[We now have a NEW POST taking us up to February 1, 2015. This post will be retired from service.]
THE AUTUMN 2014 UPDATE
Dear Donors,
Together, we reached our goal of $100,000 to pay the November 1 legal bill 11 days ahead of schedule!
Thank you Canadian donors from coast to coast and our friends from around the world for your generosity, support and determination — and especially for not being afraid.
The name of our non-profit corporation is the “Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty.”
We were very deliberate in including in our name the word “sovereignty”, which forms a cornerstone of our Claims against the Government of Canada.
Canada and dozens of other countries throughout the world gave into a bully because their “leaders” were afraid of harm caused by a trading “partner” — and they gave their sovereignties away.
Help us convince by example the Leaders and Governments of all countries worldwide that they should return their sovereignties back to their Peoples.
Please continue to support our lawsuit.
“Alone we can do so little. Together we can do so much.” (Helen Keller)
— Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, and the ADCS-ADSC team
Chers donateurs,
Ensemble, nous avons atteint notre but d’amasser 100 000 $ pour payer notre facture légale du 1er novembre 11 jours d’avance !
Un gros merci à vous, donateurs canadiens, et à nos amis de tous les coins du monde pour votre grande générosité, soutien et détermination. Et surtout pour votre courage.
Le nom de notre organisme sans but lucratif est « l’Alliance pour la défense de la souveraineté canadienne ».
Nous avons choisi délibérément le mot « souveraineté » puisqu’il constitue la base fondamentale de nos revendications envers le gouvernement du Canada.
Le Canada et des dizaines d’autres pays se sont pliés devant l’intimidation des États-Unis parce que leurs « leaders » ont eu peur des menaces de notre « partenaire » commercial. Ils ont donc vendu leur souveraineté à rabais.
Aidez-nous à convaincre les dirigeants et les gouvernements de tous ces pays qu’ils se doivent de remettre leur souveraineté à leurs peuples.
S’il vous plaît, continuez à soutenir notre cause.
« Seuls, nous pouvons faire si peu. Ensemble, nous pouvons faire beaucoup. » (Helen Keller)
— Ginny, Gwen et toute l’équipe de l’ADCS-ADSC
DONATE to www.adcs-adsc.ca (ADSC en français).
Personally, I’m thrilled that NativeCanadian is onboard.
It is essential that the Charter Challenge make a dedicated outreach to other interest groups that already have well established networks and political action mechanisms in place. Canadian First Nations are strong political activists – know how to organize for public impact – as per the recent land claims decision in Supreme Court.
We should be reaching out to and engaging:
– First Nations Canadians (no carve-out for First Nations status or any other Treaty obligation in the IGA – probably because the Harper Cons were too stupid to even consider it)
– the academic community (lots of cross border connections)
– the medical community (lots of Canadian medical people have a US tie due to education, employment, spouse)
– gay and lesbian community (sensitized to discrimination and value of Charter rights, and also Canada’s legalization of gay marriage and anti-discrimination laws has brought many US gay people to immigrate to Canada for both love and opportunity)
– Canadian Jewish community (lots of cross border connections, sensitivity to discrimination due to nationality, politically influential)
Excellent suggestions. NativeCanadian represents the Canadian First Nations well. He’s the only one here standing up or those like his wife — and he has been trying valiantly to spread the word to the “Native Canadian” peoples.
No doubt about it: Yes, the Harper government was TOO STUPID to even think of that community when signing the IGA with the USA!
Wondering, thanks for emphasizing the other communities we should be aligning with.
The analogy is right on, Samuel Adams. This is legalized financial rape of *US Persons Abroad*.
The authorities that should stop such a crime are standing by watching and not speaking out or saving the victim. Our financial rape is as despicable as any other kind of rape.
@Dash,
Thank you for your comment and I will reply to your email separately.
I am sorry that you have decided not to donate further to ADCS-ADSC because of comments made on a website (Brock), as others have mentioned, that is not affiliated with ADCS.
Unlike many posting on this website, I want to maintain my U.S. citizenship. I personally will never participate in a burning of the U.S flag protest for many reasons, including the fact that the U.S. flag, for me, represents the American people and, when it was created, the desire to resist oppression.
My “beef” is with Mr. Obama and the U.S. Congress that passed these bad U.S. tax rules — not with Americans.
I will not bash the United States. My words are directed to U.S. Congress and to the complicit Government of Canada.
But Dash, you really need to appreciate that U.S. Congress has harmed, and aims to harm, innocent Canadians who had U.S. citizenship imposed on them without their consent, and that some of these Canadians will speak out using strong words and actions.
ADCS-ADSC, which for the moment has the only purpose of mounting legal challenges, does not equal, and is not affiliated with, the Isaac Brock Society.
But to make it clear, I personally have the highest respect and affection for the Brock administrators and for this small group of “fanatical” Brockers.
