Welcome, Foes of the C51 Police State

Just about every Canadian -- of every conceivable stripe -- opposes Bill C-51, aka the Jihadi Terrorists Under Every Bed Bill.

Former PMs, former Supreme Court Justices, law professors, the Canadian Bar Association, unions, First Nations, journalists, former CSIS officers, environmentalists, and even ordinary, everyday, minding-their-own-business Canadians.

Today it was announced that Free Dominion is reopening its forum to join the fray.

Here is Mark Fournier's explanation.

Although it entails some risks, Connie and I have decided to reopen the forum in reaction to the dangers to our freedom that we are all facing if Bill C-51 is passed by the federal government. So far the political left in Canada has been bearing the main burden of opposing this legislation and we believe principled conservatives and others should have a place on the political right where they can voice their opposition to this dangerous bill.

It beats the hell out of me why anyone purportedly in this fight -- and it is the fight of the decade at the very least -- would scorn any ally. But some are too pure to join forces with groups they otherwise disagree vehemently with.

I'm not so pure.

In fact, I've spent most of today sending emails to two groups I and my co-bloggers usually mock the shit out of -- fetus fetishists and gun nuts.

Funnily, the same idea occurred to Lorne Gunter.

He too sees many dangers for all manner of people in C-51. Among his examples, this:

Want a quicker, easier way to stop abortion doctor murderers or anti-registration gun owners or politically incorrect groups with unpopular views? Label their activities a threat to national security and government agencies can eavesdrop on their phone calls and intercept their e-mails and texts.

(I think he had a bit of brain-fart there lumping abortion doctor murderers -- I mean, who wouldn't want to stop them? -- in with the noble gun owners and politically incorrect. But we get his point.)

Hell, CSIS has already identified white supremacists and anti-abortion fanatics as higher terrorist threats than radical Islamists.

In fact, it appears that the main gun owners' organization in Canada, the National Firearms Associations, does have serious enough reservations about C-51 to join the Protect Our Privacy Coalition and schedule an appearance before the C-51 committee.

But then it mysteriously reneged.

Tasha Kheiriddin speculates about a quid pro quo offered and accepted. NFA has some issues with the Harperists over other pending legislation.

Was the NFA feeling the heat? Or was it the other way around? Could amendments to C-42 [the other legislation] be in the offing, and was the NFA’s decision to abstain from embarrassing the government by tearing into its terrorism law the quid pro quo?

We don't know what the organization was thinking, do we? But I wonder what individual gun owners think of a bill that could label them -- just about on a whim -- security threats, disrupt their activities, intercept their communications, and TAKE THEIR GUNS AWAY?

As for the fetus freaks, much as I loathe them, I doubt that even they -- with at least one NOTABLE EXCEPTION -- would want to protect abortion doctor murderers.

But in today's Canada, anti-choicers are proudly dissident. And depending on the whims of police, security forces, and governments of the moment, they could find their little bunfests and prayer-wanks subject to some serious scrutiny and disruption too.

The simple fact is that the C-51 police state threatens us all. All of us. Birdwatchers and bloggers, target-shooters and teaching assistants.

Fetus freaks and free-speechers, too.

All of us.

Me, I welcome anyone who recognizes that fact and is willing to join in the fight.

And hell, who knows? A grand unified anti-police state movement may just breathe some life into the old Canadian collectivist notion of the common good.


UPDATE: Vice has the goods on the quid pro quo. NFA buckled pretty easily for a bunch of tough guys and gals, didn't they? I hope the members are satisfied.

Clarke does for the Canadian National Firearms Association... (UPDATE)

what Levant does for Tar Sands extraction corporations.

We suspect both of them do it for money, as mercenaries and paid lobbyists. Perhaps also out of love for the *cause* they promote.

Each one brings to advocacy endeavours a wide range of knowledge, skills and experience.

Ericka, however, is able to harness some persuasive arguments that Ezra cannot.

My co-blogger fern hill wrote a blogpost which features a photograph of Clarke with the Minister of Justice for the Harper government and Kurtis Gaucher, that Press Progress published. 

When that photograph went viral, Petey MacKay was asked why he donned the shirt, claimed it was a wounded Canadian veteran (Gaucher) who requested it, yadayadayada...

