Blog Archives
Political Child Sex Charges In Kellie Leitch’s Riding
This is an open letter to the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister of Canada, Hon. Premier of Ontario, Ontario Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth, Public Safety Minister of Canada, Attorney General of Canada, Privacy Commissioner, Ontario Chiefs of Police, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Barrie Crown Attorney’s Office, Liberal Party of Canada, Young Liberals, Conservative Party of Canada, New Democratic Party, Green Party of Canada, Canadian Bar Association, National Newsmedia Council, parents and children in the riding of Simcoe-Grey, as well as parents and children across Canada:
Dear Mesdames and Messrs,
This is a very important letter regarding current child sex charges against a political figure in the riding of Simcoe-Grey. This riding is represented by MP Kellie Leitch, who is better known for her controversial campaign to become leader of the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC). It is lesser known, until today, for a police task force probe against a Simcoe-Grey Federal Liberal Riding Association (SGFLRA) executive, and the complete failure of all democratic pillars pertaining to this case.
I’m a peripheral witness in the matter of Jared Nolan, as well as a journalist and a former fellow executive on the same board of directors. I shared communications with the accused in the days before he was arrested and I made lengthy reports with both the Barrie Police Service (BPS) and the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), who’ve partnered for the sake of a larger criminal probe. The charges involve multiple youth complainants and allegations of child luring, child pornography, and distribution of child pornography. I have urgent information to provide the public, government and law enforcement, in an effort to protect more children who remain at risk due to institutional oversights and competing political agendas.
I’ve thought long and hard about writing this and I accept there may be consequences. I’m not even sure if whistleblower protections exist in our country, to cover what I have to say. The only thing I’m sure about is that I can’t possibly remain silent. I also acknowledge this will inflame numerous parties, so I feel the need to explain my agenda before I begin and the venomous accusations begin to fly.
Although I’m a journalist, this isn’t written as a news item. This website earns no income whatsoever and exists as a platform for free speech only, beyond the limitations of mainstream media. It doesn’t collect data and I don’t profit in any way. In fact, I’m about to burn all my professional bridges by going public with a scandal of this magnitude.
The reason I must do this is because of who I am. I grew up as a Crown Ward and I’ve been affected by similar issues, so I can relate to the childhood, rehabilitation and legal repercussions of child sexual exploitation. I’m brutally familiar with the cracks in our system and perhaps one day you’ll know my own story. Obviously it’s not something anyone wants to have to say out loud, but if I don’t do this, I feel like other children will lose their innocence as a result of our collective ignorance. I couldn’t live with that, knowing what the journey looks like to heal.
When I’m not actively publishing, I moonlight as a child rights advocate. I’ve done this my entire life and I’ve assisted with various inquiries and events, like the G20, government consultations, a military investigation and policy changes within the Children’s Aid Society (CAS). I’ve also muddled through the industry meltdown in journalism by collaborating with universities to give lectures about ethics, conflicts of interest, the purpose of a Fourth Estate and modern threats to press liberty.
The following statement seems to have chosen me as the messenger because I would understand the full peril of everyone’s actions. By ‘everyone’, I mean the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC), the police, the news media, and our member of parliament. By ‘full peril’, I mean the continued sexual exploitation of children, because each of these entities doubled-down in their own ways to cover it up.
I don’t know if this happened due to error or arrogance, but countless regulations were (allegedly) broken by all of the above. To save myself from any libel accusations, I verily believe that countless regulations were broken and I’m sharing all my evidence to explain who, what, where, why, when and how. I believe parents have been stripped of the right to protect their own children, as an unfortunate consequence of institutional lapses in judgment. I believe this case presents a much larger issue that impacts tens of thousands of kids across Canada – directly, not indirectly, as a result of possible legal obstructions and political interference.
My statement begins that I became a director of the Simcoe-Grey Federal Liberal Riding Association (SGFLRA) in the Spring of 2016. I was taking an extended break from political investigative journalism and I placed a few big projects on the back-burner to deal with my health and some family issues. I’m a political animal and aggressive defender of constitutional rights, so despite my hiatus from publishing, I remained interested in our local matters.
I know many Canadians complain about a ‘liberal biased media’ and I will prove some of their comments true by the time I’m done. Hopefully my actions will speak for me fairly and disarm any critics that would accuse me of partisanship, by the time they’re done reading this too. Many political journalists have been involved with various parties and it is our constitutional right to participate in a democracy, just like everyone else. We have to tread a fine line the same as lawyers and public servants, but I believe I did this responsibly to remove any conflict of interest. At the end of the day, my ethics trump partisanship and the effect of coming forward should be evidence of my moral compass. I walk the talk that I give to students of journalism and if I’m forced to be an example, then please let it be a good one.
My resignation letter to the Simcoe-Grey Federal Liberal Riding Association, including reasons:
(Continued below…)
When I joined the SGFLRA there was a coup of sorts, to replace the previous board of directors. During the federal election cycle, the executive was comprised of lifelong Liberals who were thoroughly dedicated to the LPC. Mike MacEachern was chosen as the candidate to vie for the seat against Kellie Leitch. There were considerable disputes within the SGFLRA regarding Mr. MacEachern and an investigation was initiated by the Liberal Party to resolve questions about his electability (more details below).
For unknown reasons, the LPC remained supportive of MacEachern as the candidate and no result of the investigation was ever communicated to the riding executive, despite the board’s many requests for assistance and guidance. As such, he formed a campaign team that refused to cooperate with the SGFLRA and MacEachern’s associates nearly ran the election alone. The riding association supported the candidate to the best of its ability under these strained circumstances, but they were denied access to a majority of plans. They were even denied the ability to fundraise on behalf of MacEachern in a handful of examples. It was so bewildering and antagonistic that some of the old executives quit the riding association as they came to terms with the lack of unity and hostile treatment.
Upon conclusion of the election and his unsuccessful campaign, MacEachern’s team formed a slate to take over the riding association entirely. This included Jared Nolan as the Executive Vice President, Rob Glozier as the President, Jeff Kerk as the Organization Chair, and Christine Guergis-Brayford as the Vice President of Membership, among others. I became a director of this organization and only a few spaces on the 2016 executive were occupied by members who weren’t part of the perceived coup.
As the LPC was notified in 2015, 2016 and 2017, Christine Guergis-Brayford is the sister of Helena Guergis and was her campaign manager for elections as a Conservative, before Kellie Leitch was chosen to displace this political family dynasty.
They were also notified of personal and professional ties between MacEachern and much of the 2016-coup-executive, that already involved a successful lawsuit against the candidate for abuse of power in a public office as the mayor. Allegations pertained to a relationship with Guergis-Brayford that may have improperly affected municipal officials in the Town of New Tecumseth. Several replacement riding executives were also colleagues of MacEachern’s, from this same troubled municipal council.
(Please note that all links are hosted by Archive.is. It’s a traditional archiving site from Iceland that respects privacy rights and it was used to preserve what may become evidence, so the data can’t be altered after the fact. If there is high demand to access pages at the same time, it may spawn a request for CAPTCHA responses to load the site. They do this to prevent DDOS attacks and in no way are the links malicious. They should load like any HTML website, with the original link and date the page was archived.)
Regarding the statement of claim against MacEachern:
And regarding MacEachern’s countersuit:
For political context, the staffer was a special advisor to Toronto’s Mel Lastman, before migrating north and taking a position under the direction of Mike MacEachern:
In a nutshell, the MacEachern entourage was ousted from local politics and the perception of impropriety may have been a factor. There’s a gag order on the settlement and it’s unknown if any part of the allegations are true, but the town paid $150,000 to resolve the complaint against MacEachern pertaining to this incident. He received $8,000 as well:
There was a second legal matter during MacEachern’s tenure as the Mayor of New Tecumseth, where he used the power of municipal council to endorse a militant protest for men’s rights, that led to criminal charges. A demonstrator from Fathers For Justice concocted a dangerous public display at the side of Hwy 400, to encourage support for misogyny with the blessing of MacEachern and his colleagues:
While the news covered MacEachern’s endorsement, it failed to investigate the purpose of Fathers For Justice and reported the group’s mission as ‘raising awareness for equal parenting’ only. There are legitimate advocacy organizations that deal with divorce and family issues on behalf of men, but I reiterate this particular ensemble encourages militancy, destruction, and criminality to revoke human and constitutional rights for women.
(Continued below…)
Overlooked was the group’s member support for the legalization of rape. Lobbying for men to have legal authority over women, whether they could have an abortion or not. Subscribing to the premise that women should have no legal rights, because they’re ‘crazy’ and abuse their access to any rights at all. Promoting the idea that women suffer from False Memory Syndrome, if they accuse their male partners of violent or sexual abuse. Asserting that homosexuals are violent and unable to safely parent. And preaching that women are inherently evil, from a religious perspective:
Fathers For Justice is additionally proud of the danger it causes to the public and millions of dollars in damages that result from shutting down major bridges and causing courtrooms to be evacuated (including those in Ontario):
Knowing all this, the LPC supported MacEachern as the Liberal candidate on behalf of a ‘feminist prime minister’. They felt this was the best strategy to compete with the extreme positions of Conservative candidate, Kellie Leitch, and a sliver of the riding’s voters who might have been disenfranchised by the loss of Helena Guergis. If anyone wondered how Dr. Leitch could gain a platform to promote radical ideas, I encourage them to consider the alternatives. All parties consider this riding an experiment for right-wing ideologies (NDP and Greens too), despite the fact that two thirds of Simcoe-Grey identifies with centre and left perspectives. In any event, I don’t mean to meander and this information will be illuminating as we continue.
So the MacEachern faction from the Town of New Tecumseth lost the public’s support and/or access to municipal resources. They reorganized as the LPC campaign team in 2015 and after a poor showing against Kellie Leitch, reorganized again in 2016 to take possession of the Simcoe-Grey Federal Liberal Riding Association. There are continuing complaints regarding partisan finances that have also been made on the record, but I don’t wish to distract from the issue of child exploitation and accounting can be handled by the appropriate people.
In part I joined the executive to observe the effects of this ‘coup’. I was the reporter who covered Kellie Leitch throughout her inauguration to politics, before anyone knew her name in Simcoe-Grey. All of CBC‘s 2011 election coverage in this riding was assigned to me, including broadcast, digital and investigative segments. I was the resident expert and I never participated in politics when I was reporting on them, but I admit to caring about what happens in the privacy of my personal time in the years that followed.
This is when I would meet the accused, Jared Nolan. He wasn’t particularly known to anyone, except the close-knit team of MacEachern associates. The same was true of Jeff Kerk and the rest of us came to learn that the three gentlemen worked together at the Stevenson Memorial Hospital. MacEachern sits on the board of directors, while Kerk managed patient data and diagnostic, paramedical services. Nolan managed the hospital’s communications and they participated in multiple board meetings together:
Now criminal charges have arisen due to a youth complainant alleging Nolan abused patient data to target (a) child victim(s). The case is so serious that a special task force was assembled between the Ontario Provincial Police and Barrie Police Services to conduct a larger probe. Two additional youth complainants have already come forward and the court issued a partial publication ban related to the investigation expanding. The names of youths are also protected but general information about the case is being covered by CTV and Postmedia, like the extreme bail conditions imposed on Nolan and a forensic warrant for eleven computers.
Regarding the initial arrest and search warrant:
Regarding bail conditions and additional youth complainants being identified:
I’m not doing anything to break that publication ban, or interfere with the Rule of Law and rights afforded to the prosecution (alleged victims) or defence. I wouldn’t do anything to imperil children, or the right to a fair trial either. I believe that achieving both goals is possible at the same time, if everyone just follows the rules. I’m deeply concerned however, that neither the LPC, the police, nor the media, are behaving within reasonable bounds.
It began with my first letter to the riding executive and LPC brass, asking how they planned to handle the situation with Jared Nolan. Instead of paraphrasing, it’s important that everyone absorbs the full details by reading what I said in its entirety:
(Continued below…)
I was shocked when no one from the riding or party would respond. Instead of answering pertinent questions that affected me and everyone else who remained on the executive, they deleted proof of my relationship to the SGFLRA, as well as Jared Nolan’s, during the execution of a forensic warrant to investigate his communications.
Given that I’m an investigative journalist, it’s my nature to document everything I see. If I read it, I archive a copy; so it can’t disappear from the internet in the age of hearts and minds and message control. I’ve seen it happen far too often and I’m invited to give lectures about my experience with this topic. It’s a discussion I have with historians and scientists, who are also plagued by the public record going missing, or being vandalized and altered. I advocate for an Internet Bill of Rights and modern legislation to regulate digital records, as well as intelligent privacy protections for consumers, members, children, researchers and/or journalists.