Stephen
@Stephen
Your comment about “American bashing” hits home. When I first came here, I learned like all of us, that “American bashing is the national pastime in Canada.” I had such a hard time with this. Of course trying to defend in the beginning. And pointing out how dreadfully rude it was and ironically, how it demonstrated that CDNs were not polite (as they often like to point out, this is what makes them different than Americans). Sometimes I could forget about it for years and then it would flare up again. It was always excused as being “it’s not that we’re against you Trish, or the people, but the US government.”
I used to believe that I could always work through whatever reaction I had to anything that came my way. And I have had some doozies. But this, so completely unexpected, so potentially devastating, has destroyed where I was at and provoked me to approach my life in a way that really, is not of my choosing. I cannot “work” through this. I cannot walk away from it. And the emotional reaction is overpowering. After nearly 3 years, the attempt to be constructive has not at all re-focused the anger. It is like having a volcano in the pit of your stomach at all times, ready to erupt at the slightest suggestion that we are guilty of tax cheating, ignorance of the law is no excuse and the usual level of garbage spewing out of the mouths of the compliance industry, and both the US and CDN government.
John Richardson said during his testimony at the FINA meeting, that the effect of all this is “life-altering” for those affected. This is not an idea, it is reality. And, as an American (which I still am at my core and feel even more so now), I am doing the same as my CDN friends were in the beginning – referring to the government, NOT the American people.
Were it not for Brock and Sandbox and the people associated with both, I could not have made it through this in one piece. I also understand the rage that fuels comments that may upset some people. It is all part of this situation and I don’t see why it would be so threatening as to turn anyone away from helping with the legal challenge. Everyone is free to do as they like.
There are also people who make up/change their minds for reasons totally unrelated to what they say they are.
http://www.infowars.com/celebrate-independence-day-by-opposing-government-tyranny/
@nervousinvestor
This attorney is more for the people then the gov’t… hopefully someone already spoke to him about the situation. He likes to be the thorn in the gov’t side…
I believe that the goals of this legal defense fund against FATCA in Canada have enough universal value and application that they should be seen as something which transcends our disagreements regarding our spectrum of differences in how we relate and express ourselves now to and regarding the US.
The fund asserts the primacy of Canadian law, Canadian democracy, consititutional, human and civil rights and the sovereignty of our autonomous nation and its values, and opposes extraterritorial interference by the use of economic might and undeserved sanctions by a foreign power. I believe that is not in essential conflict with being a patriotic American. Being patriotic does not reside in giving your nation a free pass from criticism, dissent, and censure, whether that nation be Canada, the US, or elsewhere. If you have more than one citizenship, you have a duty to consider and resolve issues of competing interests, and to see where one or both are acting unethically, and require a citizen to mount opposition in order to achieve a just resolution.
That I believe is entirely congruent with the best of the ideals that the US espouses, unless, it is an enduring and essentially American value to believe that Might should prevail over Right.
When I learned the Pledge of Allegiance, I did not pledge to support my birth country in whatever the US chose to do, without criticism or protest. When I naturalized as a Canadian, I also did not pledge to stifle any deserved criticism.
I believe that this fund and our efforts here are entirely congruent with the very best of what believe it means to be a true and patriotic citizen, whether American or Canadian, or a member of another nation. Far from being disrespectful, I believe that a symbol is only as powerful and as true as it adheres to what it was created to stand for. And, democratic process, free speech, and understanding the corrupting and corrosive nature of unopposed power is part of what is eroding the ideals that I was raised to believe the US stood for.
When a nation acts with arrogance, and wields its great powers in ways that harm countless others abroad, as well as at home, it is our duty to publicly oppose those actions.
Participatory democracy is a messy business.
The US has a long and admirable history of dissent, protest, and those who spoke truth to power at great personal cost. Some paid with their lives. There are many of these figures who I greatly admire, and who are part of the reason why I have still a sadness that I was forced to give up such a birthright. And as a result, I believe that whether from inside, or from outside, we have the right and the duty to take the US to task as a government and as a nation when it betrays the very values and ideals that it espouses. We certainly are not reticent in doing so for the current government of Canada.
I did NOT want to give up my US birthright. I remained a US citizen as long as I could hold out, but have been FORCED to give it up by the US. We have discussed this on previous threads here at IBS, but it is still my opinion that a true patriot – whether in the US, or Canada or elsewhere, is one who is as fully engaged as possible with the issues regarding the country/countries of their allegiance, and is proactive and ready to try to make as informed and reasoned criticisms of government, elected represenatives, policy, laws, etc. when warranted, to the best of their ability, resources and circumstances.
As a child, I grew up watching US elections and political conventions on TV with my Dad, late into the night. We watched the Vietnam protests, Watergate hearings, Democratic National convention in Chicago, March on Washington, etc. We watched several versions of the news – Canadian and US, every night. He never missed a Face the Nation, etc. He subscribed to Ramparts, and many other news magazines.
I believe that what we are doing here is ultimately of benefit to the US as well as to Canada and the rest of the globe.
FATCA is NOT the solution to the fight for scarce resources and a better life for all.
I know your dad would be very proud of you Badger.
@Stephen Kish
Haven’t received your email yet. But I will look forward to receiving it.
