Vol. XIX, Nos. 10 & 11, October & November 2001
The Western Separatist Papers has been
published (usually) monthly by W.S.P. Ltd. since 1983. Address all
correspondence to WSP, Box 143, 255 Menzies Street, Victoria, B.C. Western Canada V8V 2G6.
A one-year subscription is $15.00. Members of the Western Canada Concept receive
the WSP with their membership.
Send e-mail to kzubko@shaw.ca. Visit the WCC on the web at: www.westcan.org
Phone us at: 250-727-3438
or fax us at: 250-479-3294
It's one year today since the federal election that spawned, once more, overwhelming support in Western Canada for the concept of a new nation. For several months afterwards, our phones were steadily ringing, mailboxes overflowing, website racking up the hits and email burgeoning with impulsive letters from fed-up Westerners. Where are all those people now?
It appears the flighty ones have eliminated themselves, leaving as always the few who arrived at the understanding of the only solution for the West, through reason.
Many have disappeared, as ephemeral as their words written in electronic impulses, having life for less than seconds, then gone to some other enthusiasm. Some people have found our modest, though long-lived organization not “cool” enough and have left us to do nothing more. There are those however, who have joined us and continue to support us with their ideas and membership and willingness to take a stand by being part of the movement for Independence. Many others have merely used their letters to us as a pressure valve, expressed themselves and thereafter feeling better, retreated in dormancy.
We all had a lot more hope a year ago that this election would be the one to finally create understanding in the masses of Western Canadians to stimulate enough debate, enough understanding, and especially, enough action to lead to a full-fledged “movement” of people, but now it seems obvious that this pattern mimics the events in Western Canada following every federal election.
It's like the movie “Groundhog Day” wherein the hero awakens to the exact same day, trapped to relive the identical events day after day, after day, until he finally “gets it right” and achieves the enlightenment that makes it possible for him to move past that to his real future.
When are Western Canadians going to do that? For decades, generation upon generation, repeat the same sequence except that when Western Canadians finally arrive at the critical realization of the solution for the West, they're often too old or sick or poor or beaten down to do anything about it except go quietly away without doing anything about it, leaving it to the next generation to struggle towards the same knowledge and experience.
Thankfully, most of you who read these words give more than token support to the West's aspirations and possibilities. You are the hope for the West.
Meanwhile the events of September have overtaken us and breathed a kind of pseudo-life into the Ottawa government, which is hectically active now, gaining new “purpose” to protect us from terrorists and it would appear, from ourselves, when the new and purportedly urgent anti-terrorist legislation is really scrutinized.
Through it, we are progressing closer and closer to the state that George Orwell delineated in his book, “Nineteen Eighty-Four.” The way this “war on terrorism” has been outlined for us by our leaders seems mighty like the state of perpetual war depicted in the book, and the rationalizations one must execute like mental (and ethical) gymnastics to try to accept first the necessity and then approve the implications of Bill C-36, remind us too much of Doublethink. Some quotes from Orwell, to remind us. . . .
“To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone - to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink - greetings!”
“The object of waging a war is always to be in a better position in which to wage another war.”
In this case, it is the war against the already tenuous freedoms of Canadian citizens. Now, with closure invoked on Bill C-36, its passage is a virtual certainty, and the war on terrorists will eventually subtly shift to become a war on the civil liberties of Canadians. Will we have the freedom to look back decades from now and see that this was not necessary, as with the War Measures Act? Only two members of the government had the guts to vote against this travesty, and the media's one most quoted criticism was that it endangers “new Canadians.” What about the rest of us?
“Power is collective. The individual only has power in so far as he ceases to be an individual.” (Orwell)
Adrienne Clarkson, the Governor General, made an impassioned speech to the nation's “Journalists for Freedom of Expression,” criticizing the rush to enact the provisions contained within the Anti-Terrorism Act as not necessary. Perhaps coming from a background in journalism, the threats to that one sector are obvious to Ms. Clarkson. Again, what about the rest of us?
