Racial Profiling; Maher Arar and Wife Monia Mazigh

From the Wednesday, October 17, 2007, Toronto Star,Greater Toronto section, page A7, here is an article about racial profiling, featuring the story of Maher Arar and the comments of his wife, Monia Mazigh:

MAHER ARAR'S WIFE CALLS FOR HONEST DEBATE
Racial profiling must be acknowledged before we can eradicate it, Monia Mazigh tells symposium

Debra Black
Staff Reporter

Racial profiling should be acknowledged and discussed so Canadians can actively eliminate it from society, says the wife of Maher Arar, the Canadian who was wrongly arrested by American authorities, interrogated and then sent to Syria where he was tortured.

Sadly, scholars and the media neglect it, Monia Mazigh told a symposium on racial profiling at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education yesterday. "We should raise it, discuss it, eliminate it from our society. But first we need to acknowledge it."

Police and government authorities often deny it, she said. But she knows first hand that it exists, she told the audience. "I experienced it myself.... Five years ago my husband and myself were labelled 'Islamic extremists' by the RCMP and CSIS."

But neither she nor her husband was ever told why. Perhaps it was because she wore a headscarf, her husband had a beard, or because they prayed five times a day, she speculated at the seminar, which was sponsored by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

As a consequence of that label, Arar was interrogated by U.S. authorities, arrested, imprisoned, sent to Syria, tortured and, about a year later, freed. A federal inquiry recently cleared his name and Ottawa paid him $10.5 million in compensation. He still remains on a U.S. no-fly list. The reason for that is unknown to either Arar or his wife.

The consequences of racial profiling are severe, said Mazigh. Communities feel marginalized and humiliated and the economic consequences can also be devastating with people losing their jobs simply because they've been interviewed by CSIS, she said.

Law enforcement agencies cannot rely simply on religion or appearance to start an investigation, she said.

"I had courage to speak out and denounce the treatment," she said. But not everyone does. She encouraged anyone who has experienced racial profiling to protest loud and long.

Racial profiling is not new to Toronto or, for that matter, Canada, a series of experts told the symposium. Young, black males have been experiencing racial profiling in Toronto for years, experts said. Indeed they said racial profiling has been an ongoing historical problem in Canada - one that has had and will continue to hae grave ramifications for all Canadians.

Five years ago, the Toronto Star published a special investigation into racial profiling by Toronto police, said Carol Tator , an anti-racism and equity teacher at York University's anthropology department. That series sparked a lot of denial and debate, said Tator, who along with colleague Frances Henry wrote a book about racial profiling in Canada.

The book was triggered by the Star series and examined the practice of racial profiling and how police culture reinforces racism.

In the series, the Star found after analyzing hundreds of thousands of criminal charges that blacks charged with simple drug possession were taken to a police station more often than whites facing the same charge. The data also showed a disproportionate number of black motorists in the database were ticketed for offences that routinely would come to light after a traffic stop.

Racial profiling doesn't keep citizens safe from violence, Tatlor said. "It is violence.... It can be argued that racial profiling by the police is the proverbial canary in the coal mine. Racial profiling exists in many of our democratic institutions."

Afghan: No NATO Run Prisons

Human rights organizations and the media have written about the plight of Afghan detainees turned over by NATO forces, such as Canada, Britain and the Netherlands, to Afghan prisons where they face being tortured.

From the Saturday, November 17, 2007, World section of the Toronto Star, page AA2, an article about the dismissal of a possible solution to this problem:

GENERAL RULES OUT NATO-RUN PRISON
Remarks follow claims of abuse in Afghan jails

Allan Woods
Ottawa - Setting up separate NATO-run jails to hold battlefield detainees who might otherwise be tortured is out of the question, the alliance's military chief says.

Gen. Ray Henault, the Canadian chair of NATO's military committee, said creating detention facilities that are run by the International Security Assistance Force, would put too much demand on the already difficult Afghanistan mission and undermine the Afghan government, which has responsibility for its own penal system.

"We consider this to be something done in concert with international standards. That's the way we intend to continue dong business," Henault said.

The Canadian policy of transferring detainees to Afghan prisons is being challenged in court by Amnesty International, which is seeking an end to all handovers until the country's jails are free of abuse.

The federal government released thousands of pages of files this week showing Canadian officials have been aware of the deplorable state of Afghanistan's prisons for some time, and are currently investigating seven allegations that Canadian detainees were tortured in Afghan custody.

The most recent allegation came to light in the first week of November and was verified by local authorities who are now deciding whether to lay criminal charges.

Liberal MP Denis Coderre said the documents prove "Canada has violated the Geneva Convention" and "must stop the transfers, bring back the prisoners and respect this convention."

Henault rejected accusations there is "systematic" torture in Afghan jails, or at the hands of its secret police, and said he is not aware of any individual cases of abuse.

"But it would probably be inappropriate for me to say that there is nothing like that that ever happens in Afghanistan."

An aide to Henault added that probes of torture allegations are "going to put the pressure where it needs to be, which is on the Afghan government." Indeed, Afghan President Hamid Karzai has already warned the country's police against using physical abuse and has launched an inquiry into torture allegations.

In the meantime, Henault said responsibility for improving the country's prisons falls to organizations like the Red Cross. Afghanistan's human rights body and the government, not NATO.

Unemployment Insurance Bias Against Women

From the Business section of the Toronto Star, Tuesday, November 22,2007, page B8, an article about the inherent bias against women in Canada's Unemployment Insurance (EI) system:

EI STRUCTURE BIASED AGAINST WOMEN, STUDY FINDS

Canadian women are being unfairly shortchanged by the country's Employment Insurance system, which was made more restrictive a deade ago and now boasts a $51 billon surplus, a recent study concludes.

The study for the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, to be released today, finds the qualification requirements for EI have left many women who lose their jobs out of pocket, despite having paid their fair share of premiums.

In fact, the study finds as many as two in three working women who pay into EI don't receive a penny in benefits if they lost their jobs.

"Because so few of them qualify, they're subsidizing the benefits for men, who are more likely to qualify, and that doesn't seem fair," study co-author Monica Townson said in an interview.

Statistics Canada data show that 40 per cent of unemployed men received EI benefits in 2004. For women, the figure was only 32 per cent.

"The rules seem to be based on the standard male job of full-time, full year," Townson said.

"A lot of women are in non-standard jobs - part-time, temporary work, contract work and that kind of thing - so it's very difficult for them to get the hours in a lot of those cases."

Because of their child-rearing and family responsibility roles, women are required to take prolonged periods of time out of the workforce, something men usually don't.

When a woman does return to work after a few years, she is required to re-qualify for EI from scratch by working at least 910 hours in the most recent 52-week period.

"It doesn't take account of the fact that women have to be out of the workforce for periods to look after their children and that may make it harder for them to qualify for benefits," Townson said.