Therefore I archived a copy of the SGFLRA website, that listed Jared Nolan as the Executive Vice President and me as a Director (see time and date in upper right corner):
It was immediately after my email to the riding and party that someone interfered with the police investigation by deleting evidence of these relationships to the LPC (see time and date in upper right corner, with mine and Nolan’s names concealed. Nolan was still incarcerated and awaiting bail when this occurred):
I was worried this could constitute tampering with evidence, if the police investigation needed to explore Nolan’s contact with minors through the Liberal Party or election campaign. Normally I wouldn’t publish the contents of my private communications and I apologize profusely to the other individuals. It is only due to the protection of minors that I would ever relinquish privacy, and it’s important for authorities to understand what was happening organically as this situation unfolded, that no part of this report is concocted in any way:
(Continued below…)
When two new complainants came forward, I also felt compelled to share what I know with police. No information is available about the subsequent girls and it’s unknown if their allegations are confined to hospital records, or if anyone knows to inquire about Nolan’s greater access to children through the Liberal Party of Canada. All we know is the investigation is ‘expanding’ and I wasn’t sure if they were aware of The Liberalist database. It contains far more information than any hospital records and it’s so sensitive pertaining to children, that it can absolutely be used to stalk and lure them, more effectively and dangerously than any other source of records (more info below).
I’m about to tread some particularly difficult ground now, explaining what I reported to the police. I do NOT allege anyone’s guilt or innocence and my statement is NOT meant to impugn anyone, or detract from complainant allegations. I wouldn’t publish these details as a professional journalist and I’m doing this today because there is no other recourse, as a constituent. I feel it is my civic duty when children continue to be endangered and the system is failing them as a whole. By the end, you will come to appreciate that I’ve tried every available avenue, before conceding to this one. I attempted to let the justice system do its job. I attempted to let the LPC devise a management plan with legal counsel and I attempted to let the media express what it could, to extricate myself from this conflict of interest. But I can’t stand idly by as so many people have chosen to use the kids as pawns and proverbial human shields. I’ve spent many days not eating or sleeping as I’ve wrestled with this conundrum.
I spoke up for the purpose of assisting law enforcement with peripheral information that may, or may not, be relevant to the investigation. The names I mention were provided to police because regardless of what happened, I believe they need to be interviewed as Nolan associates who may possess deeper insight.
It was approximately the first week of December 2016 that I contacted the Barrie Police Service (BPS). The task force created for the Nolan case is a partnership between the BPS Child Exploitation Unit and Technical Crimes Unit, with the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP). The Nottawasaga OPP detachment owns this file and the lead investigator is from the OPP Headquarters in Orillia, but I chose to call the Barrie officers to avoid another potential conflict of interest.
As I explained to Constable Callahan (badge #4244, extension #2648), Mike MacEachern sat on the Police Services Board, to determine the local OPP’s annual budget. He was also involved in selecting the Nottawasaga OPP commander and in MacEachern’s own words,
“Over time we’ve been able to assert our influence over police services that maybe wasn’t being asserted in the past.”:
Since the information I have to provide about the Jared Nolan case is immediately connected to Mike MacEachern, I remain concerned that his ‘influence’ over the investigating force may compromise a full and fair outcome from either perspective. Just like journalists, police have to observe conflict of interest regulations to prevent abuses of power, even accidentally. When professions involve competing community interests, we’re directed to take great care in our ethical approach. It’s not a negative thing to recuse oneself and on the contrary, it’s deemed respectable. Especially in small town areas where there are a limited number of officials to go around, we must be cognizant and careful of the public interest.
I spoke with Constable Callahan for nearly two hours. He was friendly, insightful, receptive, and he respected my concerns about this conflict of interest. I had no issues whatsoever, reporting to this officer. He found the facts I relayed to be helpful and quite possibly relevant. He even commended me for putting the report together concisely, so it was analytic and complete.
I explained about Jared Nolan’s access to youth data in The Liberalist and the connections between Stevenson Memorial Hospital executives with the Liberal riding association. I explained that I didn’t think the hospital was even aware of a close relationship between Mike MacEachern, Jeff Kerk and Jared Nolan, because I hadn’t seen any disclosures of conflict in meeting minutes that involved the three of them.
It’s more than a colloquial relationship to run an election campaign and certain positions on the SGFLRA. There was a legal exchange of money for various expenses, acting as agents-on-behalf, liability insurance binding the group together through the riding association, and soliciting donations to benefit one of them directly.
I found it curious if this presented no issues for the hospital and no matter what, it put Mike MacEachern on all three boards of directors (past, during and/or present) affecting the investigation of Jared Nolan. He sat on the police board (investigators), riding association board (source of data I’m attempting to have investigated) and the hospital board (where charges have already been laid). I’m humbly and respectfully concerned for the sake of public perception, this dynamic means a different police force will need to oversee the case.
I was asked by Constable Callahan if I knew how Jared Nolan got involved in health care. I explained that I didn’t and he was unknown to most riding executives, outside of the MacEachern entourage. According to Nolan’s LinkedIn account, he had no experience in the health industry prior getting the job at Stevenson Memorial Hospital, at the time of MacEachern’s nomination campaign:
It seemed increasingly important that police interview Mike MacEachern and Jeff Kerk, for their help to put these pieces of the puzzle together. Without prejudice, I relayed what information I knew about these gentlemen and I made no accusations to the police about them either. I stated what facts were available in hard copy, without any melodramatics.
I’ve already addressed the information surrounding Mr. MacEachern and in the example of Mr. Kerk, I only had his LinkedIn account to go by. Kerk was at the hospital the longest out of this group of colleagues and he reported his involvement with patient data in that position,
“Oversee data processing requirements, plan and implement end-to-end data transfer to replace Hospital Information System in collaboration with four allied hospital facilities. Repeatedly meet patient care goals through streamlining systems that optimize patient flow across numerous performance measurements.”:
Emphatically I repeat this should not impugn Jeff Kerk without cause, but given the relationship between Kerk, Nolan and MacEachern, it appears to make his knowledge relevant to the investigation overall. If the hospital isn’t aware of that connection, they can’t effectively investigate either. And no one may be aware of these connections, because Kerk quit the Stevenson Memorial Hospital a couple weeks before the charges were laid against Nolan. He departed to a different set of hospitals in another region altogether.
As Kerk relocated his employment, MacEachern also abdicated as the LPC candidate. An unexpected letter was submitted to the SGFLRA on October 23, 2016, saying he was no longer interested. This came as a great surprise because until the charges were pending against Nolan, MacEachern was adamant about staying on. It was the source of much discord between some old and new executives and the campaign wasn’t backing down for any reason. Then all of a sudden, within days of each other, this group of colleagues began to scatter. Constable Callahan asked if I thought they heard a leak about the pending charges for Nolan. As I told law enforcement I couldn’t know and I could only provide them with circumstantial info.
(Continued below…)
Regarding Jared Nolan himself, there was another curious entry. Although he didn’t have experience in health care prior to the hospital, he did have a history in politics with the LPC. He was a Special Assistant to the Office of Nancy Karetek-Lindell, a former MP for Nunavut and Chair of the Aboriginal Affairs standing committee:
She departed federal politics despite enormous success and returned to municipal matters, where she remained incredibly active at the local level. After Jared Nolan spent 4 years working in her office, he disappeared from politics until this reappearance in Simcoe-Grey that has been marred by criminal charges, a decade later. I suggested to police and the LPC that they may wish to inquire with Karetek-Lindell about his tenure. It’s unknown why Nolan might have departed a high profile position in Ottawa, only to resurface in the background so many years later.
I was clear with Constable Callahan that I didn’t know if this information was pertinent. We seemed to agree that it did invite questions that appeared to need answers, however. He asked what my motivation was to make this report and I answered that I didn’t think it was my right to determine if these facts were relevant. I was only sharing what I knew, so police could evaluate and make that unbiased decision.
Although PC Callahan was congenial and helpful, it was unfortunate I had to make this report with an officer who wasn’t assigned to the Nolan case. Special investigations are housed at a separate location from the Barrie detachment and it wasn’t possible to reach the applicable officers when I called. Constable Callahan thanked me for the report and assured me he would deliver to the correct people. I was then to wait for their contact, in case they needed me to attend and make this statement official.
A few weeks passed and I was distracted by the holiday season. After Christmas I began to worry that I hadn’t heard back from anyone and I began leaving messages for Constable Callahan. I did this intermittently for a number of days, because I’m familiar with police schedules and the possibility of catching shift changes that could cause a 4-day delay.
After more than a week I began to wonder why I couldn’t reach PC Callahan and I rang the Barrie dispatcher to inquire about his availability. That person (badge #5561) became argumentative when she couldn’t locate information for Callahan and she suggested I was mistaken, that he must not be a Barrie police officer.
When I confirmed I was sure, she asked me to explain the whole situation. I did my best in this pressing moment, but it made her more convinced that I must have the wrong police department. I then explained the partnership between the OPP and Barrie Child Exploitation Unit for the purpose of this case, but that was met with belligerence and her denial that a Child Exploitation Unit existed. It took some bantering back and forth for the dispatcher to clarify, as she chastised me for calling the department by an incorrect name. She said it was the Crimes Against Person Unit (or ‘CAP’ for short) and there are many special units within that heading.
Beleaguered by now, I asked to speak with the CAP unit. I was told they’re unavailable and dispatch can’t put calls through to them. So I asked to speak with any officer in the Barrie Police Service, but this staffer refused to connect my call and flatly threatened to hang up on me.
I was absolutely stunned as this amazing pattern took root and I asked how police can refuse to take a report. Before the person hung up I managed to ask for a supervisor and Bonnie (badge #5660) took over the call.
Bonnie was wonderfully helpful and she agreed to pull the recorded conversation I just had with the previous dispatcher for review. Bonnie found that Constable Callahan’s schedule wasn’t in the main system and he was off work indefinitely, for an extended leave. There was no date available for his return and I could try the next morning to see if he attended. If that wasn’t possible, I was advised to speak with a different officer because no one could account for PC Callahan’s whereabouts. His voicemail wasn’t updated to say he’d be away, but at least a supervisor could confirm he was a BPS officer.
In the meantime I was notified by a third party that an Annual General Meeting (AGM) had been called for our riding. An election was planned to solidify the executive and no one from the party or SGFLRA let me know. I was concerned that I was in the process of reporting to police and the party hadn’t responded to any concerns surrounding Jared Nolan.
I sent a second email to the riding president outlining my concerns, with a request for Vulnerable Sector checks to be implemented as a precaution. It won’t be much longer until I explain what The Liberalist database contains, to understand why this is paramount to youth safety and relevant to the Nolan case. I was polite, balanced and professional in how I approached this, but you’re welcome to see for yourself:
(Continued below…)
I immediately followed with another email to LPC brass, primarily Anna Gainey and Rob Jamieson. It stated many of the same issues and began to broach the topic of liability for the LPC, if the party refused to intervene for the protection of children,
“I’ve written to you as a director of this very EDA, as a constituent and as a reporter, but you still refuse to respond, as if youth information in the hands of LPC is free-to-abuse for anyone who wants it. This is not acceptable. Full stop.”:
(Continued below…)
The Liberal Party of Canada didn’t respond and neither did the riding association, but Jeff Kerk replied on both their behalves as an executive. His letter appears at the bottom and my response to all is at the top. He threatens that my party communications have been given to police in an effort to silence me, and I caution against intimidating me from reporting:
(Continued below…)
After this occurred I attempted to contact an officer at the Barrie Police Service again. This time I was able to cite the Crimes Against Person Unit properly, to locate someone working the Nolan case who would be able to understand the information. But this dispatcher seemed to take offence that I was asking to speak with a CAP officer. She refused to put me through and after interrogating me about the problem, decided that I shouldn’t be allowed to speak with a Barrie officer and I must contact the Nottawasaga OPP instead.
I didn’t have time to make the full report to every dispatcher having a bad day in Barrie. This frontline is one of the most discontent I’ve ever come across in policing and their supervisors don’t behave anything like that. But again the administrative staff at BPS attempted to deny my call altogether. Again I tried to explain about the conflict of interest with OPP and the task force partnership with Barrie. By now I had learned to just insist on speaking with an officer, because the gatekeepers weren’t familiar with specific cases. The only thing I know for sure is they get particularly upset if you ask for the CAP unit, like no one is supposed to communicate with that department.
This time I spoke with Constable Coopman (badge #7572, extension #2936) from the Barrie Police Service. He was also understanding and congenial, like his colleague Constable Callahan. I didn’t give a full re-report, but enough was expressed, including my update from Mr. Kerk, to spur him into contacting an investigator from the CAP team.
I was then put in touch with Constable Monroe (unknown badge #, extension #2948). We went over much of what happened and he sought to relieve my worries about trying to give a report. Every officer I’ve spoken with agrees there is merit to what I’ve explained and supports my attempt to provide them with the evidence (namely the altered data about Nolan, relationships with the LPC and The Liberalist database).
