Showing posts with label RCMP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RCMP. Show all posts

August 01, 2008

Canada Bus passenger beheads seat mate !!

Witnesses: Canada bus passenger beheads seat mate

Associated Press - August 1, 2008 4:43 AM ET

PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE, Manitoba (AP) - Police in Canada say they arrested a 40-year-old man who allegedly stabbed and beheaded a seatmate aboard a bus.

Witnesses say other bus passengers fled in horror as the attack took place late Wednesday night aboard a Greyhound bus en route from Edmonton, Alberta, to Winnipeg, Manitoba.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police say the suspect was captured as he tried to escape from the bus early Thursday about three hours after the violence.

Authorities declined to provide details beyond that the victim had been stabbed. They said a motive hadn't been determined and refused to identify the suspect or the victim.

One passenger says the victim was asleep with headphones on as the attack began.

A passenger, the bus driver and a trucker who stopped secured the bus door to prevent the alleged attacker's escape.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


July 26, 2008

Oh, yeah, Fantinorama/Zaccardelli bs continues

Fantino & Zaccardelli: Canada's Keystone Cops

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:fLFTmMMGy_AJ:casselmanual.blogspot.com/2007/06/fantino-zaccardelli-canadas-keystone.html+jerry+falwell+fantino&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca


Current OPP Chief Fantino Gets To "Probe" His Old Friend, former RCMP Commissioner Zaccardelli.

Abbott & Costello as Keystone Cops

Well, fellers and gals, I just bet that will be an honest investigation.


Can you believe Stephen Harper's snottiness in handing over the Zaccardelli case to one of Zaccardelli's best cop friends, Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino, all in the cynical assurance that Fantino's cursory review of the RCMP pension scandal will exonerate his old friend, Zaccardelli?

How often are Canadians going to abide being treated like gullible fools by the Stephen Harper government?

You think I'm being unfair to Fantino?

Read what Fantino told the Globe & Mail's Jeff Sallot when asked how the OPP commissioner might handle his review of the Ottawa Police Service case file about Zaccardelli and the pension fund scandal (G&M, June 20, 2007, page A4):

"I can't really look at a man's career of 30-some odd years of dedicated, loyal, committed service and forget all of that and just focus on this one piece of his career."

But, Commissioner Fantino, that is precisely what you are being ordered to do, to focus on Zaccardelli's abandonment of his solemn duty to support and protect all the RCMP staff under his leadership.

So do it, Fantino! Perform the investigative duty the government of Canada has demanded of you. If you don't, when your whitewash report is ready, well, there may be another government in power, and perhaps we will urge it to investigate your investigation, should it prove too forgiving of your dear friend Zaccardelli's failures. OPP Commissioner Fantino apparently has the notion that not worrying when your own officers' pension funds are stolen is no more than a picayune peccadillo.

Fantino, like Zaccardelli, is a comic-opera figure of Napoleonic strut and firing-squad posturings, both of them preposterous, prancing martinets out of a Franz Lehar operetta. Zaccardelli's silly, militaristic mien and threatening, toplofty deportment belong in a Marx Brothers farce set in some ruritanian state like Freedonia where the police chief has so many epaulettes he gets cheek burn.

Zaccardelli should be made to pay for the immense damage he did to the RCMP and the culture of fear he fostered in underlings ought to be visited upon him.

But now here comes this arrogant OPP copper Fantino on the very eve of accepting leadership of the scandal investigation, implying that he will not fully address the criminal activity involved in stealing the pension funds of RCMP officers, and implying that he will overlook the fact that, when this criminal theft of funds was reported to Zaccardelli, the whistleblowing RCMP officer who reported the scandal was threatened with punishment, silence and dismissal.

Fantino reportedly said he's surprised at all the vilification that fell on Zaccardelli's head.

Don't you get it, Julian?

The crime happened on Zaccardelli's watch and he tried to bury the crime and so he takes the fall.

He's the top cop of the land and he buries crime?

Where in hell did you get your training in police ethics, Fantino? At a fascist rally?

I hope every Canadian will watch this probe by Fantino with hawk eyes.

Canada, don't let these two constabulary pomposities off the hook for one minute!


Part 2


With constabulary duties to be done, to be done,

A policeman's lot is ne'er a guilty one.


Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Juvenal, Roman satirist, Satire 6.346-8


"But who will guard the guards?" asks the famous Latin poser, a question as old as Plato's Republic. And, just in case you think Socrates, Plato's mouthpiece, had the lock on nifty answers, the blabbermouth egghead dropped the ball on this little query.

Plato contrives to have the Athenian citizens ask their usual scripted question. These Athenians are always waiting offstage in Platonic dialogues, toying prissily with the hems of their chitons, flashing one another and playing grab-ass until called upon to utter the naïve question, said question always apposite to Plato's rhetorical needs.

Their pert query? "Duhhhhh, tell us, O Wise Sayer of Sooth, who is going to protect the city from its own protectors." Socrates says the protectors themselves will police themselves. Athens (read Socrates) will train them not to salivate each time they are given more power.

After this finely tuned moral training, says Socrates, the protector guards (modern translation: 'cops') won't want to steal the good wine, lie with the cutest slaves, sell secrets to the enemy, take bribes from the olive-oil merchants, or absolve their guard buddies of punishment for guard crimes. These crack troops, moral gumdrops to a man, will police us because of their own 'taught' virtue.

No, they won't.

By the very nature of the duty we ask them to perform, policemen are prone to be corrupt, for we give them powers denied to ordinary citizens. Whenever extraordinary power is granted to humans, soon or late, that power is tested, used and promptly abused. Lord Acton denominated the abuse aptly in an oft-quoted sentence from one of his letters to Bishop Creighton in 1887:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

Earlier, in 1770, William Pitt the Younger, British Prime Minister from 1766 to 1778, in a speech in the House of Lords said: "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it."

Then what is the quick, easy answer? There is none.

Did you observe the first part of the recent trial in British Columbia where, once again, the RCMP was allowed to be investigated by other cops? The results were predictable. The RCMP officer who shot a young man in the back of the head because he was drinking a beer in public did nothing wrong! Followed acceptable procedure. Through an utterly preposterous RCMP account of a supposed fight in the police station, the officer did his duty. Oh yeah! That's why we have an RCMP. To blow the brains out of a guy having a drink after a hockey game.

Or perhaps not? Perhaps you, like me, do not accept police behaviour like that?

The police must NOT be allowed to investigate

themselves. EVER.

What has the Harper government just done?

Handed a cop probe over to….cops.


Saturday, June 23, 2007:

Meanwhile, at RCMP HQ, the hurried resignations and scurryings to exit the building continue. Check out Mr. Gavin who just resigned. Pure as the driven snow? Mais, bien sûr!