The report recommends taking a longer-term view to determine eligibility. "A longer-term perspective would help women in the patterns that (women) have of paid and unpaid work," Townson said.
The Canadian Press

Turning a Blind Eye to Uganda's Human Rights Record

From the Saturday, November 24, 2007, Toronto Star, World section, page AA3, an article about the hypocrisy of Commonwealth countries in ignoring Uganda's record on human rights:

'DOUBLE STANDARDS' SLAMMED
Opposition accuses Commonwealth of hypocrisy for ignoring Uganda's disturbing rights' record

Richard Brennan
Ottawa Bureau

Kampala - The Commonwealth is turning a blind eye to the fact that Uganda is one of the most oppressed countries in world where murder, corruption and intimidation is systemic, says the leader of the main Ugandan opposition.

"The level of corruption in Uganda is unprecedented," Kizza Besigye, leader of the Forum for Democratic Change, told Canadian reporters yesterday.

Besigye said it was the height of hypocrisy for Uganda to host the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, which espouses the values of human rights, democracy and an independent judiciary.

"We are quite disappointed with the Commonwealth, mainly for being unable and unwilling to promote and uphold its own principles," he said.

Up to 100 protesting opposition supporters gathered near the summit site yesterday and were attacked by police wielding batons and sticks, Beti Kamya, an opposition MP, told Associated Press.

The crowd responded by throwing empty bottles and stones, she said.

Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni will be chair of the Commonwealth for the next two years, and outgoing secretary general Don McKinnon of New Zealand has been quick to defend criticism of Museveni's government.

Besigye said the Commonwealth clearly displays a "double standard," referring to the fact it suspended Pakistan's membership this week for imposing emergency rule and jailing thousands of people who opposed President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's heavy hand, while conditions in Uganda are as bad or worse.

He accused the governing party, the National Resistance Party, of bribing members of the parliament to support amending the constitution to void term limits, allowing Musveni to run a third time.

Museveni yesterday defended the move, saying other Commonwealth countries don't have term limits.

Besigye, a former personal physician to Museveni, was jailed in 2006 on charges that included treason and rape, and during his time in prison he was nominated as a presidential candidate. While campaigning, he was handcuffed to a man charged with killing eight tourists.

"For the entire period of the campaign, I was busy in court defending myself against charges of rape," which were determined to be unfounded, he said.

Besigye said the presidential election was marred by violence - "including the open killing of our supporters here in the town of Kampala," as well as ballot stuffing and vote buying.

When Helena Guergis, Canada's secretary of state for foreign affairs, was told about Besigye's comments, she replied: "Duly noted."

Besigye also said it is shameful to have the government spend $150 million to host the Commmonwealth leaders when most Ugandas live in abject poverty.

"This expense is undertaken against the background of extreme poverty" and the fact that thousands of people have lost everything in recent floods with no help from the government, Besigye said.

"Not even one shilling has arrived in the emergency area ... but we are happy to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a talk show,"he said.

The Persecution of the Falun Gong by China and Western Media

FromThe Epoch Times, epochtimes.com, Opinion section, December 6-12, 2007, page A47, a disturbing article on the CBC giving more credence to the Chinese government than to Amnesty International, the United Nations and Human Rights Watch in re-editing a documentary to give what the Chinese government had to say about the Falon Gong than to the Falon Gong themselves or the human rights organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

What planet is CBC on that they are not aware of the Chinese government's human rights record in its treatment of ethnic and other groups and on human rights defenders and freedom of speech? Do they think China has cleaned up its record of human rights abuses since its brutal put down of dissenters in Tiananmen Square?

The CBC is not the only media to give more the Chinese government more credence than the Falun Gong. This is so ugly. It is like reporting about the Holocaust primarily from the viewpoint of the Nazis.

I wonder whether the media bias has to do with right-wing conservatives controlling more media than they ought and not wanting to harm trade relations.

Or do too many journalists not have enough comprehension that where human rights are concerned, the perpetrator of the abuse cannot be trusted to tell the whole story. Amnesty International's and Human Rights Watch's whole purpose of being is to shine a light on the dark places in the world where there are human rights abuses. If Amnesty says there are abuses and people are in jail because governments do not allow freedom of association and speech and press, are television or print journalists so stupid or lazy that they cannot see what the world's conscience is telling them? Unfortunately, there must be some of this at work and we have seen it happen before on an entirely different issue.

Global warming skeptics gave media the runaround for at least a decade - long after scientists knew and had already expressed their grave concerns about climate change.
Jounalists never educated themselves enough to know there was only one credible side to this story. There are all kinds of stories about global warming now, particularly in print media in almost every section of the paper - business, news, living, houses, cars - I even saw one in sports. But at least a decade of educating the public was wasted.

The media blindness (or the interfering by and blindness of media management) to this particular record of human rights abuses is tantamount to complicity in it. If Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch say there is persecution or torture or human rights abuses, no one but a fool or someone or some organization corrupted by business or power or other self-interest would say otherwise. But maybe they are just following the federal government's lead, as they don't support human rights at home or abroad either.

WHY SUCH MEDIA RELUCTANCE TO REPORT ON THE PERSECUTION OF FALUN GONG?

By Michael Mahonen
Special to The Epoch Times

The CBC's recent re-editing of director Peter Rowe's documentary "Beyond the Red Wall: The Persecution of Falun Gong: resulted in numerous international media reports that were highly critical of the decision. While this criticism is valid, the CBC should be both appreciated for at least airing an edited version as well as criticized for sweeping away some evidence that director Rowe had delivered to their doorstop.

In fact, the vast majority of media, including some who criticized CBC, have reported very little about the persecution of Falun Gong, even though the persecution has been investigated and confirmed by Amnesty International, The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, the U.S. Department of State, Human Rights Watch and others.

While the Chinese Communist regime (CCP) launched the persecution of Falun Gong in the early morning hours of July 20, 1999, practitioners were literally dragged out of their beds and bussed to sports stadiums, many of which were filled over capacity. The occurred on a mass scale across China. It was ferocious, unexpected and shocked practitioners. The CCP's own survey in late 1998 has estimated 70-100 million Chinese were practicing Falun Gong. The planning for such a large scale, organized attack had to be months in the making.

Of course the accompanying avalanche of propaganda against Falun Gong was also well planned in advance. It targeted not only the citizens in China, but the international community as well, since the CCP was well aware of the negative effects from the international community after the massacre of students on Tiananment Square in 1989. This time the propaganda and justification for their actions were planned carefully.

Names such as "evil cult" were spread by the CCP to an international community, which knew next to nothing about Falun Gong at the time. Falun Gong practitioners didn't have the chance to contemplate what was happening before the international community was provided with this strong first impression and sole source of infromation by CCP propaganda.

Western media, having little other information to go on, initially helped to stigmatize Falun Gong by repeating unsubstantiated propaganda by the CCP. These first impressions have left an enduring on the minds of many, including those in the media.

However, when Falun Gong practitioners snapped out of their initial shock and began to provide alternate information to the media, the ink given to the Falun Gong side was grossly minimized in relation to the information from the CCP that was initially reported. This trend has continued to today.