When Constable Munroe recognized the importance of what I shared, he asked me to wait as he contacted the lead investigator. I was then told he spoke with Detective Sergeant Doug Rees, from the OPP Headquarters in Orillia. This is the primary officer for the Jared Nolan case, making a total of 3 or 4 locations trying to coordinate the investigation (depending how you count Barrie police and the separate CAP unit).
I’m assured that Constable Monroe is part of the CAP unit and he was a pleasure to speak with, just like the other officers. I’m unclear if he’s part of the OPP or BPS in this equation, though. We didn’t need to speak anymore and I forgot to get his badge number, because he returned with the first bit of progress and I was relieved to hear it. He explained Det. Sgt. Rees was ‘stuck in Eastern Ontario executing a search warrant’ and when he returned the following week, I would get a call to schedule an appointment. An officer was finally going to receive this report and perhaps the dysfunction was resolved.
In the meantime I had run into an issue with the Globe and Mail that still needed sorting out. On the heels of my last letter to the LPC, the prime minister gave a speech to youths about his promise to do more about sexual violence. There were only a few days between my letter and his public address and it was striking, because the party was denying my request for Vulnerable Sector checks, pertaining to Young Liberals and volunteers. It was refusing to respond for the sake of any children in Simcoe-Grey, in the face of criminal charges against an executive. The hypocrisy was astounding and too much salt in a wound to ignore.
The speech was published as part of the Globe and Mail‘s ‘Unfounded‘ series, that investigated police for failing to investigate sexual violence reports. This was relevant to my topic and the LPC censoring its connection to Jared Nolan, so I went the following day to archive a copy of Trudeau’s coincidental comments. But low and behold the speech was missing and not only that, it was completely scrubbed from the Internet. There wasn’t a trace in Google caches and that’s a difficult feat to accomplish in less than a 24-hour turnaround.
It turns out the Globe and Mail rewrote the piece entirely. They added a second author and deleted most of the prime minister’s talking points, while replacing them with an alternate version that was attributed to different politicians. They pointed at police to erase a public record and broke every rule in the ethics guide for Canadian journalists along the way.
I only asked them to be respectable and I had no intention of making this public. I asked for an original copy of the article that contained the speech and I offered the Globe and Mail this exclusive about The Liberalist data, if they could just be straightforward with me. What happened next was straight out of the Twilight Zone and it’s beyond comprehension to paraphrase. The Public Editor responded by accusing me of trying to hack her because I didn’t type in the Globe and Mail font. You read those words correctly and I will let the newspaper speak for itself (begin at the last page for chronological order):
(Continued below…)
I’m not sure what to do about a mainstream publisher that doesn’t care about ethics, professionalism, or its legal obligations. The Public Editor argues it’s the Globe and Mail‘s right to vandalize history however it pleases. That would mean the paper is nothing more than corporate/government relations and it can’t promote any of its stories as bona fide journalism. I can only hope this becomes a case study, as another pillar of democracy cowers behind vulnerable children. They’re not interested in a story about youths in danger if it’s connected to a political party either.
The tone of my writing is probably changing now, just as it did in real time as this all happened. I’ve maintained professional decorum. I’ve extended patience, empathy, and benefit of the doubt. I’ve been as honest as humanly possible and focused on the greater good of these children. But there comes a point when humanity begins to show through.
It was right before the Simcoe-Grey Federal Liberal Riding Association AGM that I sent Anna Gainey and Rob Jamieson a final email. If you don’t bother to read the other letters, please make sure you sit for a moment with this one. It’s the most pointed words I’ve ever used with the LPC. I preface them by repeating that I make no allegation against any individual and the only thing I’m asking for is an investigation to ensure the safety of children. I don’t claim to know who did what or if anyone is guilty. I only claim to know there is a severe vulnerability created by The Liberalist and that SGFLRA executives need to be interviewed in relation to the Jared Nolan case.
(Continued below…)
So it can’t be denied that all my letters were received, here is a copy of the ‘read receipts’. Following this, I will address the AGM and the exact perils of youth data in The Liberalist:
(Continued below…)
I prepared a speech for the Annual General Meeting, despite the fact that it was technically illegal (improper, unregulated, anti-democratic?). No one was allowed to know the name of candidates until the ballots were being distributed. They couldn’t even tell us during the pay-to-play dinner (details in my speech). No Agenda was distributed to members prior to the meeting and the impromptu copy supplied by LPC was contrary to Robert’s Rules for this election. It denied any riding business. It denied the constitutional right to speak. It denied any capacity to deal with an emergency. It approved meeting minutes that were never recorded, seen, or distributed. It approved annual accounting that couldn’t be explained or supported by the treasurer. And it did this all on camera in front of CTV News, with Postmedia bearing witness as well.
The media was invited by the riding association and a few reporters received my prepared address. I brought copies of the LPC Constitution and applicable Bylaws, so no one could dispute my grounds to speak. But the meeting Chair and Returning Officer tried to shut the reporters down. The Chair said he was ‘directed’ to prevent me from speaking and if it was against the rules, he would have to ‘fall on his sword’ to see it through. No one would answer who ‘directed’ this party rep to revoke member rights, but there were phone calls flying and officials for the meeting are delegated by the LPC itself.
When the media wouldn’t kowtow and some members spoke in my support, I convinced the Chair to read my speech during a break and include it in the AGM minutes, despite denying my right to say it aloud. It contained motions to preserve our democracy in the Liberal Party and emergency maneuvers to protect the children. I was specifically denied the right to utter words about Jared Nolan, Vulnerable Sector checks or The Liberalist database.
Here is a copy of my prohibited remarks, that were accepted into the SGFLRA record as silent documentation. No one was taking minutes for this AGM just like the previous meeting produced no minutes; but somewhere, somehow, the Chair assures us that the following is included in them:
(Continued below…)
It’s worth noting the riding president, Robert Glozier, didn’t attend the AGM. Mike MacEachern didn’t attend the AGM and neither did Christine Guergis-Brayford. The former and latter were elected that night, without anyone being allowed to know they were running. Jeff Kerk was also elected, as the party allows him to interfere with me and my attempts to report to the police. The LPC continues to obstruct parents from knowing what the party does with their children’s most sensitive information.
This is the only video available from the AGM, but more of the event was captured by CTV News. The beginning of this clip is fairly quiet and the second half is crystal clear. It demonstrates the abuses of power undertaken by the Liberal Party of Canada:
(Continued below…)
About The Liberalist:
I spoke at length with CTV News about their interest to cover this story. It was described as a ‘bombshell’ and ‘nuking the LPC’, but from my humble perspective, it’s just asking people to do the right thing. Due to the Liberal Party of Canada’s unexpected and negative response, I have no choice but to get this information directly to parents. Whether Jared Nolan is convicted or exonerated, it has no bearing on the overall harm being caused by the party. He’s just one example of what could go awry, when you build a non-consensual, unprotected and secret database about children.
Whereas the Conservative Party has a CIMS database that was thoroughly covered by media during the Harper Government, the LPC responded by assembling The Liberalist, built from the same technology used by Democrats and former US President, Barack Obama.
Everyone who purchases a Liberal membership is recorded in the database. Every survey you complete is recorded, to determine your political and psychological interests. What events you attend are recorded. How much you donate is recorded. Your address, contact and family connections are also recorded. This seems pretty harmless and par for the course, in the case of adults.
But more is recorded about children without them even knowing it. A child can be as young as 14 years old to join the party, but they can be even younger to volunteer. No one has to join to be allowed to volunteer and kids in Ontario require 40 community service hours to obtain a high school diploma. Political parties are near the top of the suggested list in many guidance counselor offices.
So what happens when your teenager contacts a Liberal riding association in pursuit of fulfilling their volunteer hours? Someone with Level 3 clearance will engage the student to learn of their interests and availability. The party representative has been instructed by the LPC to fill all the standard fields, as well as:
- Their age
- Personal contact info (cell phones where possible, thereby bypassing parents in many cases)
- School info
- Opinions on any matters
- Their household background and demographics
- If they’re from a single parent family
- Do they have siblings
- Do they drive or need transportation from riding executives
- Relationship status, are they involved in romantic activity yet
- Their activities
- Their schedules
- And any emotional vulnerabilities
They’re also asked to provide the names of friends, so the LPC can recruit new volunteers based on the trust of their referrals. Those children will be recorded in The Liberalist without ever contacting the party, or knowing that someone else provided their information. Kids who request volunteer hours won’t receive a consent page to collect the aforementioned data. They’ll just believe they’re speaking with a party member who cares to hear about their interests.
Once this information is recorded in The Liberalist, any party member with Level 2 or 3 clearance can access their personal details. This is Canada-wide, not even confined to provincial territories. A campaign manager in Nova Scotia can look up the kids in British Columbia if they wanted. Anyone suffering from illness that would cause them to prey on children can track the ones in their region in real time.
When volunteers go door knocking and one of them has a tablet, they’re entering information about the families while chatting with them on the front porch. These people didn’t have an opportunity to consent either. They have no guarantee that a criminal isn’t collecting their data the moment it gets uploaded, because the LPC refuses to implement any protections like Vulnerable Sector checks for party members who manipulate that data.
Yes, Jared Nolan had access to the highest levels of The Liberalist, for the election campaign and then as Executive Vice President of the Simcoe-Grey Federal Liberal Riding Association. He had access to this information for the same amount of time that he spent at the Alliston hospital, because these positions commenced in tandem with one another.
Hospital records can tell you basic facts about a person and provide a phone number easy enough. But Liberalist records can tell you what they think, hope, fear, or struggle with, and where you can find them for a rendez-vous according to their schedules. They may even tell you if a teen is sexually active, based on responses to dating questions.
Making the situation in Simcoe-Grey even more complex, is the fact that one of the executives from the MacEachern entourage is a high school principal. Mr. Kerk and his family have been heavily involved in Big Brothers/Big Sisters as well. I don’t say this to impugn anyone and they must understand that I’m advocating to protect the children around them. While Kerk has been exceptionally angry with me, I would hope he feels the same about preventative measures. MacEachern also works with vulnerable youths through his employment support organization.
The accused, Jared Nolan, had an overabundance of access to children through the party. It’s undeniable and I don’t understand why everyone is rushing to hush me up, instead of rushing to seal the gaps that ever placed these kids in danger. I believe the police need to investigate Nolan’s use of The Liberalist and crosscheck the names of youth complainants with the party database. But that would require cooperation from the LPC and they would rather silence me than have to talk about it. They revoked their own Constitution in the eleventh hour of attempting to mediate and I hope my emails indicate that I made a sincere effort.
Everyone is so angry but I still don’t feel like the bad guy, because I know in my heart this is the right thing to do, under impossible circumstances. When I was young and in the care of CAS, I grew to learn that if something made you feel terrible inside, it needed to be talked about. I won’t throw that lesson away now, because someone is more worried about liability than they are about the children. Politically speaking, a good PR specialist would have owned this and made it a lemonade story. The LPC could have led the way and implemented Vulnerable Sector checks, while challenging every other party to follow suit. If they really wanted to take the hardline votes away from Kellie Leitch, they could have legislated mandatory Vulnerable Sector checks for all volunteer organizations that work with kids. And if really sober people were allowed to sit at the table, there’d be a policy discussion about the collection, handling, and privacy of data.
So that brings us to the end of the AGM, but I’m still not finished making my statement. I began by saying that all democratic pillars fell at the same time and there are a few more calamities to address yet. I’m not religious but I pray now for the Provincial Advocate’s help to make this a teaching moment. This will be the more daunting part that I need to explain and I can’t stress enough that I’m not out to ‘get’ anyone. If you just granted these conversations we wouldn’t be here, but everyone doubled-down at the same time to completely paralyze the investigation.
I’ll begin with CTV News and their negotiations to do this story. They have footage from the AGM and all the documents I’ve provided here. First they wanted to interview me on camera. Then they didn’t. Producers didn’t want to cover the ‘procedural stuff’ and they were only interested in The Liberalist. Then they needed another witness to verify how the database works, as a condition of running that part of the story. Under the strictest of conditions, I put them in touch with a source that had to remain protected. That person was professionally significant and provided anonymous interview, corroborating what I’ve explained. CTV got exactly what it asked for and then changed the terms.
The reporter, just like police I’ve had an opportunity to actually speak with, was supportive and helpful. He wrote the proposed story and submitted to his superiors, only to be reassigned for the next week straight. He wasn’t able to look at The Liberalist material, but did keep pushing to do the story. I don’t hold any of this against the journalist, but the producers are a different story. They reneged the agreement to produce another witness and wanted to push for more.
I was informed by the reporter that CTV News wants him to find a student who volunteered for the riding association to cultivate for the story. ‘Cultivate’ is my description, but I’m including our text messages so you can draw your own conclusion. They would also like to hear evidence against Nolan at the trial that he abused The Liberalist, before CTV News will tell any parents or children about the vulnerability of their information.
