Practically Speaking: There is
Practically Nothing Left of Our Rights
Dee Nicholson, the National Director of Communication for Freedom
in Canadian Health Care, writes on the recent political dynamics
involving bill C-6 and Canadian health freedom.
Several muses played a part in writing this, my humble
opinion: a bill (C-6) that overtly threatened our rights; a dictatorial
sending Parliament on a forced vacation; and the Minister of Justice,
the Honorable Rob Nicholson, to whom I am, thankfully, not related.
Each one of them stirred a few brain cells into activity, making
some dust fly, and concurrently reminding me that these thoughts
are not in the day-to-day dimension of the average Canadian. Mores
I received the following note from a friend, who got it from a friend,
who seems to be wise beyond the norm, in that she points out that
even the astute among us, who have trimmed the wool from our eyes,
are having difficulty seeing all the way to the big picture: "Today
in Haiti they called
12000 US troops an occupation. The stories of violence are marketed,
not true. Yet we will have that many troops in Vancouver for the
Olympics. And what do we call it? Hell, most people I speak with
do not even know they voted for it. All these scares keep us busy,
researching, debunking. Yet their real game is to keep us so busy
debunking we do not research
or even conceive of what they are really up to."
As Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitlers Minister of Propaganda,
once said: How fortunate for the governors that the governed
do not think! Fortunate, indeed, I would say. Most people
are under such a heavy burden of stress in their lives that they
hand over the reins of government
to people they could not possibly know well enough to let them
steer the ship of state, unsupervised, for a term of several years,
and having voted, go back to their nuclear lives saying, Its
the governments problem, let them handle it. Thats
what we pay them for.
When you think about it, in practical terms, that is equivalent
to handing the keys to a jet plane to a five-year-old, and telling
Junior to take her for a spin. Seriously, what do
we really know about the people we elect, beyond slick campaign
speeches, a lot of glitz and glamour, and that they must be terrific
people, because their brochure said they were? Or because they
happen to be endorsed by the right party? What knowledge do we
really have of the inner workings of a candidate, what makes him
tick, and what he might do if he thought nobody was watching?
fact, beyond the dog-and-pony show of politicking, and the very
expensively-designed and rigorously-enforced party talking points,
do we really know? How can we be so casual about the governing
of our very lives?
But I digress.
Let me assure you, the realization of how deep the deception of
democracy has become, or indeed always was, had none
of the flavor of a typical Eureka! moment; in fact
it was, to me, the omen of more dark realizations to come. All
of these lead irrevocably to the same
conclusion, that there is an unseen hand running this planet,
and it isnt the least bit associated with Heaven.
The first muse: Bill C-6
The late, unlamented Bill C-6 was a real pip. Even more of a pip
was the performance given by our Health Minister, Leona Aglukkaq,
whose pleadings for her pet bill included the floating of the
possibility of dead babies stacking up, if the Senate
did not pass C-6 unamended.
She put on an animated show for the media, wearing her ohso-serious
spectacles, and outdoing them in her demeanor.
The corporate media, ever the darling of the real governors of
the world, the money masters, spewed Aglukkaqs take on C-6
across headlines, while in back rooms, highly-paid toadies were
couching those ubiquitous
talking points in phrases guaranteed either to confuse or manipulate
people into believing that there were no Constitutional violations
in the Bill. Rather, Aglukkaq insisted, the stated purpose of
this legislation was to protect the Canadian public from things
like badly-designed baby
seats and toxic toy products, and save Canadian lives. For that
purpose, she whined, her demonstrably overzealous agency needed
overreaching authority, like warrantless search and seizure, denial
of due process of law, and the administration of this kangaroo
court process to be determined at ministerial discretion, for
Heres where it got interesting.
While the corporate media fell totally under the charms of the
horn-rimmed Minister of Health, and dutifully parroted her claims
of Bill C-6 being for the good of the Canadian people (pardon
me while I upchuck), the Liberal-dominated Senate of Canada was
fighting hard to enforce the Constitution. They pointed out the
thousands upon thousands of letters they had received from Canadians
across the land, from people demanding that their rights be defended,
and they actually performed their job, which is to give sober,
second thought to all legislation put forth by the Lower
House, and to ensure that it does not offend the Constitution
or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Leading the charge were feisty Alberta Senator Tommy Banks, along
with Senators Jerry Grafstein, Joseph Day, Jim Munson, and George
Furey, all Liberals, and Senator Elaine McCoy, who is listed as
a Conservative, but broke ranks to defend our rights. It
seems to me that an operational problem should be solved operationally,
she said, cutting right
to the chase.