In a thorough, in-depth article published in Compassion Magazine(editor: please createhyperlink for the following link: http://wwfaluninfo.net/Compassion6/Compassion_Edition6.pdf), Leeshai Lemish examined 1,879 media articles written about the persecution of Falun Gong that appeared in the leading newspapers and wire services of the English speaking world such as the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, AP and Reuters. CCP sources were "cited as the main sources of news in the headline or opening paragraphs of articles about Falun Gong four times as often as Falun Gong sources and three times as often as rights organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. In other words, for every article with a headline like: 'Falun Gong Woman Says She was Tortured,' four articles had a headline like: 'China Sentences Sect Member."

In another study of 1,308 AP articles, those in which Falun Gong reported practitioners dying from torture in custody, Mr. Lemish found that the CCP was given the opportunity to directly respond 50.2 percent of the time. When the CCP made major accusations toward Falun Gong, such as claiming practitioners died from refusing medical treatment or suicide, Falun Gong was given a chance to respond only 17.9 percent of the time.

Imbalance continues today
In an article by the Canadian Press, head of news for CBC, John Cruickshank, made a telling comment regarding the Red Wall controversy, "The Falun Gong - they want it all their way. They wanted it basically to be their show. Peter Rowe used an awful lot of Falun Gong footage, and just at a certain point we got uncomfortable with the degree to which we were basically putting their show on to television without there being a reflection about what was actually credible."

This program was made by Peter Rowe, a non-practitioner. In what way is it Falun Gong's show? Due to the fierce restrictions in China, there are only two types of footage I've seen taken by Falun Gong. One is of torture victims on the verge of death, reminiscent of emaciated Holocaust victims, including the case of Ms. Gao Rongrong, the lower half of whose face was charred and covered with large scabs from multiple burns by electric batons.

The other type of footage is taken on Tiananmen Square showing practitioners among large crowds of people being violently attacked by Chinese police while holding banners and calling for an end to the persecution. Red Wall included some of this latter footage, with on-screen labels stating it was footage taken by Falun Gong. The practitioners who took the footage risked their personal safety and even death to show the world what is happening. Yet somehow this is dimished to Falun Gong wanting it 'all their way."

This isn't a competition for airtime, or an endeavor for attention, or an unsubstantiated claim of political struggle as the CCCP states when it serves their propaganda aims of the moment. Before the perseuction began, Falun Gong had nothing at all to say about the CCP.

This is a full on, brutal persecution of innocent people - including the elderly and children - on a mass scale that has been verified by the top international bodies mentioned above. People are dying as I type these words and will be dying as I type these words, and will be dying when they're read.

In the CP article, Mr. Cruickshank stated in reference to CBC personnel in Beijing "Our guys are good... They had seen an early version of the script and they were horrified by it - they said that what was being treated as truth in this show was not accepted by any credible organization." There are many valid points of evidence presented in Red Wall, even in the CBC's edited version. To what exactly is Mr. Cruickshank referring? This blanket statement insinuates uncertainty over the program as a whole. To say that no credible organization accepts what is presented in Red Wall is grossly inaccurate and irresponsible.

What his guys in Beijing should be horrified by is the persecution itself, for which they have not produced a single substantial report since it began over eight years ago. Granted, this must be taken in context, considering that covering the persecution of Falun Gong is one of the most- if not the most - difficult, obstructed, guarded and dangerous journalistic endeavors in China. This is what makes the footage shot by Falun Gong practitioners so valuable. Yet is is utilized as a point of contention and to draw suspicion against those who risked their lives to shoot it and then send it out of China.

If the unspecified rationale from CBC's guys in Beijing is solid enough to elicit a reaction so strong as to re-edit a previously approved program produced by a veteran, trusted director, one must ask where these guys in Beijing suddenly turned for such conclusive information on the persecution of Falun Gong, considering they've produced nothing in the past.

One must also question why, for eight years, the CBC has all but totally ignored first-hand accounts of persecution sent out of China at great risk by the victims themselves. Certainly if their guys in Beijing can so quickly invalidate the initial version of Red Wall with such all-inclusive certainty, they must be able to substantiate or deny at least some of these reports from the actual victims. Why such one-sided certainty and effort to dismiss evidence of persecution, while ignoring reports of the persecution for so many years?

The intent here is not to solely criticize CBC, as there has been neglect on this issue by almost all major media. But CBC had a rare and valuable opportunity delivered to their doorstep. However, they not only swept away some of the most vital evidence, but dminished the urgency of the matter by accusing the abused party - which provided some of the most compelling footage in the program at the risk of their own lives (free of charge!) - of some petty attempt to have the program "be their show."

This disturbing lack of clarity must be addressed directly when the stakes are so high.

In a National Post article, CBC splokesman, Jeff Keay said, "We wanted to have a credible and solid piece of work out there, because I suspect, at the end of the day, we will have the Chinese government upset with us and we will have some Falun Gong members upset with us."

Beijing denies the persecution outright, despite the masses of evidence compiled by human rights organizations that prove otherwise. Beijing denies abusing practitioners, torturing practitioners, killing practitioners, and all other abuses which have been confirmed. Beijing is upset any time the persecution is exposed. They are the persecuting party. CBC should not be concerned about what Beijing thinks whatsoever. Of course Beijing will be upset.

David Matas, co-author of a report on the illicit harvesting of Falun Gong practitioners' organs, said in the same National Post article, "The notion that CBC would pay any attention to Chinese concerns is evidence they've lost all perspective," and continued, "The CBC becoming a vehicle of Chinese government propaganda - even under the notion that it's balanced coverage - is not responsible journalism."

Considering the CBC's fastidious and controversial extraction of actual evidence of persecution from the program, it is curious that they retained the numerous denials and accusations made by the Chinese Embassy spokesman who did not even attempt to provide any substantiating evidence whatsoever.

CBC extracted evidence revealing the two most damning events undertaken by the CCP: organ harvesting and the so-called self-immolation.

The immolation is the single most crucial event that turned perception of Falun Gong around in the minds of people in China as well as many around the world. The footage was played constantly on China's state controlled media, complete with follow up reports and masses of commentary by CCP appointed experts. To some, the incident brought to mind a quote atributed to Hitler's propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, peeople will eventually come to believe it."

The footage was also played in Western media, the shocking images leaving a deep impression on viewers. The response allowed Falun Gong was a one line denial that the immolators were not Falun Gong practitioners.

Practitioners in China deconstructed the video footage in the report, finding many inconsistencies, uncertainties and contradictions. This led to the production of a video, which when made available to the public, caused the CCP to edit footage out of their initial report before re-broadcasting it further.

Although many points of contradiction, evidence and inconsistencies were raised in the deconstruction video and presented to international media, it was met with virtual silence. Broadcasts of the immolation had already made a deep impression in the minds of views and readers, but the other side was not given a voice. This voice was once more diminished in the CBC version of Red Wall. I urge all readers to view the deconstruction of the so-called self-immolation and judge for themselves: www.falsefire.com

With more and more third parties confirming the facts of persecution in China and calling for an end to the atrocities, including Chinese human rights lawyer Gao Zhishen (who has been detained for a second time, current whereabouts and well being unknown), defecting Chinese consular official Chen Youglin, defecting Chinese policeman Hao Fengjun, high ranking CCP officials Wang Ahaojun and Jia Jia, along with an increasing number of other brave individuals speaking out in China against the persecution of Falun Gong, Western media would be hard pressed to further justify its silence.