I’ve lost all respect for CTV News (as an organization, not the individual reporters). This is not the Fourth Estate and we have countless lessons throughout history that teach us not to behave this way. Cultivating prospective victims has caused the guilty to go free and the innocent to be wrongly convicted. This is not the business of journalism and we have a duty to be ethical in educating and narrating on behalf of others. When I warned the LPC this would be tricky for me to navigate, I meant what I said because I recognize the need to let the justice system handle the Nolan case, while media still needs to educate about the protection and privacy of youth data. I regret the party refused to listen, that they should have addressed this before it became a public safety issue. Because now, a producer starved for ad revenue will decide how they want to pursue your story.
On the flip side they could bury it altogether, like the example from the Globe and Mail. From that perspective we’d have three flavours of state media and the public will continue to tune out until publishers finally get the message and there are no jobs left in Canadian political journalism.
Here are the screencaps regarding CTV and they’ll be followed by developments with the Leitch campaign, Rogers, new evidence, and the Ontario Provincial Police:
(Continued below…)
They say that politics makes for strange bedfellows and the dynamics in Simcoe-Grey are unique to the entire country. Our MP is Kellie Leitch and if you need assistance, that’s who you have to call. I haven’t been allowed to attend her events since 2011 and that time she called the cops to have me removed, because I was reporting for the national broadcaster. I departed peacefully and there was no need to get upset, for the record.
But I thought, because it’s her riding. And I thought, because it’s a hospital that concerns her. And I thought, because it’s about children that she’d have to uphold her Hippocratic Oath. And I thought, I’d be selling my soul to let her skewer good people in that Leitch campaign style. And I thought, I’d be accused of playing partisan with children’s interests if I didn’t try everything that I’m supposed to.
So I called Nick Kouvalis and tried to explain. We ended up arguing and he quit two days later, but everyone thinks it’s because of an old cuss word because they didn’t know what was going on behind the scenes. In any event, Kellie Leitch wouldn’t speak for the kids in Simcoe-Grey either. At least no one can say that I didn’t try hard enough:
(Continued below…)
As all these angles were developing, I set out to organize the evidence. I was supposed to meet with Det. Sgt. Rees in the days following the AGM, so I needed to be prepared for that anyway. I had to hunt for a few things and a riding member told me about a picture that was posted to Facebook, showing Mike MacEachern with Jared Nolan and a handful of teenagers volunteering to do the canvass.
I mean Mr. MacEachern no disrespect or suggestion of guilt. He knows I disagree with his past politics toward women, but they don’t automatically suggest wrongdoing. I wouldn’t want to be accused of heinous crimes for having a polar-opposite opinion and I don’t mean to cause anyone else that type of harm. If this picture existed, obviously it could be important to the Nolan case and a lot of riding members are upset about the situation – it’s not just me. The conflicts of interest I’ve mentioned are simple facts and they only need to be mitigated to protect the integrity of the investigation. These are not personal attacks and even if you don’t want to believe that, then consider I can’t afford one lawsuit, let alone one for every person or agency I’ve pissed off throughout the course of this letter. And the worst is yet to come.
When I examined social media in pursuit of this alleged photo, I found that I was blocked from many of the 2016-coup-executive accounts. I had to perform cursory searches to inspect what public information was available. It was then I discovered Jared Nolan’s Facebook account had changed, even though his bail conditions prevent him from going online. His avatar appeared to be displaying a photograph of Jeff Kerk’s children. I won’t publish these pictures of toddlers widely and I regret needing to reference them at all. I will hyperlink for the purpose of an investigation only, and I ask that no one distributes them any further – please. To do so may be an act of child exploitation in itself, if this evidence becomes valid to the Nolan investigation. I do this because I am genuinely concerned for the safety of these young persons and possibly their family, and I have no other way of notifying the authorities (more info regarding that obstruction below).
This is a link to an archived copy of the Jared Nolan account, displaying the noted photograph.
This is a link to an archived copy of the avatar photo expanded, that includes access to Facebook metadata from the original page. I hope it will assist law enforcement in researching the details, to determine who might have posted this and when.
I’m not positive if this is a photo of Mr. Kerk’s children, but comparative analysis has led me to this concern. I overlaid the photo from Nolan’s account with others that were published by the Kerk family and despite a small age difference between the images, it does appear to be the same girl. Her ears are unique and constant throughout these comparisons.
If it seems odd that I would take such a step, it’s because I know this Nolan account to be legitimate and that it has changed since the accused was legally prohibited from accessing the Internet.
With the greatest and most sincere apology to Jeff Kerk, this is a link to a photo he posted of his little girl, campaigning with Mike MacEachern in the 2015 election.
And this is a link to a Kerk family photo, that was distributed as part of his bid to be nominated and/or elected.
These photos were so unhinging and needed to be collected due to another development on social media. When I was researching the accused, I stumbled on a Facebook account for “Jeff Jared Kerk Nolan” that I was not familiar with existing in the past:
I don’t know who created the account but it’s definitely contrary to the Facebook user agreement. It appears to be relevant to the investigation and I’m unclear if it was shared between the two SGFLRA executives, or if it may represent a threat to the Kerk family, or possibly a cry for help. The only claim I’m making is that police need to inquire about its purpose, to ensure no children are in danger, including the Kerks.
Because I’ve been threatened by Jeff Kerk directly, with full knowledge and power of the party, I attempted to bring this to the attention of police, instead of addressing the matter in private. I have never tried to inflame this situation for children to bear the consequence and I couldn’t have predicted the responses from LPC, the media, or what was about to happen with the Ontario Provincial Police.
I was supposed to hear from Detective Sergeant Doug Rees at the OPP Headquarters in Orillia, the same week as the riding association’s AGM. Preliminary contact was negotiated through Constable Monroe (as mentioned earlier) and a physical meeting was supposed to occur in the week of February 20, 2017, to facilitate my report and submission of evidence. It had now been more than three months since police lost my report to Constable Callahan, and through various administrative dysfunctions or confusion about jurisdiction, failed to receive the information via three different officers already. In the meantime Nolan had another hearing and his case was winding through the courts.
On February 22, 2017, I called the OPP Headquarters to ask for Det. Sgt. Rees. It was the middle of the week and I hadn’t heard from him yet, as the Facebook evidence was weighing on me heavily. Administrative staff by the name of Randy Shore answered the call (in the vicinity of 3:30pm EST), and reported there was no Det. Sgt. Rees within the Ontario Provincial Police.
I politely responded that I was sure about the information and I was scheduled to communicate with the officer this week. I explained knowing he was the lead investigator for the Nolan case and that our meeting was delayed because he was ‘stuck in Eastern Ontario executing a search warrant’ in the week prior.
This caused Mr. Shore to put me on hold as he checked some information. He returned to confirm that Det. Sgt. Rees is in fact an OPP officer, but just like the problem with Barrie Police and the CAP Unit, there was a separate database to locate him. Shore wasn’t able to give me an extension number for the investigator, but he asked me to wait as he placed a call to the officer’s mobile telephone.
Shortly after, the OPP Headquarters called back. Mr. Shore informed me that Det. Sgt. Rees is refusing to speak with me, or meet with me in any capacity. I retorted this must be a mistake and I explained about the intervention of Constable Monroe, that he already planned to meet with me, to accept my evidence and report.
Mr. Shore was caught off guard and responded that he might have misunderstood what the sergeant meant. He asked me to wait again, as he called the officer to clarify his position. I added that I have new evidence pertaining to the safety of children and that I’m deeply concerned it’s been impossible to share it with the police. If they refused to accept a report, then I would have no choice but to make the information public.
Shore then responded, ‘I guess I should do my duty and ask if kids are in immediate danger‘. I replied that I didn’t know and it may be possible – that’s why getting the evidence to police was imperative to do a proper risk assessment. It was on this note that we disconnected our call and Shore was supposed to call me back immediately, after gaining clarification from Det. Sgt. Rees.
But my telephone didn’t ring for an hour and a half, so I called the OPP Headquarters back myself. I was stunned to find the office had closed and no one would be addressing these issues today, even though I explained a threat assessment was required for children at risk. That report in itself, was left in limbo. I also haven’t taken the time yet to read the Police Services Act because I’ve been dealing with these emergencies, but I’m positive that somewhere it must say that law enforcement is required to accept reports and provide the administrative numbers associated with them.
The following day, on February 23, 2017 at 10:08am EST, Detective Sergeant Rees finally called me back from his mobile device. Whereas my conversations with other officers were generally pleasant and supportive, Det. Sgt. Rees was quite aggressive and arrogant. He demanded to know what evidence I possess and I tried to explain it requires a full background to appreciate the substance of my report.
This made the officer angry and he demanded, ‘What evidence do you have, what evidence do you have, what evidence do you have‘? I felt intimidated and I began by humbly trying to explain the pages from Facebook first. I was belittled for this and the detective stated he didn’t care about a relationship between Jared Nolan and Jeff Kerk. He said if I was worried about children to report separately to my own detachment, because he refused to accept this as being related to the Nolan case.
I then tried to explain that I had more evidence of Nolan’s information being altered, to conceal his access to children. I mentioned the Liberal website tampering, the LinkedIn page and that police didn’t understand the significance of his access to The Liberalist. It was at this point that I became extremely disheartened, because Det. Sgt. Rees laughed at me and reiterated he would never meet to take a report.
My face paled and I was astonished. I pleaded that it was important for police to have this context and it further relates to physical contact with partisan youth volunteers. But just like the Liberal Party Chair at the AGM was predetermined to silence me, the OPP became adamant about preventing my report as well. The latter changed its direction 180 degrees over the course of one week and I couldn’t understand why, if it’s not related to the conflict of interest issues I expressed in the beginning. Were they not being negligent in failing to check if Kerk’s children were being threatened in any way? At the very least they decided that possibility was ‘Unfounded’ without examining any of the evidence.
Exasperated by now, I told the detective he was forcing me to publish this information if the OPP refused to receive it. It relates to the public safety and I would also have to complain to his superiors. But Det. Sgt. Rees continued laughing and taunted me to follow through. He said, “Go ahead and publish whatever you want,” and through his authority, I believe I have police permission to do what I’m doing today.
I didn’t overreact or respond in anger and haste. Instead I telephoned Constable Coopman from the Barrie Police Service, because he was helpful and receptive in my experience with trying to report. Unfortunately the officer wasn’t available so I left two messages on his voicemail. I explained what happened with Det. Sgt. Rees and that I didn’t think it was advisable to publish everything to the general public. I didn’t think it would help the case or any affected parties, if they encouraged these matters to proceed extra-judicially. I didn’t think it would look good on the police if they forced me to do this either.
Those messages were left on February 23, 2017 and I didn’t receive a callback until yesterday, March the 3rd. Constable Coopman inquired if I was considering civil action and I was stunned by that question as well. I said I wasn’t, which led to him inquiring why I called and what did I expect him to do.
I told Constable Coopman that I wasn’t sure how to proceed and that I felt I had police permission to make these matters public, in light of the response from Det. Sgt. Rees. As an officer of the Barrie Police Service he wasn’t able to comment and I asked him to help me obtain the report number from my original contact with Constable Callahan, in lieu. I don’t know what will come of this because PC Coopman is off work for nearly the next week, but he said he will inquire about what’s happening ‘behind the scenes‘. I’m not even sure if I’ll be able to obtain my original report number, so I’ve done my best to document this contact independently, to show what’s happened with the police.
There is nothing more daunting than having to confront law enforcement and I sought to avoid these complications since the beginning. In addition to MacEachern’s own comments about his influence over the OPP (linked earlier), there is plenty of evidence this type of pressure was exercised in all local matters. Therefore, I attempted to collect my phone records to document what I could.
(Continued below…)
That brings us to the final pillar collapsing and my experience with the policies at Rogers Communications. My conversations with the BPS and OPP transpired over both my landline and cell phone. The mobile device automatically records the data for all incoming and outgoing calls, whether local or long distance. It also displays the call duration as a matter of basic service, so I was able to screencap a record of that without assistance.
In the case of a landline however, the service provider must be contacted through a privacy request for information. Even if you purchased call display, there is additional charge from Rogers to obtain the details of a home phone. Unfortunately for this case and the safety of children, the majority of my conversations with police occurred on the home phone.
It took a total of three days for Rogers to provide me with accurate instructions. Customer service reps provided the wrong information and Live Chat reps weren’t able to deal with the matter. I had to push hard to get in contact with the manager centre in Dartmouth, just to explain. No one was listening that my request was due to ‘exigent circumstances’ and the safety of children.
Upon sending my privacy request, it was kicked back by the legal department. They first refused to provide anything at all and would only respond to a subpoena, to provide my records to the police. They wouldn’t let me obtain my own calling data, even though I wasn’t asking for anything more than what my cell phone provides by default.
I explained the police wouldn’t subpoena the records because this related to a complaint about professional misconduct against them. I don’t understand why Rogers won’t let me prove my own activities and the services I pay for, but they will give my records directly to the party that I need to complain about. There’s something very wrong about this that causes an actual police state. How am I not supposed to feel intimidated, when the entire system is allowed to collaborate to gaslight youth complainants, their witnesses, or advocates?
