor on leave after charged with biting adult store worker
An "apparently intoxicated" Cook County prosecutor became disruptive in an adult store on the North Side and bit a worker in the leg when told to leave, authorities say.
Sarah
Naughton, 31, an assistant state's attorney since 2008, was charged with
misdemeanor battery and misdemeanor criminal trespass, police said. She has
been placed on administrative leave and will not be allowed to litigate cases,
according to state's attorney spokesman Andy Conklin.
Naughton and a
companion, both "apparently intoxicated," entered Taboo Tabou in the 800 block
of West Belmont Avenue around 7:40 p.m. Saturday, police said. They became
disruptive and were told to leave, according to the police report.
But
she "became belligerent" and bit a worker, leaving a visible welt on his leg,
the report said. Her companion, Bradley Gould, 31, shoved the worker and made
"menacing gestures'' to him, according to the report.
Taboo Tabou owner
Mark Thomas said as soon the couple entered the store, the manager “knew they
were trouble.’’
“They managed to get 10 or 12 feet into the store and she
could tell they had diminished capacity,'’ he said.
“We’ve been around since
1986, we’ve gone through skin heads, drug dealers, drunken Cubs fans, we’ve been
through it all."
The manager told the couple she would “love to” have
them return another time, Thomas said. They left but started banging on the
front windows. “They were giving the finger to everybody who walked by,’’
Thomas said. “They were acting like jackasses.’’
The manager called for
help from a 35-year-old employee of a cigar shop next door that Thomas also
owns. “You don’t know who you are talking to,'’ Naughton told the worker and
gave him a push, Thomas said.
Gould then tried to take a swing at the
worker and “chaos ensued,'’ according to Thomas.
“They were really
wobbling and she went down really quick on her own. When she fell, she grabbed
his leg and bit him on the ankle and broke his skin,’’ Thomas
said.
Thomas took the worker to Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center,
and Naughton and Gould were taken to a police station where they requested
medical attention.
They were taken by Chicago Fire Department ambulance
to Masonic Medical Center and later released from police custody.
The
victim, reached by phone Tuesday afternoon, declined to comment.
What does your Member of Parliament know about you? More importantly what do you know about your MP?
Good Day Readers:
Many when completing their federal income tax return answer "yes" to the innocuous sounding question:
As a Canadian citizen, do you authorize the Canada Revenue Agency to give your name, address, date of birth, and citizenship to Elections Canada to update the National Register of Electors?
After watching and reading the following, in concert with the Conservative Party of Canada's use of its Constituent Information Management System, a giant online vacuum cleaner-like data collection system, you might wish to re-think your response to that question. CyberSmokeBlog certainly will. Are the New Democratic and Liberal federal Parties any different?
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Political parties operate outside Canada's privacy laws Politician's email provokes debate, concern and surprise
By Daniel Schwartz
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
In 2011, about 10,000 people signed a petition addressed to Jason Kenney and
his ministry, Citizenship and Immigration, demanding that Alvaro Orozco, a young
Nicaraguan who was facing deportation, be allowed to stay in Canada.
Orozco, a gay artist, did avoid deportation, but that
petition is back in the news after Kenney sent out an email extolling what
the government of Canada has been doing on "gay and lesbian refugee
protection."
It startled many in the gay community that a federal minister had their
contact information at his disposal. It also pulled back the covers on the use
of personal data and, in particular, the lack of Canadian laws governing what
personal information Canadian political parties are allowed to keep and exploit,
essentially as they see fit.
As a little-reported study for Canada's privacy commissioner noted recently,
"Canadian federal privacy protection law does not cover federal political
parties."
In fact, even Ann Cavoukian, the Information and Privacy Commissioner for
Ontario, was astounded today when she realized the parties are not covered.
Ontario Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian is concerned that political parties can use information they gather from voters for purposes other than for what it was intended without voter's consent. (Canadian Press)
In this case, it seems that Kenney's parliamentary office had saved the names
and email addresses of the petition signatories and included them on the mailing
list for the message that Kenney sent out on Friday.