There are many signs of the imminent collapse of the CCP. When that time arrives there will be no more stifling of voices from the many friends and relatives of Falun Gong practitioners who are also suffering through various forms of persecution and who have witnessed immense suffering of their loved ones. The small percentage of police officers and CCP officials of conscience will also speak out.

The voices of the persecuted Falun Gong practitioners themselves will no longer be ignored as documentation of abuses will be compiled. At this point there will be no need for media to fulfill its responsibility of revealing this massive atrocity. But people will be demanding to know why they hadn't.

Waterboarding Explained

Torture and human rights abuses are never acceptable, ever, under any circumstances. And I mean any. There are ethical and moral ways of treating prisoners and prisoners of war. Just think of the world's abhorrence over the Abu Ghraib prison photographs of prisoners being humiliated and mistreated. Waterboarding is inhumane and inappropriate under any circumstances. End of story.

Treating people, even prisoners, even alleged terrorists, in a humane fashion, like you would wish to be treated, is never the wrong thing to do. As Gandhi said: "An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind."

EX-AGENT BACKS 'TORTURE' TECHNIQUE

A former CIA agent who was part of an interrogation team were public with his account yesterday saying the waterboarding of a top al Qaeda figure was approved at the top levels of the U.S. government.

John Kiriakou, a leader of the team that captured top terror suspect Abu Zubydah, said waterboarding worked - it forced Zubaydah to talk in less than 35 seconds.

Waterboarding is a harsh interrogation technique that involves strapping down a prisoners; covering his mouth with plastic or cloth and pouring water over his face.

The prisoners quickly begins to inhale water, causing the sensation of drowning.

Critics say the technique is torture.

AP

Changing Laws for Same-Sex Couples in Nova Scotia

From the October 8, 2007, Maclean's, Newsmakers section, page 77, an article about to women in Nova Scotia who could get legally married there but who could not have both names on the birth certificate of their child.

JAMIE AND EMILY O'NEILL
TWO PROUD MOTHERS

Until last week, two women could legally marry in Nova Scotia, but if they wanted to have children together, only one could be listed on official records as the mother. That all changed when the province hastily amended their rules following a human-rights complaint lodged by Emily and Jamie O'Neill. The two women married two years ago and they decided to have a baby through artificial insemination. Emily is the biological mother of a bouncing baby girl, Jordyn, who was born on Aug. 7. But when they registered the birth, Jamie was told by officials that the only way she could be registered as a parent was if she were to adopt Jordyn. A same-sex couple, could in effect, share a marriage certificate, but not a birth certificate. Last week the O'Neills filed a human-rights complaint and within days the government revised the regulations.

Tasered to Death

It seems unimaginable that a man was tasered to death in an airport, because no one in immigration could figure out that he was Polish speaking and did not speak English and after 10 hours got frustrated and combative. Still there was no need for four RCMP officers, still only speaking English to the man, to Taser him. For a country that prides itself on its multi-culturalism, this seems to be a terrible blot against an RCMP force and immigration and security staff in an international airport.

Here is an article from the Wednesday, November 21, 2007, Toronto Star, Canada section, page A21, about an apology from the Public Safety Minister and information on the incident. The four officers have been assigned elsewhere.

DAY APOLOGIZES FOR 'TRAGIC INCIDENT'
Lawyers' groups calls for Taser moratorium in wake of deaths

Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau

Ottawa - Five weeks after a man died after being shot with a Taser at the Vancouver airport, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day followed the British Columbia government's apology with one of his own.

"This was a tragic incident that took place. We never want to see it happen again," Day told reporter yesterday at a news conference.

I'm sorry it took place. I think all Canadians are sorry it took place and we want to make sure it never happens again. That's why there are a number of inquests at a variety of levels."

Later yesterday, Day's office announced he had appointed an independent reviewer to assess the RCMP's use of Tasers.

Paul Kennedy, head of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, is to submit an initial report by Dec. 12. Day said Kennedy will review RCMP protocols on how the stun guns are supposed to be used and whether Mounties are following them.

Earlier, Day stopped short of apologizing on behalf of the RCMP, saying "men and women in uniform" deserve the benefit of the presumption of innocence in an incident that would lead to criminal charges.

He noted the officers involved in the Oct. 14 Vancouver incident have been reassigned to other duties while various reviews, including a public inquiry called by the B.C. government, are underway. Day said the Canada Border Services Agency, which has been under fire for its silence, will release a report on the incident in the coming days.

Concerns continue to mount about the use of Tasers in Canada.

The Criminal Lawyers' Association of Ontario yesterday wrote a letter to the federal public safety minister ot call for an embargo on the use of the stun guns and a national inquiry into their use by law enforcement in Canada.

Lawyer Frank Addario said in an interview a broader inquiry is needed given that there have been 17 deaths over the past few years as a result of Taser use.

On Monday, B.C. Attorney General Wally Oppal said his government would launch its own public inquiry because of a "vacuum of information" from all authorities involved in the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski.

Dziekanski, 40, who spoke no English, spent hours in a seure baggage claim area of Vancouver International Airport awaiting his mother, who was not allowed into the secure area. A bystander's videotape shows the final agitated 10 minutes of his life, and his agonizing death after RCMP officers stunned him with a taser less than a minute after approaching him.

Oppal said no explanation was forthcoming from the authorities involved. "We thought someone might step up and offer an explanation about what happened. You think of the repercussions here and the public deserves answers."

Federal Liberal public safety critic Ujjal Dosanjh said while "any apology that comes is appropriate," Ottawa should show "leadership" by consolidating all the reviews into one inquiry.

Meanwhile, RCMP in Chilliwack, BC., face questions over another Taser incident. A 29-year-old man was in critical condition after a violent struggle Monday with police who were trying to subdue him at a Fraser Valley-area store. Police used pepper spray, Taser, batons and finally extra officers to take the man into custody.

RCMP say the unidentified man suffered lacerations to his head.

With files from The Canadian Press

Challenging Discrimination Against the Disabled

From the Thursday, November 22, 2007, Greater Toronto section of the Toronto Star, page A12, an inspiring article about a student with significant physical disabilities and learning disabilities who has become a human rights activist:


WE'RE ALL DIFFERENT AND THAT'S OKAY
Gifted student 'stirs the pot' with diversity message

Daniel Girard
Education Reporter

Connor Steele wants to be an English professor so he can "challenge the boundaries of accepted knowledge."

Consider the first 17 years of his life Act I.

Born with spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy and learning disabilities, Steele has defied conventional wisdom that says it means reduced intellect and a substandard quality of life.

A gifted student, he took top academic honours last spring among Grade 11 students at Bradford District High School - with a 96 per cent average. Along the way he's acted in a school play, been on student council, launched a book club in hopes of boosting literacy test scores and started a homework cafe.