Given this strange anomaly, I amended my request to Rogers. I specified that I only need proof of my calls with police phone numbers and the duration of those communications. I’ve spent numerous hours reporting on the telephone and my records will surely prove this. Then law enforcement will need to explain why there are no report numbers to associate with our lengthy conversations. For three full months this stonewalling and unaccountability has persisted. For three months I’ve known that children may be compromised and I’ve tried everything possible to report it. And for three months the Nolan case has been progressing through the courts, lacking what may be some rather important evidence.
Rogers has decided to provide a copy of my outgoing calls only. It won’t let me prove that police have ever called my house. It also won’t acknowledge ‘exigent circumstances’ and refuses to expedite my request. The company won’t respond to children in danger and complaints involving child pornography will have to wait in line, just like everything else. The police are allowed to take all my records from Rogers to defend against this complaint, though.
Please see my communications with the Rogers legal department about these concerns:
(Continued below…)
Please see photos of the calls I was able document with police as well:
(Continued below…)
I reiterate that I do not know if my report will be relevant to a conviction or the defence. I reiterate that Jared Nolan is presumed innocent and a trial hasn’t concluded to determine the outcome of these allegations. I reiterate that everyone named in this letter is also presumed innocent of being involved in any way. But along with the presumption of innocence, our Charter provides for a full and fair hearing of all the evidence, to determine a legitimate outcome. This is meant to protect both the complainants and defendants, in an adversarial system where everyone adheres to the same rules.
In closing, I’ve addressed many issues that have arisen from this case. The matters pertaining to law enforcement require a resolution before a miscarriage of justice can be alleged by any of the parties. I sincerely believe the probe will be incomplete if it doesn’t examine access to youths through The Liberalist and ensure child complainants don’t appear in that sensitive database. There is a distinct possibility for crossover between the hospital and the riding association. It’s possible that current evidence could appear misleading if it doesn’t have the rest of this context. I also believe the Facebook evidence needs to be evaluated, to assess if any members of the Kerk family are in danger, regardless of the Nolan case.
Regarding the Liberal Party of Canada, they need to confront the consequence of their actions, or lack thereof. Why are they concealing Nolan’s relationship to the party and a treasure trove of extremely sensitive data about children? Why will they take no steps to secure that data from criminal abuse? Why won’t they discuss the type of information they collect about children and whether this action is ethical in the first place? Why won’t they conduct an internal investigation, to at least determine if the high school students recruited by a fellow executive and school principal were impacted in any way? Why won’t they let youths and their parents determine control of their own privacy permissions? Why won’t they alert families to speak with their children, to ensure no abuses have been committed through the party?
A lot of good-meaning Liberals are distraught about this situation. Some who have entered these details about children into The Liberalist database are now questioning themselves and how ‘stupid’ they might have been. They sought this information on behalf of the party with the best of intentions, hoping it would allow them to be sensitive toward the next generation of pundits. No one really considered the way this data could be abused, until the case of Jared Nolan brought that possibility to our doorsteps.
In the case of Simcoe-Grey, there were past boards of directors that did require Vulnerable Sector checks to become a youth representative. But as we’ve learned, these traditions are optional and individual to every riding association across Canada. It requires party leadership and mandatory regulation, because national databases require national oversight. The 2016-coup-executive didn’t require safety precautions and it left us with the current situation.
While there is no way to completely protect children without any gaps in the system, failing and even refusing to implement Vulnerable Sector checks for users of The Liberalist database may be a breach of fiduciary duty. It’s an unnecessary source of risk that blatantly invites abusers to join the party and take advantage of it. Individuals who suffer from psychological illness that would cause them to become a child predator can’t control their impulses and this fact is wholly established by the justice system. So why invite damage that can last a lifetime, to the kids who represent our collective future?
This situation has left me in a such position, that all I can do is hold up a mirror. Every pillar of democracy has been afflicted by the Unfounded illness, that prevents us from evolving past it. The police are waiting for me to break this information with the news, to give them cause to investigate. The news is hoping to find its own victims, before it will tell the public or police. And the LPC appears to be silencing anyone who tries to remedy the threat to children. I’m not the only person writing letters to the party and every single member has been ignored. Some are threatening to cancel their donations and even that hasn’t merited a response.
These collective behaviours have served to paralyze the Nolan investigation, as well as the entire establishment. One pillar won’t hold the other accountable and if that continues, it would represent the collapse of our democracy. I’m hopeful this is an opportunity for everyone to show leadership, if I sit you down at the same table to talk about these matters frankly. I’m not looking to sue anyone and I claim no personal damages, but I can’t let this go until you acknowledge your responsibilities to the children of Canada. I add this problem is not unique to the Liberal Party alone, and all partisan organizations must collaborate to find a solution, before Gen Y becomes the generation that doesn’t vote.
Yours very truly,
***Edit, March 6, 2017 at 6:45pm EST:
To assist with understanding the implications of Jared Nolan’s access to The Liberalist database, I’m including archived links to a majority of the party’s user guide. At this moment the website is still live and you can visit the original pages to inspect further. Unfortunately archiving isn’t able to replicate the proprietary videos that appear on some pages, but I advise visiting the direct source to view these illuminating tutorials.
I also note that all sections describe Level 1 and Level 2 access. While Level 3 is mentioned as having administrative powers, the guides do not describe what those powers are. My letter above addresses that missing information regarding Level 3, that Mr. Nolan is believed to possess throughout the MacEachern election campaign, as well as the riding association as the Executive Vice President. He maintained this access for a period of 2 years and it was the identical amount of time he spent employed at the Stevenson Memorial Hospital.
My speech for the AGM addresses the fact that the Liberal Party of Canada didn’t take any steps to revoke his permissions as an administrative, precautionary, or disciplinary action. The party claims it asked for Nolan’s resignation upon learning of the charges, but to my understanding, nearly 2 months lapsed before Nolan agreed to abdicate. Therefore he maintained access to this sensitive youth data, even under strict bail conditions regarding the exploitation of children. I couldn’t know if Nolan continued exercising that access while prohibited from the internet, but the LPC didn’t seek to prohibit him or any alleged predators from logging into The Liberalist, by denying a response, cooperation with the investigation, or the implementation of Vulnerable Sector checks for this (or any) riding association.
I allege the LPC is entrenching its plausible liability, by refusing to protect the most sensitive information about voters and their children, in the party’s exclusive possession. This is exacerbated by the fact that the LPC advertises access to this data, in an effort to attract volunteers they decline to screen for criminal reference, before handing over information like youth schedules, school identification, dating info, family info, contact info, and emotional vulnerabilities. This was always a nightmare waiting to happen and it must be amended forthwith.
(Liberal and Liberalist websites are built from WordPress bases. Although this blogging/website platform is one of the most convenient and easy to use, it’s also one of the least secure ways to store data on the internet and is subject to countless amateur hacking attempts, as well as practice for data engineers in training. This is a well known fact to the data, privacy and security communities: https://archive.is/8zy8z And despite the fact that LPC claims ownership of the data they collect, it’s managed by an American company and stored on American servers. This subjects the information to US oversight and the US Patriot Act, in addition to anyone like the accused, Jared Nolan, who was granted the highest access without a Vulnerable Sector check.)
Liberal Data Warehouse https://archive.is/oksXT
User Guide for The Liberalist – Levels 1 and 2:
Liberalist user guide index https://archive.is/DaTvW
Introduction to Liberalist (includes info about tech creation in US) https://archive.is/VcRL5
Account types https://archive.is/VllzI
Request an account https://archive.is/jDhT1
Finding your active accounts https://archive.is/Hh0Cw
Log in https://archive.is/yDZsC
Setting up your Action ID https://archive.is/jrhac
Linking multiple accounts with Action ID https://archive.is/Z3UO0
Set up profile https://archive.is/TWqyt
Creating Level 1 & 2 accounts https://archive.is/2hID1
Finding individuals https://archive.is/qniGE
Quick look up https://archive.is/mo0Vy
Customizing quick look up https://archive.is/HyYdM
Individual record overview https://archive.is/pegTh
Individual record components (for adults, includes ‘activist codes’) https://archive.is/Waenu
Comparing My Voters and Shared Contacts https://archive.is/R738l
Creating a list of Shared Contacts without My Voter file https://archive.is/q9lDW
Linking My Voters with a Shared Contact file https://archive.is/vjZGI
Create lists https://archive.is/3mXaO
Basics of creating a list https://archive.is/g9WoZ
Types of lists https://archive.is/45c8E
Registered Liberals list https://archive.is/EQqAA
Supporter list https://archive.is/8t9LZ
Donor list https://archive.is/nn8Z3
Transportation list (for volunteers & voters who need rides, page now censored) https://archive.is/Uj6ug
Vote history list https://archive.is/C14as
Finding Liberals and other affiliations https://archive.is/kHmPX
Suppressions https://archive.is/dPWC5
Refining a list https://archive.is/JJe6B
Saving and editing a list https://archive.is/V77mx
Sharing lists https://archive.is/c7qBZ
Data entry https://archive.is/p4zCi
Quick Mark https://archive.is/7JShN
Scan bar codes https://archive.is/PQnPh
MiniVAN (mobile app for real time data entry) https://archive.is/ndTJk
Data entry for voting information https://archive.is/ulVZB
Volunteer recruitment (doesn’t address kids or Level 3, however) https://archive.is/WSoQJ
Stages of recruitment in volunteer program https://archive.is/FAmwV
List creation for volunteer recruitment https://archive.is/LQkA5
New volunteer list https://archive.is/B9Equ
Past volunteer list https://archive.is/kRB6G
Active volunteer list https://archive.is/eiUYa
Flagging your volunteers https://archive.is/hqT0f
Creating an event in Liberalist https://archive.is/kyS2k
Develop a script for volunteer recruitment https://archive.is/oJw46
Create a Virtual Phone Bank (without party oversight to schedule robocalls) https://archive.is/3gQIw
Communications overview https://archive.is/L76fl
Customizing your canvass overview (Level 3 mentioned) https://archive.is/5hWH0
Virtual Phone Bank overview https://archive.is/uxkRb
Sharing your Virtual Phone Bank https://archive.is/MR2bG
Email Blast overview https://archive.is/HZtZ3
Email Blast analytics https://archive.is/Z1sgc
Voice broadcasts overview https://archive.is/DVhXq
Broadcast survey overview https://archive.is/ubla1
Predictive dialer https://archive.is/lAACV
Create phone bank user group https://archive.is/g7dvN
Send your list to predictive dialer https://archive.is/N3aZ0
Canvass https://archive.is/1DNWv
Customizing your canvass https://archive.is/5hWH0
Creating a canvass list https://archive.is/dnMk0
Create a list using Turfcutter https://archive.is/T0pZO
Create a canvass list by poll https://archive.is/LoqDo
Split your report https://archive.is/Ut0c8
Door to door canvass overview https://archive.is/MXfnv
Using Manage Turf https://archive.is/dVXRU
Generating list numbers with Manage Turf https://archive.is/gLdPD
Sending a list to MiniVAN (mobile app) https://archive.is/nvFnA
Using MiniVAN (mobile app) https://archive.is/ndTJk
Canvass sheet components (mentions Level 3, categorize by political party) https://archive.is/xKw45
Phone canvassing https://archive.is/2MUXl
Making a phone list (based on identities in household) https://archive.is/uvzn5
Campaign tools https://archive.is/tXUvX
Targets https://archive.is/npdnr
Geo Liberal (dot) ca https://archive.is/puxoP
GOTV events https://archive.is/qFGc9
Create staging location events https://archive.is/uQkfV
Create list of your volunteers for GOTV https://archive.is/wVEhj
Creating your GOTV script https://archive.is/PN0tW
Using phone bank for onboarding volunteers (seeks personal schedules) https://archive.is/cvCVq
Assigning roles to your volunteers https://archive.is/Q2WyQ
Use Geo Liberal (dot) ca to plan staging locations https://archive.is/pzdVS
Using counts and crosstabs to plan staging locations https://archive.is/6bRAG
Creating poll kits https://archive.is/OETs6
Find out how many door knockers you need https://archive.is/AJLY9
Creating lists of early voters (with data from Elections Canada) https://archive.is/nnrUl
Analyzing your vote https://archive.is/1Kwg2
Analyzing your vote (original videos http://liberalist.liberal.ca/analyzing-your-vote/)
Adding new voters https://archive.is/hPEjq
Adding new voters (original video http://liberalist.liberal.ca/adding-new-voters-tool/)
Rules for adding new voters https://archive.is/ZuWYV
Process for adding new voters https://archive.is/IWQBs
Managing ride requests https://archive.is/Rh8G0
Create transportation list https://archive.is/amLXQ
Scheduling rides https://archive.is/iePnV
Literature drops https://archive.is/AgND4
Data entry for voting information https://archive.is/ulVZB
Smartphone data entry for voting information https://archive.is/WtpWZ
Smartphone data entry (original video http://liberalist.liberal.ca/user-guide/data-entryvoting-information/)
Bingo sheet data entry https://archive.is/EMx6x
Finding out who voted https://archive.is/nnrUl
Event management overview https://archive.is/tIInN
Private events https://archive.is/92CYf
Public events https://archive.is/2StG1
Schedule volunteers or participants for events https://archive.is/lW6XR
Marking attendees https://archive.is/W3IuQ
Using My List to schedule volunteers or participants https://archive.is/FLGa2
Promoting your event https://archive.is/drzBA
Managing volunteers and participants https://archive.is/WAJ9L
View participants to your event https://archive.is/twHDY
Create a list of attendees https://archive.is/wlXBH
Marking attendees https://archive.is/W3IuQ
Data analysis https://archive.is/YTQn4
Analyze canvass results https://archive.is/Vapdh
Setting report preferences https://archive.is/fAqza
Counts and crosstabs overview https://archive.is/Zk3f3
Layouts of counts and crosstabs (ex. search by sex) https://archive.is/QG159
My Voters variables (assign ‘activist codes’ to identify personal traits) https://archive.is/8wnKe
Shared Contacts variables (assign ‘activist codes’ to identify personal traits) https://archive.is/JCZhd
Analyze a specific list https://archive.is/omVwH
Analyze list of Voter IDs by poll https://archive.is/2Bv5L
(Voter IDs arise from Elections Canada. They’re amalgamated with LPC data collected on these individuals, to build the greater psychological profile)
Analyze your volunteers by volunteer stage https://archive.is/FmeL9
Schedule automated reports (daily, weekly, monthly) to track individuals https://archive.is/SB6QO
Membership, Victory Fund and Laurier Club donor lists https://archive.is/i69Uq
Liberalist User Agreement (claims proprietary ownership of all surveillance data about volunteers, voters, and households) https://archive.is/GUmqy
Train to be a Liberalist Champion https://archive.is/JBdN7
Data entry training for volunteers https://archive.is/3SF8U
Liberalist training videos (for Levels 1 & 2 but no info for Level 3) http://liberalist.liberal.ca/video/
Government Passes Anti-Constitutional Surveillance Law During Ottawa Shooting
A terrible tragedy befell the nation’s capital yesterday, when a shooter opened fire at government sites in Ottawa. A full investigation must begin to assemble the details, as the flames of hysteria are fanned in the public consciousness. The words “terror” and “terrorism” have been tossed around so casually, that nowadays any hardened criminal would classify as a terrorist according to the Harper Government and mainstream news sources. For that matter, political activists who take issue with the government’s policies at home and abroad are referenced in the same manner.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, social media is rife with suspicion that this horrendous event may represent a false flag operation, to assist the government’s dismantling of civil liberty and human rights in the name of war, profit, political posturing and public control.