When people sign a petition on Change.org, the web site used to try to help
Alvaro Orozco, they provide their name, email address and full address and, if
they wish, a personal comment.
They can also choose whether or not their signature will be displayed
publicly, and they can read
the site's privacy policy.
If someone read down far enough, they would learn that when they sign a
petition, their "personal information may be delivered to the intended recipient
of such campaign and/or the creator of such campaign."
As well, when someone opts for public display of their signature, which is
the default on the site, they "are also consenting to the disclosure of your
name, city, state and a link to your change.org user profile."
Not our jurisdiction
Anne-Marie Hayden, the spokeswoman for the Office of the Privacy Commissioner
of Canada, told the CBC's Louise Elliott that while the office finds this story
troubling, it does not come under its jurisdiction.
"Our office does not have jurisdiction over political parties under either
the Privacy Act or the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents
Act," Hayden wrote in an email.
The Canada Elections Act specifies how the voters' lists that they provide to
parties and MPs may be used — for communicating with voters, soliciting
contributions, recruiting members — but that's it.
While most countries with a mature democratic system have at least some
regulation through privacy laws that cover political parties, Canada and the
U.S. stand out as exceptions.
The only provincial legislation that covers political parties is British Columbia's
Personal Information Protection Act.
'Voter-ID' big business in the U S
For party activists who want to mine data to help get their candidates
elected, the U S is really the place to be, with more personal data on voters
available.
Their sources include voter registration, lists for rent, iPhone apps for
political canvassing and Google's Political Campaign Toolkit for targeted online
advertising campaigns.
Jennifer Stoddard, the federal Privacy Commissioner, oversees privacy laws but has no jurisdiction over the privacy practices of political parties. (Canadian Press)
They have also had much more experience with robocalling, robotexting and social media campaigns.
"The last decade has indeed seen dramatic developments in the scale and
sophistication of technologies for reaching potential voters and donors in the
U S, gleaning more refined information about them, and building list management
and profiling databases," write
Colin Bennett and Robin Bayley in the analysis commissioned by federal
Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart.
Bennett is a political scientist at University of Victoria and the author of
six books on privacy. Bayley is a privacy and policy adviser with Linden
Consulting in Victoria.
In Canada, they write, "there has been scant attention paid to the extent to
which parties collect, use and disclose personal information, and the associated
risks."
They note that "the privacy policies of Canada's federal political parties,
if they exist, are not always easy to locate" and have vague commitments and
incomplete remedies.
"In terms of personal-information handling information and processes, none
discloses or hints at the presence of a privacy management framework."
How parties build their databases
Tom
Flanagan, now a political scientist at the University of Calgary, also has
extensive experience in the backrooms of the Reform Party and the Conservative
Party, including as a national campaign manager.
University of Calgary's Tom Flannagan says a good data base of information on voters is 'an invaluable asset to any political party.' (CBC)
He was instrumental in moving his party towards using a permanent
constituency information management system (CIMS), now the envy of the other
parties, and he wrote about building and using the CIMS in his 2007 book,
Harper's Team. He also managed the Wild Rose Party's campaign in the
2012 Alberta election.
In an interview with CBC News, Flanagan explained that a political party in
Canada starts with the names, addresses and identifier numbers from the voters'
list and an online telephone directory, which telemarketers they hire already
have.
Then, through door-knocking and phoning they add information to their
database that voters may provide, such as email addresses and who they support.
In the database, party officials rank voters on the intensity of their
support.
That information is then merged with the fundraising data and political
activism data — will they take a campaign sign, volunteer, etc. And through each
brief encounter on the phone or at the door, a canvasser tries to gather
information on where the voter stands on one policy issue, which is also added
to the database.
"If you keep doing this over a period of years, you build up a lot of
information," Flanagan says.