Steele is also active in human rights and environmental causes and launched a letter-writing campaign on behalf of Bradford's gays and lesbians after seeing them discriminated against.

"We're all different and that's okay," Steele said in an interview yesterday before making a presentation to educators in Mississauga.

"But we've all got something to offer, something worthy of respect."

That was the message Steele delivered to an after-school diversity workshop of 150 teachers, staff and administrators from the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board. With a mixture of personal experience and humour, he spoke of how technology has "brought peace" to the long-standing debate over how to integrate people with special needs into the school system.

"Because of technology, I am free to choose whether to go inside or out, whether to study torts or Tolstoy," said Steele, who uses a motorized wheelchair and adaptive technology programs for reading and writing.

Still, he said, widespread discrimination remains for people with disabilities, as it does for any others considered different from the mainstream.

"It's so important for educators to hear a current student's voice," said Chris D'Souza, equity and diversity officer with the board and organizer of the workshop. "If they have an understanding that this uniqueness has to be addressed, then they can make better accommodations within their classroom and adapt their curriculum to reflect it."

D'Souza said that while schools have done better in recent years in understanding their shortcomings, "we've still got a long way to go." Visible-minority and disabled teachers are under-represented in classroooms, he said, and the curriculum needs to be more inclusive, for example, by showcasing more diverse protagonists in literature classes.

Until that happens in schools and across society, Steele vows to be there, "stirring the pot" for those who are oppressed.

"I'd like it better if I didn't have to," he said. "I'd like it more if the world didn't require my posturing."

Canada's "Moral" Behaviour: Only When It Suits Harper & Washington

From the Sunday, November 18, 2007, Toronto Star, Canada section, page A8, is an article about Prime Minister's Harpers selectively moral foreign policies.

HARPER'S 'SELECTIVE' MORALS BAD NEWS FOR DESERTERS

Thomas Walkom

The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the refugee appeals of two U.S. Army deserters should come as no surprise.

Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey do not qualify as refugees under the United Nations definition used here. They are not fleeing political persecution; they do not face torture. They are merely trying to escape what they - and most Canadians - see as an unjust Iraq war.

This does not mean that the pair should be sent home to face court martial. Quite the reverse. If Canada's federal government had the inclination to face down Washington just a bit, both men - who almost certainly qualify for permanent resident status - would be welcomed, not as refugees but as landed immigrants. That's how Canada treated U.S. draft dodgers and deserters from the Vietnam War. And it worked out fine.

However, it is most unlikely that Prime Minister Stephen Harper will take this path.

True, he has promised to deal with foreign affairs "on moral grounds." But his is a selective form of morality. Harper is willing to go to bat against countries that the U.S. criticizes - like China. But he is not willing to take on those that President George W. Bush deems friends. And he is certainly not willing to take on Washington itself.

Nowhere is this double standard more apparent than in the government's approach to Canadian citizens detained abroad.

Harper has been outspoken in his defence of Huseyin Celil, a Canadian tried and convicted in China earlier this year on charges of terrorism.

Harper has raised Celil's case personally with the Chinese leadership. In July, then foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay rebuked China again, saying that "due process for this Canadian citizen was not followed and his rights were not respected."

Compare this to Ottawa's tepid response in the case of another Canadian, Bashir Makhtal, who has been languishing for months in an Ethiopian jail. Makhtal was seized at the Kenyan border last December as he tried to escape Somalia's latest bout of mayhem and handed over illegally - to the Ethiopian army. While he hasn't been formally charged with anything, it seems that Ethiopia suspects him of connections to a separatist group it regards as terrorist.

Yet from Harper, there has been radio silence. The reason? Ethiopia is America's proxy in the Horn of Africa. Its invasion of Somalia to depose an Islamic government (the invasion that caused Makhtal to flee) was sanctioned and militarily supported by Washington.

In this context, it seems, the Canadian government finds a mere Canadian citizen expendable.

But nowhere is the double standard more apparent than in the case of Omar Khadr, another Canadian imprisoned abroad on charges of terrorism. Khadr faces trial in a setting so unfair that it makes the Chinese justice system look reasonable.

He can be convicted on the basis of secret evidence and statements obtained under torture. In the unlikely event that he is acquitted, his captors have reserved the right to keep him in jail anyway.

Yet Ottawa insists that the process if fair. That's because Khadr's human rights are being abused not by Beijing but Washington. And this government does not wish to irritate Washington.

For the two U.S. deserters, none of this is good news. Their ability to remain in Canada depends on the federal government's willingness to accommodate U.S. war resisters.

Alas, there is little likelihood of this. This government won't protect even its own citizens without U.S. clearance. It is unlikely to help Americans trying to escape Bush's wars.

Thomas Walkom's, column appears Thursday and Sunday.

White House Memos Endorsing Torture

From the World & Comment section of the Toronto Star, Friday, October 5, 2007, page AA-AA4, an article about White House memos which seem to endorse torture:

MEMOS PUT WHITE HOUSE ON DEFENSIVE OVER 'TORTURE'
U.S. officials confirm existence of documents that appear to endorse extreme interrogation

Tim Harper
Washington Bureau

Washington - The Bush administration found itself in familiar territory yesterday, facing accusations it was covertly torturing terrorism suspects and holding them in secret "black sites."

The White House confirmed the existence of two secret memos, first reported in The New York Times, that appear to authorize the Central Intelligence Agency the ability to use its most extreme interrogation techniques, including simulated drowning, known as "water-boarding."

But it said the memos did not circumvent a U.S. law prohibiting "cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of suspects or an official 2004 policy that declared torture "abhorrent."

Questions about harsh interrogation techniques have become a hallmark of the Bush administration and most of those questions continue to swirl around former attorney general Alberto Gonzales who, the reports said, approved the legal opinions to bring policy more in line with the wishes of U.S. President George W. Bush.

Gonzales was driven from office last month amid charges he had politicized the justice department and compromised its independence in his zeal to accommodate his mentor, Bush.

The man nominated to succeed him, Michael Mukasey, faces a Senate confirmation hearing later this month and the question of torture policy seems certain to be raised at those hearings.

"The policy of the United States is not to torture," said White House spokesperson Dana Perino.

"The president has not authorized it, he will not authorize it. But he had done everything within the corners of the law to make sure that we prevent another attack on this country, which is what we have done in this administration."

Democrats in the House of Representatives demanded the two memos be released and promised to probe administration interrogation policy.

They said they would call Steven Bradbury, the acting chief of legal counsel at the U.S. Justice Department, identified by the Times as the author of the memos.

The revelations immediately became fodder in the Democratic presidential race.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama called the revelations an "outrageous betrayal" of this country's core values.

"Torture is how you create enemies, not how you defeat them," he said in a statement.

"Torture is how you get bad information, not good intelligence. Torture is how you set back America's standing in the world, not how you strengthen it."

Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd said the law made it "crystal clear" that torture was illegal.

"It is 'abhorrent' that the Bush administration would publicly disavow torture, while its office of legal counsel is secretly interpreting settled law to reach the opposite conclusion," Dodd said.