That’s not to say this wasn’t an act of terrorism. Maybe it was, but surely it’s too early to reach a conclusion when the names of suspects hadn’t been released to hypothesize a motive. Or had they?
At 10:13am EDT, The Globe and Mail‘s Josh Wingrove reported that tactical officers were pointing guns at every parliamentary journalist on site. (Via Twitter)
At 12:11pm EDT, The CBC’s Kady O’Malley reported her group was ordered to leave a local rooftop by police, as they continued to search for a culprit and attempted to secure the area.
By 1:14pm EDT, Ms. O’Malley reported a continuing lockdown that blanketed Ottawa. She was unclear if the event was over, as no further information was available.
While Canadian news personalities were at police gunpoint, American outlets like CBS News and the Associated Press had a full story to sell, complete with the dead shooter’s name.
Before the scene was secure at 10:54am EDT, a joint release was published to identify the culprit. It stated,
“The gunmen has been identified by U.S. officials to CBS News as Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, a Canadian national born in 1982.”
By 4:58pm EDT, the story was edited to remove the shooter’s name, or any mention of the U.S. government’s knowledge.
The only problem is that no one could update the Google database quick enough with these changes, so the original information still appeared with search results.
This story was altered again in the evening, when the Canadian government allowed the name of a shooter to be released and American media added law enforcement to their list of official sources. They also added a middle name, Abdul, to emphasize the suspect’s Islamic ties with an accusation of terrorism.
As members of parliament begin to piece this tragedy together, they’re advised to inquire how American intelligence knew the name of a ‘possible terrorist’ as the mayhem was still unfolding. How did Americans know when Canadians didn’t, and how was the information so widespread that foreign media and Google had access to distribute, but domestic reporters on the scene did not.
Canadian parliamentary bureau chiefs didn’t posses the same information as their U.S. counterparts and they faced the barrel of police guns as a narrative was provided on their behalf by another country. If this is dubbed an act of terrorism that American sources had knowledge to pre-report, then why weren’t steps taken to prevent the violence?
Many have questioned how a gunman could enter parliament with a rifle unnoticed, despite the massive security and busy lineups. Some are calling for greater state police control and warmed to relinquishing their Charter rights, in an effort to fight the new war on domestic terrorism. Something has to justify police militarization since the War on Drugs has been transformed into a lucrative product of capitalism.
All Canadians who pay attention to the news are acutely aware of a creeping police state and the loss of privacy rights in the tradeoff. In fact, one Liberal MP, Joyce Murray, proposed Bill C-622 to gain oversight of CSIS and CSEC, so law enforcement can’t overstep its bounds to the degree that’s been revealed through Snowden leaks.
This shooting event also occurs at a time when the Mayor of Ottawa is seeking re-election, with a history of accommodating CSEC as a business partner.
The journalist who brought these Snowden leaks to light is in town to promote his new book about the overreaching powers of a surveillance state. Glenn Greenwald will be speaking just a few blocks from Parliament Hill, in the same neighbourhood that’s under lockdown. It’s purely coincidental that he wrote a scathing piece about the Canadian government and co-dependent media’s abuse of the word “terrorism” a day earlier.
Meanwhile, the NDP noticed a different terrorism anomaly regarding the violence in Quebec on the day before as well. The Prime Minister’s Office was accused of planting a foreboding comment in Question Period, that preempted police reports of a “possible terror attack against soldiers”.
Public Safety Minster Steve Blaney reported the Monday event was “clearly linked to terrorist ideology”, but the Toronto Star reported multiple witnesses saw the suspect with his hands in the air, when at least one police officer opened fire. They also say a knife was “lodged into the ground near where the incident occurred”.
Well, that’s what the original story by Allan Woods, Bruce Campion-Smith, Joanna Smith, Tonda MacCharles and Les Whittington stated. A syndicated copy had to be located at the Cambridge Times, because a newer, edited version at the Toronto Star appeared dramatically altered by Tuesday.
Forsaking journalism ethics, the Toronto Star surprised industry watchers by editing this story without providing a notice to reflect the consequential changes. Now the article claims the suspect was an Islamic radical, who emerged from the vehicle with a knife in his hands. There is no mention of any witnesses who saw his hands in the air and the knife was no longer lodged in the ground. All information from witnesses was removed without explanation, or apology for reporting incorrectly at the onset, if indeed the witnesses were mistaken. The French press at TVA still values the eye witness accounts, but no English speaking media reflects these reports from the scene.
This TorStar article was more than edited and qualifies as being replaced entirely, having lost its tone, facts and spirit from the original published version. It was radically changed to support the government’s narrative and censored independent sources that previously appeared, replacing them with quotes from the Harper administration that focus on the suspect’s motive for Islamic terrorism.
If it wasn’t for smaller newspapers syndicating the Toronto Star‘s original content, there would be no proof of the first comprehensive version. Professional journalists don’t normally condone editors changing the spirit of their work without a caveat, especially when five reporters collaborated to produce the same entry. The history created by print newspapers also couldn’t be erased with the click of a button, before the press migrated to internet-based reporting that appears to lack mechanisms of accountability.
These two examples oppose each other due to the disparity between facts and there is no footnote to reflect this glaring incongruency. The Toronto Star has been a leader in journalism ethics and wouldn’t alter published pieces to discredit their own reporting without a reason being provided. That is, until they and a bevy of established journalists who remained silent, had a taste of the politics of fear.
Any reasonable person should be afraid when gunshots are flying from hostile individuals, but will fear be allowed to dictate a terrorism narrative in place of the facts? The Opposition’s privacy and ethics critic, MP Charlie Angus, also describes gunshots around 10am EDT, while American media had solved the event by 10:54am EDT and members of parliament were being detained without access to the same information.
If the U.S government could assess a terrorist attack on Canadian soil before the Canadian government was aware, then why was it not prevented? On the same token, if the Canadian government was in the middle of mayhem, then how did Americans obtain information that wasn’t available to affected bureaucrats, from their own intelligence and law enforcement agencies? What powers does America have over Canada that Canada doesn’t have itself? If a shooting on government property can be solved before it’s even finished, then why wasn’t CSIS, CSEC, DHS and the NSA capable of early intervention? After all, the Wednesday shooter was already placed on the government’s watch-list.
The timing is incredible and may very well be motivated by the war against ISIS/ISIL. Canada shed its peacekeeping status for more aggressive combat that generates profits for the Canada Pension Plan, with the potential to invite ideological backlash. This is not disputed. An unbiased investigation is required, but the public should be patient for confirmed, judicial facts; bearing in mind political motives, various narratives and the race to sell fear.
On the very day terrorism was alleged in Quebec, the Harper Government passed Bill C-13 without much notice from the peanut gallery. Until Monday, Bill C-13 was one of the most controversial pieces of legislation that was presented under the guise of cyber-bullying, but even the mother of Amanda Todd spoke against the exploitation of her daughter’s death as a tool to create a warrantless surveillance state in this vein.
Due to terrorism accusations made by the Harper Government that took up most of the day, no mainstream news reported the bill’s passage later in the same day. CBC was the only major outlet to mention the bill on Monday, but they neglected to note the House of Commons vote or passage of this legislation at any point in the story. They presented the information as incremental progress while failing to report its successful, parliamentary completion.
This too presents a problem with ethical journalism, but CBC has seen its fair share of challenges since the Harper Government appointed ten Conservative donors to the board of directors, with influence over the public broadcaster’s direction.
Regardless, the only mention of Bill C-13 passing arises from a Saanich News editorial. The smaller publication urges everyone to be vigilant as this legislation completes the last step of approval (ascent) with senate, that is dominated by a Conservative majority.
Surprisingly, the senate passed a first reading of Bill C-13 the very next day. It accomplished that hurdle expediently on Tuesday, but this wasn’t reported by any source whatsoever. Senators then scheduled a second reading in two days’ time, on Thursday, October 23, 2014. The only lapse in this process was the Wednesday parliamentary shooting.
By today Bill C-13 may see the quickest passage through any bureaucracy in the democratic world, without the public or media noticing and while legislators are reeling from the ominous smell of gun smoke. Neither the parliamentary reporters who stared down the barrel of a police gun on Tuesday, nor the members of parliament who were barricaded, would be rested very well.
Plus there’s an RCMP press conference about the Wednesday shooting that will surely distract attention from the new law. In the days ahead, it’s likely they’ll tout Bill C-13 as a way to catch terrorists, also under the guise of cyberbulling and even though being watch-listed with preexisting surveillance powers didn’t prevent Michael Zehaf-Bibeau from taking action.
This brings us to what’s at stake. The taboo that nobody wants to evaluate. The decision senators will have to make while recovering from a psychologically traumatic breach of personal security.
We’re talking about public data surveillance, or what closely resembles stalking.
There are plenty of ambiguous words used to describe big data monitoring, but few understand what it means or how deeply it’s abused behind the sealed doors at CSEC. Warrantless internet surveillance has the potential to track a target’s GPS movements with updating by the minute. It can penetrate the entire chain of communication between an individual and their contacts, including strangers who make reference to the target by any degree of separation across the world wide web. The technology has predictive behaviour capabilities. Every citizen caught in this widespread dragnet is psychologically assessed through language semantics and assigned a persuasion, to determine if any of them presents a public relations issue, or if the original target has too much influence to garner support for their business, political and/or social beliefs.
Five Eyes governments have established media surveillance programs specifically. They surveil news topics and journalists, to monitor the reporter’s effect on public perception. When anyone posts a news link on any form of social media, all comments are collected and ranked for government and law enforcement dissemination. Canada spent $20 million and hired 3,300 staff to spy on journalists and political opponents since 2012. The European Commission and United States does the same, in this vacuum of nonexistent legislation to protect the public’s privacy in the modern age. Instead of updating constitutional rights to reflect modern technology, they’ve crafted legislation like Bill C-13 that revokes those rights entirely.