But, with regard to the RCMP, let's hope, to coin a phrase, it ain't over until the caught laddy sings.

July 05, 2008

repost on the Maher Arar case (timely, eh?)

Canadian authorities complicit in Arar’s illegal detention and torture

By Keith Jones
18 November 2003

Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien has condemned US authorities for their treatment of Maher Arar—the Syrian-born Canadian citizen whom the US deported to Syria so he could be detained without charge and tortured. “It is completely unacceptable and deplorable,” declared Chrétien the day after Arar had held a press conference to explain how US officials had deported him to Syria over his vehement objections and how in Syria he had been held in a tiny cell and savagely beaten.

Washington’s treatment of Arar was abhorrent and criminal. (See Washington’s practice of torture by proxy: the Maher Arar Case.) Chrétien’s denunciation of the conduct of US immigration and security officials, however, fits to a tee the old adage, “he doth protest too much.” Especially since Chrétien has categorically refused to call a public inquiry into the role Canadian authorities played in Arar’s ordeal.

US officials, including Secretary of State Colin Powell, have said that the US only detained Arar because Canadian police and security agencies—the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and probably also the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS)—had identified him as a terrorist suspect. Yet Chrétien has brushed this aside, saying anything that happened to Arar was the fault of US immigration, police and intelligence agencies.

Arar became suspicious that he had been fingered by Canadian authorities when his US interrogators revealed an extensive knowledge of his life in Canada. “They were consulting a report while they were questioning me,” Arar told a November 4 news conference, “and the information was so private, I thought this must come from Canada.”

Arar’s US interrogators confronted him with a copy of the lease he took out on an Ottawa house in 1997 that had been co-signed by another Syrian-born Canadian, Abdullah Almalki. They also told him that he had been observed eating a meal in an Ottawa fast-food restaurant with Almalki.

The subsequent conduct of Canadian authorities indicates that Canada’s security and diplomatic establishment, or at the very least important elements of it, condoned, if not actively sought, Arar’s deportation to Syria.

* Although the Canadian government ultimately protested against Arar’s detention in Syria, CSIS agents reportedly travelled to Damascus to obtain information from the Syrian regime about the “confession” its interrogators had beaten out of him.

* In recent weeks, information about Arar’s forced confession has been leaked to the Canadian media. The source of the leak has not been identified, but undoubtedly it can be traced back to elements within the RCMP and/or CSIS who are anxious to discredit Arar, the better to defend their own role in fingering him.

* According to the Toronto Star, the US Ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, reportedly told a private audience that Canada wanted Arar detained in Syria.

* The Canadian consular official who met with Arar while he was being detained in New York dismissed his warning that he was in danger of being deported to Syria.

* In August, Canadian Foreign Minister Bill Graham reported that a Canadian representative had met with Arar in Syria and Arar had rejected suggestions he had been tortured. Arar says this is utterly untrue. In fact, he put himself in extreme danger by screaming to the Canadian representative that he was being abused and had been tortured. Graham has ordered an internal inquiry to determine why Arar’s account differs so radically from that of the representative who met with him.

Further questions about Canada’s role are raised by the fate of the aforementioned Abdullah Almalki. An engineer and Canadian citizen, he was arrested in May 2002 while visiting his family in Syria and has been held without charge by Syria ever since. Arar encountered Almalki while in detention in Syria and reports that he has been subjected to even worse treatment than he was.

There is every reason to believe that Almalki was arrested on the basis of suspicions raised by the Canadian intelligence authorities—suspicions the Canadian government now concedes were unwarranted. Writes Toronto Star columnist Thomas Walkom, “Abdullah Almalki, a Canadian citizen, is being tortured in a Syrian prison because the security services of his own country passes on unproven suspicions to Damascus—either directly or, more likely, through the US. ... If this is what intelligence sharing means, it must stop right now.”

Chrétien has tried to justify his refusal to call a public inquiry by saying that the Arar case has been referred to the RCMP’s Public Complaints Commissioner. Yet the Commissioner, Shirley Heafey, herself recently complained that the RCMP is not co-operating with her on terror-related enquiries, hiding behind the sweeping, new Anti-Terrorism Act.

See Also:
Washington’s practice of torture by proxy: the Maher Arar Case
[18 November 2003]


June 19, 2008

Canada guidelines laid down on tasers

Crack down on Tasers, watchdog tells Mounties

TOM HANSON/THE CANADIAN PRESS
Paul Kennedy, the RCMP watchdog, leaves a news conference in Ottawa after releasing his report on the Mounties' use of Tasers on June 18, 2008. The report was based on 4,000 incidents where the gun was used or threatened.




OTTAWA BUREAU


OTTAWA–The RCMP must immediately restrict the use of Tasers by the Mounties to experienced officers and order medical attention once a person is hit by the 50,000-volt stun gun, a new report says.

RCMP watchdog Paul Kennedy's report, based on a review of more than 4,000 cases where the weapon was used or threatened, was approved in principle yesterday by Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day and the RCMP.

But both Kennedy and Day signalled the RCMP has reservations about the impact on its operations.

While Kennedy rejected a ban on the use of Tasers, he criticized the RCMP for failing to act on his main interim recommendation in December to immediately restrict their use to situations where "combative" or "assaultive" suspects threaten death or "grievous bodily harm" to themselves, officers or the public.

Kennedy, commissioner for public complaints against the RCMP, said Tasers are still used in situations where suspects cannot even be described as "resistant."

Now, after a seven-month probe, Kennedy says Mounties must go even further and restrict the stun gun's use to experienced officers – above the rank of corporal in urban centres, and constables with five years' experience in rural detachments – and must summon medical attention every time it is discharged.

If adopted, the recommendation to limit who can carry a Taser could affect nearly half the Mounties now deployed on active duty, and take the stun guns out of the hands of many cops in rural and remote areas, where junior officers are frequently posted.

In all, the report contains 12 recommendations that slam RCMP data reporting on Taser use as faulty, unsupervised, and a poor justification for relaxing the rules around its use since the Taser's introduction in 2001.

Day had asked Kennedy to study RCMP protocols on Taser use in the wake of the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver airport last October.

"We see this somewhat as a victory," Walter Kosteckyj, the lawyer for Dziekanski's mother Zofia Cisowski, said yesterday. "This report was essentially calling for a conditional moratorium."

Kennedy said he accepts that there is likely an "as yet undefined" link between the stun gun's use and some deaths.

Yet he said police risk losing public confidence if they fail to become more publicly accountable for the increased use of the weapons.

"Nobody is calling for the police to be disarmed and not use weapons," said Kennedy. But, he added, "the police alone cannot and should not decide what is appropriate use of this weapon."