Elaine McCoys reasoning was that if all Health Canada wanted,
by its proposal that it be given the right to warrantless search
and seizure, was to make sure they could get immediate access
to a warrant, why were they not simply looking into ways of expediting
Perhaps it was the requirement that an Affidavit, delineating
and supporting the probability that a search is reasonable, be
presented to a judge; considering the fact that Health Canada
has a hair trigger, the inconvenience of having to validate the
ministrys concerns in a legal document must have been anything
but minor! Good heavens, what if Health Canada were prevented
from going after those dastardly vitamin-traffickers, who might
do a midnight flit, unless armed officers could burst in on them
with the element of surprise?
It is important to note one critical fact: Bill C-6 had passed
the three readings of Parliament unanimously. Unanimous votes
dont happen by accident, they happen at the direction of
the Leader. And while the Senate appears to have an arms-length
relationship with the Prime Minister and the Leader of Her Majestys
Loyal Opposition, they tend to be loyal to the party that appointed
them: gratitude for a really good job that you can do until youre
75, with all kinds of perks and a pension that rivals those in
the corporate domain, must run deep.
So, while Leona Aglukkaq and other big-cheese Conservatives were
slamming the Liberal Senate majority for stonewalling
Conservative legislation for no other reason other than that they
could, and asserting that they were ramming an insult up the Prime
Ministers nose at the expense of the safety
of Canadians, in effect, the entire Liberal Senate
Caucus was breaking ranks with Michael Ignatieff, because his
Parliamentary caucus voted unanimously to pass C-6 with its Constitutional
Ignatieffs arms length relationship with
his Senate caucus appeared cut off at the wrist.
That means the Senators were doing their job, while the leader
of their own party would not do his, protecting and defending
the Constitution and the rights of all Canadians. By amending
Bill C-6 in such a way as to resolve most of the Constitutional
issues in its language, the Senate forced the Bill back to Parliament,
to start all over again --- this time to face a barrage from health
freedom advocates and their fired-up hordes of angry Canadian
consumers of natural health products and their right to sell them
and consume them, the moment they got back from Christmas vacation.
One thing the Senate missed, however, was the clause that I believe
to have been the most dangerous to all our freedoms. In Sections
2 and 14 there lurked language making Canadians subject to the
dictates of unidentified foreign authorities. Stunningly, this
language generated not a peep out of either of the Houses of Parliament!
In case you havent thought about that, consider this: how
many trade groups does Canada belong to? How many international
agreements does our government sign, most without the slightest
murmur in the mainstream media, while those which do garner some
attention are suitably prettiedup for public consumption?
All those international agreements, according to the World Trade
Organization, are actually binding contracts, and they have us
by the short hairs on that: we can withdraw from our affiliations,
but we lose the benefits of participating in the group.
Canada has one vote at that table, and there are over 190 other
guys sitting down with ours. They arent Canadian. They might
not have anything against us, understand the probable cause for
Leona Aglukkaqs being so serious about C-6?
Personally, I am not often given to flights of fancy, and take
some pride in my objectivity. Mr. Harper and Ms. Aglukkaq would
no doubt say they wondered what Id been smoking, but thats
my opinion, and Im sticking to it. I just figure that one
clause, the one nobody wanted to talk about, like the elephant
in the drawing room, had to be important. And gee whiz, look what
it could do to our right to be Canadian!
There was way too much emphasis on C-6 for me to believe that
all this hoo-hah was over a product safety bill. Health Canada
used all the propaganda tricks in the book: they passionately
described C-6 like a glowing panacea for all their problems in
protecting the lives and safety of Canadians, then blithely dismissed
the loud demands of scads of Canadians by saying, We do
not feel the bill violates the Constitution, and calling
activists conspiracy theorists. Then they brought
out the big guns in a desperate last gasp: a warning from Leona
Aglukkaq that they
shouldnt amend Bill C-6s Constitutional violations,
because a whole bunch of babies would die.
The Senate still lobbed the bill back to Parliament substantially
changed, leaving Aglukkaq in a disempowered huff and Harper without
his loophole to avoid abiding by our rights as Canadians, as well
as stuck with an obstinate Liberal majority in the Senate.
The second muse: Pass the prorogation, please
A rather sticky wicket for the besieged Stephen Harper, who had
his feet to the fire over the Afghan detainee torture issue, and
was floundering in the polls, buoyed only by the relative ineffectiveness
of the saturnine
Michael Ignatieff. The ultimate fate of Bill C-6, I believe, became
a driving force behind the second muse, the prorogation of Parliament
until March 3rd.
You have to understand, when I read stuff in the paper, I immediately
go in the other direction to see what I might find. In this case,
I looked at what had befallen C-6, and the options left to Stephen
Not-me! Harper, and it turned out that prorogation
did a huge favor to Harper that
nobody seemed to be saying much about.