As fern hill pointed out in her screen caps as well as a very revealing one from PatRiotChick, it was all a RUSE engineered by Clarke.  And MacKay was duped. DUPED!!!

*Mind you, Ericka appears to be as dim as Ezra, and she has yet to master the obstreperous bullying techniques that he has perfected as a StunTV host.

  

But as you can see from the photographs above and this one, and that one; she has different tactics at her command.  No matter that her gallery of photos on her Facebook account (now locked) looked eerily like those posted by Michele McPherson - Bruce Carson's fiancée - when she was a sex worker advertising "the Girl Friend Experience".

Lobbying is a complicated job which requires that supplicants hired by corporate interests or other organizations, meet politicians to secure their collaboration.  Much has been written about the talents female lobbyists must deploy to win the support of powerful men.  While official meetings held in public officials' and government buildings must be recorded as well as any campaign or party contributions, quid pro quo may cover a wide range of mutually beneficial favours.

So, let's assume that Ericka Clarke is employed respectably and honourably in the performance of her duties, and that she is NOT a woman who needs rescuing from a dodgy organization that trafficks her talents to members of the Harper Conservative government.  Let take as a given, just as Kate Heartfield outlined here, that Clarke is NOT “selling her body” or “selling herself” for the purpose of promoting CNFA and its goals. 

No need to involve MP Joy Smith and Cons' prurient concerns and beliefs about the rampant sexual exploitation of women and girls that were spewed during the Justice Committee hearings about C36.  Clarke's interactions with CNFA, its membership and the politicians she meets are seemingly professional, consensual and not coercive.

In fact, her status and working conditions are much better than those imposed upon young women hired by PETA to stage a "protest" aka publicity stunt during the Ottawa Ribfest.  Those employees are the equivalent of female servers in the employment of Hooters.  It is a job requirement that they display their bodies in the uniforms provided by their employer, albeit a less revealing one for restaurant staff.

Sadly though, CNFA does not appear to value Clarke's role as a 'field officer' highly enough to put her name on this very special invitation sent to MacKay and his "fellow" MPs (CPC only?).  Perhaps she'll be present as bullet buffer and spirit-fluffer, unless the association didn't appreciate the frenzied media brouhaha she created.

Ericka Clarke and Ezra Levant.  We may disagree with the goals and ideology of the organizations that pay their salaries.  Both are workers toiling, as many of us choose or are obliged to do, in the bowels of capitalist enterprises.  We may mock their words, expose their lies, deconstruct their odious tactics.  If they attack those who criticize their Over Lords, we will push back - as hard as we can.

This is a blogpost we published shortly after the Moncton shootings, questioning the premise of the NFA and its lobbying efforts in Canada.

*After reviewing the docs that I screencapt'ed in preparation for this blogpost, I realize that I forgot to insert that one as an example of Ericka's skills. So, there it is.

October update:

Go see what Stephen Lautens found here.

So Ericka Clarke is effectively a lobbyist?! Now someone should check the Harper government Lobby Registry to ensure that her work is recorded there, if Clarke is indeed a professional lobbyist rather than a skilled amateur.

Barbara Frum on How to get women elected.

In the October 1971 issue of _Chatelaine_ Barbara Frum wrote a short piece in her characteristic irreverent, droll style.  It was titled: "Insiders' tips on how to get women elected."

The last paragraph:

Marry a man who's already there and become his widowA third of all the women who've ever been in Parliament got there on the sympathy vote, as widows.  One hard-eyed pro, who dismisses the ability of women to get into politics on their own and has been cynically successful running widows on the black-crepe ticket, says: "The only way you'll ever see a hundred women in the House is to provide a hundred rifles to the wives of sitting members, and then teach them how to shoot."

Huh.  Imagine publishing that, nowadays...?

On the other hand, jerks like Peter MacKay should be very, very afraid.

Grand merci to mon copain, who spotted the vintage _Chatelaine_ on my bookshelf and perused it, much to our shared amusement.

No Compromise MacKay

Press Progress published this photo today.

Yes, indeed, friends of Peace, Order, and Good Government, that is Canada's Minister of Justice and Attorney General pandering his foul ass off.