Unlike in the U S, he notes there are no good third-party sources of
information on voters available to parties, so "the personal information comes
only from asking people to answer questions."
Flanagan, however, believes there should be a firewall between a party's
database and the correspondence of MPs and ministers, and he says there was one
when he was Stephen Harper's chief of staff back in 2002.
Petitions were in what he called a grey area. Petitions submitted to the
House of Commons are public and so the Conservative Party's position was that
they "have the right to look at the names and later contact them if they seem to
be supportive of some issue that we could approach them on."
Flanagan recognizes that with a CIMS database being used at both the national
and local level, accessed by thousands of campaign workers, that it is
impossible to prevent them from keeping parts of the information and it would be
impossible to patrol.
"The data can be transferred, but the data are relatively innocuous, much
less personal than people give all the time to retailers or to government
agencies" and much less likely to be shared.
For Flanagan, a good database is an invaluable asset to any political party
and "an asset to democracy" because it "promotes parties contacting voters as
individuals instead of contacting them through a 30-second ad."
When interviewed, he was uncertain whether there is a privacy framework under
which parties operate, but he says he "would hate to see governments start to
regulate it to the point where it becomes difficult to use the technology."
No laws for parties
Ontario's privacy commissioner, Ann Cavoukian, told CBC News that although she has "no problem
stretching my jurisdiction," when the legislation allows, she cannot do anything
in this case because she has "no jurisdiction whatsoever over political parties
in Ontario."
When governments and businesses gather information they are allowed to use it
for the stated purpose and that purpose alone, unless they obtain prior consent
for another use.
In the case of voters, they provide their electoral information in order to
participate in an election. As Cavoukian sees it, political party use of that
information would be a secondary use.
As well, when parties ask voters questions about their views during phone
interviews or when canvassing, Cavoukian says that she can "practically
guarantee" that the voters think it's for a one-time purpose. "They're not
providing that information for use in any way contemplated by the party, at any
time, in any capacity."
She wants political parties to "be transparent about how they are going to
use the information."
Then they should ask, "is that OK with you? You raise it, you notify them and
you allow them to say no.
"By just assuming you can use it for whatever purpose you want, any trust
that was there is completely eroded," Cavoukian feels.
Data leaks
Unintentional data leaks and data breaches have been a constant problem for
governments and businesses in recent years and political parties have not been
immune.
For example, in Winnipeg last year a Conservative candidate accidentally sent
contact information on about 6,000 of her constituents to an environmental
activist.
Cavoukian hopes that at least political parties will encrypt the data, since
more leaks will happen.
They have "some obligation, a duty of care, given that they can collect it
and use it in any manner that they wish," she says.
Like Flanagan, she views this information gathering as an issue of democracy.
For her, though, "it's not just about protecting individual rights," privacy is
a prerequisite for "the freedoms that we largely take for granted."
She says that in those cases when a democratic society morphs into a
totalitarian state, "the first thread to unravel is privacy."
Buckraking and shilling with Tony "The Human Cash Register!"
Buckraking Around the World With Tony Blair The sactimonious former Prime Minister's business with dictators
Ken Silverstein
Friday, September 14, 2012
Eraldo Peres/AP/Corbis
KAZAKHSTAN'S vast oil reserves and proximity to Afghanistan have made it a crucial ally in the past decade, but few observers have any illusions about its corrupt, despotic ruler. President Nursultan Nazarbayev has led the country since its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991; in 2011 he was reelected with 95 percent of the vote. The rubber-stamp parliament has granted Nazarbayev the permanent right “to address the people of Kazakhstan at any time” and to approve all “initiatives on the country’s development.”
Yet Nazarbayev has found one important Western cheerleader. Last year, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair appeared in a dreary neo-Stalinist propaganda video produced by a Kazakh TV station and exclaimed that Nazarbayev had displayed “the toughness necessary to take the decisions to put the country on the right path.” The movie features extensive interviews with Nazarbayev and Western energy executives praising him, as well as fawning interventions from Blair. “In the work that I do there, I’ve found them really smart people, capable, very determined, and very proud of their country,” he enthuses.