This goes beyond the confines of metadata and only the Privacy Commissioner of Ontario has taken up the cause, likely to the chagrin of political parties that have begun to use similar technology against their opponents during elections. Whatever good this intrusive spying could accomplish is outweighed by the bad. Michael Sona only possessed a list of phone numbers and intentions, let alone mapping of the entire public’s thoughts and updates on the location of political foes by the minute.
If anyone physically tailed a political candidate, volunteer or supporter every minute of the day and night, or attempted to record every one of their exchanges, it would be considered criminal harassment. If that person also tailed every contact who spoke about their target and psychologically assessed them to create charts, it would surpass Hollywood’s fascination with the complex plotting of serial offenders.
But this isn’t fiction and warrantless internet surveillance can be used to harm a civilian, based on their political beliefs. In the United States it’s already used to surveil judges, adding a difficult challenge to the essence and appearance of democracy. The dialogue is strictly controlled to conceal these uses and they’re couched in the terrorist argument, to discourage the public from searching deeper.
Residents have been told if they don’t break the law, there is nothing to fear. This subverts any purpose of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and replaces that document with a Trust Me clause from the government. It replaces the core legal relationship between citizens and law enforcement, with unrestrained power and no oversight to justify its use. It imperils evidentiary laws that are designed to protect the innocent.
Beyond the dry language of legislation, this is how the words of Bill C-13 can be utilized by an aggressive government and the Five Eyes intelligence community. Suggested reading provides the history and development of technology and related policies in Canada, the United States and Europe. It was becoming law in Canada when the airwaves were filled with terrorism accusations and the government expected no one would notice. It also relates to media surveillance that could explain a few altered stories, deleted posts and political misunderstanding.
Edit, November 22, 2014: Liberal Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette published a diary of events during the Ottawa shooting, while barricaded in an office with numerous colleagues. Her honest and forthright account also challenges the Harper government and American explanations. The timed entries conflict with media reports, as documented above. She further includes mention of a second shooter.
Canada’s Attorney General: Buddies, Bullets And Bongs #cdnpoli
A photo of Canada’s Attorney General and Justice Minister, Peter MacKay, recently went viral on social media. The government’s top legal bureaucrat was seen posing with Canada’s National Firearms Association, sporting a t-shirt in support of the group’s endeavours. The graphic on this gifted apparel melded the country’s maple leaf symbol with a rifle, and everyone in the shot was smiling. Going by the acronym “NFA”, it is the northern counterpart to America’s NRA, that holds considerable influence over gun control laws on the stateside.
(More below…)
(credit: Ericka Clarke/Facebook)
The NFA was identified by mainstream news as a social force behind repeal of the Long Gun Registry. The Quebec government was also mentioned for a temporary injunction to halt that repeal, with its case to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. Despite this acknowledgement, the most important information that raises questions about of conflict of interest appears to be overlooked or censored.
On Docket 35448, Attorney General of Quebec v. Attorney General of Canada, et al, the NFA is listed as a party to the proceeding, that will argue constitutional matters in relation to gun control. Quebec wishes to keep a registry and the federal government is strongly opposed, with the NFA in its corner.
On June 5, 2014, Canada’s National Firearms Association received Intervener status from the Supreme Court. It came with instructions to pay the Attorney Generals (Canada and/or Quebec) any monies required to cover the cost of additional disbursements that may arise from the gun lobby’s participation in the hearing. The NFA is forbidden from introducing new evidence, or supplementing the appellant and respondents’ records.
(More below…)
(credit: Supreme Court of Canada website)
On July 31, 2014, the NFA filed its documents including a Factum and Book of Authorities. On August 14, 2014, MacKay’s office did the same and the following day the case to suspend Quebec’s gun registry was set to proceed with appeal. It was less than two weeks later that the infamous picture was discovered, indicating a personal-political relationship between NFA members and Canada’s Attorney General.
Given the longstanding ruckus between Peter MacKay, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Supreme Court of Canada, the public has little patience for the appearance of impropriety. Going forward it will be important to learn if or what gifts might have changed hands between these judicial parties, and the appropriateness of campaigning for one another while legally opposing a provincial government.
More to the unsavoury appearance, the Twitterverse discovered additional photos of NFA members who posed with the Attorney General. On veteran Kurtis Gaucher’s Facebook page, he’s found casually bragging about 4 ounces of marijuana. Perhaps Gaucher has a medical prescription, but in light of MacKay’s vehement stance against the substance, it sparked renewed publicity across social media.
(More below…)
(credit: Kurtis Gaucher/Facebook, Ed Tanas/Twitter)
On Ericka Clarke’s Facebook account, a photo of the woman holding a significant weapon was discovered. Her social media has since been closed to public access and the option to contact was removed. Before this occurred, a Twitter member took the liberty of pointing out the irony with a Buddies, Bullets & Bongs meme that is quickly gaining traction.
(More below…)
(credit: Ed Tanas/Twitter, Ericka Clarke/Facebook, Kurtis Gaucher/Facebook)
In the meantime this relationship is clouding another Supreme Court case regarding constitutional rights within the provinces. The Attorney General of Canada appears to support ‘gun toting drug slingers’ over public safety, according to the consensus of popular social media. With a little less tongue-in-cheek, the Supreme Court may need to ask if the fees it assessed were paid to the government in promotional t-shirts, however.
Corporate Surveillance of Judges, Journalists & Public Has Ties to NSA
A recent Snowden leak drew fire from Julian Assange’s legal advisor and civil liberty monitors around the world, as visitors to WikiLeaks learned they were being tracked by US government in addition to its architect. Stopping by the website was enough to get an IP address logged and from that information users can be identified, if the NSA wished to take the investigation further.
Days later in the United Kingdom, the news broke that British spies at GCHQ intercepted millions of Yahoo webcam chats. Images of civilians were collected for a facial recognition program, with little regard to their nationalities or compromising situations. Many users were captured during intimate encounters, proving nothing is sacred when it comes to privacy in the eyes of Big Brother.
In both cases journalists and constitutional experts condemned the intrusion, united in their arguments by a selection of key themes: The ambiguity of laws that govern digital spying allows for government abuse and due to secrecy, the public has no idea when its rights are being transgressed. The Five Eyes spy agencies answer to no one and without oversight, there is no recourse for abuse. Press freedom is essential to a functioning democracy and government surveillance of their communications is tantamount to intimidation, thereby quashing a reporter’s independence and ability to protect sources. Finally, the surveillance of civilians has crossed new lines, if they’re now being tracked due to reading public content. Some have said the government is making a list and checking it twice, without ever informing the innocent citizens they’re surveilling.
Where defence advocates cite the threat of terrorism, civil liberty groups accuse governments of going too far under the guise of national security. Photos of our neighbours sharing private moments don’t appear to keep a country safe and neither does detaining the mates of journalists. In the US and Egypt reporters have been criminalized for the act of recording and telling the truth. In Canada, a judge tasked with approving CSEC warrants admits his orders are being misrepresented and abused in the international arena.
At least, at some point along the way, a covert court, congressional or parliamentary committee condoned these actions. They had to evaluate evidence that justified a temporary suspension of civil rights in the name of human safety, before allowing the NSA, GCHQ or CSEC to proceed. Whether citizens disagree with the mode, the means or the reason, an authority of some sort provided guidance until we craft laws around metadata and what constitutes privacy in the modern age. There is a telephone number to call with complaints and the election ballot box collects everyone’s messages.
The process is slow, expensive and fraught with debauchery, but it does exist. Lawyers are pushing for new legislation to close extensive spying loopholes and journalists are right beside them, urging governments to restore respect for the press. But what if it’s not the government spying and the global public is subjected to the same risk?
Private Surveillance
This privacy saga has expanded through a series of new developments and regrettably I must use myself as the example. It’s rare for an investigative journalist to become part of the story and it is with great caution that I endeavour to do this. It’s also the only way I can relate these facts, through a collection of evidence that arose from my experience and carefully considered indignation.
On February 13, 2014, I published an article on FreeThePressCanada.org. It’s a special report that addresses government conflict and proposed oil fracking beside a nuclear waste repository along the shores of the Great Lakes system. This significant resource provides drinking water to millions of residents in Canada and the United States. As anticipated, it raised concern on both sides of the border and the response has been overwhelming.
I chose to publish on this website because I’m a freelancer and I control the content here. Although I’ve written for mainstream media and Canada’s national broadcaster, relationships are being questioned between the oil industry, government and news organizations in our country. This investigation was too consequential to relinquish to another party, in the event anyone could seek to suppress the information. Our press was free to the point of envy, but much has changed under the current administration. Today the government keeps an “Enemy List” and Canadian scientists aren’t the only names on it.
Due to my access, I was able to monitor the analytics and keep an eye on the story’s progression. I receive data indicating how many people have visited, what articles they’ve inspected, what country they hail from and if they arrived at the site from links posted at an alternate location (all information is anonymous and only tallies are provided).
Facebook, Twitter and Reddit account for the most common referrals. Sometimes the audience visits via forums, blogs or other news sites, where users are discussing the issue in a comment section and someone shares the link. Less frequently a referral may appear that I fail to recognize and six days after publishing, I noticed a curious entry.
An unknown visitor arrived from Spotter Studio (click actual link at own risk):
The combination of “spotter” plus “alias to create” was enough to pique my interest. I tried visiting the page that showcased my work, only to find it contained a secure log-in for an incredibly powerful tech corporation. Since the area that contained my information was restricted to me, I set off to learn more about this company.
Spotter.com is impressive to say the least. At first glance they compile big data and work with matters of reputation management. They gather consumer feedback from platforms like social media and there are multiple competitors that do the same. Everyone using these network tools has come to accept that ads appear according to the same technology.
Corporations like Google have kept privacy czars at bay by reinforcing their policies to ensure this practice is anonymous. For no reason would this exercise in text mining become personal and connect with an individual. The advertising is based on general demographics and categories of interest.
Obtaining GPS
However, in 2011 Spotter unveiled proprietary software that surpasses these capabilities. They sought the metadata and location of internet users to match with items they’ve posted, for the purpose of building a private database and tracking system. Whereas government collects IP addresses through judicial warrant or National Security Letter, this company obtains GPS coordinates for targets under private surveillance, directly from internet pages. Without legal clearance to capture this information like the NSA possesses, the only way for Spotter to achieve the same feat is by running script that may skirt the law and calls everything into question about the goals of big data.
This would barely represent the violation I was about to feel. My article was clearly entered within the Spotter monitoring centre, because that’s the location a visitor clicked a link to arrive at my page in the first place. I couldn’t know who was paying the company to keep tabs on my work and their main accounts weren’t particularly encouraging.
Prominently displayed on the Spotter site are logos for the European Commission, Dubai Courts, Air France, Coca-Cola and McDonald’s. That may account for a quarter of wealth in the world and suggests these services don’t come cheap. Spotter headquarters are located in France and they conduct business in the US, Canada, UK, Switzerland, Luxemburg, UAE and Qatar. Early literature mentions operations in Belgium, Denmark, Spain and Portugal as well.
Inspired to know more, my investigation continued. I quickly found it wasn’t just me this faceless observer was watching. If the public discussed my website their GPS was logged the same as WikiLeaks discovered. The only difference is the NSA claimed jurisdiction over Assange and in my case there was no court to grant a private company permission to pinpoint everyone in a journalist’s readership.
Armed with GPS coordinates the Spotter software then builds a map. Everyone who shares or speaks about the surveilled link may be tagged, to assess my reach as a reporter. In this way the technology resembles a worm-type virus, because those who visit can have their personal information seized and there is nothing I can do to stop a third party intrusion. The software updates reader responses in real time and can catalogue half a million entries per day.
This isn’t a matter of beefing up security or cleaning an infection from my site. It’s happening externally through Spotter and if I wasn’t alerted to the company, I would never have known about this peril. Whether sharing happens directly from my news site or somewhere else like Twitter, this program will penetrate the entire network to identify readers. The script to obtain the audience’s location is therefore infecting all of social media. One line is all it takes to be included, regardless of where it’s occurring.
Profiling Syntax and Tone
This software goes deeper than text or data mining. It also performs sentiment mining by analyzing the words for “syntax and tone”. A psychological profile of sorts has been assembled from my writing style and content. Again it’s the same for anyone who comments, to gauge how I’ve affected the pubic audience. A Spotter client is profiling everyone with an opinion related to my work, with as much depth as they’ve applied to me.
The definition of commenting includes any words associated with the link while sharing and resulting discussion with friends. These friends may not have posted the article, but if a response is entered their sentiments will be catalogued in addition to the person who did. Spotter proceeds to save these comments, along with everyone’s GPS. That means people who didn’t click the link can be caught in the same dragnet.
It doesn’t matter if you’re on a different continent with better privacy laws than North America. If you spoke negatively or positively about my investigations, this program will know the difference and add you to the watch-list database through the mapping module. There is no protection or discernment for members of government and if an elected official joins the conversation, the psychological meaning of their text will be analyzed the same as anyone else. In this sense, there is no such thing as diplomatic immunity from having one’s thoughts surveilled.
