Category Archives: Police State

Where is Justice When Police Investigate Themselves?

Dan Dicks of will be joining me today on the radio to discuss the problem of police being allowed to investigate themselves. Of the nearly 2000 cases of violence or death involving the police, which were investigated by the Ontario Police’s own ‘Special Investiagtions Unit’ between 1996 and 2006, only 38 resulted in any charges being laid. Can the police be trusted to investigate themselves?

Dan is a Canadian activist, journalist and filmmaker from Toronto. He is the producer of the films ‘United We Fall’ and ‘The Nation’s Deathbed’, and the Director/producer of ‘Into The Fire’.
Please visit his Youtube channel weavingspider and website .

You can listen live at 3:00 pm EST on February 16, 2012 at

First Hour (2:00 pm EST), I will be talking to Dr Jerry Hoover. Dr Hoover is a Naturopathic Doctor, now retired in Nicaragua, who has had decades of experience restoring to health people who suffered from chronic diseases such as diabetes, autoimmune disease and cancer. We will be discussing how natural approaches differ from standard medicine and why they are successful in reversing conditions that are considered incurable by the mainstream medical establishment.
Please visit Dr Hoover’s website, naturalcancercure, where you can download his free e-book.
One of the topics we will address today is the role of sunlight in human health. We have all heard that sun exposure makes our bodies produce Vitamin D, which lowers our overall risk of cancer and improves our general health, but too much sun is known to age or burn the skin and raise the risk of skin cancer. So, how much sun we need and how should we go about exposing ourselves to it safely?
Listen in at 2:00 pm EST for the answer to this questiion and much more.

London Riots and Provocateurs

If the police shooting of Marc Duggan sparked the riots in London, why didn’t the police shooting of this 19-year-old do the same in the USA?

The answer is simple: the police didn’t let it happen. They quickly came out with their riot gear to disperse the protesters who gathered that night. And that was the end of it- no riots in San Francisco. In London, they likely did more than just let the fire burn by itself: they probably used provocateurs, as reported by young people on the scene who tweeted that people posing as reporters tried to bribe them to go looting.

1- They look like cops, i.e. pretty big and/or buff.
2- They act like cops, i.e. pretty unfriendly and aloof with a telltale bad vibe.
3- They dress like people who are dressed up like protesters, i.e. their clothes look new and not worn-in like the rags on every other hippies’ back.
4- Or they dress up like ‘anarchists’, often with face coverings, but their police-issue boots give them away.
5- They instigate violence.

Here are some examples from Canada:

G20 in Toronto:

Montebello, Quebec, 2007

I am just waiting for some footage like this to come out of London.

London Riots A Conspiracy?

Civil unrest broke out in London and spread to surrounding suburbs over the weekend and has continued to rage for the past four days. Young people of various ethnicities have been rioting and looting, torching buildings, breaking into shops and making away with consumer goods such as TVs, alcohol, electronics. The police have been slow to get things under control, appearing to stand down as mobs of people rampage in the streets.

Looters making off with stuff they don’t really need:

Why are these people running amok like this? Unlike in the episodes of civil unrest in the Middle East that took place over the previous year, those participating have not made any clear statements concerning their reasons for acting like hooligans. Officially, what sparked this was the death of a young black man by the name of Marc Duggan, who was reportedly shot by police while sitting in a taxi. Well, this is what the mainstream media has been repeating, but it doesn’t quite make sense. First of all, it is odd that not only are the rioters not holding up placards drawing attention to the case of Marc Duggan, nor are they chanting any slogans related to police brutality, but only small numbers of Londoners even payed tribute to Mr Duggan after his death: a few in his neighborhood held a vigil, and even fewer placed flowers at the site where he died. The death of Marc Duggan does not seem to have directly acted as the natural catalyst for the chaos we are now seeing.

Even more suspiciously, it was reported on Russia today that people in the neighborhood where Duggan was killed stated that a police surveillance vehicle had been filming the area for days before the shooting, that armed plain-clothes agents had been spotted hiding in bushes nearby and that the taxi in which Marc Duggan had been a passenger had been taken away after the incident and then returned later for more tests. Were they planning to kill someone to use it as a cover for riots that would then be instigated by provocateurs?