There are few in the public arena with any kind of awareness of the necessity of preserving the rights of ordinary citizens. We are hopelessly enmired in the collectivist mentality so that even the defenders of liberty can only justify it by appealing to its effects on groups.
There are two contradictory premises operating within our attempts to come to terms with the events of September 11th, and to respond to them. On one hand we have this war on terrorism to which Canada is a party, yet on the other hand we have to maintain our Canadian niceness and tolerance while waging this war. Mustn't say another nasty word critical of immigration policies. Mustn't use the wrong language when identifying groups. Must be sensitive. (Very hard to do, while also waging war!)
On one hand, we have new draconian legislation to catch an ill-defined threat, and on the other hand we have the real targets of this legislation, ordinary Canadian citizens that are vulnerable to its incursions into our freedom. Talk about “collateral damage!”
Truly, we have regressed to 1984. Recall the words of George Orwell:
“Always yell with the crowd. It's the only way to be safe.”
“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”
“One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”
“Nothing is your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull.”
“It was not by making yourself heard but by staying sane that you carried on the human heritage.”
“The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil.”
We are inundated with images of Osama bin laden by a mechanism that just as easily can turn itself around upon anyone. And while the lense of the camera is focused so intently upon the terrorists, it rarely pauses to consider and spotlight the dangers to the rest of us by the rush to abandon our basic fundamental rights in the name of catching terrorists.
“The Masses never revolt on their own accord, and they never revolt merely because they are oppressed. Indeed, so long as they are not permitted to have standards of comparison, they never even become aware that they are oppressed.”
One of the two Liberal MPs who have stood against their government's efforts to effect closure on the debate over the law was Andrew Telegedi who emigrated from Hungary. He said, “As someone who has lived under a repressive totalitarian regime, I am intimately aware of the value of civil liberties. I have a very deep and abiding fear that in the name of national security, we sacrifice civil liberties, and in so doing endanger our democracy and the democratic process.”
The bill “changes the normal judicial process for a person or organization suspected of terrorism,” and “gives extraordinary power to the Solicitor-General, the courts and the police,” without proper safeguards, Mr. Telegdi said.
Certainly not oppressed by our own government! Our own media establishment! Our own institutions! Yes, and, as Orwell said, “WAR IS PEACE - FREEDOM IS SLAVERY - IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.”
It's 1984.
Keltie Zubko
Lloydminster Meeting of Separatists
To the Editor:
We attended the Independence meeting in Lloydminster on the weekend of November 16<M>th to 18<M>th, 2001. There were separatists from BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Separatists, with a clear view of separation. Not a word of negotiating with Ottawa was mentioned.
There were very interesting speakers. From Doug Christie with the Western Canada Concept from B.C. we were very interested to learn issues that he spoke on in the early 80's are the same unsolved issues that we face in the West today. We found his speeches very interesting and very informative as always. Thank you, Doug.
Henry Banman, former WCC candidate in Saskatchewan who ran in the early 80's gave a very interesting and uplifting speech. Thank you Henry.
Fred Cameron former leader of the WCC in Manitoba, a true gentleman, travelled from Winnipeg and gave a very informative speech on Saturday. Did I mention Fred is 81 years young, a true believer in the separatist movement. We appreciated hearing from him very much.
Fred Marshall from Edmonton wrote a speech that was delivered by his friend Reg Sinclair, as Mr. Marshall was ill and could not attend. We were glad to hear from Fred Marshall and hope he's feeling better.
We feel progress was made in the rallying of all Western separatist groups, and would like to have another such gathering early in the New Year. We need more people coming out to help build a stronger movement for Independence. With prayers and God's will, we will have a Western Canadian independent nation.
Wishing all our friends across Western Canada, a very Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year!