It apparently comes from a tweet by Ericka Clarke, who identifies herself as "NFA Field Officer."

Peter Mackay (Attorney General of Canada) rocked a #nocompromise shirt with me today! #nfa #cdnpoli #change #politics pic.twitter.com/lGEhHbzBDJ
— Ericka Clarke (@ericka_clarke) August 23, 2014

That would be the National Firearms Association.

As Clarke points out, the corrupted Canadian maple leaf symbol is captioned "No Compromise."

Let's have a closer look at it from NFA's swag page. These are pins on offer.

(Isn't that sweet? They offer a girly-pink version.)

Now, I don't know anything about guns, but that doesn't look like a varmint-scaring or freezer-filling type weapon to me.

Moreover, the phrase itself is lifted from the org's bigger and scarier USian cousin, the mega-lobby National Rifle Association.

Sadly, cosmic synchronicity strikes.

The top news story today is about a 9-year-old killing her instructor with an Uzi at a place called "Bullets and Burgers." (You can't make this shit up.)

Also, from the Cosmic Whup-Ass Department, there's another story on the latest CONservative fearmongering fundraising flyer, touting "traditional family values."

Under a section entitled "I stand with the Conservative Party on the following issues," the members are asked to check off those that apply. "Respecting traditional family values," is one of the options, along with "safe and sensible firearms policies" and "tough-on-crime approach."

If only the CON Brain [sic] Trust could have seen into the future, I'm sure another option would have been "respecting the rights of young children to play with heavy assault weapons while their parents had a burger and a brew".

As I asked on Twitter: Has any other Attorney General of a supposedly civilized nation ever panderingly posed with butchered national logo on his chest with a bunch of gunnnutz?

I'm pretty sure no other Canadian Attorney General has.

But then no other Canadian Attorney General has posed with a police department and a tank before either.

That's New Glascow, Nova Scotia, population in 2011 a tad over 9,000.

So, fellow and sister Canadians, is Canada unrecognizable yet?

UPDATE: Huffington Post: MacKay was duped into posing in offensive NFA t-shirt.

While that's really not hard to believe, Stephen Lautens opines:

If he's that big a dupe, let's hope MacKay's next clothing encounter is with someone from Victoria's Secret http://t.co/n85LhCpgB8 #cdnpoli
— Stephen Lautens (@stephenlautens) August 27, 2014

Added: Duped is the absolutely most correct word for Petey.

MacKay has quite the history of blaming others for his boo-boos, doesn't he?



UPDATED: Challenged to make photoshop good on his Victoria's Secret idea, Stephen pops this out instead. (Some are very relieved.)

MORE UPDATE: CBC.


EVEN MORE: Lautens is on a roll. Check out #MacKayTees on Twitter. Fun!


UPDATE (August 28/14) About that "duped" angle.

Dammit, double dammit. Ericka Clarke insulted me on twitter four times, telling me that the other guy in the photo whom I'd called the other doofus is a vet who'd "sacrificed life and limb". She told me to "keep it classy." Just now I was trying to embed one of those tweets here and discovered that SHE'D DELETED THEM ALL AND LIKE AN IDIOT I DIDN'T TAKE SCREEN SHOTS.


Arggggghhh.

The cowardice of these people knows no bounds.

MEA CULPA: I was wrong.

@fernhilldammit That would be the injured veteran you so lovingly called a 'doofus'. He sacrificed life and limb for your rights. Continue.

— Ericka Clarke (@ericka_clarke) August 28, 2014

She didn't delete.

UPDATE: From harebell in the comments. This is priceless. The doofus is a liar and Ericka is a shameless schemer.

"I really have to think Kurtis for playing the crippled veteran, MacKay didn't question that" ... pic.twitter.com/QNI6trz5Jc #shameful #cdnpoli

— PatRiotchick (@PatOndabak) August 28, 2014

LAST (I promise) UPDATE: The Star ran a story on #MacKayTees with lots of Stephen Lautens's photoshopped creations but failed to credit him despite his name running up the side and the fact that the Lautens family has a long and current relationship with the paper. At his own blog, Stephen has collected the whole set for our enjoyment. Thanks, Stephen.