And why has this been allowed to go on for several days? Are the police and government dragging their feet? Russia Today reports that Parliament is holding a debate on what to do. A debate? At a time like this? Surely, they could take a lesson from Canadian and American police and deploy sound and water canons or use rubber bullets to keep people in check? They have such means at their disposal, yet they seem to be intentionally backing off and playing helpless, allowing the violence to escalate. They also say that those participating in the looting are doing so for excitement, and that there is a deficit in the police force as many officers have been laid off in previous years, while the government has been spending enormous sums on foreign wars. The message appears to be that this is happening because there is not enough of a police presence to keep these people from acting like unruly children.

Footage shows ‘mob mentality’ taking over after a few men initiate an attack on the police, pushing them back. But who are these men, dressed in black, with face coverings and shiny white sneakers? Could they be agent provocateurs sent in to herd the black sheep into engaging in an attack?

The following report appears to confirm my suspicions that provocateurs are being used to instigate and fuel the rampage, as youths are claiming they have been offered money to loot by people posing as journalists.
Meanwhile, police have been ordered to stand down.
After the 2010 G20 and other such events, this is starting to look all too familiar to me.

Member of Parliement Gerard Batten states that what we are seeing is a display of ‘pure criminality’ and that the solution would be to bring troops back from Afghanistan and deploy them against British Citizens.
“Let’s get our troops back into this country and actually put them on the streets supporting the police in order to crush this criminal insurrection,” he says, which translates simply into “it’s time for us to have martial law in London.”
He also declares that the problem is not lack of jobs, but lack of willingness on the part of these people to do them, and that what has further contributed to this wanton criminality is the lax laws that make it hard for people to get arrested and allow them to get away with just about anything. I have a hard time believing that. In London, where Big Brother reigns over the inhabitants with him myriad ever-present, all-seeing eyes, where the government has invested probably billions in surveillance equipment, there are not enough laws in place to punish people for criminal behaviour? Then what is the point of having all those cameras? I have a hard time believing that. Rather, it is looking to me more and more like this violence is being allowed to take place in order to bring in the next step in the agenda of creating a total police state. Britain was the first to install cameras on every corner, to ban guns outright, and to bring in the naked scanners at the airports. Will they now become the first living model of the NWO martial law police state?

So, again, what are these rioters ‘fighting against’? Justice for Marc Duggan? Doesn’t look like it to me. Is it backlash against austerity measures that were imposed in 2010? Are they just so angry that they can’t afford iPods that they have taken to pillaging local shops? Or, possibly, has this situation been designed and instigated by the globalist elites in order to herald the advent of martial law in Britain and soon the rest of the Western world? Given the evidence, it seems to me like the last option is the correct one.

BC Police Taser 11-Year-Old

I remember when I talked to a Montreal cop about tasers a few years ago. I asked him what he thought of them, whether it might not be a good idea to get rid of them, but he was of the mind that we should have more of them. But what about these incidents where people die from being tasered? he said those people must have had some underlying medical condition and they would have died whether you used a taser or not.
Excuse me?!
Yes, he really said that and I just imagined him and all the other cops sitting spiral-eyed in front of a screen at a brainwashing seminar on tasers where they are told, “If the person dies, they were weak and were probably going to die anyway. It’s just a coincidence that it happened after they got tasered.”
Looks to me like the people who indoctrinate cops about tasers are the same ones who program the medical professionals about vaccine ‘safety’.
That cop seemed like a nice guy. He really did. But he had been programmed to believe the most absurb things when it comes to electrocuting people to keep them in submission to you as a policy enforcement officer.
Now, please explain to me how an 11-year-old kid got tasered and why the police is refusing to tall the public whether the child was armed or not? How did we get to the point of having ‘peace officers’ who electrocute children in this country?