John McCain , the Arizona senator and Republican presidential hopeful, who is a former prisoner of war, said water-boarding is specifically outlawed under the 2005 law. He was instrumental in the passage of that law, and his amendment prohibited the use of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

McCain has stood firm against an administration, led by Vice President Dick Cheney, which wanted unfettered presidential powers to approve harsh interrogation.

Human-rights advocates said Congress must use the upcoming confirmation hearings to put an end to any back-door torture.

Congress should be clear - it will not confirm another attorney general who advises the president that it is okay to break the law," said Joanne Mariner of Human Rights Watch.

The Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents many of the more than 300 detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, said its clients were being tortured even as the Bush administration was publicly denouncing the practice.

"Torture is illegal, immoral, and it doesn't work. Detainee torture policies that produce faulty intelligence and exaggerated confessions result in innocent men being locked up," said Vincent Warren of the rights centre.

The Reuters news agency, citing an unnamed U.S. counterterrorism official, said a high-ranking Al Qaeda terrorist known as Abd at-Hadi al-Iraqi had been held in a secret site in late 2006.

He has since been transferred to Guantanamo Bay.

Bush acknowledged the secret detention sites in September 2006, when he transferred 14 detainees from the secret prisons to Guantanamo Bay.

Their existence, first revealed in 2005 by The Washington Post, sparked an international outcry, with some European officials charging the United States was illegally torturing people on their soil.

Accomplices to Torture: Stop the Transfer of Detainees

From the Wednesday, November 14, 2007, Toronto Star, Ideas section, page AA8, an article about Amnesty International's report into detainee transfers conducted by Canada and other countries:

Canada's Shame
TRANSFER OF DETAINEES IS COMPLICITY IN TORTURE

Michael Byers

The world's most respected human rights organization has just accused this country of complicity in torture. Canadians should hang their heads in shame.

Yesterday, the London-based International secretariat of Amnesty International released a 38-page report into detainee transfers conducted by Canada and other members of the International security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. The report is based upon Amnesty International's own field research, as well as on-the-ground reports from other reputable human rights and media organizations.

Back in December 2005, Canada and Afghanistan concluded an "arrangement" on detainee transfers that lacked basic verification mechanisms, such as the right for Canadian officials to visit transferred detainees. Last May, under the threat of a federal court injunction, the Canadian government negotiated an improved arrangement.

But the new arrangement has failed to work. According to Amnesty International, transferred detainees remain "at substantial risk of torture and other ill-treatment."

The human rights organization cites two reports from the UN secretary general, the most recent from just two months ago, pointing to the use of torture in a "significant number of cases." It collates a number of media reports to the same effect, as well as statements from the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission. It highlights the admission, by the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade last summer, that Canadian officials had received at least six first-hand reports of torture.

Amnesty International expresses particular concern about Afghanistan's notorious National Directorate of Security (NDS), the secret policy who end up holding most of the transferred detainees.

It writes that it has "received repeated reports of torture and other ill-treatment of detainees by the NDS from alleged victims and their relatives, as well as a range of organizations including UN agencies."

One alleged victim claimed to have been taken to a room in the NDS compound in Kandahar where "the walls were covered with blood." There, he was hung from a hook on the ceiling and repeatedly beaten into unconsciousness.

As Amnesty International explains, Canada's current reliance on occasional verification visits is misplaced. Monitoring "is a technique to detect torture only after it happens, and cannot substitute for prior precautions that prevent torture from happening in the first place."

The human rights organization also criticizes Canada for downplaying the number of transfers that occur. It suggests that as many as 200 detainees may have been moved from Canadian custody, not including the many immediate transfers that take place during joint Canada-Afghan military operations.

And it expresses concerns that the Canadian government's investigation into abuse claims early this year may have been neither "competent" nor "impartial."

Amnesty International then usefully summarizes the applicable law. It points out that torture is a "grave breach" of the Geneva Conventions, "may also constitute a crime against humanity or a war crime under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court," and is absolutely prohibited under international human rights law.

As part of this absolute prohibition, "states must never expel, return or extradite a person to a country where they risk torture or other ill-treatment."

More specifically, under the UN Convention Against Torture, countries may never transfer a person to a situation "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be tortured." Any country that does so is, under universally accepted rules of "state responsibility," is no less culpable than the country directly engaged in the abuse.

An Amnesty International explains, the situation is analogous to a country which knowingly releases detainees in a minefield while claiming that their safety is no longer its responsibility.

The report concludes by calling - quite reasonably - for a temporary moratorium on the transfer of detainees. The moratorium would allow for their rights to be protected while a comprehensive effort was made to reform the Afghan detention system. Such reforms could include "placing staff and trainers within Afghan detention facilities in order to monitor and train Afghan detention officials."

Yesterday, the Canadian Department of National Defense responded to the Amnesty International report by stating that "Afghanistan is a sovereign country with a constitution that requires the protection of human rights, and which has the responsibility for detention of Afghans."

The response misses the point. Canada is a sovereign country, too. We have our own constitutional and international legal responsibilities that are engaged whenever our soldiers act overseas. And we had, until recently, a strong reputation as a human rights respecting state.

Amnesty International is right. It's time to stop the transfer of detainees.

Chinese Journalists' Lawsuit with Yahoo Settled

Here is an article about Yahoo settling with Chinese journalists, after Yahoo provided Chinese authorities with information about the online activities of the journalists. Obviously greed in setting up business in such a new and expanding market overrode any moral misgivings about snitching on online clients to a repressive Chinese regime.

This is from the Wednesday, November 14, 2007, Business Section of the Toronto Star, page B8:

YAHOO SETTLES LAWSUIT OVER DISSIDENTS' EMAILS

San Francisco - Yahoo Inc. yesterday settled a lawsuit with two Chinese journalists who were jailed after the company provided Chinese authorities with information about their online activities.

Terms of the deal were not disclosed.

The two journalists and a family member sued the Sunnyvale, Calif.-based company earlier this year after Yahoo HK, Yahoo's Hong Kong subsidiary, gave Chinese authorities emails containing pro-democracy literature. The jailed journalists alleged in the lawsuit that jailers have tortured them and that Yahoo was responsible.

The company has denied any responsibility and maintained it was complying with Chinese law when it turned over the emails.

The case has raised questions about whether Internet firms should co-operate with governments that deny freedom of speech and frequently crack down on journalists.

Neither side discussed terms of the settlement other than to agree that Yahoo would pay the lawyers' fees of the two journalists and the family member who sued. The three were represented by The World Organization for Human Rights in Washington, D.C.

Shi Tao, a former writer for the financial publication Contemporary Business News, was jailed under state secrecy laws for allegedly providing state secrets to foreigners.

According to the suit, the other journalist, Wang Ziaoning, was arrested in 2002 after Yahoo HK gave police information linking him to his anonymous emails and other political writings he posted online.

Yahoo lawyer Michael Callahan was summoned before the House foreign affairs committee last week to explain testimony he gave to Congress last year. He said then that Yahoo had no information about the nature of China's investigation when the company handed over details that ended up being used to convinct Shi.