Day and RCMP Commissioner Bill Elliott issued written statements yesterday that welcomed Kennedy's rejection of a moratorium on the weapons.

Elliott said he would act "to provide clearer direction to our members, to further restrict situations in which the (conducted energy weapon) can be deployed, and to develop and implement measures to enhance accountability and to promote officer and public safety."

But he stressed that any "specific steps" would be need to considered along with the geographic realities and "operational imperatives" faced by the national police force.

Neither Elliott nor any other senior RCMP officer would comment further or do interviews on the report, a media spokesperson said.

Staff Sgt. Brian Roach, a staff relations representative of the RCMP's rank-and-file members, said he was "relieved" that Kennedy supports "the continued use" of the Taser.

"It is an important intervention tool that not only enhances officer safety, but public safety. Obviously, proper training and clear policy on the proper circumstances for its use are important."

Kennedy admits his data analysis did not prove younger, inexperienced officers were quicker on the Taser draw.

But he said he inferred it from many of the complaints he received, including 117 cases where 13 to 16 year-olds have been shot with a Taser.

Kennedy painted a disturbing picture of the typical police user of Tasers, and the average victim. The weapon is most often deployed when two or more officers are present, usually constables on general patrol duty. The jolts are frequently cycled multiple times.

Tasers are most often used on males, aged 20 to 39, who are usually drunk, on a Friday or Saturday night, when police are called to scenes of a disturbance or assault, or when the subject is disruptive in a cell.

"These activities have been going on since man found firewater ... we've been able to confront them without resort to the Taser," Kennedy said.

The weapon should only be available to officers who have "the maturity of judgment" and experience.

Kennedy also dismissed the "storyline" in the RCMP's training program that says it's appropriate to use a Taser to control a person in the throes of "excited delirium" so the individual might receive prompt medical attention.

Day said the government "accepts the report and its recommendations in principle, including the main recommendation to further restrict the circumstances within which conducted energy weapons may be used."

But Day quoted Elliott as telling him that he would act "in a manner that takes into consideration the operational requirements of the RCMP."

With files from Petti Fong

RCMP watchdog's analysis of Taser use

WHO USES TASERS, WHERE AND WHEN:

• Mostly RCMP officers in the West, between 8 p.m. and 4 a.m., often on Friday or Saturday nights.

• Often two or more officers are present; usually constables on general patrol duty.

• Most likely involves a "disturbance" or assault-related offence.

WHO GETS HIT:

• Usually males (90 per cent), unarmed, between the ages of 20 and 39. However, many have been aged 13 to 16.

• Individuals suspected of, or confirmed to be, using a substance, usually alcohol.

HOW:

• In "probe" mode – where electrodes attach to a suspect and discharge a jolt over a wide area, which "translates into muscular incapacitation in addition to pain" – the weapon is most likely cycled once for five seconds.

• In "push-stun" mode – where the weapon is pushed against a person's body or clothing, and a five-second shock is discharged that generally does not cause muscular incapacitation – police often (40 per cent of the time) cycle the weapon two or more times.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT:

• Individuals are likely to receive medical attention if they are 50 or older; if they are female; if they are suicidal or having a mental health crisis; if weapons are involved.

• If substance use is suspected, they are less likely to receive medical attention.

• Medical attention is also likely if weapon is deployed in "probe" mode alone, or if combined with "push stun" mode, or if multiple officers are present.


June 05, 2008

Details exposed in the taser enquiry

RAIDWOOD PROBE

Taser inquiry sifting dozens of complaints

One story of heart attack victim, another of man shocked eight times among submissions alleging abuse

The Canadian Press

VANCOUVER -- Germain Quesnel sat in an RCMP cell for an hour, believing he was having a heart attack.

He had just received two blasts from a police taser to his chest because Staff Sergeant Lorne Malkoske said he wouldn't move away from the cell door.

Mr. Quesnel, who had had two previous heart attacks, asked for his nitroglycerin medication but officers believed he was just trying to get out of jail.

An hour later he was taken to hospital where doctors confirmed he'd had a heart attack.

The report of Mr. Quesnel's tasering appears in RCMP and Complaints Commission documents submitted to a B.C. public inquiry into the use of tasers.

"I sincerely apologize to you for his actions. Your concerns were raised with [Sgt. Malkoske] and he was told that his conduct was not acceptable. He has assured me this will not reoccur," said a letter sent to Mr. Quesnel from a senior RCMP officer about the March, 2003, incident.

That letter is now among dozens of submissions to the inquiry. It was submitted by another man who says the same sergeant assaulted him with a taser two months later.

In his submission, Phil Spicer, 58, admits he was drunk when police squeezed his 6-foot-5, 275-pound frame into the back of a police car.

But it was the way the Richmond RCMP staff sergeant attempted to get him out of the vehicle that set off Mr. Spicer's four-year crusade over alleged police misuse of tasers.

With his hands cuffed behind his back, Mr. Spicer was shocked eight times by Sgt. Malkoske.

As Mr. Spicer's lawyer, Wayne Guinn, explained in a letter to Richmond RCMP, "The problem arose when officers tried to fit too big an object into too small a place ... they created the trouble."

Mr. Spicer's lengthy submission includes police reports, a letter from the RCMP Public Complaints Commission and his allegations of excessive force in a B.C. Supreme Court lawsuit, as well as details of Mr. Quesnel's ordeal.

His story is among about three dozen sent to the inquiry from people who feel police abused their authority by using the weapon as a compliance device.

Neither Sgt. Malkoske nor Mr. Quesnel could be located for comment.

Former B.C. appeal court judge Thomas Braidwood is conducting a two-part inquiry at the behest of the B.C. government after the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski at the Vancouver airport last October.

Mr. Braidwood has already held public hearings for the first phase of his inquiry and a report is expected later this year. The second phase of the inquiry, looking specifically at Mr. Dziekanski's death, will begin when other investigations are complete.

About 2,800 tasers are being used by more than 9,100 RCMP members across the country. Municipal and provincial police forces, correctional officers and, in the case of Vancouver, transit police, also use conductive energy weapons.

Mounties have wielded the electronic guns more than 3,000 times since their introduction in December, 2001. Mr. Dziekanski was the 18th person in Canada to die after a taser strike.

Lorraine McLeod of Edmonton wrote to the inquiry about her nephew. "I believe the taser weapon is in the hands of police officers who are not trained to its lethal force," she said.

Taser International maintains that the weapon itself is not lethal. The question is one that will be examined by the commission.

Ms. McLeod's nephew, Jason Doan, 28, stopped breathing after he was shocked three times in August, 2006. He died a few weeks later in hospital.

"This tragedy with my nephew Jason happened to a man who needed help - not death," she stated.

