Author Archives: Canadian Cop

I celebrated New Year’s this year at a residence I rented in Maine, not too far from where I was born. My “pure Canadian” wife and I were joined by our two daughters and their husbands, as well as other family members including my mother who continues to live on Campobello Island where I grew up. The reason for the celebration in Maine was that my older daughter, who now lives in Texas and is married to a Texan, has applied for a green card and could not leave the US. She and her husband had originally intended to come to Nova Scotia and spend Christmas with us, but when her green card did not get issued in time, we had to settle on “Plan B”, which allowed her to spend some time with her grandmother and other family members.

When I opened my Christmas gift from my Texas daughter and her husband, it was a T-shirt with a depiction on the front of a star above a cannon and the words “COME AND TAKE IT”. My son-in-law, who is from Cuero, explained that the shirt was from the neighbouring town of Gonzales. He explained that back in the 1800’s, Mexican authorities had given the people of Gonzales a cannon to help protect themselves from frequent Comanche raids. Over the next few years, the political situation in Mexico deteriorated and several states revolted. The Mexican commander thought it unwise to leave the cannon with the residents of Gonzales and asked them to return the cannon. The residents’ reply was a defiant “COME AND TAKE IT”. The Battle of Gonzales was the first military engagement of the Texas Revolution.

Continue reading →

RICO, short for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, is a (US) federal law enacted in 1970 as a crime-fighting tool for use against the Mafia. It includes prison sentences of up to 20 years and seizure of financial assets for those found guilty of such “racketeering.”[1]  A noble cause – who could disagree with clamping down on organized crime?  Fast-forward 45 years, and have a look at the proposed application of the RICO Act by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) against scientists who speaks out against Michael Mann, Dr. Rajandra Pachauri, and the rest of the Clime Syndicate at the IPCC.[2]

The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 (BSA) was not intended as a way to catch those engaging in menial tax evasion, but rather as a tool to help federal prosecutors fight the worst of the worst: international criminal syndicates who were daring and powerful enough to make prosecution a nightmare. Unlike targeting your average street thug, the BSA was supposed to be a big gun capable of taking out the really tough guys. Organized crime. Terrorists. Drug cartels. The kind of people whose money could influence law enforcement with bribes and/or intimidation.[3]   Another noble cause!  Again, fast forward 45 years, and see who the US government is harassing with FBAR penalties (not to mention giving a whole new meaning to “off-shore bank account”).

Operation Choke Point is an initiative of the United States Department of Justice that was announced in 2013, which is investigating banks in the United States and the business they do with payment processors, payday lenders, and other companies believed to be at higher risk for fraud and money laundering (another noble cause).  This operation, disclosed in August 2013 Wall Street Journal story has been accused of bypassing due process; the government is pressuring the financial industry to cut off the companies’ access to banking services, without first having shown that the targeted companies are violating the law.  As reported by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, critics believe “it’s a thinly veiled ideological attack on industries the Obama administration doesn’t like, such as gun sellers and coal producers.” [4]   Earlier this year, FDIC chairman Martin Gruenberg told Congress that Choke Point was over, but many business owners believe the FDIC and DOJ has passed enforcement duties along to a newly created independent agency: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the brainchild of progressive senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). The CFPB operates under the guidance of the Federal Reserve and doesn’t rely on Congress for funding, which critics say allow it to operate without any meaningful checks on its power. [5]

We are all familiar with civil forfeiture in the United States.  Proponents see civil forfeiture as a powerful tool to thwart criminal organizations involved in the illegal drug trade, with $12 billion annual profits, since it allows authorities to seize cash and other assets resulting from narcotics trafficking. Proponents argue that it is an efficient method since it allows law enforcement agencies to use these seized proceeds to further battle illegal activity, that is directly converting bad things to good purposes by harming criminals economically while helping law enforcement financially. Critics argue that innocent owners become entangled in the process such that their right to property is violated, with few legal protections and due process rules to protect them in situations where they are presumed guilty instead of being presumed innocent. [6]

These are just a few of many pieces of legislation, purportedly enacted to go after criminals, that are now used to prosecute, intimidate, extort and criminalize honest, law-abiding citizens.  The people acting with malevolence here are not those who these laws are being applied to, but those who are applying the laws.  Someone once said, “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”  Tyranny is defined as “cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control” – my question is, “are we there yet?”