Blair’s fondness for Central Asian dictators is not limited to Nazarbayev. Azerbaijan’s president, Ilham Aliyev, is the man that a WikiLeaks cable compared to Sonny Corleone, thanks to his thin skin and temper.
His domestic critics have been imprisoned, and less than sycophantic media outlets have been harassed. But none of this seems to have bothered Blair, who traveled to Azerbaijan in 2009 and saw a leader with a “very positive and exciting vision for the future of the country.”
Why is Tony Blair, the man who embodied liberal hawkishness and democracy promotion, shilling for these dictatorships? Perhaps it doesn’t hurt that he is earning millions of dollars advising Nazarbayev on “governance” and that his lucrative Azeri trip was paid for by a wealthy local businessman and former government lobbyist. It is generally taken as a given that politicians, upon leaving office, will enter the private sector and earn a good living. But for the pious, moralistic leader who wagered his career on bringing down Saddam Hussein through a war he portrayed as a humanitarian imperative, the contrast with his public sector service is striking. Blair’s ambition to create a more democratic world may have shrunk, but his bank account has certainly grown.
BLAIR'S WORK in Central Asia is just a small component of the burgeoning business he’s built since resigning in 2007. The Financial Times estimates that last year alone he took in $30 million from giving speeches and consulting with governments and corporations. His customers have included JPMorgan Chase—which pays his firm, Tony Blair Associates, approximately $4 million annually according to the newspaper—and the monarchy of Kuwait, which has an unflattering record on human rights. Blair has also established a network of nonprofit smiley-face initiatives, such as the Faith Foundation, which “aims to promote respect and understanding about the world’s major religions.”
Yet it’s not always clear which hat Blair is wearing while traveling the globe. Before Muammar Qaddafi’s demise, Blair held six private meetings with the Libyan leader, with whom he’d formed a close geopolitical alliance during his years as prime minister. (Papers found in Tripoli after Qaddafi’s overthrow showed that Blair had even offered advice to Saif Qaddafi on his Ph.D. thesis.) A Blair spokeswoman wrote to say that the former prime minister “kept in touch with Colonel Qaddafi after [Blair] left office and visited a number of times. But he also constantly urged reform of Libya’s system.” Meanwhile, Blair has set up a complex, deliberately opaque corporate structure that makes it impossible to know how much money he is making.
“He’s willing to spend good money to keep it hidden,” said Richard Murphy, an accountant and founder of the London-based Tax Justice Network. Blair has thus far declined to accept a peerage that he is entitled to, which Murphy suspects owes to the fact that he would have to disclose his income to the House of Lords if he did so.
Blair’s Kazakh contract was sealed last fall and will reportedly pay him as much as $13 million. A source with inside knowledge of Kazakhstan’s leadership told me that the former prime minister is expected to help buff Nazarbayev’s personal image internationally. Blair’s office claims that he is “supporting the development of the reforms” underway and that while he was “well aware of the criticisms made of the Kazakhstan government ... there are also visible signs of progress.” It’s not clear what “reforms” or “progress” Blair is referring to. In late June, Human Rights Watch issued a report that detailed “significant setbacks” in Kazakhstan, including the use of criminal charges for “inciting social discord” (which carries a maximum sentence of twelve years in prison). The report also highlighted police and military violence against striking oil workers last December. During the clashes, twelve protesters were shot dead. (His office also acknowledged that he recommended the Kazakh government hire a London P.R. shop called Portland, whose senior officials include erstwhile Blair aides Tim Allan and Alastair Campbell. Meanwhile Portland is lobbying for Nazarbayev in the United States.)
Former Kazakh Prime Minister Akezhan Kazhegeldin, who was forced into exile in 1997, is dismissive of Blair’s alleged efforts. “He can offer all the advice he wants but you can’t have better governance in Kazakhstan without changing the government,” he said when we met in London.