Police responded to a report of a man smashing car windows and said they used the taser after an officer was hit with the wooden handle from a pitchfork.

Alison Beil wrote to the commission to say her son was "tortured" when the University of Victoria student was awakened in his home by Saanich Police and jolted five times.

And Margaret Hantuik told the commission that she called Victoria police herself when she was worried her son could hurt himself. The Grade 12 student, who has Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism, was stressed from exams and in a manic state. The slight, 125-pound teen was already in the hospital when police officers used the taser.

"I strongly believe my son was tasered for expediency. The officers wanted to get on their way," she wrote to the commission.

"How could three strong, middle-aged officers not have held a slight, terrified lad, calmed him a bit and then shut the door?" she asked.


May 25, 2008

Breaking News on attacks on our people for asserting our rights and jurisdiction

Breaking News on attacks on our people for asserting

our rights and jurisdiction:

RCMP EVICT HEREDITARY CHIEF KIAPILANO AND

SUPPORTERS FROM SQUAMISH BAND OFFICE,

VANCOUVER


Squamish Nation territory ("Vancouver, Canada")

May 24, 2008

On Saturday, May 24th, a force of twenty taser-armed

RCMP officers and band council police forced Chief

Kiapilano off his own land yesterday during a peaceful

occupation of the Squamish band council office by

Kiapilano and his supporters.

On Friday morning, May 23rd, Hereditary Squamish

Chief Kiapilano and a dozen supporters had swiftly

occupied the offices of the state-funded "Squamish

Band Council" in North Vancouver, and ordered the

eviction of the entire band council.

Chief Kiapilano is leading a movement to expel

agencies from his land who are responsible for the

genocide of his people. Last March, Kiapilano and

Eagle Strong Voice (Kevin Annett) initiated these

actions by posting eviction notices on the Roman

Catholic, Anglican and United churches in downtown

Vancouver, ordering them off Squamish land.

Chief Kiapilano said in a statement from inside the

occupied band council office, "Our people are

starving, they're living in dilapidated homes, and

these so-called 'chiefs' [representing the colonial

government] are doing nothing for them. Now 'chief'

Bill Williams has signed a deal with the province

[British Columbia] allowing mining and destruction of

more of our land. We're here today to tell these fake

leaders to leave, and we're staying here until they're

gone."

Bill Williams left and band council member Byron

Joseph stayed. Williams called in the RCMP and band

council police. Chief Kiapilano then advised Byron

Joseph and his staff to leave the premises, and

announced his intention to change the locks on the

building.


"We're consulting our [colonial] lawyers" announced

Byron Joseph, just before he and his advisors left the

building for lunch.

"Chief Kiapilano declared a common law jurisdiction

over this building, and has reclaimed it for all of his

people", said Irene Peace Kiapilano. "We call on all

hereditary chiefs to do likewise, and reclaim their land

and government from a foreign occupying power."

Then on Saturday, May 24th, led by RCMP Inspector

Richard Kennedy, [phone 604-985-1311

mvanrcmp@rcmp-grc.gc.ca] sixteen heavily armed

mounties wearing flak jackets surrounded the band

council office. Negotiations were going on between

Chief Kiapilano and band council staff. After a lawyer

from the Smythe-Ratcliffe firm [Phone 604-687-1231

info@smytheratcliffe.com] spoke to band councillor

Byron Joseph, the talks were abruptly cancelled.

The mounties blocked the doorways and prevented

Kiapilano's supporters from re-entering the office.

"They wouldn't let me back into the building where

they had the Chief trapped, so I got out my drum and

start drumming" said Irene Peace Kiapilano.

"The cops were ready to attack us. They had their

tasers out. I told Inspector Kennedy we had served

the eviction notice on Byron Joseph and the band

council, and he had accepted it. Kennedy said the

federal Minister of Justice said they didn't recognize

Chief Kiapilano or our document, even though it had

been accepted in their own courts!"

Chief Kiapilano and his supporters were then

physically forced from the building under threat of

immediate arrest, and escorted off the band council

land by a line of RCMP vehicles.

Native elders from the Downtown Eastside Womens'

Centre showed up to support Chief Kiapilano. They

were verbally threatened, photographed and

ordered to leave by the same RCMP squad.


Before leaving, Chief Kiapilano declared three times

to the RCMP and band councillors that his eviction order

remained in effect. He and his people would return to

enforce the order and remove the [illegal] Squamish

band council from office.

"We offered them a hand of peace and they responded

with violence" said Chief Red Jacket of Turtle Island, a

participant in the occupation. "In our law, when that

happens, all we have left is to go to war."

Further actions against the agencies responsible for the

ongoing genocide of the Squamish people will continue

on Sunday, June 1 at 10 am at the former "holy rosary

catholic church" at Dunsmuir and Richards in downtown

Vancouver. It is now an open community space under

the jurisdiction of Chief Kiapilano.

Issued under the authority of Siem Kiapilano of the

Squamish Nation 24 May, 2008

For more information: 1-888-265-1007 (Canada)
hiddenfromhistory@yahoo.ca

www.jointhefederation.org
Read and Hear the truth of Genocide in Canada, past and

present, at this website: www.hiddenfromhistory.org


April 06, 2008

A dose of Canadian REALITY from Robert Fisk

Robert Fisk: The fearful lives in a land of the free

Sat Apr 5, 2008 4:34 pm (PDT)

Robert Fisk: The fearful lives in a land of the free

Westerners assume that anyone with a Canadian passport is safe,

I was given the chance to talk to 600 Muslim Canadians a few days ago. The dinner was in an Ottawa banqueting room and the guests also included the imam of the Ottawa mosque, the Ottawa chief of police and sundry uniformed Canadian army officers.

The imam sat between me and the Canadian capital's top cop – a genuinely decent guy who wanted Muslim Canadians to regard him as a friend – and we were even able to joke about the reality of those "random checks" which Muslims of Middle Eastern origin and a certain R Fisk seem to receive at North American airports. All well and good, then, until I got up to speak.

I warned the audience they might not like all they heard from me. And sure enough, when I told the audience that they were perfectly at liberty to condemn Israel and America – indeed, that they should condemn both when they abuse human rights, occupy other people's countries and shoot innocent civilians – but that I wanted to know why I so rarely heard them condemn the vicious police states in the Middle East and other areas of south-west Asia from which they originally came, I was greeted with silence. A smattering of Muslim diplomats sat like statues, thus identifying the cruelty of their regimes. The only immediate applause came when I remarked that the moment Western soldiers started shooting at Muslims in Muslim lands, it was time for the soldiers to withdraw.