The Harper government passed Bill C-24 to protect us from terrorists.  They included the IGA implementing FATCA in Bill C-31 to protect Canadian banks from debilitating sanctions at the hands of the US government.  The intention of Bill C-51 is also to protect us from terrorism.  These are all good things!  But from my perspective (I have the stink of the US on me), C-31 made me a second class citizen in my own country.  Bill C-24 provides “my government” with the potential ability to strip me of my Canadian citizenship merely because I had the misfortune to be born in the US and I have been vocal in my disdain for my treatment by the Canadian government.  Bill C-51 would ease the transfer of information between federal agencies, including confidential data (like that collected in the long form census) – of course, none of these federal agencies would even consider transferring any of this information to a foreign government!  Ask Maher Arar!

Obviously, my concern that government would ever misapply a law or share my personal information among federal agencies (and foreign governments) indicates my need to be fitted with a tinfoil hat!  Anyone would have to have been paranoid, or just plain crazy, to think laws enacted to go after the Mafia, drug cartels and terrorists would ever be applied to law-abiding citizens!

Of course, our recently elected Liberal government is obviously different.  Justin Trudeau transcends politics – if we had only had him as Prime Minister when the US demanded an IGA enacting FATCA, things would have been so different!  He would have put Obama in his place.  It was that evil Harper who caused all of our problems!  (Anyone who believes any of this paragraph is more in need of a tinfoil hat than I am).  I would point out that it is progressive policies and politicians who are predominantly responsible for this affliction.

As someone who has for the most part been a Harper supporter, I was betrayed by him (and relegated to second class citizenship as a result).  I have stated in the past on this site that I have no doubt that the Liberals or NDP would have done the same – it seems every other country in the world did.  But it was not the Liberals or NDP who had the misfortune to be in power at the time – it was the Harper government.  I have made many negative comments about Harper as a result, and voted for the Liberal candidate (Bill Casey) in my riding.

I will be watching with great interest what transpires from here.  If the Trudeau government does not get rid of the enabling IGA, will he be subjected to the same venom that Harper (deservedly) was?  Will this be an issue he even cares about?  Or will he just pay it lip service and say, “I tried, but it is Harper’s fault.”  I am concerned that such a charade would be enough to appease many on this site.  Can we get some kind of commitment from those of you on the left that, if Trudeau does not get rid of the IGA, he will be subjected to the same venom that Harper was?  One of the first things he plans to do is to cozy up to Obama – that does not bode well for us.

And if you think the long form census data will only be used for benevolent purposes, you have not been paying attention to what is going on in the world.  In the words of Ronald Reagan, the nine most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.”

[1] http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/09/28/new-low-in-science-criminalizing-climate-change-skeptics.html
[2]  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-fossil-fuel-industrys-campaign-to-mislead-the-american-people/2015/05/29/04a2c448-0574-11e5-8bda-c7b4e9a8f7ac_story.html
[3] https://www.irsmedic.com/2014/11/08/failure-bank-secrecy-act/
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point
[5] https://reason.com/reasontv/2015/08/21/operation-choke-point-the-governments-co
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States

On Friday, November 7th, I attended the Remembrance Day ceremony at the elementary school where I live. I wore my ceremonial dress, as requested, and joined a couple of veterans who were also in attendance. During the singing of “O Canada”, for the first time in my life, I felt really conflicted. After 30+ years as a law enforcement officer in Canada, during the singing of our national anthem, it started to really hit home that the current Canadian government does not consider me to be a Canadian.

Continue reading →

The following email was sent to my MP, Scott Armstrong, signed with my real name:

Dear Mr. Armstrong;

In 1958, my Canadian parents crossed the US border and attended the nearest “maternity home” where I was born before we all returned home to Canada.  Since that time, I have never lived, worked or voted in the US.  I have always lived, worked, voted and paid taxes in Canada.  I also bank here, where I continue to live.