Glenn, Robert and Gladys Kratchmer
Wainwright, Alberta
The AIPs of Whimperland
To the Editor:
Will supporters of Alberta separatism look on 2001 as another year of learning experiences or of accomplishment?
The Alberta Independence Party (AIP), which was/is not a party, held its founding convention in Red Deer on 20 January 2001. The naiveté of the executive soon became apparent to the 300 or so onlookers and media when someone asked if the word “independence” was synonymous with “separation.” After some unanticipated and emotional discussion, which could hardly have been considered an informed debate, those in attendance voted to define “independence” as “separation if necessary but not necessarily separation.” At this point, several gentlemen who were sitting beside me were heard to say, “Here we go again . . . spineless . . . another waste of time. . . . .” as they walked out.
A few weeks later Mr. Klein called a provincial election. During a radio interview, soon after the election call, he was asked about the Western Separatists. His response was “I'll take care of the separatists.” Could he have meant that the AIP was created to deflect votes from separatist candidates? Although none of the AIP candidates were elected, some did surprisingly well against the established parties. The sentiment for support of independence is there!
To become a political party in Alberta, the AIP had to petition 5400 signatures within 6 months. Although some supporters made a serious effort, as we approach the end of one six month extension, the AIP is still deficient nearly 2000 signatures. Will the AIP petition have enough signatures by November 30<M>th to be registered as a party?
The AIP website soon evolved into a forum for political scrapping. Postings by persons who chose to remain anonymous, because they did not have the courage to be identified with their comments, soon brought the site into a self-destruct mode. What was the message any visitor to the AIP site would form from this experience? Perception soon became reality.
After a summer of silence, an AGM was hastily called in Red Deer for October 20. Approximately 60 people assembled in a hall with a seating capacity of 600. Most people voted to redefine the AIP as a separatist party. What does this mean to Albertans? Do they want the same “maitre chez nous” leverage as Quebec with Ottawa? Does it have the same meaning as DeGaulle's “Vive le Quebec libre!”?
As the year ends, I wonder if the AIP will become another footnote in the history book of prairie political parties. Oh well, we can always try again and again . . again. But on second thought, it might be easier just to keep on whimpering.
Fred Sontheim
Vice-President, AIP
Alberta
The Western Separatist Papers welcomes your letters to the editor. Please send them to , or WSP, Box 143, 255 Menzies Street, Victoria, B.C. V8V 2G6, or fax them to 250-479-3294.
Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day.
Thomas Jefferson
To be what we are, and to become what we are capable of becoming, is the only end in life.
Robert Louis Stevenson
It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.
Giordano Bruno
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton
The honest man must be a perpetual renegade, the life of an honest man a perpetual infidelity. For the man who wishes to remain faithful to truth must make himself perpetually unfaithful to all the continual, successive, indefatigable renascent errors.
Charles Peguy
Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
William Pitt
One of the greatest pains to human nature is the pain of a new idea.
Walter Bagehot
When a true genius appears in this world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift
The hardest part of gaining any new idea is sweeping out the false idea occupying that niche.
Robert Heinlein
By Doug Christie
What's Happening Here?
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and communism, which was in many ways more of a media event than a reality, there existed the real possibility that we would see for the first time since the 19<M>th Century the withering away of the state, the reduction of taxes and the emergence of greater freedom and privacy. Military budgets were decreasing. No particular reason could be found for huge military spending, no threats of similar magnitude to the Soviet Union were coming on the horizon with the possible exception of China and the huge budgets of defence were making way for a supposed peace dividend.
Perhaps as a result of the decline in the military budget which after all is really the largest representative of a command economy and a total socialist system in the supposed free world, the economy of the United States particularly, and the rest of the industrialized world was beginning to sputter. Perhaps military spending was a necessary engine of growth.