Blair isn’t the first prime minister to cash in after leaving Downing Street. His predecessor, John Major, took a senior position with the American private equity firm Carlyle Group and Margaret Thatcher netted $500,000 per year as a consultant with Philip Morris. But they were far more discreet and restrained than Blair in their business dealings. Blair’s transformation into a human cash register has outraged many in Britain, and he continues to collect a pension and benefits that cost taxpayers more than $250,000 per year. “Blair is transfixed by money,” Peter Oborne, chief political commentator for The Daily Telegraph, told me. “This sort of behavior is more common in America, where the culture is more commercial and presidents—in particular Bill Clinton—have acted in a financially unscrupulous fashion after leaving office.” According to John Kampfner, a former editor of the New Statesman, “Blair loved being on the world stage and then he was forced out of office against his will. His business deals allow him to remain on the stage and continue to hobnob with the rich and powerful.” Blair’s office stated that there has “been a lot of inaccuracy” reported about his earnings, but declined to provide specifics.
As noted by Oborne, Blair’s friend and political doppelgänger Bill Clinton (estimated net worth: $38 million) is also making large amounts of money from speechifying and consulting. But Clinton, as always, has shown himself to be more deft than Blair. While Clinton and his foundation have taken money from an assortment of dubious sources, the forty-second president has been marginally more discerning in picking his clients. He made introductions in Kazakhstan for Canadian mining magnate Frank Giustra; Blair went directly on the Kazakh dictator’s payroll.
WHEN BLAIR was prime minister, he did indeed deliver some memorable speeches. The All American Speakers Bureau, one of several agencies that have represented Blair, lists his minimum fee as $200,000—twice the rate of Donald Trump. However, the huge sums that he currently commands are something of a mystery, given the content of his private sector lectures. “The reason I am in Dongguan now is because I was told that everything that was happening here was amazing,” Blair said during a 2007 speech at a VIP banquet in China. “Dongguan’s future is immeasurable.” Such twaddle infuriated Chinese newspapers, which said Blair’s empty remarks showed he was only interested in “digging for gold” and “money-sucking.”
One could argue that these banalities at least do no harm. More troubling was his speech in Azerbaijan, which was paid for by Nizami Piriyev, a presidential ally and the owner of a methanol plant. According to a transcript cited by the Daily Mail, Blair shilled for the plant with a mixture of green platitudes and name-dropping. “I had this conversation with Al Gore about the environment, where Al says to me, ‘When there is a will, there is a way,’” he said. Blair knew little about the topic he was speaking on and appeared to be mouthing lines fed to him by his local handlers. He even found time to praise formaldehyde, a byproduct of methanol’s industrial process (and a human carcinogen). “To be honest until I looked at the list of what formaldehyde does, I had no idea of how many parts of my life was governed by the existence of this thing,” he marveled. “When I go back home, I will tell to my nine-year-old boy: ‘Stop all other studies and concentrate on formaldehyde and you will be fine!’”
During a trip to the Azeri capital of Baku in July, I met Hikmet Hajizadeh, who runs a pro-democracy think tank. In 2010, his son Adnan was sitting in a restaurant when thugs burst in and viciously beat him; yet he was charged with “hooliganism” and spent more than a year in jail. Adnan’s real crime had been to produce (along with a friend, Emin Milli, who was jailed on the same charges) a satirical video that made fun of the regime for importing donkeys at about $41,000 a head from Germany. “It’s like Brezhnev’s Soviet Union here, but the government wants to impress Western investors,” Hajizadeh told me. “That’s why Blair was brought in. His speech was just for P R” For the regime, that is certainly true. For Blair, it was about something more shiny and tangible.
Ken Silverstein is a contributing editor for Harper’s magazine. This article appeared in the October 4, 2012 issue of the magazine. Click here to read a response from Blair's office.