DHS Wants to X-Ray Your Every Move

‘Naked Scanners’ were first introduced at a London airport last year, and from there it has been a slippery slope. We have all heard about the ongoing shennanigans and abuses of power by TSA employee, of people who refuse to be scanned being subjected to more and more invasive gropings, of women who refuse to have their bottles breast milk irradiated being put into glass cages in front of everyone, and even of visiting diplomats being subjected to such demeaning treatment.

As many of us expected, this trend toward government invasion of personal privacy is now just expanding and expanding. The TSA is now implementing airport-style security procedures at train stations and were recently criticized for wanding and frisking children after they had disembark at their destination.

But it won’t stop there. ‘Malintent’ scanners that can detect bad intentions have been around for a while and the DHS recently announced their intention to put them to good use at things like sporting events and the like under the FAST Program.

There are also mobile x-ray units that can travel along city streets, peering into vans and homes to detect human bodies, drugs and weapons. I remember seeing, over a year ago, a promo video by the makes of this van, who listed ‘stooling’ (aka taking a dump in your vehicle) as one of the activities their product could detect.

This technology is also covered in the following article in the Christian Science Monitor:

And if you think that’s bad, they have more in store for you including DNA scans at airports to be rolled out this summer! Accoring to the Activist Post, “This technology is being implemented under the cover of combating human trafficking, illegal immigration, and finding missing persons”. American police now also have authority to take DNA samples during arrests, before a person has been convicted of a crime, and have been doing the same through mandatory blood tests at DUI checkpoints in Florida

Prison Planet reports that DHS documents show their intention to roll out naked scanners at public events:

“The non-profit Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) on Wednesday published documents it obtained from the Department of Homeland Security showing that from 2006 to 2008 the agency planned a study of of new anti-terrorism technologies that EPIC believes raise serious privacy concerns. The projects range from what the DHS describes as “a walk through x-ray screening system that could be deployed at entrances to special events or other points of interest” to “covert inspection of moving subjects” employing the same backscatter imaging technology currently used in American airports.”

They have the technology and fully intend to use it. So if you thought it wasn’t a big deal to go through a potentially cancer-causing scan now and then at the airport, think again. How far will you let them go in treating you like a criminal, invading your privacy, and subjecting you to toxic radiation? How far will you let them go in doing this to your children?

I expect that if this continues it will soon be standard procedure for people to undergo x-ray and other screening to participate in common activities like attending an event, entering a courthouse or school, or maybe visiting a shopping mall. Many of us wonder how long the public will tolerate this. There has been quite a lot of criticism and pushback from the public, but DHS is going ahead with their agenda anyway and I suspect that part of the goal is to get people to restrict their own movements as much as possible. Restricting personal freedom of movement is always a priority in any tyrannical regime. Of course, they have more finesse than to do it the old-fashioned way of making you, say, wear a Star of David and confining you to a ghetto. They will just see to it that going anywhere will be such a miserable experience that you will voluntarily circumvent your own movements. 

Welcome to the future. Now bend over.

Arbitrary Detention and Deportation in Canada

Thursday, Febriary 10th, my guest on The Truther Girls radio show will be Sophie Lamarche, who will talk about the arbitrary detainment of Mohamed Harkat under the Canadian process known as Security Certificates. This process enables the government to detain and deport any permanent resident or refugee without evidence of their having committed a crime or being likely to commit a crime in the near future. It is quite arbitrary, and once the process has begun, even if the person is completely innocent, little can be done to reverse it and prevent their deportation.

You can listen to the show live from 2:00-4:00 pm EST on February 10th at or download the archive from
For more information on the case of Mohamed Harkat and Security Certificates, visit:

Justice for Mohamed Harkat Committee

What is a Security Certificate?
• At the request of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the government of Canada can declare any permanent resident or refugee inadmissible to this country based on undisclosed grounds. CSIS can then arrest and hold the person indefinitely, for years, without charge.
• The detained person’s lawyer is given only a summary of allegations, and is denied access to anything CSIS wants kept secret. The CSIS-approved judge is presented with some of the evidence behind closed doors, without a defence lawyer present.
• The judge’s mandate is to rule on whether there were “reasonable grounds” to issue the security certificate. CSIS need only prove that there is a possibility, or a belief, that a person might do something that threatens national security, based on the individual’s actual, past or potential activities or associations. No actual crime need have been committed. The court can rule only on whether it is possible that the allegations are true.
• The men are not permitted to answer to the accusations in a fair trial because, unlike a criminal trial, the evidence in a security certificate case remains secret “for reasons of national security”.
• If the judge upholds the Certificate, the detainee faces immediate deportation. The decision is final and no appeal is permitted.
Bill C-3 and the Supreme Court decision

On February 23, 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled unanimously that Security Certificates are unconstitutional in three respects:
– The use of secret evidence, with no access or recourse by the detained or their lawyers, is a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;
– The differential treatment of refugees from that of immigrants is unfair under the Charter;
– The detention could be considered arbitrary under the Charter if no regular review is conducted.
The finding was welcomed by human rights advocates. However, instead of fixing the real problem of secret evidence, the government chose to make only cosmetic changes to the previous law, creating a system of so-called “special advocates” to review the secret evidence and cross-examine it, without consultation with the detainee. The same situation continues: a CSIS-approved judge, no access to the evidence, indefinite detention without charge, and threat of deportation to jail, torture or death.

What is a Special Advocate?
A “special advocate” is a person appointed by a court or a government, whose job is to represent the interests of the detained in the review of secret evidence and in closed evidentiary hearings to which the detained and their lawyers do not have access. This process has come under criticism by human rights groups. Ian McDonald, a former Special Advocate in the UK, resigned over the unfairness of the process.
Isn’t a special advocate better than nothing?
Special advocate processes are fundamentally flawed. The special advocates created under bill C-3 are not allowed to consult with detainees after viewing secret evidence. They are appointed, approved, and must seek permission to conduct interviews from the same CSIS-approved judge that rules on the security certificate.
The process still prevents the detained from directly facing their accusers. This restriction is the key problem with security certificates, as recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada in their 2007 ruling.
The special advocate process merely allows Government to claim it has complied with human rights requirements while actually allowing the problems to continue unabated.
No Appeal
The new version of the Certificate Process does not allow for an appeal on the findings in the case, nor does it allow appeals to be initiated during the proceedings. This is a departure from normal court practice and makes defence against allegations even harder.

Currently, Mohamed Harkat, Mohammad Mahjoub, and Mahmoud Jaballah are still detained under release conditions. certificates against Hassan Almrei and Adil Charkaoui were quashed, but not before all five Muslim men had their lives torn apart by allegations that they are connected to terrorism. These are allegations only and not criminal charges. All three face the threat of deportation to torture or death.
Who is Mohamed Harkat?
Mohamed Harkat arrived in Canada in 1995. In 1997, he was granted status as a Convention refugee from government persecution if he were to return to Algeria.
On December 10, 2002, Mohamed Harkat was arrested by undercover police outside his home in Ottawa. Mohamed spent one year of his 3 ½ year detention in solitary confinement. He was released on bail on June 21, 2006, with the strictest bail conditions in Canadian history.
All five men detained under security certificates faced brutal release conditions. One even voluntarily returned to jail rather than put his family through the torment. Courts relaxed all of the conditions of detention significantly in 2009.

The security certificate remains unjust, and an affront to the basic human rights of the detainees, still with no charges against them. If there is any evidence against these men, they should be given fair and independent trials under the criminal code.
Meanwhile, the human rights violations inherent in the security certificate process also continue in other aspects of Canadian law. In particular human rights advocates are concerned that sections of the Immigration Act and sections of the Anti-Terrorism Act also contain provisions for secret proceedings.

SIGN our new statement against security certificates and spread the word to your groups and contacts.
CONTACT your MP or other political representative and ask for their support for the campaign.
VOLUNTEER to help the Justice for Mohamed Harkat Committee.
DONATE to the campaign.