As someone who has voted for you in the past, I would request that you answer the following questions, the answers to which will determine if I ever vote for you again:

1. Do you consider me to be a Canadian who was born in the US, or a “US person” who lives in Canada?

2. Based on the fact I am Canadian, have always lived and worked in Canada, and do all my banking here in Canada where I live, do you consider my bank accounts “offshore” and the business of any foreign government?

3. According to the Master Nationality Rule, a Canadian living in Canada is only Canadian.  Do you believe this, or do you believe that a Canadian living in Canada can also be American or Eritrean, and thus be subject to the laws of those nations while in Canada?

4. Do you believe that might makes right (i.e. that the US can do what it wants inside Canada, because of its might, but Eritrea is not allowed to do the same thing) or that Canada should stand against all foreign marauders?

5. Do you support the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its guarantees to protect people from unlawful search and seizure and to not be discriminated against based on national origin?

6. Do you support the FATCA IGA, which assists the IRS in a fishing expedition which, while allegedly aimed at tax cheats, will actually result in a massive by-catch of honest, law-abiding Canadians (and we know what becomes of the by-catch on a fishing expedition)?

7. If you answered “yes” to 5 and 6 above, how do you reconcile that, considering that the IGA violates the protections guaranteed in the Charter?

8. Do you honestly believe that there will ever be reciprocity, when all the US is promising to do is “to pursue legislation to provide reciprocity” or do you accept that Canada will get nothing from this except to maintain the status quo (i.e. avoid economic sanctions)?

9. Do you believe that Canada is a sovereign country, and should not acquiesce to the extortionist demands of foreign powers?

10. Would the Conservative government be so quick to sign an IGA that violated the Charter rights of any other group except “US persons”, or is the political calculus that Americans are unpopular enough that trampling on their rights will have little political fallout?

11. When the enabling legislation for FATCA is tabled, do you intend to support it or to take a stand for Canadian sovereignty and the Charter rights of all Canadians?

Thanking you in advance for your prompt reply.

Canadian Cop

In the early 1900’s, the Black Hand was a type of extortion racket that involved sending a threatening letter to a victim and demanding a specified amount of money to prevent the threats from being carried out.  According to an article published in the New York Times on March 26, 1910, famous tenor Enrico Caruso paid $1500 – $2000 to the Black Hand to “purchase peace for himself”.  Despite the payment, Caruso continued to receive letters in which he was threatened with every conceivable kind of bodily harm unless he promptly paid more.  That is the problem with acquiescing to the demands of an extortionist, you are identified as an “easy mark” and leave yourself susceptible to future acts of extortion. 

The Criminal Code of Canada states in section 346(1): Every one commits extortion who, without reasonable justification or excuse and with intent to obtain anything, by threats, accusations, menaces or violence induces or attempts to induce any person, whether or not he is the person threatened, accused or menaced or to whom violence is shown, to do anything or cause anything to be done. 

Continue reading →

I have read with interest the claims that this is a “good deal” because it provides “reciprocity” to the Canadian government.  This is not true, according to my investigations.  Anyone who believes this is true should check out a post by James George Jatras on his RepealFATCA.com website. Check out the links to the two letters at the top of that page.  Following is an excerpt from the article written by Mr Jatras in July 2013:

Without this new authority, on which the Congressman’s letter pronounces what amounts to a veto, Treasury cannot deliver on promises of “equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic exchange.”

And without imposing “equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic exchange” on domestic U.S. banks, credit unions, and other institutions, Treasury cannot pretend that IGAs are anything but a one-sided, extraterritorial diktat that foreign governments enforce FATCA to the detriment of their countries’ institutions, taxpayers, and consumers, and in violation of their sovereignty.

Continue reading →

A law enforcement officer who is an “Accidental American” writes the Prime Minister asking for the protection of the Canadian government.

Continue reading →