Callaghan subsequently has acknowledged that Yahoo officials had received a subpoena-like document that made reference to suspected "illegal provision of state secrets" - a common charge against political dissidents.

But Callahan continued to insist that Yahoo did not know the real nature of the Chinese investigation.

Women's Equality: The Persons Case

From the Saturday, October 20, 2007, Toronto Star, Ideas section, page ID4, is this article on women's rights in Canada and the famous "persons" court case:

The Persons Case
THE MOTHERS OF CANADIAN EQUALITY

Seventy-eight years ago this week, a group of 'maternal feminists' rewrote the constitution

Tracey Tyler
Legal Affairs Reporter

With wheat ready for threshing and bumblebees on the delphiniums, it was "a perfect day in harvest time," said Nellie McClung, recalling the afternoon she and four other women gathered on Emily Murphy's veranda in Edmonton to sign a petition.

The issue, destined for the Supreme Court of Canada, was whether women were "persons" under the British North America Act - then, in effect, our constitution - and eligible for appointment to the Canadian Senate.

It was the Roaring Twenties and the women were decidedly out-of-sync with Flappers and the intoxicating jazz era. Few could understand why the five, particularly Murphy, who craved a Senate seat, were so determined to win the right to serve in an institution that, even then, was considered outdated and badly in need of reform.

But the women, in some ways unlikely trailblazers, knew they were on to something bigger. And by the time it was resolved 78 years go this week, the Persons Case, as it became known, had acquired huge symbolic importance, establishing the concept of universal personhood" - quite simply, equality for women and every disadvantaged group. It's also one of the most important constitutional cases in Canadian history because it carved out the principle that the Constitution is meant to be "a living tree," growing as the country changes.

More than 50 years later, that would become the foundation for the Supreme Court of Canada's decisions extending new rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The case was celebrated yesterday with annual "Persons Day" breakfasts around the country. This year's event coincided with a new book about the case by Justice Rovert Sharpe of the Ontario Court of Appeal and Toronto lawyer Patricia McMahon. Entitled The Persons Case, The Origins and Legacy of the Fight for Legal Personhood, it recreates the courtroom drama and delves into the personalities of the ideological compatriots dubbed "The Famous Five."

It's recognition that eluded them at the time. Ten days after the decision, the stock market crashed, triggering the Great Depression, and their momentous victory was quickly forgotten.

While the case and the "living tree" approach to constitutional law would gain significance with the feminist movement of the 1970s and advent of the Charter in 1982, many of the details still aren't widely known.

Ardent prohibitionists, the five were also proponents of "maternal feminism," a progressive social movement that pressed for equality of the sexes but stressed the importance of family and believed that many of society's problems, including poverty, could be solved by applying a woman's perspective.

Three of them, McClung, Louise McKinney and Irene Parlby, were in their sixties. Murphy was in her fifties.

The fifth, Henrietta Muir Edwards, was pushing 80. All had deep roots in suffragist campaigns that secured voting rights for women. Battling for entry fo the Senate would be their last hurrah.

"I think it really just irritated them that someone was saying, under our constitution, that a woman can't play that role," Sharpe said in an interview. "It just seemed kind of ridiculous to them."

The case would not have forged ahead without Ontario-born Murphy, the colourful, complex and politicially ambitious Anglican minister's wife, who penned fiction under the name Janey Canuk. The first female magistrate in the British Empire, Murphy, it seems, favoured a hands-on style in everything she did, even corresponding and visiting with inmates she sent to prison.

"I think she would have been quite fun to sit down and talk to," said Sharpe. "Unfortunately, you couldn't have a drink with her. They were all teetotallers."

The constitution gave Murphy no right to complain about sex discrimination and the legal environment was hostile to reform, with a series of English cases denying women the right to hold public office or attend university.

The federal government maintained that women could not sit in the Senate without the almost insurmountable hurdle of a constitutional amendment.

Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King agreed to refer the issue to the Supreme Court, which ultimately took the view the constitution was frozen in time; since women could not hold public office when the British North America Act was written in 1867, the Fathers of Confederation did not mean for women to become senators.

Sailing to England to appear before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, then Canad's final court of appeal, Newton Rowell, "a former Ontario Liberal leader and constitional lawyer who was representing the five, had to convince the law lords to abandon centuries of common law.

On Oct. 18, 1929, it was Lord Chancellor John Sankey, a lifelong bachelor (and, at the time, heartsick over his mother's death) who struck the blow for equality, declaring in his judgment: "The exclusion of women from all public office is a relic of days more barbarous than ours."

Looking back, the case shows how an unpredictable brew of personal and political considerations can shape a landmark court ruling, say McMahon and Sharpe. Individuals do make a difference, for there was nothing inevitable about the decision, the authors say in the book.

"But for the unlikely conincidence of Emily Murphy's unquenchable thirst for a Senate appointment, William Lyon Mackenzie King's fondness for referring difficult questions to the courts, and John Sankey's determination to make his mark as a reforming Lord Chancellor, the result could easily have been quite different."

Five months after the ruling, King appointed a female senator - but it wasn't Murphy. There were no Senate vacancies from Alberta. Instead, the honour went to Ontarian Cairine Wilson.

During her induction ceremony, a sword got caught in Wilson's gown. Still bitterly disappointed at being passed over, Murphy wasn't above a put down. "Isn't it time that both the sword and trailing gowns be put out of the Senate?" she wrote to McClung.

After Wilson, the government showed little commitment to giving equal voice in the upper chamber. In his remaining 18 years in office, King appointed 67 Senators, not one a woman.

Among his successors, Jean Chretien holds the best record, with 33 women among his 75 appointments. Today, women hold 32 of 105 Senate seats.

Canada's First Nations

It is very disappointing that Canada has joined the U.S. and Australia in not signing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Three developed nations, shirking their responsibilities again (think Kyoto agreement as well).

Here is an article dated Monday, November 5, 2007, from theToronto Star, page AA8, Ideas, about Canada's First Nations people:

Canada's 'Dirty Secret'
First Nations still searching for a place to call their home

Sara Mainville

Lately, I have been trying to understand why I cannot live in Ontario's cities comfortably.

For the most part, I notice too much. The "you don't belong here" stare may be part of it. I receive this common "welcome" in restaurants frequented by my lawyer friends. These looks may have more to do with my informal attire than my race. But it is hard to divoce class oppression from racial tension.

One thing is fairly clear - That I grew up economically disadvantaged largely because I grew up Anishinaabe on a reserve. And my personal comfort level on the reserve is much higher than in most Ontario municipalities. This may be why I continually gravitate back to reserve life.

I have had several discussions recently with an old friend. Schooled in mathematics, Chris Belleau also has been an amateur historian of the Garden River First Nation. Chris has actuallly been schooling me. He has told me about four imperatives that our nation - the Ojibway nation - agreed to during the period of first European contact. The imperatives were to find territory to support smaller populations of Anishinaabeg (Ojebway communities); to not let the European gather us together in large members; to not show them the "shiny stuff" lest they gather among us in large numbers; and to never forget that we are Anishinaabe.

