Ontario’s highest court has signalled that the right of police officers to look through someone’s phone depends on whether there’s a password.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario says it’s all right for police to have a cursory look through the phone upon arrest if it’s not password protected, but if it is, investigators should get a search warrant.
The court’s ruling comes in the case of a man who appealed his robbery conviction, arguing that police breached his charter rights by looking through his phone after his arrest.
Kevin Fearon was arrested in July 2009, after a jewelry stall at a flea market in Toronto was robbed, and police found pictures of a gun and cash as well as a text message about jewelry on his phone.
The Appeal Court denied his appeal, saying that police were allowed to look through Fearon’s phone “in a cursory fashion” to see if there was evidence relevant to the crime, but after that they should have stopped to get a search warrant.
The court says if the phone had been password protected or otherwise locked to anyone other than its owner, “it would not have been appropriate” to look through the phone without a search warrant.
The Appeal Court judges referenced a decision in a murder case in which the judge did not allow evidence from a personal electronic device because it “functioned as a mini-computer,” which has a high expectation of privacy. The contents of that device were only extracted by a police officer using specialized equipment in that case, the Appeal Court judges noted.
“There was no suggestion in this case that this particular cell phone functioned as a ‘mini-computer’ nor that its contents were not ‘immediately visible to the eye,’ the court said in its ruling, released Wednesday.
“Rather, because the phone was not password protected, the photos and the text message were readily available to other users.”
The court, though, declined to create a specific new rule for all cellphone searches.
“It may be that some future case will produce a factual matrix that will lead the court to carve out a cellphone exception to the law,” the ruling said. “To put it in the modern vernacular: ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”‘
SEATTLE (AP) — An effort is building in Congress to change U.S. marijuana laws, including moves to legalize the industrial production of hemp and establish a hefty federal pot tax.
While passage this year could be a longshot, lawmakers from both parties have been quietly working on several bills, the first of which Democratic Reps. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon and Jared Polis of Colorado plan to introduce Tuesday, Blumenauer told The Associated Press.
Polis’ measure would regulate marijuana the way the federal government handles alcohol: In states that legalize pot, growers would have to obtain a federal permit. Oversight of marijuana would be removed from the Drug Enforcement Administration and given to the newly renamed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Marijuana and Firearms, and it would remain illegal to bring marijuana from a state where it’s legal to one where it isn’t.
The bill is based on a legalization measure previously pushed by former Reps. Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Ron Paul of Texas.
Blumenauer’s bill would create a federal marijuana excise tax of 50 percent on the “first sale” of marijuana — typically, from a grower to a processor or retailer. It also would tax pot producers or importers $1,000 annually and other marijuana businesses $500.
His office said Monday it doesn’t yet have an estimate of how much the taxes might bring in. But a policy paper Blumenauer and Polis are releasing this week suggests, based on admittedly vague estimates, that a federal tax of $50 per ounce could raise $20 billion a year. They call for directing the money to law enforcement, substance abuse treatment and the national debt.
Last fall’s votes in Colorado and Washington state to legalize recreational marijuana should push Congress to end the 75-year federal pot prohibition, Blumenauer said.
A supporter of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez hangs a pair of shoes at the front of the US embassy in Caracas. (AFP Photo / Juan Baretto)
South America – Venezuela in particular – has been the target of a coordinated campaign by the US government and private industry over the past few years. But those of us who have been paying attention know this is nothing new.
WikiLeaks recently published new documents showing that US global intelligence corporations like Stratfor and its foreign offshoot CANVAS worked hard over the past decade (aided and abetted by US Government agencies) in a failed attempt to overthrow Venezuela’s democratically elected president Hugo Chavez.
Meddling in the ‘Backyard’
The US corporate over-world has always worked closely with the CIA, the State Department and the Pentagon promoting the overthrow – known as “regime change in rogue states” – of governments that do not automatically align to US interests; or, better said, of governments that do not automatically align with the interests of the supra-national global power elite that is deeply embedded inside private and public power structures in the US.