Two interesting phenomena emerged from this remark. The first was that, when I finished, both the police chief and the Canadian army officers joined the applause. Canada's hopeless military involvement in Afghanistan is a subject of considerable controversy within the Canadian military. When the politicians have had their say, I've discovered, soldiers usually let us know their views.
Much more revealing, however, was the long car journey I took next day across the frozen tundra of Canada during which two Muslim Canadian men – yes, yes, they had beards – explained to me just why their community was so silent about the iniquities perpetrated by their local dictatorships back home. I had suggested that they were rather too beholden to those regimes – for funding and political support. They agreed – up to a point.

"Mr Robert, you have to understand something," the driver suddenly said. "They have their 'mukhabarat' agents here in Canada. Whenever there is even a dispute between families, anyone who's angry can report back that his antagonist is anti-regime. We have to remember that we have families still in our Arab countries. They can be arrested. Or we can be arrested when we go back to visit them."

Of course. Only a Westerner – only someone who automatically assumes that anyone with a Canadian passport is safe – could have failed to spot the flaw in the country's brave multiethnic society: not that Canada's vast communities from every part of the world live in the land of the free – which they do – but that their freedom is frighteningly circumscribed by the ruthlessness and lack of freedom in the countries from which they came.

And so I began to learn what it is like to be an Arab Canadian. It takes only a local argument to have an email winging its way back to Tripoli or Cairo or Damascus or the Gulf, informing the local despots that their dual citizen – Mohamed or Hassan or Abdulrahman or whatever – is a potential subversive and, ergo, a terrorist. And, so great is the co-operation between our beloved Western intelligence agencies and the torturers of these repulsive dictatorships that this "intelligence" is shared.

So only days after the original message has gone off to the Arab world, the "mukhabarat" privately tell the Canadian intelligence service – a truly silly institution called CSIS – that Mohamed or Hassan or Abdulrahman is a "terrorist". At which point, Mohamed or Hassan or Abdulrahman come under observation from CSIS as potentially dangerous terrorists in Canada.

At which point I realised exactly why my remarks in the Ottawa banqueting hall were greeted with a frozen silence. It isn't long ago, for example, that Maher Arar, who lives in Canada, was picked up by the FBI's goons while in transit at JFK airport and "renditioned" to an underground prison and torture in Syria, courtesy of information provided by CSIS and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

The Canadian government subsequently awarded Arar $10m for this outrageous experience. But who wants to speak out against one's country of origin if it's going to end in the company of a well-trained torturer?

Just as Tariq Ali revealed the darkness behind the Bhutto legend in the London Review of Books last year, so my favourite lawyer, Gareth Peirce – she of In the Name of the Father fame – has now shone her crimson torch upon the British version of these iniquitous goings on.

In the same publication, she has given the most detailed account so far of the fraudulent British promises given to Arabs who chose to return to their savage homelands – rather than languish under a form of house arrest in the UK – that they would be neither tortured nor imprisoned after they went home.

When Benaissa Taleb and Rida Dendani were packed off back to Algeria, for instance, a British diplomat had promised that they would be detained for only a few hours. But they were both interrogated and beaten for 12 days in Algiers before being sentenced to years in prison. When Dendani appealed desperately to the British Special Immigration Appeals Commission, the SIAC didn't even bother to reply. And there was no reason why they should.

As Peirce has now revealed from court papers, private memoranda between the Home Office and Anthony Blair (I am truly sorry that I must mention this wretched man's name again), a caution from civil servants about the probable torture to which deported Egyptians might be subjected if sent to Cairo, was greeted by our former prime minister with the words:
"Get them back."
In reference to the Home Office's concern that Egyptian assurances could not be trusted, Blair wrote:
"This is a bit much. Why do we need all these things?"
Am I the only one to react to the preachy, hypocritical sermon by this detestable man at Westminster Cathedral on Thursday with something more than disgust? Because it is his callous, immoral reaction to that deportation case – and the response of countless political leaders like him – towards Muslims in Europe and North America that led to that cold, hollow, frightening silence in the Ottawa banqueting hall. If I had been among the audience, I now realise, I would have remained silent too.

5 April 08. The Independent.

Robert Fisk's new book The Age of the Warrior: Selected Writings, a selection of his Saturday columns in The Independent is out now

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/fisk/robert-fisk-the-fearful-lives-in-a-land-of-the-free-804914.html

Synthetic terror update: Toronto 18 and my own remarks

I want to say this on this blog.

My case for asylum here in Canada had the EXACT same elements. People are frightened to be around me at all even after all these years ..

But I have never been able to access help and Amnesty was a very big factor in that.

Throughout my 14 year ordeal, I have cried bitterly that there has been no Martin Luther King on which to call. I am still crying about it TODAY.

How different my life might be IF he were still alive is impossible for me to imagine. I have been used as a "tool" to further an anti-human rights agenda by Canadian government that is for certain.

I have PLENTY to say - I say it the best I know how. But some days are just too much.

No, I did not go to the Don Jail, but lived with the "reality" that any day it might happen - that threat still exists even today, hanging over my head. Instead, I got hospitalized many, many times. Now I can't get into a hospital if I am sick no matter what I do. Part of my "punishment" for coming here and making an inland refugee claim . ..

In setting me up in the United States, warrantless wiretapping was used, illegal searches of my home were made while I was held by the US, guns planted, and all legal recourse is DENIED. My accusers are still walking around unpunished except a few who came to light were fired from the US federal payroll as the years rolled on. Sigh.

I wish I had gone to another nation for help. Way too late now.

What these innocent people face and I face is something called a "psychiatric void" which goes on for years and years. You don't know what is going to happen and you cannot plan a future.

In my case, since my experiences are SO different, I just become more and more isolated from everyone else. That is a horrible burden to carry, too. I assure you.

Just a crying shame.

I think about Leonard again, today.

I am so sorry, Leonard! I have tried SO hard to help.

And I am so sorry about what has happened to those family members who have had to suffer because Of what I did one day in 1993 .. but someone had to do it.

The JERKS need to be held to account and put on PUBLIC RECORD for what they DO. Our children need to KNOW that we will go to incredible lengths to protect their futures.

That's what adults are supposed to DO.

If you read this, by some chance, I beg - when you make your choices, think seven generations ahead, not about "today" or the money you might back or how it affects your "career" or "prestige". DO THE RIGHT THING. At least you can go to bed at night and live with your conscience and not have to resort to drugs to make you "feel better.

Someday, someday - my grandchildren and their offspring will be very proud of me. That is my current hope. Maybe my ONLY hope .

I do hope these families have a brighter future - for some of us, we become "marked" and there is no escaping long term PAIN.