Also my email to [] seems to be bouncing–or at least I got a notice saying that it hadn’t been delivered yet after 24 hours. Since you personally posted that email address on here for Solomon can you clarify what might be happening? Thank you.
@Samuel Adams
No, I did NOT castigate the victims. I will NOT block anyone else from burning the American flag, on American, Canadian, or any other soil if it is their choice to do so. If they choose to burn the American flag it is their right to freedom of expression and I will not try to block them in any way. I will not castigate them in any way.
At the same time, when it comes to how I spend and donate my hard earned money, I prefer to focus on constructive, focused activity. I will certainly respect anyone burning the American flag out of anger–but I would prefer to put my money elsewhere on more constructive forms of protest. I will respect anyone’s right to any kind of political protest but I certainly hope they will respect my right to spend my money as I choose.
Again, I look forward to Stephen’s reply as my email to Solomon seems to have bounced.
@Samuel Adams
To put it another way:
I won’t pay good, hard earned money for you to burn the American flag.
But if–independent of me–you burn the American flag anyways and are criminally charged for it–I might well be talked into paying for your defense.
@Dash1729 – I hope you have seen the responses to you from yesterday. Let me repost my statement in response to yours from yesterday:
The Isaac Brock Society blog is not the same as the ADCS effort. Although Isaac Brock bloggers and commenters support the effort at ADCS they are not the ADCS. People are allowed to express their opinions on IBS without (at least with little) censure. The opinions on IBS have no influence whatsoever on the direction of the legal challenge that is being undertaken by ADCS. If you don’t like what certain people are saying on IBS, please do not hesitate to make your feelings known to them (as you have done here), but please do not allow your dislike of certain commenter’s opinions to dissuade you from supporting this cause whose mandate has not changed.
Therefore, your money is not going towards anyone burning any flags but solely towards the legal challenge against FATCA in Canada, period.
Will you guys be burning an American made American flag or one made in China?
If you burn the Union Jack we go ‘whatever’.
Just seems stupid to me.
@Dash
“I won’t pay good, hard earned money for you to burn the American flag.”
Don’t worry, I will burn it for free.
In all seriousness, I get your point, but the situation affecting expats has actually come this. That’s why your donation is needed.
Is this an attempt to control behaviour by threatening to withhold funds?
30% withholding penalty on ADCS contributions if indicia of flag burning isn’t reported.
I know that was a cheap shot, but I couldn’t resist.
@bubblebustin
“Is this an attempt to control behaviour by threatening to withhold funds?”
Control behavior? No.
Influence behavior? Yes.
If it is somehow wrong for me–someone who has significant life experience that I feel could be of benefit to IBS and ADSC–to be using my prospective future donation to influence the direction that ADSC will take–then it is time to terminate this conversation now. Of course I expect to have some influence based on donations that, as I understand it, are not tax deductible on either side of the border. My donation, however, won’t be large enough–even if everything is fully resolved to my satisfaction–that I would expect to control things.
I expect to be listened to in a respectful manner. I don’t expect to be able to dictate what people do.
To burn or not to burn. That is the question.
I know, another cheap shot. But what the hell, we’re all screwed tomorrow anyway.
@ Dash,
I don’t understand why you’re conflating ADCS with anything other than ADCS itself.
ADCS has a narrow and specific mandate. Money raised by the ADCS goes to pay legal costs for a court case. Not to purchase things nor to fund activities, etc. Solely to pay for a court case.
You wrote:
When it comes to “the direction ADSC will take,” a lot of people are fighting FATCA in different ways. ADCS is a registered non-profit corporation fighting it through the Supreme Court. I don’t think anything you do (or I or anyone else does) will change that. At any rate, I have no desire to as I think they’re on the right track.
@pacifica777
Yes of course I understand the specific mandate of ADCS.
I’m trying to get a feel for who the people–the stakeholders–involved are. I’m sure that ADCS and IBS have some of the same people involved (if I’m wrong on this please do correct me). I’m trying to figure out what the priority of those people is. Is the mission of ADCS the top priority for those people–with this America-bashing stuff being a small sideshow? Or is it the other way around?
I’m looking to hear from a critical mass of people that the more clearheaded focus of ADCS is the top priority. If I do then I don’t care if there might be others for whom the more hotheaded America bashing takes priority. But I want to hear from specific people that they will give the clearheaded ADCS priority over America bashing.
@Dash
There you go again.
Administrative Notice: The Isaac Brock Society is a website, an open forum to discuss the issues of United States citizenship, extra-territorial taxation, FBAR, and FATCA. We welcome a diversity of opinions. Therefore, the views expressed in comments and articles belong to the individual writers and do not necessarily represent the collective opinion of the Isaac Brock Society. Also, the Isaac Brock Society does not necessarily endorse videos or other material which are posted here for informational purposes.
Did I miss something here?
@Joe Blow
I agree that all views are or should be welcome on IBS but when it comes to ADCS which is soliciting money I want to see a more focused effort rather than everyone all over the map. As @pacifica777 pointed out there are presumably many efforts going on to opposed FATCA–I am looking for one where the people have their personal energies focused and under control.