This has been especially true throughout Latin America, traditionally America’s geopolitical and economic backyard, from Mexico to Tierra del Fuego.
For example, September 11th of this year (of all dates!) marks the 40th anniversary of the CIA-backed, financed and orchestrated overthrow and assassination of Chile’s democratically elected president, Salvador Allende.
Allende was replaced by a pro-US and pro-UK military junta headed by General Augusto Pinochet. At the time, private corporations like ITT worked hand in hand with CIA operatives promoting strikes, social turmoil and waging psychological warfare through the local media. Then it was Chile; now it’s Venezuela.
General Augusto Pinochet (left) poses with Chilean president and Marxist leader Salvador Allende 23 August 1973 in Santiago. (AFP Photo)
In fact, the 1970s and 1980s saw the Kissinger-designed and executed ‘Condor Plan’ finance and diplomatically support various military coups and regimes not only in Chile but in Argentina, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay and other countries in the region.
Such US-UK support for authoritarian and criminal regimes would only stop when some Latin American general like Argentina’s General Leopoldo Galtieri went too far by doing something really stupid, like Argentina’s 1982 invasion of the Falkland Islands.
Relatives of Argentine soldiers who died during Argentina’s 1982 war over the Falkland Islands decorate tombs at a cemetery. (AFP Photo / Angeline Montoya)
Barring that, all those US-backed coups used local military strongmen trained in the US Military’s School of the Americas in Panama to do as they pleased in their local countries, as long as: (a) they kept those countries aligned to US geopolitical imperatives which during the Cold War meant being staunchly anti-Communist; (b) accepted Chicago-Boys-style financial dependency and artificially created public debts; (c) kept local populations in permanent fear and thus ‘disciplined and orderly.’
Since the fall of the former Soviet Union, however, these tactics changed dramatically. Now US control over Latin American countries is centred on promoting ‘democracy.’ Well, actually, “the kind of democracy that we want to see,” as Hillary Clinton so eloquently put it when visiting ‘Arab Spring Egypt’ back in March 2011.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (C) shakes hands with Egyptians as she takes an unannounced walk through Tahrir Square, the epicentre of the 18 days of protests that overthrew long time ally Hosni Mubarak, on March 16, 2011. (AFP Photo / Paul J. Richards)
Such money-controlled democracy is, of course, no democracy at all, but rather an obscene money-sloshing and media clownery system that catapults their favourite candidates into local positions of power.
When the US has its way as in Mexico, Colombia and Chile, and their candidates win local elections, then it’s all business as usual.
But when growing political awareness among the local populace elects presidents into power who prioritize the local national interest as in Ecuador (who just re-elected their fine president Rafael Correa), Bolivia (Evo Morales) and, most notably, Venezuela with Hugo Chavez, then the ‘regime change’ mega-juggernaut comes into full action.
Public and private initiative
In America, you never know whether it’s the White House and Congress running the country and the corporate over-world, or if it’s the other way around: The corporate over-world runs the White House, Congress and the country.
Recent WikiLeaks documents released on Venezuela describes Stratfor as “a company that fronts as an intelligencepublisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations such as Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency.”
“The emails,” WikiLeaks goes on to explain, “show Stratfor’s web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.”
The filtered emails cover a wide range of issues on the energy sector, especially oil; political change and the state of right-wing forces inside Venezuela; and the state of the country’s armed forces. They also refer to Venezuela’s relations with Cuba, China, Russia and Iran, and provide bleak projections for the economy and the financial sector.
The Serbian-based and US-supported Center for Applied Non-Violent Action and Strategies (CANVAS) is yet another such ‘global intelligence’ front of what, in practice, are organizations specializing in engineering social turmoil – even civil war – as countries like Serbia, Libya, Afghanistan and Syria have painfully learned.