Veeger


Sunday Star - TORONTO TERRORISM CASE, (2) articles.
I suspect that this TORONTO 8 was a subcategory of : 'staged for the media' non-event with no actual terrorist act ever intended to be acted out. In other words, a police-intelligence operation for the benefit of public relations and propaganda only. I am sure that the Toronto Star, a Liberal newspaper feels upset as they had the wool pulled over their eyes on this, just like everyone else.
Only the HARPER-DAY- BUSH- CHENEY alliance knew the full scope behind the planning and operations for this. But bin my mind, Clinton too as a possible.
Although the RCMP and CSIS were accomplices, the 'handler' for these unfortunates was an FBI agent who has been traced to Georgia, where he disappeared after the event.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TORONTO TERRORISM CASE


TheStar.com | GTA |

For the families - fear and bewilderment
The arrest of an alleged Toronto terrorist ring on June 2, 2006, was initially hailed as an intelligence coup. Now the case seems far less clear-cut. Meanwhile, the family of one accused continues to wait – and suffer

Apr 06, 2008 04:30 AM

Thomas Walkom

National Affairs Columnist

History will record June 2, 2006 as the day when police arrested members of what they claimed was Canada's first homegrown Islamic terrorist conspiracy. But in a modest middle-class section of Oakville, Rukhsana Gaya – then a department store cosmetics manager – remembers that day as the moment her family's life was shattered.

"The phone rang about 11 p.m. My husband answered. It was the RCMP. They said Saad (her son, then 18) had been arrestetd on terror-related charges. My husband told me and I said: `What do they mean, terrorism?' Of course, I knew about 9/11. Everyone does. But not that it would affect my family. Not that it would have anything to do with me."

In the lexicon of terror trials, Rukhsana Gaya is what is known as a family member. Her son was one of the 17 young Muslim Canadian men arrested that night in June (an 18th was picked up later) when police swooped in to forestall what they claimed was an Islamist plot to blow up buildings and behead the prime minister.

Today Saad remains jailed at the Maplehurst Correctional Complex in Milton awaiting trial on charges of terrorism and intending to cause an explosion. He declined to be interviewed for this story.

But 22 months after his arrest, the case of the Toronto 18 – which at the time was lauded by politicians as a spectacular intelligence coup – appears far less clear-cut. Three of the 18 have had their charges stayed (in effect, dropped) and been quietly released

A preliminary hearing to determine if there was enough evidence to bring the 14 adults to trial was abruptly short-circuited by the Crown last fall, midway through the testimony of key witness Mubin Shaikh – a paid RCMP informant who has had his own brushes with the law.

The defence cried foul, and some suggested that the government was merely trying to avoid the embarrassment of having a judge throw out some charges for lack of evidence.

Indeed, a 44-year-old Mississauga man, who at the time of his arrest was portrayed as the radical firebrand of the alleged plot, has already had his charges reduced and is out on bail.

And in a document filed in court last month, a lawyer for one of the defendants claimed that it was informant Shaikh who provided the 9-mm ammunition used for target practice at an alleged terrorist training camp.

The first trial, of the only youth still facing charges, has just started. The trial of Saad and the 13 other adults may not begin for another year

For the Gaya family, all of these developments are cold comfort. They are baffled that anyone could believe that Saad, an easygoing (and, confesses his mother, somewhat lazy) first-year student at McMaster University would be involved in anything as hateful and complicated as a terrorist plot.

They are saddened that Canada, a land the Pakistani parents chose and the country in which all three of their children were born, would countenance actions that they find blatantly unfair.

Unnerved at being the centre of media attention, they agonized for months before agreeing to have their story published in the Toronto Star; they still don't want their pictures in the newspaper.

They keep referring to themselves as "normal." But they are struggling to keep afloat in a world in which normal has been turned upside down.

All have dealt with it differently. Saad's father, who asked not be identified by name and who chose not to be interviewed for this article, simply doesn't speak of what happened. An engineer, he goes to work each morning and returns home each evening to pray.

"He doesn't want to deal with the outside world,"
says Saad's 24-year-old sister, Beenish.
"He doesn't think there is any point. He wouldn't go to the preliminary hearing; he didn't want to see his son in that environment. Who wants to hear your son called a terrorist? He just talks to Saad when he phones."

Beenish, too, feels her life has been derailed. Before June 2, 2006, she was a highly motivated chartered-accountancy trainee working long hours at the downtown Toronto firm KPMG as she prepared for her final exams.

If she thought about terrorism at all, she says now, she saw herself as a potential victim.

"After 9/11, I thought, `If Al Qaeda strikes here, they'll hit me,'"
she says.
"I mean, I work in one of the tallest buildings in the city; I take the Lakeshore GO train. I hate Al Qaeda more than anyone."

She is Muslim. But in the days before her brother's arrest, this fact did not greatly affect her. She doesn't wear any of the clothing so often associated with Islam, such as the headscarf, burqa or veil; her friends are from all backgrounds. She takes her religion seriously, but it neither dominates nor uniquely defines her life.

She sees herself as Canadian rather than Pakistani-Canadian. And why not? She was born in Montreal, raised in Oakville, educated at McMaster University in Hamilton. Who could be more Canadian?

On the day before Saad's arrest, she and her youngest brother (now 15) were helping their father widen their driveway. Saad, she says laughing, offered to pitch in. "But he's so skinny, he couldn't shovel without standing on it."

Then came the arrest, the publicity and the subsequent media circus at the Brampton courthouse, as Muslim family members tried to make their way past the gauntlet of journalists while police officers armed with submachine guns looked on.

To someone who had always viewed herself as a normal Canadian, the experience came as a shock. Beenish might have thought she was like everyone else; the world, it seemed, disagreed.

"Suddenly you are portrayed as the other,"
she says.
"One minute you are scared of terrorists; the next minute you are the enemy."

And so the family members kept their heads down. Beenish took a leave of absence from KPMG to focus on her brother's court hearings. Rukhsana, even more devastated, was sure she'd have to leave her job.

"I was scared at the beginning to tell anyone,"
she says.
"But I didn't want to lie to my co-workers. They were all so supportive; they were wonderful."

She offered to quit. But her manager persuaded her to stay on, saying she could shift to part-time work if she wanted to devote more time to Saad's case.

Still, the effect has been paralyzing. The normally gregarious 43-year-old no longer goes out to see friends and relatives. She has been twice hospitalized since her son's arrest. During conversation, her voice will suddenly break. Sometimes, she says, she cries uncontrollably.

"Even still, at 3 a.m., I will wake up with my heart breaking."

To Saad's family, his description of life in jail was terrifying. At first, he was permitted neither a mattress nor his glasses, he later told Beenish. (A corrections ministry spokesperson, while declining to comment on Saad's case specifically, says that mattresses are sometimes removed from the cells of "special management inmates" considered to be security risks and that their spectacles may be confiscated for the same reason.)