So it is no surprise that our ancestors agreed to settle in territory that would support us. Through teaties, "reserves" become our homelands. However, because of continuing land and resource development, on which the economy of Canada continues to be almost solely dependent, Canada's Indian Agents helped to expropriate a large chunk of our reserves. In my treaty, which involves most of northwestern Ontario and a small part of Manitoba, we also agreed to revenue sharing. However, reserves that were to be chosen by our chiefs were disputed by a land-hungry Ontario. In fact, Ontario fought all the way to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in England to dispute the understanding between Canada and my ancestors. Sadly, Ontario's new interpretation of our solemn treaty won out.

Another sad feature of this reinterpretation of my treaty was that our homelands were to be set aside by agreement and compromise between Ontario and Canada.

In the 19th century, the chief of Whitefish Bay First Nation sent word to Crown representatives that it "agitated his heart" that he was to be placed on lands that were largely rocks and bog. Along with not being able to exploit the lands and revenues that we agreed to share in our treaty, our huting and fishing rights were over-policed, with several wrongful convinctions made by the Ontario government. It is interesting that now I am meeting with the Ontario government as a representative of my people on the "resource sharing file."

And it is especially interesting that arguments of equity and fairness are used against our claims for revenue-sharing arrangements. Either Ontario is forgetting its own history or its politicians are simply ignoring it. It was hoped that Section 35 of the Constituion Act, 1982, would be transformative and right past wrongs done to First Nations. Unfortunately, it has done little but protect rights such as hunting and fishing that already were protected in treaties.

I am particularly troubled at how the concept of euity has been turned on its ear to argue against the "special" rights of treaty-rights holders. Treaties were agreed to exist "forever." Like constitutions, they should be held as the highest law of the land. My ancestors unfortunately never read Adam Smith or Machiavelli to understand the true nature of European-based socities. While my ancestors have tempted to right the failed relationship, I read documents from Indian Affairs' files that reveal athe small evils against "Indians" that were regarded as necessary for the greater good of Canada.

It is no wonder that the call by Louise Arbour, the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights, for self-cricism by Canada over its "aboriginal" policy had so little resonance in the media.

Ontario and Canada need to remove their blinders regarding justice for First Nations. Canada's long-held dirty secret has now been exposed on the world stage. Through the United Nations' Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People, we may need to force you to move forward.

Sara Mainville is a member of the Ontario Bar and Assistant Professor at Algoma University in Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.

Imprisoned in Iran: Marina Nemat

From the Autumn 2007 issue of the University of Toronto Magazine, pages 45-46, is an article about Marina Nemat, who wrote about her experiences in Iran in Prisoner of Tehran.

THE ROAD TO FREEDOM

One a cold January evening in 1982,two Iranian Revoluntary Guards burst into the Tehran home of 16-year-old Marina Nemat and placed her under arrest. Her crime? She had criticized the Islamic government in her school newspaper and had asked her calculus teacher to teach math instead of propaganda. The young woman was taken to the notorious political prison Evin, where she was blindfolded, handcuffed and tortured, her soles whipped with a cable.

Nemat was also sentenced to execution. Set in front of a firing squad, her life was spared at the last moment by a guard named Ali. He gave her the option of marrying him him and living under house arrest. The alternative, he threatened, was to arrest her parents and execute her boyfriend. The 15-month marriage ended only after a rival political faction assassinated Ali.

Twenty-five years later, Nemat has detailed her experiences in Prisoner of Tehan (Viking Canada). After immigrating to Toronto with her husband, Andrew (the boyfriend Ali had threatened to execute), and son in 1991, the couple had a second son and moved to a house in the suburbs. But after the death of her mother, Nemat experienced nightmares and violent flashbacks. "There was a jumble of images in my head, and I couldn't take it anymore," she says. "I either had to go jump off a bridge or do something really stupid, or I had to make sense of all the memories. Being a reader, the most logical thing that came to mind was putting it on paper."

Nemat found time to write most afternoons after waitressing the lunchtime shift at Swiss Chalet. She would head over to Second Cup, buy a hot chocolate and writer in her notebook for an hour before picking up her sons from school. She didn't intend to publish her writings. But Nemat's nightmares continued, and she realized it was because many of her memories were still secret. (No one in her family - including her parents - had ever asked her about her experiences in prison.) In 2002 Nemat enrolled in U of T's School of Continuing Studies, where she took classes ranging from grammar to non-fiction, and earned a certificate in creative writing over five years. Instructors helped her revise her manuscript (there were seven drafts in total), and introduced her to an agent.

Nemat's book is now a bestseller in Canada, and has been published in 17 languages. She is writing her first novel, about an Iranian woman who has a baby while imprisoned. But her biggest success, perhaps, is creating her own psychological freedom by breaking out of "a cycle of hatred."

"I have watched good people turn into bad people - very bad people," says Nemat. "And I have watched them do terrible things to each other because they hate one another. When you watch that, you feel helpless. And if you are lucky enough, you are able to separate yourself from that hatred, you are able to overcome all the reasons to hate and pull yourself out of it. I don't know how it's done. How does a human being pull himself or herself out of the cycle of hatred? People do it all the time. I'm not the only one."

- Stacey Gibson

Women Do Not Get Same Medical Treatment

I knew from past news reports that women with heart attack symptoms were less likely to have those symptoms recognized, and therefore treated, by doctors. However, here is an editorial that shows that the story is much wider and worse than I ever thought. It is shocking.

From the Comment, Editorials section of the Toronto Star, page AA6:

Despite concerted efforts to fight two-tier medicine in Ontario, new evidence suggests that it is far more prevalent than anyone believed.

But the kind of two-tier medicine highlighted in a study to be published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal next month is not a result of public versus private care. It is found to exist throughout the intensive care units of Ontario's publicly funded hospitals and shows up in the treatment that women receive compared with men.

The study of nearly 500,000 patient records at 14 Ontario hospitals in 2001 and 2002 found that although more women were admitted than men, fewer received intensive care unit, or ICU, treatment - even when their illnesses warranted it.

Severely ill women were one-third less likely to be admitted to ICU's than men with comparable conditions. And women who were treated in intensive care units tended to be discharged earlier than men and were less likely to be given crucial therapies, such as mechanical ventilation. The bottom line is that women in intensive care were 20 per cent more likely to die than men.

While decisions made by family members in end-of-life treatment may explain some of these differences, they are consistent with many other studies showing gender-based biases in medical treatment.

More research is clearly needed to pinpoint the reasons for these disparities and the root causes of gender-biased medicine.

At the same time, though, women should not have to keep dying needlessly while the health-care profession explores the reasons for the differences in its approach to women and men.

Because these kinds of biases are likely to occur only on a subconscious level, practitioners must be made aware of them by bringing them to the surface. Accordingly, protocols and checks should immediately be put in place requiring doctors and other health-care providers to ask themselves when treating women whether they would prescribe the same treatment plan if the patient were a man.

And hospitals should be monitoring treatments and outcomes on a gender basis to see if efforts to reduce the disparities between men and women are having any real impact.