But September 11<M>th has changed all that. The right and left have come together to fight a new and ill-defined enemy: terrorism. This phenomenon is a new, self-perpetuating enemy. The more you hit it, the more terrorists you make to perpetuate the war on terrorism. The concept of a pre-emptive strike has been refined to justify the newest dream of the eternal socialist – the new perpetual war. It can go anywhere and hit anyone that America or its allies suggests, or should I say asserts may harbour, assist or associate with terrorists. Anyone who demands proof or definition of terms is relegated to the category of a terrorist themselves. All dissent is disloyal in war. When the enemy is everywhere and everyone only obedience and subservience to the powerful is an option; all else risks the irrefutable accusation that you too are a terrorist, or associate with terrorists, or give aid and comfort to terrorists.
What has this meant to freedom and democracy or privacy and personal security? Well, in perfect Orwellian doublespeak, to preserve your freedom, we must take it away. To protect your property, we must eliminate your privacy and conduct surveillance upon your every communication and thought. We must, to avoid the accusation of being or sympathizing with terrorism, subject our freedom to the hands of government bureaucrats who can conduct secret trials and even execute people after secret trials and on evidence they consider sufficient and with no constitutional safeguards and no right of appeal anywhere in the world as American field commanders can now do.
When Donald Rumsfeld was asked if he preferred if Osama bin Laden was killed rather than captured he is reported as saying “good heavens after what he has done I would hope so.” As if to require proof of his supposed heinous crimes would be superfluous. If such evidence was readily available and his guilt so obvious one would think for the edification of the world, the United States would relish the opportunity of a trial. But no.
In Canada and Australia and Great Britain new anti-money laundering legislation is proposed. This alleged to be to catch the terrorists supposed methods of raising funds and hiding money. But who has established that they use banks? But FINTRAC and international police powers are now entitled to track and attach all bank transactions of all citizens, terrorists or not. It is clear the goal was never terrorists, but tax dollars, the life-blood of bureaucrats and the command economy of government. It is equally clear that September 11<M>th is being used as a pretext for the plans and schemes of government which were already well-established long before September 11<M>th and really just waiting for that very pretext for implementation. Such is the nature of government that its appetite for tax dollars, its life's blood, has a long and convoluted historical memory. Government can be a blood thirsty monster, when uncontrolled.
The family and private property is the last and only bastion against the state. As the state seeks to crack the family unit by state child regulation, it gradually eliminates both parental authority and the notion of heterosexuality itself. The laws against promotion of hatred are being amended with every suspicious murder of a homosexual, to render even biblical reference to homosexuality illegal, as was done in the case of Hugh Owens in Saskatchewan. This man's lonely stand fifty years ago, was the norm of public opinion. Today, he cannot find a single expert of religion to uphold his right to quote the Bible.
The state takes away children everyday in Canada and sometimes as in the case of M.M. to remove them from a home said to be perfectly acceptable to put them in foster homes where his young son writes a letter threatening suicide and posts it on the bulletin board because the social workers will not let him even talk to his dad. This is a man never accused of child abuse, who was charged with kidnapping for taking his children out of a foster home. Of this I have personal knowledge. This I see in my daily life. This makes me angry and very sad. This is never reported in the media, who uniformly support the state.
Dangerous Amendments
The principles of bail under Canada's criminal code are such that when a person is charged with an offence, even a serious offence, the onus is upon the state, i.e. the prosecutor to justify detention of the person and they can do so on either of two grounds:
First, that the crown establishes the likelihood that the accused will not appear for his trial. This is the primary ground. Second, if the crown establishes the likelihood the accused will re-offend while on bail, the secondary ground.
The new anti-terrorist bill has demonstrated the sinister nature of the Canadian government towards freedom and their deliberate intention to silence opponents of its multicultural and anti-Christian agenda. They have in a word done what every Soviet style government has always done. They regard ideas as more dangerous than people, even those charged with serious criminal offences.