The Justice for Mohamed Harkat Committee calls for the abolition of the Security Certificate process; an immediate unconditional release of the detainees, or a fair trial if any evidence actually exists against them; the, or seeking to deport, people to countries where they will be, or may reasonably expect to be, submitted to imprisonment, torture cessation of deporting or death; and, the dismantling of the Kingston Immigration Holding Centre.
Presented by the Justice for Mohamed Harkat Committee (Ottawa)

Police State Update Sept 27 , 2010

The following articles were discussed on The Truther Girls radio show on Sept 27.
The CFR Asks, Are Americans Too Constitution-Obsessed?
(After all, it’s only a piece of paper. Right?)

FBI Launching Mass Raids on Anti-War Activists Homes
The FBI is confirming that this morning they began a number of “raids” against the homes of antiwar activists, claiming that they are “seeking evidence relating to activities concerning the material support of terrorism.”

So far there do not appear to have been any arrests related to the raids nor, according to FBI spokesman Steve Warfield, are there any expected. He also insisted that there was “no imminent threat” related to the antiwar organization targeted. Some of the activists say they were ordered to appear before a grand jury, however.
Note: normally, you are not supposed to do a raid to seek evidence. You are supposed to do a raid if you already have evidence, i.e. probable cause. Otherwise, you are just violating people’s privacy. However, this principle has gone out the window since ‘probable cause’ has been replaced with ‘reason to believe’. As stated, there was no ‘imminent threat’, i.e. the raids were carried out for some other reason than to actually protect the public. And given that no-one was arrested, there evidently was nothing illegal going on. No probable cause, no threat, no arrests. What was this done for? Just to show people that they have no rights and are subjected to being treated as terrorists just because they are against the war? The message is clear: don’t challenge the status quo, becaus the status quo is that the government does whatever it wants and doesn’t need a valid reason to do it.

And to help you help the government violate everyone’s rights, the DHS has created a pamphlet to help people know when to rat out their neighbors. It contains a list of signs to look for that may indicate your dude-next-door is in with Al Quaida, such as “travel to or interest in travelling overseas to attend violent extremist institutions or paramilitary training camps”

John: Hey Dave, what are you up to?
Dave: Well, John, I was just booking my flight to Pakistan to attent a violent extremist institution”
John: Uh-oh. (calls DHS)

Did you really need the DHS to tell you to sound the alarm if someone says he is on his way to terrorist boot camp?

Also, be alert to:
– People who buy to much fertilizer (look out, home gardeners!) or peroxide (heads up, cheesemakers!)
– Anyone who has recently changed his name
– “Adoption of a new life style and segregation from normal peer and family groups in association with advocating criminal or terrorist activity.”

The last one is particularly tricky. Imagine this scenario: Jane stops hanging out with her aspartame-and-American-Idol-addled friends and gets involved with some Tea Party folks. She starts hanging out with people who like that quote about the tree of liberty needing to be watered every once in a while with the blood of partiots. Now what do you do?
a- go back to your online game and stay out of it
b- recommend Prozac to Jane
c- report Jane to the DHS and become a community hero!
d- report Thomas Jefferson for coining that phrase in the first place, then take part in a community Constitution burning, followed by a good old fashioned witch hunt (it’s fun for the whole family!)

Meanwhile, according to Michael Vail of Black Listed News,
The National Intelligence Council and the European Union’s Institute for Security Studies jointly released a document on global governance (PDF) . It is difficult to determine the economic and political future climate of one nation but to attempt to do so for the world is a task. Worse yet, to add more complex variables to the equation such as NGOs and international organizations. These groups are the primary drivers for globalization and international order. These Non-governmental organizations write the policy papers and steer debate on subjects like adopting a global tax. The leaders and statesmen of our respective countries are becoming symbolic window dressing while the real debate is going on without our knowledge.–.html

But please, don’t talk about Global Governance. Don’t even entertain the thought that there may be such a thing. It’s nothing but a ‘conspiracy theory’ and, according to the MYAC report released in 2009 by the DHS, those who believe in such are potential terrorists. The only people who are allowed to talk about global governance are those who are attempting to usher it in.