The leaked emails from CANVAS had them explaining their recommended strategy for toppling governments, as in one revealing message to Stratfor:
“When somebody asks us for help, as in Vene (sic!) case, we usually ask them the question ‘and how would you do it?’. That means that the first thing is to create a situational analysis (the word doc I sent you) and after that comes “Mission Statement” (still left to be done) and then “Operational Concept”, which is the plan for campaign… For this case we have three campaigns: Unification of opposition, campaign for [September 2010 parliamentary elections] and parallel with that a ‘get out and vote’ campaign.”
Very straightforward!
Stratfor Global Intelligence CEO George Friedman (AFP Photo/Ronaldo Schemidt)
Stratfor’s founder and chairman is one George Friedman, who is regularly interviewed in the Wall Street Journal, CNBC and CNN and is advisor to JPMorganChase, CitiGroup and Ernst & Young. Stratfor’s president & CEO is Shea Morenz, who for many years was a senior officer at Goldman Sachs. Not exactly corporations and megabanks bent on promoting the common good of the people of Venezuela, or of any other country in Latin America or elsewhere.
Clearly, there are no sharp lines separating these private intelligence publishers and analysts, think tanks like the Council on Foreign Relations, RAND Corporation, National Endowment for Democracy and major corporations, from public US-Government agencies like the CIA, NSA, USAID and the State Department.
In fact, throughout Latin America, lucid political observers will always keep an eye on what ‘La Embajada’ is up to. ‘La Embajada’ is Spanish for ‘The Embassy’ – not just any embassy, of course, but the local Embassy of the United States.
No surprise then to learn that this batch of WikiLeaks documents reveals US-based firms working to overthrow Hugo Chavez by assisting and financing opposition candidates like Henrique Capriles Radonsky, who was Chavez’s main opposition candidate, coming in second place in last year’s presidential elections.
Capriles Radonsky is strongly backed by US, European and Israeli interests, thanks to his notable alignment to those countries’ objectives in Venezuela and the region. Of Jewish background – in a country with a very tiny Jewish community – Radonsky promises to steer Venezuela away from the close ties forged by Chavez with Iran, Cuba, Russia, China and (until it was overrun and destroyed by NATO) also Libya.
Due to President Chavez’s ailing health, this public-private US initiative is again hard at work promoting all opposition forces inside Venezuela, whilst they eagerly await good news (for them) about president Chavez’s condition, hoping that he may have to relinquish the presidency he won late last year, which would mean new elections in a Venezuela without Chavez.
That would spell real tragedy for that country, as the US public-private initiative would again go into full ‘lets-get-our-boy-into-the-Miraflores-presidential-palace-in-Caracas’ Mode.
Supporters of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez gather at Simon Bolivar Square in Caracas. (AFP Photo / Juan Baretto)
A tragedy not just for Venezuela but for the entire region as well, where the US continues holding full sway in countries like Colombia – whose president Juan Manuel Santos is a member of the Rockefeller-funded, New York-based ‘Americas Society’ that promotes in-roads into Latin America for the powerful Council on Foreign Relations, whose head office is just across the street from them on Park Avenue at 57th Street. And Mexico recently elected pro-US rich-boy Enrique Peña Nieto as president. Two countries where it’s business as usual.
‘Make it look like a democratic election’
In advising on how to engineer destabilisation, CANVAS told Stratfor, that “We only give them the tools to use.” Referring to the 2010 parliamentary elections, they wrote, “This year we are definitely ramping up activity in Venezuela… they have elections in September and we are in close connection with activists from there and people trying to help them (please keep this to yourself for now, no publication). The first phase of our preparation is under way.”
So, this is “the kind of democracy the US wants to see.” Or, as Don Corleone in ‘The Godfather’ would recommend to agents and operatives if he sat in the State Department or the CIA: “Make it look like a democratic election.”
Maybe Corleone’s best disciples are actually running the show after all.
AFP Photo / Geraldo Caso
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
It was only a few months ago that Hamlton’s Mayor Bob Bratina stated “If ICLEI Is A Conspiracy To Take Over The World I would Like To Join Today”, At the 2012 ICLEI livable cities forum.
It seemed as if he was just trying to make a joke, especially since the city of Hamilton has been “in on” the conspiracy of ICLEI/Agenda 21 since the year 2000 (when they joined ICLEI).