Even before trial, they have given a judge huge powers to seize and destroy hard drives of computers, force service providers to identify a client or person who posts to a site, wipe material off the Internet even before a trial is held. Given the nature of Canadian judges, all appointed by the powers that be, will they resist the temptation to silence any opinion before trial? The history of the cases of Ross, John Ross Taylor, Keegstra, Zundel or McAleer would not tend to give much hope. This legislation, which amends section 320.1(1) of the Criminal Code will likely result in silence first and a possible trial later for anyone who opposes third world immigration or homosexuality. The murder of a homosexual in Stanley Park has been seen as a means to make homosexuality one of the protected groups under the Criminal Code even before any suspect has been found. The perpetrator could have been another homosexual for all we know.
The court under the new section 320.1(6) needs only be satisfied on the balance of probabilities the computer may contain hate literature available to the public, then it can order the material deleted.
Note that a government-appointed judge has become a censor. Also note the provision is clearly designed to make censorship justified if it “probably offends” and even on reasonable grounds before a hearing. Can anyone hear the new totalitarians at work?
The amendments to the Human Rights Act, section 13(2) have now given the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal jurisdiction over the Internet, explicitly and completely, which was the subject of some doubt in the Zundel case. The clear inference is that a body, appointed by the Prime Minister himself, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, will decide what may appear in Canada on the Internet. This may or may not apply to material originating beyond our borders, but under the guise of saving us from child pornography, you can be sure the enemies of freedom are working on an international convention to eliminate so-called “Holocaust denial.” Their only problem temporarily is the American First Amendment, which really protects free speech and is really protecting controversial speech in the States. The struggle continues in the U.S. but in Canada the free speech forces are being driven back. The courts are the only (meagre) hope.
Also, under the guise of anti-terrorism, the Government of Canada has given the Minister of National Defence the power at will to declare temporary military zones for up to one year, giving the Canadian military the power to forcibly remove anyone found therein, as identified in the quotes from a story that appeared in the National Post on November 23, 2001, by Ian Jack:
“OTTAWA - The Minister of National Defence will be able to designate any area in Canada a temporary military zone for up to one year, allowing the Canadian Forces to “forcibly remove” anyone in it during that time, under legislation introduced yesterday.
“Billed by the government as housekeeping legislation largely concerned with air transportation, the Public Safety Act affects 19 pieces of legislation ranging from the Explosives Act to the National Defence Act.
“Opposition MPs raised concerns, saying it endangers Canadians' constitutional rights by giving the government broad new powers.
“The National Defence Act amendments give the Minister the authority, on the recommendation of the Chief of Defence Staff, to create a temporary military zone over “property, a place or a thing that the Canadian Forces have been directed to protect in order to fulfill a duty required by law.”
“Renée Filiatrault, press secretary to Arthur Eggleton, the Minister of National Defence, was asked to clarify whether that meant the site of an international meeting such as the G8 set for Kananaskis, Alta., next spring, could be designated.
“ `If the [Chief of Defence Staff] makes a recommendation to the Minister that the protection of international relations, national defence or security of people and things at a particular event necessitates the establishment of a temporary security zone, the Minister could designate that area to be a temporary military zone,' she said.
“The bill would give the military the authority to `forcibly remove' an unauthorized person, `and any animal, vehicle, vessel, aircraft or other thing under the person's control.' It also bars anyone who is removed from seeking compensation if they are injured `by reason only of the designation of a military security zone or the implementation of measures to enforce the designation.' . . . .
“The legislation allows the government to share air passenger information with law enforcement agencies in Canada and other countries if it believes a `credible' threat exists.” [end of excerpt]
This provision has rung alarm bells with the anarchist left who have always demanded the democratic right to disrupt public meetings they don't like (either the private ones of people like Doug Collins to explain free speech issues or the public ones of Jean Chretien and his cronies in the G8, the eight biggest debtor nations.)
This alarm may spell the doom of some of the government's more draconian plans, because of the left's many friends in the media, the Stalinists and statists who see the state as a distributor of rights and wealth to “the poor.”