It’s important to understand that sentiment mining was already in development, but due to the early stages of this research, ethical arguments were only beginning as well. It was introduced as another anonymous tactic that didn’t focus on the individual, but when Spotter used this tech to target a specific journalist the mission became intensely personal. As they married this feature to hunting down my audience, it also personalized surveillance of the readership. No longer can anyone claim this effort was anonymous, because they save exchanges from those who comment to reference with GPS coordinates, from which they can be singled out. Everyone with a blog is equally being surveilled.
How The Data Is Used
Stunning by itself, this collection of data must serve a purpose to validate the cost of running an elaborate operation.
Spotter software combines the location and syntax analysis to determine a journalist’s risk and influence. Once they’ve identified a nuisance to their clients, a plan to deal with the problem is devised under the heading of reputation management. Attention to corporate persona is normally good for business when it’s used to resolve customer complaints or deal with emergencies. On the other hand, if used nefariously to stalk someone for political reasons, that ability can become a weapon in a hurry. History has proven this time and again, from the Glavlit to the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda.
(source)
The company’s capacity to use this intel against individuals is reinforced by a decision-making segment within the Spotter Studio. The reason this monitoring occurs is so clients can prepare an effective defence of their interests and confront the source of unhappiness directly. The other option is promoting allied influencers to mitigate the damage, commonly referred to as “spin”.
A client can determine their own strategy, or they can employ a Spotter communications team to handle these reputation issues. The company notes a favoured tactic is winning over detractors and engaging them to promote the object of their criticism.
It would be up to a journalist, government employee, NGO, business or targeted entity, whether to accept these overtures or not. Perhaps an anti-nuclear or anti-fracking agency would come on board and begin touting the benefits of this energy, instead of criticizing it anymore. Perhaps a news producer would begin to deny stories that had a negative impact on their alliance, that was forged through negotiation with the vested Spotter client. Whatever the change in attitude, it likely doesn’t come free. If the individual doesn’t cooperate, it’s also conceivable there may be repercussions.
Although we must speculate about the intentions of anyone using this software, what can’t be overlooked is the intention to interfere with media. Journalism wasn’t meant to double as public relations for corporate interest and allowing intimidation through private surveillance destroys the constitutional ideal of press freedom at its core. Covertly collecting the GPS coordinates of readers should handily remove any benefit of the doubt, as it surpasses the NSA’s mandate and goes well beyond the confines of anonymity in metadata.
Spotter goes on to say that politicians use their services and the European Commission is front and centre on that list. It raises the question if a government actor is behind the surveillance of journalists and members of the public. With no oversight of companies that perform similar spying to that of intelligence agencies, we must ask if private watchers are contracted by bureaucrats to bypass procedures or keep monitoring off the record. In this respect Spotter may have more power than any government, because they’re free to target for money without needing to justify their actions. The more effective they are in helping a client defeat their opponent, the greater everyone’s year-end bonus.
(source)
Complicating this situation is the international structure being surveilled. While the Spotter company is based in France, I’m in Canada and the website in question is technically located in the United States. The client that watch-listed my work could be located in any country and my readership extends globally as well. Lawyers may have a heyday trying to sort this out, but meanwhile I have no recourse to shield myself or the informed citizens who support investigative journalism.
The public doesn’t realize they’re being run through behavioural diagnostics and mapped for reading the news. It’s as if a plague began the moment Spotter inputted my web address and I suspect major publications took priority over my platform. At this point a wiretap would be less intrusive for its reach and the implications extend to every profession that uses the internet. The government may track journalists suspected of telling too much, but a corporation will watch anyone they’re paid to study and both will be tracking a target’s entire network of contacts. The private version of this surveillance will also be more intrusive than what the Five Eyes are allowed to perform.
Without knowing which of these engaged Spotter to surveil my audience, I can only say that five days after being privately watch-listed, the US Department of Homeland Security called my house.
Blurred Lines Between Corporate and Government Spies
Most intriguing are Spotter’s quiet relationships. They have a longstanding history with the International Olympic Committee, providing surveillance and reputation management that covered the Sydney, Australia games. They assist prospective host cities by out-maneuvering the competition with proprietary intelligence. Their politically minded sports clients include the World Anti-Doping Agency, Rugby World Cup and Tour de France. If you spoke about any of these topics on the internet, there’s a chance your words were already added to the Spotter database for monitoring purposes. That means all your friends who responded too, along with a regular update of everyone’s movement.
In August 2011, Spotter announced a $7 million contract spanning four years with the European Commission. The company notes their previous affiliation and goes on to celebrate the most recent project, assessing European issues in the media. More important are the Decisional Analytics designed to navigate and steer opinion regarding policy matters. The monitoring for this database includes all 27 member states, as well as third party countries and any number of “influencers”.
By the end of 2012, Spotter secured another contract with the European Research Council. After demonstrating their software could deliver on its promises, the institution sought their services to develop a global media monitoring and analysis system. The term “media” includes all traditional forms, plus social media, blogs, forums and comment sections spanning the world wide web.
Since the company admits to saving copies of all media and comments in a proprietary database, this may present legal problems in the United States and several countries that value copyright. In the Associated Press v. Meltwater case (2013), the court held that clipping copies wasn’t protected by fair-use doctrine and this practice was an infringement. My own site states that payment is required and yet I’m guaranteed that Spotter has taken my work without notification, compensation or permission. I certainly didn’t give them access to mine or the readership’s GPS, but they’ve taken that without anyone’s knowledge. A similar case in the UK had the opposite outcome, but surveilling the audience network along with geo-location metadata wasn’t considered among the issues.
This comprehensive data saved by Spotter is a new phenomenon that addresses more than copyright and assumes possession of the readership, in addition to diagnosing their behavioural tendencies and movement. It’s unknown how this would impact privacy laws in Canada, involving an untested example of researcher surveillance. The University of Montreal engaged Spotter to monitor names related to the school and devise a ranking system, based on their public influence.
Deepening the mystery regarding Spotter’s stature and authority, the company cites the UK Home Office as a high profile client in limited print material. This government ministry oversees national security, counter-terrorism and MI5. The latter works in concert with British spies at GCHQ, in partnership with the Five Eyes intelligence community including the NSA and CSEC. Therefore it’s possible a government client watch-listed me through a private mechanism that circumvented traditional approval.
The LexisNexis Connection
Behind every good surveillance company is an exceptionally skilled programmer and Spotter hired Olivier Massiot as its Chief Technology Officer. Prior to joining the team, he is credited with the development of text mining and analytics for a powerful American competitor, LexisNexis.
LexisNexis also treads a fine line between corporate intelligence, law and national security. They’re predominantly known for providing databases to universities and cataloguing case law plus legislation from each of the Five Eyes countries. QuickLaw is one of their proprietary services and it’s used by most lawyers in Canada to research trends and precedents.
What little is known about the company (that requires log-in to most pages) is trusted by all courts and prestigious schools in North America. Judges stateside may not realize that additional products in the suite are used to surveil them akin to journalists, however. Profiles are created to find weaknesses, bias and relationships about not only judges, but also opposing counsel, arbitrators and experts. This may involve checking assets, business registrations, deed transfers, licences, tax filings and social interaction with others.
We probably haven’t heard much about LexisNexis because they provide Advanced Government Solutions, although these services are available to the private sector as well. The client list includes: Attorneys General, Corrections, Parole and Probation, Courts and Judiciary, Health and Human Services, Municipal Attorneys, Regulatory and Administrative, Tax and Revenue, Law Enforcement, Defense, Intelligence and Homeland Security.
Working with 4,000 state, federal and local police departments, the company boasts about their ability to provide officers with investigative data that isn’t available through public records. This includes documentation of a target’s mental health without any effort to seek patient consent. They licence access to proprietary records that are described as “inaccessible to general law enforcement searching”. The exclusive information can then be shared across a private network for police investigators in the LexisNexis program.
As Spotter collects GPS coordinates for private customers, LexisNexis does the same for police. They also map relationships and analyze links between people that can be integrated with the force’s internal records. This raises another set of questions if law enforcement is allowed to possess private information that would “otherwise be inaccessible”.
In October 2013, LexisNexis released a Social Media Monitor that behaves similar to the product from Spotter. Police can highlight a geographic perimeter on any touchscreen device and this program will collect posts from users in the area. Surveillance can be set by keywords or target names and the software contains a predictive feature that PoliceOne editor, Doug Wyllie describes as resembling the Minority Report. With forward looking semantic technology, it attempts to assess the precognition of crime and no, it’s not a prototype.
(source)
On the Homeland Security front, comparative software monitors terrorist threats and hunts for fugitives who are trying to stay off the radar. Experts at LexisNexis assist the government with a customized repository for their abundant information, as well as access to the company’s records that were obtained both publicly and privately.
In service of the Department of Defense and National Security Agency, this multifaceted corporation collects, analyzes and “enriches” international data to help with greater insight. This may include social media and information about journalists, or anyone who landed in a geo-surveillance circle. An itemized contract with the government indicates they train spies and support staff how to operate the software as well.
It’s confusing that no conflict of interest was raised when LexisNexis sought to influence government policy. They’re employed to create these surveillance programs and in the next breath they help the intelligence community devise civil liberty and privacy rights, while compiling personal data about judges.
Likewise, this company represents the energy industry and it’s impossible for a target to know if they’ve been watch-listed by a corporate client or the Five Eyes collaboration. A disturbing scenario exists in Canada and CSEC is deflecting criticism for sharing intelligence about activists with oil tycoons, offending public perception in the same manner.
LexisNexis also analyzes the news, but it appears Spotter goes one step further by personalizing surveillance of the journalist and audience. In the LexisNexis example, metadata is extracted from internet pages and the same situation could arise if they choose to follow Europe’s lead in the future.
In any event, the information is collected in bulk and when the same technique was applied to telephone metadata, the President’s advisory council admonished the NSA for breaking a good, long list of constitutional protections. If widespread surveillance of telephone data was seen to have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and association, then it stands to reason the unrestrained collection of online information would be equal if not more offensive.
When all else fails, LexisNexis is a go-to source for political campaigns. A candidate can purchase their services to surveil the competition with every intrusive tool previously mentioned. A framework of personal and business associates will be unearthed, from basic assets to global sanction lists. If they’re not busy digging up the dirt, they will also help with PAC registration forms. Another conflict of interest appears imminent and the Harper government in Canada has announced its intention to use similar technology in the next election.
Should a client go awry and require legal assistance, LexisNexis offers Council Benchmarking to decide if the cost is worth defending or better to settle with a complainant. The justice of these matters seems to have little bearing, when a decision is made by crunching the fees and odds with computerized analytics.
It must be reiterated that I would not have known about this company if Spotter didn’t hire their text mining and analytics developer. Spotter is also connected to the LexisNexis database, sharing private resources to accommodate client wishes while bringing this relationship full circle.
Metadata or Democracy?
Growing the team hasn’t been easy according to Spotter executive, Frédéric Marcoul. Recruitment agencies didn’t produce the type of developer they were seeking and the company began canvassing the winners of gamer coding competitions. This tactic resembles the NSA’s presence at hacking conferences and raises eyebrows, still.
Despite this challenge, corporate and government spies have no trouble collecting the public’s information and tracking individual movements over time. In the absence of a warrant this behaviour is downright dangerous and civil liberty is non-existent for more than journalists. So far the debate has centred on privacy and freedom of speech, but this involves freedom of thought and association, not to mention voting and justice. In the wrong hands these programs could terrorize an innocent life and judges aren’t sheltered from it either.
Technology doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong, nor does it possess a moral compass. As governments drag their heels about modernizing defence and privacy legislation, every person on the internet is being profiled and catalogued for the highest bidder. There is no regulation regarding how the data is used and watchers now control the levers of democracy more than any elected official.
No online newspaper can protect readers from being surveilled, let alone their staff. No blog or forum is safe. If a client has a web address to input, then no website is immune to spying. Celebrities on Twitter are also at risk, because the company profits from sharing their metadata and the policy makes users agree to this.
Law enforcement can monitor citizens by the same means, but we must remember that any private client can do the equivalent. In fact, police that lack this warrantless spying would be at a disadvantage, if corporate customers chose to surveil them as individuals for their own reasons. It’s a double-edged sword and the only winners are companies that traffic this information without restraint, authority, oversight or allegiance to anything but profit.
These lists extend globally, as do the targets being monitored. You might be an Average Joe who lives on Main Street, but rest assured that if you read this article, someone is likely paying attention. Next week a new client could purchase your data and this process will repeat for as long as intelligence agencies lobby to let it continue. In the meantime the public is at its most vulnerable and world leaders have been rendered impotent by the very power they sought to wield. If there is anything remotely amusing about this, it’s that twenty-year-old gamers took the reins from political veterans. I dare say it’s time to take them back though.
(source)