Two arrested after allegedly trying to launder $520K - in cash - through payday loan centre
Graeme McNaughton
Monday, September 24, 2012
Toronto police have arrested two men, one of whom is suspected of trying to
launder over half a million dollars in cash that was stuffed into three duffel
bags and brought to a Scarborough loan centre.
The man is alleged to have entered Money Money Cash on June 14, with the
cash, asking that it be wired to an account in Los Angeles, said Detective Conststable Steve Fryer. The bags contained $520,250, in $20, $50 and $100 bills.
The business called the man the next day to say they would not complete the
transaction, Detective Constable Fryer said. Part of the money was returned. Two men
then allegedly began to harass and threaten the store owners for the remaining
balance, which was returned in July.
It is unknown why the business kept some of the money, said Detective Constable Fryer.
Ainsley Drakes, 45, of Richmond Hill has been charged with two counts of
uttering a forged document, attempted laundering of the proceeds of crime,
possession of proceeds of crime, uttering a forged passport and conspiracy in
connection with the investigation.
Andrew Wilson, 42, has been charged with conspiracy in connection with the
investigation.
Mr. Drakes had previously been charged with fraud and money laundering in
connection with a 2001 scam that saw people lose between $52,000 and
$5-million.
According to court documents, letters claiming to be from a Nigerian bank
were sent to individuals and corporations around the world, asking for help
establishing bank accounts in exchange for a commission.
Ainsley Anthony Drakes and Kerlis Wilson (Toronto Police Service)
Charges coming as Niagara cops add cheese to smuggling probe
Monday, September 14, 2012
Niagara Regional Police officers have been visiting pizzerias in the peninsula recently asking one important question: Where did you get your cheese?
It’s part of a larger internal investigation into cheese smuggling, allegedly
by some members of their own force.
CBC News has learned from numerous police sources that charges are expected
soon against a few officers who are allegedly involved in the movement of
caseloads of cheese from the U.S. to sell to Canadian pizzerias and
restaurants.
The alleged scam involves jamming cases of ‘brick’ cheese—used as a common
pizza topping—into their vehicles to smuggle across the border. With cheese
being as little as a third of the price in the United States, drivers are making $1,000
to $2,000 a trip, according to numerous sources.
Canada Border Services Agency officials say anyone — officer or civilian —
caught smuggling large shipments of cheese into Canada would be in violation of
the Customs Act for failing to declare any pay duties on the controlled
goods.
As well, CBSA says it would be a violation for failing to have proper permits
and licences from both the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Department of
Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
The accused officers either face police act charges (internal discipline) for
either discreditable conduct or neglect of duty or criminal code charges of
breech of trust if any were found to have intentionally plotted to avoid customs
and duties.
Offered contraband cheese
Mario Sebastiano, owner of Super Mario’s pizza in Port Colborne, told CBC News he was approached two years ago by a Fort Erie man offering to supply numerous cases of contraband U.S. cheese. The Fort Erie man, along with some police officers, are now at the centre of the cheese smuggling probe.
"He was gonna sell me a case for 150 bucks – normally its 240," Sebastiano said. "He can supply whatever I want. If I want five to six cases a week, he’d give me five to six cases because he can bring it to this side here, no problem."
Sebastiano says he tried a sample, admitting it was an attractive offer since
his business buys more than $100,000 a year worth of cheese. But he says he
turned it down because it was illegal – and the contraband cheese was inferior
quality.
Among the numerous pizza shop owners questioned by Niagara Regional Police
officers in recent weeks were the staff at Volcano Pizzeria in Fonthill, west of
Niagara Falls.
"Cops came in here a couple of times asking questions about it," Brandon Elms
told CBC News. "We get all our stuff legit. We thought it was a joke at first.
Who is going to go around trying to sell smuggled cheese?
"The cheese bandits, the mozzarella mafia!"
But Albert Zappitelli who runs Zappis, a popular Niagara Falls pizzeria says
higher Canadian cheese prices, due to restrictions by the Canadian Dairy Board,
and strict controls on cheaper U.S. imports, are driving an underground
economy.