There is however, no media or public outcry over the government's appointed friends having power to censor everything on the Internet.
The one nagging question which emerges is this: Why would the government specifically bar any action to recover for injury caused to any person, by reason o the implementation of measures to enforce the designation of the military zone, if the measures could easily be demonstrated as justifiable against a real, genuine terrorist? Could it be they intend to use the designation to attack dissenters and have immunity?
Bumper Sticker Enclosed!
Please accept the enclosed bumper sticker and use it on your car or other prominent place to help advertise the idea of Independence, and the means of contacting us. Thank you!
The Lloydminster Meeting
The Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Alberta and BC representatives of the separatist movement held a small meeting in the Tropicana Inn at the border city of Lloydminster on November 16, 17, and 18th. David Sawkiw and Frank Serfas organized the meeting.
Doug Christie spoke Friday evening about federal government infiltration and disruption of political movements in Canada, including the actions of Grant Bristow, SIRC, CSIS and the recent expose of the lesbian CSIS agents of Quebec who were fired. The involvement of CSIS in the humiliation of the Reform Party just before the election of Kim Campbell was discussed and analyzed. The likely methods of disruption in future of the separatist movement was also discussed.
On Saturday at noon, Doug Christie also spoke after Henry Banman, the former Saskatchewan leader of the WCC. He mentioned the need for a movement rather than a party and to proceed provincially through a referendum as required by the Federal Clarity Act which specifies the means of legal secession.
The meeting on Sunday resolved to become a federal party. We all hope it will not reproduce the Reform-Alliance-Democratic Representative Assembly-Conservative Party of present chaotic renown.
In light of the events since September 11th, this book becomes even more interesting. “Give a man secure possession of a bleak rock and in nine years he will turn it into a garden. Give him nine years' lease on a garden and he will turn it into a desert.” Arthur Young in Travels 1787
Hernando de Soto has written an astonishing book, “The Mystery of Capital -- Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else“ (Hardcover - 276 pages 1st edition (September 5, 2000) Basic Books; ISBN: 0465016146)
The real problem of the Third world and the problem of poverty everywhere is not lack of government funds or loans and handouts. There are plenty of those.
The real problem is lack of property rights which are easily defined, readily acquired and easily transferred. Only if such is the case can capitalism, the accumulation of wealth through stored credit in assets, work. The denial through bureaucracy of the means, for people to build a porch on their house without government approval is the essential cause of all of our unenviable reliance on government regulation and control. We see how Canada descends into Third World status the more our property rights are threatened. We can even see that the current crisis of terrorism and the root causes of the reliance upon terrorism, is in proportion to the awarding and the withdrawal of property rights.
The bureaucratic maze that faces the Lima slum dwelling entrepreneur sounds daunting but it also sounds familiar. We too in the developed world have often become law-breakers by improving our property, disturbing rare bats in our attic, adding a porch without planning permission, running our small business without sufficient attention to absurd regulations, relying upon our good ideas rather than government sanction. This is very true of Western Canadians in general.
Over everyone's shoulder is a bureaucrat whose sole function is to increase the cost of the producer with a tax, a fee, a permit or a license to get the right to do what the entrepreneur wants to do for free, and will. It is just graft with legislative authority. The sad part is that power corrupts. Bureaucrats have power to extract wealth fees, licenses, taxes, tariffs and other unearned rewards by the legalized coercion given to them by the state. They themselves give up their freedom to produce and be free in exchange for a small but regular and secure salary. The captive entrepreneur who may take used tin cans and create door chimes out of them will continue to pay a toll, a tax, or a kickback or bribe (depending on whether he is in a regulated or black market economy, simply because he has nowhere else to go an cannot escape the control of the bureaucrat or thug.
But we who are able to see the effect of taxation in feeding the oppressive governments, we who have the knowledge of an alternative for the West, may not be able to save the world, but we could save part of it, by creating a new nation of Western Canada.