His plans to usher in the next phase of the Agenda 21 framework are now showing through and are no laughing matter.
Think vertical, mayors tell home builders thespec.com
Home builders in Hamilton and Halton are being told to look up, not out, for future developments.
Mayors Bob Bratina and Rick Goldring, of Hamilton and Burlington respectively, told local home builders Friday the days of sprawling subdivisions as the major form of growth in the cities are over, replaced by a changing market demanding projects closer to amenities. The city leaders’ breakfast is a traditional opening to the Home Show.
For Bratina, it’s a simple matter of space — Hamilton can’t spread out any more.
“My answer to that is to think vertical,” he said in an interview after his presentation. “If you’re running out of land, then the only way to go is up.”
Convincing home buyers of that isn’t a major issue, he added. Empty-nesters and young professionals are voting with their wallets for smaller properties and better condos where they’re close enough to walk to what they need. The ones who have to be convinced are home builders.
“A lot of traditional home builders grew their business in the era of the ’50s and ’60s when there was a different set of circumstances,” Bratina said. “Well, everything has changed and I think the era of scraping all the topsoil off a farm and putting up a cookie cutter subdivision is coming to an end.” Continue Reading
Top officials from the United States, France, Germany, Britain, China, Russia and Iran take part in talks on Iran’s nuclear programme in the Kazakh city of Almaty on February 27, 2013 (AFP Photo / Pool / Shamil Zhumatov)
Negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 nations ended with offers of eased demands on the Islamic Republic. While it’s a good start, experts say, the crippling US sanctions on the country are unlikely to be changed as they are written into American law.
A new proposal finalized during the Wednesday meeting in Almaty, Kazakhstan would require Iran to suspend – but not completely close down – operations at its underground uranium enrichment facility in Fordo. It would also create a set amount of 20-per-cent-enriched uranium for Iran to stockpile.
The offer marks a new turn in the long term of negotiations between world powers and Iran, which previously had made stark demands on the Islamic Republic. The P5+1 – the United States, Russia, France, Britain, China and Germany – are now only asking for scaled down operations in Iran’s nuclear program, which some governments allege is aimed at developing a nuclear bomb.
Iran would also now be able to keep enough enriched uranium to produce medical isotopes at a research facility in Tehran.
The group asked Iran to allow International Atomic Energy Agency monitors to visit its facilities more often in exchange for the suspension of selected current sanctions and a moratorium on new ones.
However, Hillary Mann Leverett, CEO of Strategic Energy and Global Analysis, a Washington-based political risk consultancy, told RT this part may be only an empty gesture.
“Everyone knows the United States has very little that it can give on sanctions,” she said. “President Obama essentially ceded his foreign policy on this issue to the US Congress; almost all of those sanctions are written into US law. They are not something President Obama can give away.”
In any case, the European Union’s embargo on Iranian oil was not brought up for negotiation at the meeting, though the P5+1 would reportedly consider easing restrictions on Iran’s gold and petrochemicals trades, as well as those on its banks.
But, after all, it may not matter in the long run, Mann Leverett told RT. “There’s not much the US can give on sanctions, and in the meantime Iran is becoming more and more self-sufficient in a range of issues so that it’s not vulnerable to such sanctions.”
Said Jalili, Iran’s chief negotiator at the meetings, called the talks “positive” in comments to the press in Almaty. He added that some of the offers coming from Western governments looked “more realistic than those presented in the past and made an effort to approach the positions of Iran.”
Mann Leverett explained what Jalili might have been getting at: “The critical issue for the Iranians, and I think this is where they perceived a slight – and I stress slight – movement on the US side, is in the recognition of their rights: their sovereign and their treaty-based rights to enrich uranium.”
Jalili stressed that Tehran saw “no justification” for shutting down the Fordo facility.
Next, Iranian and EU officials are set to meet in Istanbul on March 18 for negotations that will include experts on nuclear technology.
By: Allison Jones, The Canadian Press
PN 