"On a monthly basis we are approached by someone who wants to bring American
cheese over the border and sell it to us," said Zappitelli. "What would their
penalty be being caught at the bridge with six cases of cheese?
"It’s not like they’re going to put you in handcuffs and take you away."
The cheese smuggling investigation stems from information gathered from a
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) arrest in April of Niagara Regional
Police constable Geoffrey Purdie in Buffalo on charges of conspiracy to smuggle
more than half a million dollars in anabolic steroids and other drugs into
Canada.
According to U.S. court documents, a joint Border Enforcement Task Force has
been using surveillance and at least one confidential informant in an ongoing
probe into the steroid allegations of Purdie and others, including
civilians.
CBC News has been unable to confirm which specific officers will face
charges, let alone whether Constable Purdie himself is directly linked to the
cheese allegations. He has refused repeated requests for an interview.
Officers reassigned, notified they are under investigation
The Niagara Regional Police Association won't discuss the allegations against
the officers, but confirms a number of their members have been formally notified
they are under internal investigation.
Jeff McGuire, Niagara’s new police chief, has refused to discuss recent
shake-ups at the Fort Erie detachment or what further charges or discipline
actions may be forthcoming. He has only confirmed the suspension of Constable Purdie due to allegations of drug smuggling.
"He’s been suspended with pay and our professional standards ground will and
are conducting an investigation, … but we first have to allow the American
investigation to continue and be completed," McGuire said last month.
McGuire also confirmed the suspension of an officer from Purdie's Fort Erie
detachment following Purdie's arrest, but would not discuss why.
The Supreme Court hearing was covered by the Minneapolis Star Tribune (Can you tag your doctor a 'tool' online? - Maura Lerner 612-673-7384). Here are come excerpts from the article:
A State Supreme Court case is testing the boundaries of website reviews. Is it defamatory to call a doctor a "real tool' or to claim a nurse described a doctor that way? The Minnesota Supreme Court wrestled with those questions on Tuesday as the Justices heard arguments in a case about what is or isn't fair game on the internet. Two years ago a Duluth neurologist Dr. David McKee sued the son of an elderly patient for defamation over some negative comments that were posted on rate-your-doctor websites. On Tuesday the State's top court was asked to decide whether the lawsuit should finally go to trial after the case was thrown out by a lower court and reinstated on appeal. The lawsuit is one of a growing number of legal battles testing the limits of free speech on the internet. A good portion of the oral arguments were devoted to the meaning of the words that Dennis Laurion, 65, used to describe his family's encounter with McKee in April 2010 when Laurion's father Kenneth then 84 was hospitalized with a stroke. After McKee examined his father Laurion complained about the doctor's bedside manner on several websites. "When I mentioned Dr. McKee's name to a friend who is a nurse she said, Dr. McKee is a real tool" he wrote. John Kelly, Laurion's attorney noted that internet sites are a "free for all" for people to share opinions and and that his client's comments were perfectly appropriate. "We have a word, the word is tool" Kelly told the Justices. "When you look at the word you have to ask, is it defamatory?" He argued that the phrase while it is clearly not a compliment is no worse than calling someone an idiot or fool. During questioning some of the Justices seemed to agree. "Saying someone's a real tool sounds more like an opinion than a statement of fact" Justice Christopher Dietzen said. Chief Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea has a similar reaction. "The point of the post is this doctor did not treat my father well," she said. "I can't grasp why that wouldn't be protected opinion." But McKee's lawyer, Marshall Tanick, argued that Laurion had gone beyond opinion making up statements that were untrue. He noted that Laurion had never been able to identify the nurse who allegedly called McKee a tool. "There was no nurse" Tanick said. "He made it up." He also accused Laurion of putting words in McKee's mouthy that made him look insensitive and not caring. See the whole article: http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/168552176.html See the comments: http://www.facebook.com/startribune/posts/527714173921326?comment_id=110848277&offset=0&total_comments=9
Dear Anonymous:
Thank you very much for keeping CyberSmokeBlog's readership apprised of this case. In litigation that probably should have been resolved with an apolog(ies) and simple handshake years ago CSB can only imagine what Bitcher & Prickman would say if they were involved.