Michael Ignatieff and Jack Layton were both howling about what
a coward Harper was, running away from criticism and
hoping Canadians would forget the specter of torture
haunting the halls of power, while stacking the Senate with
new appointees. Harper, while getting outfitted for his
trip to the Olympics, lobbed back that Canadians dont
care much about torture, a rather insulting retort which
somewhat ensured a shortened lifespan for his troubled minority.
He shamelessly admitted hed be appointing new Conservative
Senators. And back and forth it went.
Prorogation allowed him an option that nobody, but nobody, expanded
upon, but which to my mind was the lynch pin to what was going
on: the re-striking of all Committees in the Senate, which was
only possible with prorogation -- or an election. Bill C-6 had
been the flag, the cherry on the fruitcake, that pointed up the
Conservatives inability to get legislation through the Senate,
while it had a Liberal majority. He could fix the overall majority
problem simply by appointing a few more Conservative Senators.
But that Liberal majority would still hold in the Senate
Standing Committees, and unless it, too, were wiped out, Harper
would face this sort of opposition again, as he pressed his agenda
of putting holes in our Constitution.
That would mean a couple of things: First, as long as Harper could
finagle his way through the minority problem in the House (and
we all know thats a sham, at best, and a purposeful fraud,
at worst), he could guarantee that his legislation would pass
through the Senate relatively easily. Second, even if an election
were to be forced upon him by the
non-confidence vote, and he wound up in Opposition, he could still
rule from Stornoway, by controlling the Conservative caucus in
The third muse: The Justice Minister limits our
All of these realizations came before the holidays, and just as
I thought I could take a breather, along came an email from the
Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson, who was belatedly (very) replying
to a letter I had emailed him last year, demanding to know how
it was that he, as a lawyer, didnt spot the overt constitutional
violations in C-6, and cut it off at the pass.
Not only was I insulted that he had taken so long to respond that
the Bill was dead and buried already, but he actually had the
cojones to write this: At the outset, I would like to emphasize
that the obligation to ensure all federal government legislation,
regulations, policies, and activities conform with the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms is one that
the Department of Justice Canada takes very seriously. With regard
to legislation, prior to the tabling of all bills in Parliament,
my departmental officials review the proposed legislation for
consistency with the Charter. As Minister of Justice, I am required
under section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act to report any
inconsistencies with the Charter to the House of Commons. I would
like to assure you that this process is completed for all tabled
bills, including Bill C-6.
Well, that didnt exactly answer my concerns. It was merely
a long version of the talking point letters I got back from Ignatieff
and Layton: We do not believe there are any constitutional
violations in Bill C-6. And it was a cop-out, to write his
job description, without responding to how I was
accusing him of not doing it.
But then he really threw me for a loop, with this: It should
be noted, however, that the rights and freedoms guaranteed under
the Charter are not absolute and are subject to limitations under
section 1 of the Charter, including reasonable limits prescribed
by law that are demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic
I immediately bristled like a pissed-off pit bull, as our Minister
of Justice, after outlining what he ostensibly does for a living,
has the audacity to put himself and his cronies above the law,
which happens to state that any legislation which derogates, diminishes,
or limits our stated rights in any
way is of no force or effect and which is exactly
what I had said to him in my first email!
Say what? The rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Charter
are not absolute and are subject to limitations??? Did you
read what he just said? This is the Minister of what? And can
you now see the agenda unfolding, as they chip away, and reinterpret,
and manipulate, at all of the rights that make Canada Canadian?
Tell you what, Mr. Justice Minister, were not finished this
debate. It encompasses the core of what is happening all over
the world, and its represented in far too much legislation,
with hidden clauses that excoriate our rights as though they never
existed (and there are many who assert that they didnt),
and secure foreign control over our so-called free
Weve all seen the erosion of liberty traded stupidly as
a put option against our security, and now are being
forced to be viewed naked by strangers in airports in order to
use our right of free passage. Now we see that behind all this
is an agenda that removes the rights of nationals in favor of
foreign authorities, with the collusion of our own
under cover of a political power struggle.
It's fascinating just how similar are the problems that
we both have - you in America and we here in Europe. The same
lies, the same cheating, the same scams, and all about the same
things...We're running along parallel lines here, said Bloom,
referring to the rise of supra-national governance, the police
state and the various tax & control scams, like global warming
and the swine flu. ~ Godfrey Bloom, UK Independence
Party Member of European Parliament
Welcome to the precursor of world governance, folks.
Winnipeg-born Dee Nicholson describes herself as a Truth
Seeker". She is the author of two books, is a degreed metaphysician,
Reiki Master, and life coach, as well as an activist for human
rights, especially the right to choose our food, medicine, and
health care. Dee is the National Director of Communication for
Freedom in Canadian Health Care, which is a charter group member
of Canadians for Health Freedom (www.canadiansforhealthfreedom.org).
She is a frequent blogger on the site, offering commentary on
a wide range of topics.
February 3, 2010