Each time Saad was removed from his cell, shackled, to attend court or use the shower during those first few days at Maplehurst, he was hustled along by a four-member crisis intervention team in full riot gear.

Because he had initially been deemed a young offender, Saad and four other youths were soon moved to a less rigorous juvenile detention centre. That didn't last. Three months later, the Crown decided Saad had committed his alleged offences the day he turned 18. He was reclassified as an adult and moved back to Maplehurst. For the next 12 months, Saad, like the other adult detainees, was kept in solitary confinement 23 1/2 hours a day.

Today, three of the accused adults are still in solitary confinement at the Don Jail. At Maplehurst, where Saad remains, conditions have eased significantly. Now the seven still imprisoned there (four others are out on bail) are allowed to associate with one another in a common wing.

But to Rukhsana, it remains inconceivable that her child, who has still not been convicted of any crime, could be locked up for so long. Saad celebrated his 19th and 20th birthdays in jail. Unless he gets bail, he will almost certainly turn 21 there – and this before he stands trial. Her once bubbly son, she says, has become quieter, more introverted.

"They have taken away his smile,"
she says.

Now, her life and that of her family revolve around the criminal justice system. The centrepiece of each day is Saad's phone call from jail. The highlight of the week is the regular visit to Maplehurst, where Rukhsana can talk to her son through a Plexiglas barrier.

At first, says Beenish, the Gayas received virtually no help from the Muslim community, or indeed from anyone.

"Other Muslims were scared to help,"
she says
. "We know a lot of people, but when we tried to raise money (in an unsuccessful bid to have Saad released on bail), so many of them wouldn't help. They were afraid that if they did, they'd be accused of aiding terrorism."

One long-time family friend, she says, cut off all contact with the family.

Beenish approached Amnesty International. They said such cases did not fall under their ambit. She contacted local MPs. Those who agreed to see her said they could do nothing while the matter was before the courts. One (she doesn't want his name used for fear of causing offence) told her frankly that politicians did not want to put themselves on the line lest they be thought soft on terrorism. Today, she says, Muslims are less wary about speaking up on behalf of Saad and the others. But in the bleak early days, the only support the family received was from their Italian and Lebanese neighbours and a group of Toronto anti-violence activists called Homes Not Bombs.

Throughout, Beenish has borne most of the burden of dealing with the outside world. For months, she attended the on-again, off-again preliminary hearing.

She and Rukhsana became such regulars at the Brampton courthouse that some began to assume they worked there.

Even now, Beenish is the one who deals with Saad's lawyer, Paul Slansky. As well, she is trying to arrange a correspondence course for her brother. When the world comes knocking, it is she who runs interference for the family.

She is also torn about acting publicly. On the one hand, she is horrified by what she sees as the unfairness of a process in which the government appears to hold all the cards. She devotes whatever time remains from her work and court duties to a website supporting the Toronto 18. She has spoken up for the detainees at university rallies.

Yet at the same time, she is hesitant about being identified in the daily press. She is not sure she trusts what she calls the mainstream media. She fears that employers will see her as a liability rather than an asset.

"I'm starting a career,"
she says.
"I don't want it destroyed."

In interviews over several months with Beenish, and more recently with Rukhsana, the conversation keeps coming back to their sense of bewilderment.

How could this happen? They are law-abiding (Rukhsana says she has never had a parking ticket); they are patriotic Canadians; they are unfailingly polite.

When police were searching her home for evidence to use against her son (they took clothing and most of the family photographs), Rukhsana offered them tea and coffee.

Nor can the two women believe Saad was involved in anything sinister.

"How could he do what they accuse him of?" asks Rukhsana. "His friends are from all over, not just Muslims: Christians, Jews, Chinese. He was part of the interfaith dialogue at McMaster ... Everyone loves him."

Beenish says that even if her brother were inclined to violence (which, she insists, he is not), he could not have managed to involve himself in anything as complex as a terror plot without awakening the suspicions of the ever-vigilant women in his family.

She and Saad used the same computer with the same password. Rukhsana, meanwhile, kept constant watch on her eldest son.

She cooked all of his meals, sending him off to McMaster each week with 18 individually prepared and packaged breakfasts, lunches and dinners.

She did his laundry each weekend when he came home. She phoned him every day at university and routinely eavesdropped on his telephone conversations at home.

"Until he marries, I am his mother," she shrugs. "This is my job."

Ironically, given the government's assertion that Saad was involved in a religiously motivated conspiracy, his arrest has caused Beenish to draw closer to Islam. The only thing that makes sense of this madness, she says, is the Qur'an, with its message that people must struggle against adversity.

She says she now looks forward to the day when she will have enough courage to brave popular prejudice and don an Islamic headscarf.

"I call myself a Muslim and I call myself a Canadian," she says. "What is my country? Canada is my country, even though it is treating me like a second-class citizen. I'm not Pakistani. I'm Canadian. I plan to stay here and work here and marry here and raise kids here.

"I take pride in being a Canadian. What's going to happen if this (the treatment of the 18) becomes the norm?"

Rukhsana's hopes are simpler. She just wants her life and her son back.

"I have nothing to hide," she says. "My son did nothing wrong. We are an average Canadian family. We are normal."

Thomas Walkom's national affairs column runs Wednesdays and Saturdays.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HOW IT ALL WENT DOWN

In the end, his charges were stayed. 'The authorities ruined my brother's future, his reputation and abused him physically and psychologically – all for, according to them, absolutely no reason'

Apr 06, 2008 04:30 AM

Anonymous


Special to the Star


http://www.thestar.com/Article/410678

* NOTE TO READERS - The names of the writer and people mentioned in this story have been withheld. Publishing any of these names might reveal the identity of someone who was under the age of 18 at the time he was charged in connection with the alleged terrorism plot. Under Canadian law, people charged as young offenders cannot be named or otherwise identified.


A time comes when silence is betrayal. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy, for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers and sisters.

– Martin Luther King, Jr.

It's been nearly two years since the raid on our house, since the day they took my brother and another relative. Since that day, my family and I have lived in silence. It's an emotional topic for me and talking about it means reliving that pain all over again. But I feel obliged to let Canadians know about our experience and what we continue to experience each and every single day.

It was June 2, 2006 – around 11 p.m. That night was a nightmare for me and my family. Earlier that day, a relative was arrested while coming home after grocery shopping. We sat at home, in shock, wondering what had just happened. None of us shed a tear, I guess out of sheer disbelief. It was getting late, and my other brother wasn't home yet. He'd been out with his friends. So my mother and I went out looking for him. We were just around the corner of our house when a pack of cars stopped at the end of the street and the SWAT team came running towards our house pointing guns at us. As soon as we got inside, they broke in, all the while yelling at us, asking us all to come down to the front door.

One by one they called us out of the house to be searched. My dad was the first to go. He had been in such a shock that after he'd heard about our relative's arrest, he'd gone back to his room and started working on his business files. And when he came down, he'd brought his papers and pen with him to the door. One of the officers glanced at the papers and pen in his hands and yelled at him: "DROP YOUR WEAPONS! DROP YOUR WEAPONS RIGHT NOW!" And with all those guns pointing at us I thought to myself, what were they expecting my father to do? Hit them with a pen? They pulled my dad by his collar and he tripped. I asked them to go easy on my father because he was already in a state of shock. Their reply made me feel sick to my stomach. They said: "We know that already, that's what we have the ambulance for."

Then they handcuffed him and took him for questioning, and we didn't see him for the next couple of hours. They searched us all and then had us wait outside in the rain with babies in our arms. They waited for my brother to come home, and when he did they put him in a car and took him. We didn't know where he was taken and what had happened to him. They finally told us that they had actually arrested him. We spent the night at our neighbours'. The next morning we received a call from my brother; he told us he was being held at a police station. I asked him how he was and he told me not to worry, but I could hear the quiver in his voice. I knew he was only trying to be strong so as not to hurt us.

The drive to the courthouse was, again, like nothing I had ever experienced before. At first, we didn't even know how to get to the Brampton courthouse. It's actually a bit humorous how we tried to find our way to court. We saw helicopters above our car and simply decided to follow their lead, and that landed us right at the courthouse. The moment we got out of the car we were surrounded by swarms of media, cameras and microphones shoved in our faces. Despite us asking them to leave us alone, they continued to hassle us until we had finally got in.

But our ordeal didn't end with that. After being searched and sniffed by dogs, we were asked to wait in a long line of people to get into the courtroom. They were allowing only 50 people inside, and most of the people ahead of us were non-family members.

I remember seeing my brother in the courtroom, shackled and handcuffed with the other accused. They were escorted in groups of five. You could even hear the rattling of the chains before they entered the courtroom. I remember seeing them all with weak smiles reassuring their families that they were all right when they really weren't, and that we – the families – had to be strong. Even these minor attempts to reassure us were stopped by the guards. They made sure that the accused made no eye contact or had any sort of communication with their families. The guards were intimidating. It's like they were implicitly telling us that our brothers were now under their control. I recall a relative telling me once about his first night at Maplehurst prison. He said the officers had dragged him by his neck and choked him until he couldn't breathe and then one of them said to him: "I own you now. You do what I say. You eat when I say you eat, you sleep when I say you sleep and you sh-- when I say you sh--." This was repeated with all of them at Maplehurst.

My brother shared with me his anguish on his first night. He said:

"When I got out of the car I was surrounded by police dogs, SWAT team, and the bright camera flashes and the reporters screaming. I went inside and I was strip-searched. For the first time in my life I felt so humiliated. Then I was put in a cell for about five hours or so till it was early morning and the whole night I couldn't sleep because of the cold concrete bench, and there was no water so I was really thirsty. But when I'd ask for water or my sweater back so that at least I could sleep or something, they'd just say, `Its not a f-----n' hotel.'"

He told me how the thing he hated the most was dealing with the guards. They would throw him on the ground, shackle him and handcuff him and then make him crawl all the way to his cell. For the first two days they had no water, no toilet paper, just a cold cell room with a concrete bench and no pillows or blanket. The windows were covered so that they couldn't see outside the door or window.

He was kept in solitary confinement for almost three months until he was released on bail under strict conditions. When I was preparing this article, I had asked my brother to write about how he felt when he was released on bail and what would he want people to know.

He wrote: "When I was released I was so happy to be back with my family but the house arrest conditions that were put on me didn't make it any different. That went on for a year and in that time I had given my family a very hard time. I couldn't go to sleep at night without taking my anti-depressants. I couldn't talk to someone for more than half an hour without losing my temper over something small. I couldn't have more than three people around me because it'd get hard for me to breathe. I'd get angry at something I wouldn't even remember but then I'd just black out and 20 minutes later there would be broken furniture around me.

"Yes I have seen the psychiatrist many times and I was told that I have post-traumatic stress syndrome and I was prescribed anti-depressants. I didn't go through any treatment simply because I was told that whatever I am going through will stop as soon as I was out on bail. Now I'm released from bail and I barely have any conditions but nothing much has changed. I'm still not even close to being the same person as I was before the arrest. I'm a completely different man, someone who keeps asking himself if he's really gone crazy ... I suffer from memory loss sometimes.

"After I came out from jail a lot of my old friends came up to me and I barely remembered any of them. And that was something that really scared me because I had been to school with these people. A lot of things have changed in me and I still get nightmares about the times I was inside. I still have my anger problems and sleeping disorder. People don't look at me as they'd look at a normal person. Either they are really scared of me, or they feel really sorry for me that they end up looking at me like I'm just a crazy person."

My other relative continues to suffer in solitary confinement along with two of the other accused. According to a study by the Correctional Services of Canada, those who went through enforced segregation for 60 days suffered from "poorer mental health and psychological functioning."

The three detainees at the Don Jail have now spent more than 600 days in solitary confinement.

I don't understand why they were treated like that and why the young men at Maplehurst and the Don Jail continue to be treated as though they've already been convicted. Why are they deprived of basic rights that are given to every other inmate? I wonder if it's because of their faith.

The accused, my relatives included, have suffered through obvious forms of degradation, humiliation, discrimination, oppression and exploitation by the media and law enforcement. And eventually, in the case of my brother, he was let go with all his charges stayed.

You and I live in a country that is supposed to be the fortress of education, freedom, justice, democracy and all those other pretty-sounding words. And yet the authorities ruined my brother's future, his reputation and abused him physically and psychologically – all for, according to them, absolutely no reason.

They say it's for no reason, but those of us close to the situation know very well what the reason was. My brother was a pawn used in the game of exploiting the public's fear and beating the drums of Islamophobia.

My other relative's solitary confinement does not affect only him but is also taking a toll on his wife and children. A couple of weeks ago, a 3-year old relative had come home from visiting her father, and said to her grandmother: "I think I've lost my daddy." When her grandmother asked her why she'd think such a thing, she replied: "Because he can't touch me." It broke my heart when I heard that. This is injustice not only against my relative but his kids. It's unfair to deprive a child of her father's touch. They're only allowed to meet with a Plexiglass screen between them, and she cries during every visit when it's time for her father to leave.

These men deserve the same rights as every other inmate. They deserve the right to be presumed innocent.

ShareThis