Hardly a day goes by it seems without getting an e-mail someone is now friends with ..... or so and so has posted new material on CyberSmokeBlog's Facebook Page. Truth is, maintaining a quality Blog is quite time consuming. Ditto for Linkedin when newly connected contacts (Where did they come from?) send links to articles some of which can be quite interesting and worth publishing. Ditto for Twitter. In our absence these social media have taken on a life of their own without CSB participating which is fine.
In the case of Facebook, while some material can be borderline bizarre, nevertheless, there will always be diamonds in the rough. The following newspaper clipping appeared under "Henry Bills" (a pseudonym) - we know who you are "Henry!"
Family Law Courts are in crisis everywhere Canada is certainly no exception. Because this type of litigation can drag on and on and on and ..... a very high price in time, effort and money may be exacted sometimes translating into heightened emotions on the part of one or both litigants. No doubt Judge Haas has likely seen almost everything (Just when you think you have along comes something new!) during his many years on the Bench. His wise words are worth considering.
Judge Michael J. Hass retired in late 2002 after 26 years serving in the Ninth Judicial District Court of Cass County, Minnesota.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
"No more munchies! No more munchies! No more munchies! ..... No more beer! No more beer! No more beer!"
Lada Gaga looks 'Gaga-gantuan' during Amsterdam concert
Maybe its a case of the stoner munchies. 'Born This Way'singer has said she is a marijuana fan and enjoyed Dutch pit stop in a city where it's legal
By Ethan Sachs
Wednesday, Spetember 19, 2012
Lady
Gaga looked positively Gaga-gantuan at her concert Monday in
Amsterdam.
The 26-year-old diva barely squeezed into an ill-fitting
leather one piece during the show that revealed a little too much of her
backside for the “Paparazzi” cameras.
Compounding the questionable outfit choice for a performer who’s considered a
fashion pioneer - fishnet stockings that didn’t quite roll all the way up her
exposed cheeks.
In a video captured by a
concertgoer, the “Just Dance” singer is handed a wrapped cigarette from someone
in the Dutch audience.
“Holland, is it real? Don't tease me,” says Gaga,
pulling open the wrapper. “Oh, it's real.”
Rick Van Beckum via YouTube
Amsterdam, where pot smoking has been legalized, seems the perfect fit for Gaga,
an admitted fan of the "medical" drug.
The New York product, “Born This
Way” as Stefani Germanotta, has admitted in the past that she dabbled in harder
drugs, but cleaned up her act - almost completely.
"'I am a little bit part of the green club," she told the hosts of "The View"
last year.
During her Amsterdam concert, Gaga used the opportunity to
extoll the virtues of pot. She even joked that she would lobby President Obama
to legalized marijuana worldwide, according to London's The Sun.
"I want
you to know it has totally changed my life and I've really cut down on
drinking," she told her Dutch Little Monsters. "It has been a totally spiritual
experience for me with my music."
Lady Gaga performs during the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards (Christopher Polk/Getty Images)
"'I am a little bit part of the green club," she told the hosts of "The View"
last year.
During her Amsterdam concert, Gaga used the opportunity to
extoll the virtues of pot. She even joked that she would lobby President Obama
to legalized marijuana worldwide, according to London's The Sun.
"I want
you to know it has totally changed my life and I've really cut down on
drinking," she told her Dutch Little Monsters. "It has been a totally spiritual
experience for me with my music."
Masters Degree (University of Calgary - Economics), Bachelor of Arts (Honours - Carleton University), Diploma Chemical Technology (St. Clair College), Oh yes, almost forgot - one course credit, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan