Sometimes You Just Have To Hold Your Nose

I always try to be completely honest in everything that I write for this blog. If I see reason for praise, I acknowledge it, sadly a rare occurrence. Most commonly I am extremely critical of the issues and people that I write about. One of my most frequent targets has been Ontario Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty.

My contempt for the Premier arose out of the role he played in the G20 police-violence perpetrated against peaceful protestors last year in Toronto. As I have written previously and extensively, the McGuinty government was responsible for withholding crucial information from the public about the non-existence of expanded police powers, most notably the fiction that the authorities had the right to stop, question, and even arrest people who came within five meters of the security fence that had been erected to protect our visiting political 'masters.' I was, and I remain convinced, that that fictitious regulation emboldened the police to far exceed their authority, resulting in the mostly baseless arrest of over 1100 people, the vast majority of whom were later released without charge.

The other person I hold directly responsible is Chief Bill Blair, who, like the Premier, waited until the Summit was over before revealing the truth. The fact of collusion between the two is obvious, and the refusal of McGuinty to call an inquiry has allowed an ongoing distrust, cynicism and disillusionment to continue to fester, not a healthy situation for a democracy. And I remain convinced that Chief Blair should resign.

So what is my point here? Sadly, despite my publicly-stated repudiation of the McGuinty government and my resolve not to vote for them in this election, I have come to the onerous conclusion that I must go back on my word.

The are two reasons for my reversal: Tim Hudak, and the fact that the recent Star poll breakdown of ridings show that in mine, the Liberal and the PC candidates are virtually tied, with the NDP not even within shouting distance.

Having lived through the years of his mentor and predecessor Mike Harris, I know the emptiness of the recycled rhetoric which Hudak is fond of spouting: finding efficiencies, cutting taxes but not services, etc. etc., concepts that may find a ready audience with the simple-minded, but deeply insulting to the critical thinker. As well, the recent antics and attempts at dismantling Toronto by Mayor Rob/Doug Ford and their acolytes offer an effective preview of what is in store for the rest of the province should Mr. Hudak and his band gain entry to the Premier's office.

I find much to fault in Ontario's Liberal government, yet sadly at this juncture, I am preparing to hold my nose and vote for it, clearly the lesser of two evils from my perspective.

Please sign this petition urging Prime Minister Harper to stop threatening Michaela Keyserlingk and to stop exporting asbestos.

Fair Taxation

Democratic Senate hopeful Elizabeth Warren speaks on the topic of fair taxation:

Increased Taxation Of The Rich In Spain

Having written previously on the logic and desirability of increasing taxation on the wealthy, I was heartened to learn that Spain recently increased its rate for those with real estate assets (excluding their principal residences), stocks and bank holding of more than 700,000 Euros annually. It is expected to raise revenues of about €1.08 billion if applied uniformly.

While including real estate holdings in the calculation may strike some as excessive, the measure at least cuts through the deafening silence with which the suggestion to increase taxation levels is met by all three of Canada's major political parties, not to mention the scorn that was heaped on Warren Buffet by the American right-wing for advocating such measures.

Fair Game - The Things Politicians Do While We Sleep

I rarely watch films today, preferring some of the edgier fare offered by cable television series such as Justified, Nurse Jackie, Trueblood and Breaking Bad. Nonetheless, with my son visiting last evening, we sat down to watch Fair Game, a 2010 film starring Naomi Watts and Sean Penn playing Valierie Plame and Joe Wilson respectively.

Many will recall that Joe Wilson is the former U.S. diplomat who, after being sent to Niger to determine whether it was selling 'yellowcake' uranium to Iraq as part of the latter's development of alleged weapons of mass destruction, definitively concluded that this wasn't occurring. He wrote a report to that effect, one that was promptly ignored by the Bush administration in its inexorable march toward war with Iraq.

When Wilson learned that the Bush administration was using the fictitious yellowcake sale as one of the major pretexts for invading Iraq, he wrote a piece for the New York Times entitled “What I Didn't Find in Africa”, concluding “that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat. “

It was at this point that the administration turned its full fury against Wilson by 'outing' his wife as a CIA operative, an illegal act for which the former adviser to Vice-President Dick Cheney, 'Scooter' Libbby, took the fall. (He was later quickly pardoned by George Bush.) However, the revelation about Plame's CIA employment was just the beginning of a campaign to discredit both of them.

The film relays the various stresses and strains their marriage suffered, almost to the point of dissolution thanks to the barrage of harassing calls, death threats, the destruction of Plame's CIA career, etc. As well, Wilson's consulting business suffered deep losses.

For me, Fair Game's greatest strength lies in its unromanticized celebration of the passionate pursuit of truth and justice embodied in Sean Penn's portrayal of Wilson, and the vindication that ultimately accrues to both Wilson and his wife. As well, there is a line in the film that resonated with me; Wilson is talking to a a group of young people, and he observes something to the effect that democracy isn't free; it requires hard work, vigilance, and citizen engagement.

If only we could take that lesson to heart.

VIDEO: Police in London, Ont., use Taser on 17-year-old boy

Watch this video and decide if the tasering was warranted:



Undoubtedly, the SIU will find nothing wrong here.

UPDATE: Circling the wagons as they are wont to do, the London Police Chief had the following justification for the use of this 'conducted energy weapon':

The sergeant was justified in deploying the Taser without giving a verbal warning, London's chief of police said Friday.

The teen had wrapped a belt around his fist, punched the other teen and then used a chair to strike the other teen about his head, Chief Brad Duncan said.

"Clearly here it was unfolding very, very quickly," he said.

"In fact, when one views the video, it's about a second between the use of force by this individual and then the application of the conducted energy weapon," Duncan said.

"Clearly at the time that the device was deployed, he was the aggressor."

Is he watching the same video the rest of us are?

What Is A Hero?

Having completed at my wife's urgent behest the always onerous task of vacuuming, I sat down a short time ago to peruse The Toronto Star. In it there is another story about Anthony Marco, the Hamilton-area NDP candidate running in Tim Hudak's riding. Already under fire for so-called controversial remarks about nazism, he has again offended someone (i.e. police and firefighters)by sharing his insights publicly.

The story, in the Star's Campaign Notebook but not available online, conveys how Marco said, just before Remembrance Day last year: “I think we throw the term ‘hero’ around a little bit too loosely these days . . . I’m tired of hearing, and no offence to doctors or firefighters or policemen, but automatically calling occupations as heroic . . . you don’t automatically become a hero just because you put on a uniform of some sort or have a title before or after your name,”

To me, what he says makes perfect sense, especially given the misdeeds of the police that are now coming to light on a regular basis. Despite that fact, Jim Christie, president of the Ontario Provincial Police Association, said he found Marco’s comment, especially from a provincial candidate, “very disturbing.”

The blind deference and obeisance to authority is a dangerous thing in a democracy. If nothing else, the police abuses at last year's G20 Summit in Toronto taught us that unless tightly monitored and always questioned, authority can be so easily abused, with very dire consequences to innocent people.

As well, I wonder if police association president Jim Christie also finds "very disturbing" the conviction and sentencing of a former Vancouver police officer, Peter Hodson, for dealing drugs on the job.

Righteous indignation should be directed at those who truly deserve it.

Please sign this petition urging Prime Minister Harper to stop threatening Michaela Keyserlingk and to stop exporting asbestos.

From The Police Beat: More Police Brutality

Not given to monomania, I really hope that at some point in the (perhaps distant) future, I will be able to completely move on from commenting about police misdeeds. It's just that I have a real thing against the abuse of authority, and every time they come to my attention, I feel compelled to offer my observations.

I have written previously about Ontario Court Justice Lesley Baldwin and her brave comments that 'contempt of cop is not a crime'. Unlike the SIU, which has proven both toothless and feckless in fulfilling their mandate of investigating the police, Justice Baldwin has clearly seen through the barrier of the 'blue wall' that police tend to erect whenever one of their own is under fire.

She is once more in the news in a Toronto Star article entitled ‘Courageous’ judge takes on Halton cops. In part, the piece summarizes her previous ruling that prompted her 'contempt of cop' comments as she dismissed charges against Kyle Davidson of assaulting a peace officer, resisting arrest and being intoxicated in public in connection with a June 2009 arrest.

According to Davidson in an interview I saw last night on TV, a police car sped by him, narrowly missing him, at which point he mouthed an obscentiy. The police car came to a sudden stop and Davidson was told he was under arrest. Incredulous at the turn of events, he asked "For what?" after which Const. Erich Paroshy broke his arm.

Justice Baldwin's observations were as follows:

"I do find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Officer Paroshy used excessive force and broke Kyle Davidson’s arm in this case,” said Justice Baldwin in her 16-page ruling, making clear that “contempt of cop” is not a justification for an arrest.

Davidson said he has read the ruling “like 75 times” and added that he “feels absolutely vindicated. I really doubted the system.”

Baldwin went further in her ruling, calling police conduct in the case “harsh and callous.” She added: “I sensed no empathy on the part of either officer for the injuries Kyle Davidson sustained in this matter.”

In a related Star story, Justice Baldwin recommended to Crown prosecutors that they “carefully screen cases where an accused is brought before the Court on charges that arise from circumstances of suspected ‘contempt of cop’ before they proceed to prosecute the matter.” In the Dyrda case, she recommended screening “where no underlying charges accompany ‘assault resist arrest’ and ‘obstruct police’ charges.”

The above reference to the Dryda case, interestingly enough, also involved Erich Paroshy, the officer who broke Davidson's arm. The details of that case are as follows:

Baldwin acquitted brothers Bogumil and Stanislaw Dyrda of all charges, including assaulting a peace officer, stemming from an incident in January 2009.

According to court documents, Stanislaw was returning from dropping his daughter off at university in Ottawa when his car swerved off the road into a pile of rocks, deploying the airbag.

Constables Paroshy and Blair Egerter responded to a dispatch around 10 p.m. and alleged that when they tried to get information from Stanislaw he responded by saying “no.”

As they escorted him back to the cruiser, the officers testified they suspected Stanislaw was intoxicated and that he pushed himself away from Paroshy.

He was then placed under arrest, and as an altercation ensued, Paroshy alleged that Bogumil, having arrived on the scene after receiving a call from his brother, interfered by pulling off his bulletproof vest.

Stanislaw was punched by the officers, taken to the ground by Egerter and pepper-sprayed by Paroshy.

The brothers said that Stanislaw was not intoxicated, but exhausted from driving 17 hours and disoriented from the car crash; also, that Bogumil was trying to diffuse the situation by offering to translate for his brother, who speaks little English. He denied trying to take off Paroshy’s vest.

“Their duty as officers was to determine if this man needed some help. Help was not what Stanislaw Dyrda got that evening. He got beaten,” said Justice Baldwin in a 32-page ruling. “At the end of this long trial, it was clear that this case involved the excessive use of police force.”

Predictably, the Halton Police Association is offended and defensive about the judge's comments.

Police association president Duncan Foot slammed the judge for her decision in a letter to a local paper.

Trying to conceal rather than root out the problems is not a strategy that will restore public confidence, nor will it do anything to curb what seems to be the rising number of reported incidents of police brutality and excessive use of force.

Added to that, to paraphrase a subject popular with the Harper government, we can only wonder about the number of unreported crimes committed by police in their overzealous pursuit of their public safety duties.