Milnet.ca Forums

The Newsroom => Military Current Affairs & News => Topic started by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 14:49:48

Title: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 14:49:48
The protest in question:
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/nova-scotia/cornwallis-protest-chief-grizzly-mama-canada-day-1.4187445

This involves 5 guys in Halifax ( I think 3 or 4 are in the military). In the videos they never identified themselves as military but the 'protesters' have started outing them on Facebook, trying to raise hell.

There was a short video posted on facebook I can't seem to link. In it they only giver their names and then the people who posted it attached a big story which is impossible to prove or disprove from the video.

Longer video with a little more context.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4eBFo3Hx0U


It don't seem to be covered currently by the media except for a side note, but this has blown up locally on Facebook. And as usual many people joined the bandwagon with pitchforks and torches. I wouldn't be surprised to see it in the local news tomorrow, with a negative spin towards the military.

I'm not condemning or condoning anything this group may have done but from the video I don't see much. The protesters took exception to the Red Ensign. I've seen a few military superiors on Facebook comment on the ones who are members saying things like 'they are idiots' etc. Which I feel is wrong for a superior to do it publicly, especially without giving the people a chance to defend themselves.

Social media has been quick to label these guys 'white supremacists' though from the video I don't see anything that suggests that. Now there are some questionable behavior that can look bad going forward they are all wearing the same shirt which gives them the image of being part of a group. Apparently they admit they are part of 'Proud Boys' something I don't know much about but this is the official shirt it seems.

I imagine a great deal of crap is going to hit these guys at work tomorrow. I'm curious what they could be charged with as the videos don't show them being aggressive at all, more so the 'protesters'.

Some side context, a lot of the same 'protesters' in the video have shown up over the years here in Halifax at different protests like Occupy from a few years back. It seems they keep looking for things to post videos off to try to start a firestorm, unfortunately these guys gave them something.


Edit:

Here is the original video which sparked the firestorm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9gEAHukudk



Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Chief Stoker on July 03, 2017, 15:31:05
The protest in question:
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/nova-scotia/cornwallis-protest-chief-grizzly-mama-canada-day-1.4187445

This involves 5 guys in Halifax ( I think 3 or 4 are in the military). In the videos they never identified themselves as military but the 'protesters' have started outing them on Facebook, trying to raise hell.

There was a short video posted on facebook I can't seem to link. In it they only giver their names and then the people who posted it attached a big story which is impossible to prove or disprove from the video.

Longer video with a little more context.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4eBFo3Hx0U


It don't seem to be covered currently by the media except for a side note, but this has blown up locally on Facebook. And as usual many people joined the bandwagon with pitchforks and torches. I wouldn't be surprised to see it in the local news tomorrow, with a negative spin towards the military.

I'm not condemning or condoning anything this group may have done but from the video I don't see much. The protesters took exception to the Red Ensign. I've seen a few military superiors on Facebook comment on the ones who are members saying things like 'they are idiots' etc. Which I feel is wrong for a superior to do it publicly, especially without giving the people a chance to defend themselves.

Social media has been quick to label these guys 'white supremacists' though from the video I don't see anything that suggests that. Now there are some questionable behavior that can look bad going forward they are all wearing the same shirt which gives them the image of being part of a group. Apparently they admit they are part of 'Proud Boys' something I don't know much about but this is the official shirt it seems.

I imagine a great deal of crap is going to hit these guys at work tomorrow. I'm curious what they could be charged with as the videos don't show them being aggressive at all, more so the 'protesters'.

Some side context, a lot of the same 'protesters' in the video have shown up over the years here in Halifax at different protests like Occupy from a few years back. It seems they keep looking for things to post videos off to try to start a firestorm, unfortunately these guys gave them something.


Edit:

Here is the original video which sparked the firestorm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9gEAHukudk

They are all members of the RCN , with two members who are apparently in the release process. From what I have seen they showed up at an aboriginal protest on Canada day waving the red ensign. I believe the aboriginals are protesting Edward Cornwallis as someone who committed genocide against their ancestors. From what I have seen on the video it was pretty tame. The commander of MARLANT has been informed and I suspect an investigation will be conducted into their membership of the Proud Boys and actions, which is a right wing group based in the US.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: PuckChaser on July 03, 2017, 15:42:17
Saw this on Facebook, and someone had linked to an "anti-racist Canada" Blog. In it, they stated the Red Ensign was the Canadian equivalent of the Confederate flag. They also stated that the ceremony was to remember MMIWG that were "murdered by the Canadian state". :facepalm:

Poor choice to go stir up crap with those crowd, but they were threatened with assault after just standing there. Despite the social media outcry, I really don't see how they'll get anything other than a talking-to about appropriate life choices. They didn't even identify as CAF members.

Also, one of them is a member of the CA, they all show up in the GAL on Outlook if the names are correct.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Chief Stoker on July 03, 2017, 15:46:59
Saw this on Facebook, and someone had linked to an "anti-racist Canada" Blog. In it, they stated the Red Ensign was the Canadian equivalent of the Confederate flag. They also stated that the ceremony was to remember MMIWG that were "murdered by the Canadian state". :facepalm:

Poor choice to go stir up crap with those crowd, but they were threatened with assault after just standing there. Despite the social media outcry, I really don't see how they'll get anything other than a talking-to about appropriate life choices. They didn't even identify as CAF members.

Also, one of them is a member of the CA, they all show up in the GAL on Outlook if the names are correct.

I agree however in this day and age, I suspect the consequences for them will be great.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ballz on July 03, 2017, 15:47:58
Remedial measures for conduct are easy on this one (to what level is a matter of judgement), beyond that I am unsure what else could be done.

Why are remedial measures for conduct easy? Because their conduct was not what was expected of a professional member of the Canadian Armed Forces. In other words, deliberately trolling a (apparently) peaceful protest. Their actions shine a negative light on the Canadian Armed Forces, which is very easy to see / prove on the balance of probabilities. Therefore, their conduct was below standard.

This is not much different from Lauren Southern trolling Slutwalks, which was a negative reflection on the LPoC.

In any case, I don't think it's unfair to call them a bunch of idiots without a trial.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 15:55:43
Remedial measures for conduct are easy on this one (to what level is a matter of judgement), beyond that I am unsure what else could be done.

Why are remedial measures for conduct easy? Because their conduct was not what was expected of a professional member of the Canadian Armed Forces. In other words, deliberately trolling a (apparently) peaceful protest. Their actions shine a negative light on the Canadian Armed Forces, which is very easy to see / prove on the balance of probabilities. Therefore, their conduct was below standard.

This is not much different from Lauren Southern trolling Slutwalks, which was a negative reflection on the LPoC.

In any case, I don't think it's unfair to call them a bunch of idiots without a trial.

Yeah I was thinking Conduct Unbecoming, but couldn't see much else.

I'm pretty sure this will fade away as soon as those 'protesters' get the next 'travesty' to catch on film. It's sad the state of the world we live in when people like them can threaten another person life/livelihood with little to no context.

Say what you want about them, they get away with a lot of stuff because people think ignoring them is better than calling out things you don't agree with.

 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: PuckChaser on July 03, 2017, 16:03:04
Conduct unbecoming is an American charge. NDA 129 or QR&O 130.60 is Conduct prejudice of good order and discipline.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-02/ch-103.page#cha-103-60 (http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-02/ch-103.page#cha-103-60)
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 16:06:25
Conduct unbecoming is an American charge. NDA 129 or QR&O 130.60 is Conduct prejudice of good order and discipline.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-02/ch-103.page#cha-103-60 (http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-02/ch-103.page#cha-103-60)

I suck at baseball, but at least I was in the same ball park.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ModlrMike on July 03, 2017, 16:09:57
I'm not sure 129 is a valid option here as I don't fully see the military nexus. That being said, Remedial Measures are absolutely the way to go.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: PuckChaser on July 03, 2017, 16:15:27
I'm not sure 129 is a valid option here as I don't fully see the military nexus. That being said, Remedial Measures are absolutely the way to go.

If there's a dubious military nexus, how does an IC stand up to a redress of grievance? If you're dead set on making an example of them, a few extras should be plenty sufficient.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on July 03, 2017, 16:29:47
At this point, nothing they did in public identified them as members of the Canadian Armed Forces. Like every other Canadian, they have freedom of expression, and from what I saw in the videos, they did not cross the line into either hate speech or libel. I am not convinced anything would stick against them.

Anyone here ever heard that the old Canadian flag (which still flies in many places, BTW) is considered the "equivalent to the Confederate flag? I've never heard that before. On the other hand, I am saddened to see that the young person holding that flag (who has never lived in the country while it was still the official flag of Canada) is ignorant of the history of its replacement. Contrary to his claim, it was not replaced by Trudeau (by which, I took him to mean Trudeau senior). It was actually replaced by Lester B. Pearson a few years before he left to be replaced by Trudeau - the whole to the great chagrin of ol' Diefenbaker (who was probably too prudish to drown his sorrow with alcohol  [:D ). Moreover, I truly don't appreciate young Canadians going around claiming that Canada is (present tense) a British colony. Personally, I swore an oath to the Queen of Canada, not the crown of England.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 16:33:50
Personally, I swore an oath to the Queen of Canada, not the crown of England.

I love that distinction, unfortunately too many people can't see the difference.

Anyone here ever heard that the old Canadian flag (which still flies in many places, BTW) is considered the "equivalent to the Confederate flag?

First I've seen it was today on that facebook. I look at it as someone who is ignorant on history, and the claim itself is a pretty big stretch. But hey protesters don't need to be right about history, just right about what parts they pick and choose ... or make up.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 03, 2017, 16:38:09
Curious:  blue golf shirts with gold collar/sleeve trim - an RCN thing or something else?

According to some of "the usual suspect" antifa social media sites, the Navy's been asked about this - see attached.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 16:41:07
The sad thing I see coming out of this, is another 'click through' web course that everyone will have to complete by a date.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Scuba_Dave on July 03, 2017, 18:43:31
So from what I have seen via the same links, and a story CBC did, it's not so much that the old Dominion flag is being compared to the Confederate flag, it's that under the Dominion flag many atrocities were conducted against native populations. Thus dragging it out during a native protest and expecting nothing to happen is ridiculous. It would be like dragging out the German flag at a Jewish protest. So they knew they were stirring the pot etc etc. And as has been mentioned they were not identifying themselves as members of the military, however you must conduct yourself to a level expected of the CAF at all times. If the Admiral wouldnt condone the actions in uniform, you can easily expect that it will not be condoned in civilian attire. As for the 'Proud Boys' part, I've read up on them after seeing it in this article, and I'm not quite sure this will be good for their case either. The "Alt-Right" this organization is representing is fairly close if not crossing the line of racism and white supremacy. This is however going to be a real good read when the charges are wrote up. If I were a betting man I would go with NDA 129 for starters...Probably a few more tacked on...
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 03, 2017, 19:03:15
The Red Ensign has only been Canada's flag from 1922–1965 (in two iterations - changed in 1957).  If you want to blame anything on the "Flag" for events prior to 1922, perhaps you would best refer to the Union Jack.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: recceguy on July 03, 2017, 19:11:43
Their venue sucked, but standing around with a Red Ensign, in a park is not illegal. If the videos are true and they did nothing, CAF shouldn't even get involved.

How do you discipline someone for upholding their Charter Rights.

The Red Ensign is not equivalent to the Stars and Bars. Anyone saying otherwise is ignorant of history and/ or an idiot.

I have trouble understanding why they blame Europeans. Probably because they are available and it is de rigueur to blame everything on 'whitey'

Trying to remember my history. If I'm historically wrong, I'm sure a correction will be forthcoming. I think, before the 'white man', the Five Nations (mohawk, etc), invaded, enslaved, pillaged,  killed and occupied territory of other peaceful tribes all though Central and eastern Canada and the States. They were merciless in their actions to other tribes. The Five Nations were made up of a confederacy of tribes that practiced genocide long before Europeans showed up. When they did, they did exactly the same thing and took the land from the Five Nations, who had stolen it originally from others. All of a sudden the rules changed and we're supposed to just give everything back and then pay them besides? Why? Something like ANTIFA, they scream, yell and demand but pay no attention to history or how they abuse it, except for the cherry picked parts.

My personal feeling is that we'll never sort out the native problem until we close the reservations and integrate everyone into a single society that is fair for all and everyone has the same chance at success, with no exceptions. One final leg up, one final gratis payment, training if they wish and job hunting help. Then that's it. No more handouts, for anyone, native or immigrant. We can't allow any more second and third generation welfare families, anywhere.

That's my :2c: on the subject.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 03, 2017, 19:26:31
When one of the guys identifies himself as being Cree and had a grandfather who fought in WW I and relatives who fought in WW II and Korea, he is shot down by the belligerent girl for not respecting their rights and history, while she is not respecting his rights and history.  Only her views mattered (Sounds familiar).  Hopefully some day she learns that "respect" is a two way street. 

From what I saw, it was not the gentlemen in the 'golf shirts' who were being belligerent, but the protesters who were blocking access to any wanting to walk through the park. 

As an aside; I have never seen a 'Black' Mi'kmaw before. :dunno:  A first for me.   
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 19:36:09

My personal feeling is that we'll never sort out the native problem until we close the reservations and integrate everyone into a single society that is fair for all and everyone has the same chance at success, with no exceptions. One final leg up, one final gratis payment, training if they wish and job hunting help. Then that's it. No more handouts, for anyone, native or immigrant. We can't allow any more second and third generation welfare families, anywhere.


Most people(myself included) will see this as the only logical fix. But unfortunately it'll never happen. Well at least not peacefully.

Look at the outrage when the government tried to make them report on where they were spending money, many refused, of the ones that did many were shown to overpaying certain band members (which wasn't a surprise if you ever been to a reserve). One of my good native friends once told me, if you want to find the Chief in a reserve, "look for the nicest house". Reserves are essentially little fiefdoms with the Chief and who they deem getting the most benefit.

And to force them en mass to integrate, well that will conjure specters of the residential schools. Something which Canada is trying to move on from.

Another problem is the divisiveness within Native populations. Ones that do well living in the main society are usually ostracized from their band. In some cases bands will banish them from their reserves, treat them as traitors and such.

I'm metis myself, but you will be hard stretched to find many with roots back to the colonial days, that couldn't claim as much.

We all know what it'll take to fix this, but we'll never have a politician with the fortitude to even attempt it. Cash handouts and apologizing only exasperates things in the end.   

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 19:39:55
When one of the guys identifies himself as being Cree and had a grandfather who fought in WW I and relatives who fought in WW II and Korea, he is shot down by the belligerent girl for not respecting their rights and history, while she is not respecting his rights and history.  Only her views mattered (Sounds familiar).  Hopefully some day she learns that "respect" is a two way street. 


That part annoyed me, typical protester pushing peoples space trying to get a violent confrontation to have captured on video.

Of the whole video she was the only one who was really being aggressive. The guy made the right move by turning his back to her.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 03, 2017, 19:43:53
We all know what it'll take to fix this, but we'll never have a politician with the fortitude to even attempt it. Cash handouts and apologizing only exasperates things in the end.

Actually, there have been a few; some of them 'Indigenous' Members of Parliament or the Senate.  There were proposals to do away with the Indian Act, but all attempts were shot down.


On that note:  How many 'Indigenous' Members of Parliament and Senators have we seen over the years?  Quite a few.  Elijah Harper played a prominent role as a Member of Parliament. 
 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 03, 2017, 20:43:48
As an aside; I have never seen a 'Black' Mi'kmaw before. :dunno:  A first for me.

I  grew up in Southern Alberta, between the Peigan and Blood tribes.  These folks looked as one would expect First Nations peoples to be. It wasn't until I was posted to NS that I have come across numerous times, men and women who identify as Mi'kmaw but are as fair skinned etc as I am.   :stars:  I also know some fine gentlemen who also identify as Mi'kmaw, they do look as one would expect a First Nations member to appear with respect to skin tone, facial features etc.  :dunno:
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Kat Stevens on July 03, 2017, 20:53:58

i have a friend, full status from Ontario.  He's as ginger as my neighbour's cat, and if he was any paler, he'd be transparent.  SPF 3000 is his skin lotion of choice.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 03, 2017, 21:09:11
Their venue sucked, but standing around with a Red Ensign, in a park is not illegal. If the videos are true and they did nothing, CAF shouldn't even get involved.


Inclined to agree.

If they didn't identify themselves as members of the CAF and they didn't break any laws then why would th CAF be involved?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 03, 2017, 21:19:19
Their venue sucked, but standing around with a Red Ensign, in a park is not illegal. If the videos are true and they did nothing, CAF shouldn't even get involved.

How do you discipline someone for upholding their Charter Rights.


I agree with RG on this one.  I also think it applies to trying to nail someone in the CAF for what they post on their FB page too.  We are, afterall, Canadian citizens too right??

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html

Fundamental freedoms

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;


(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;


(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and


(d) freedom of association.

I'd like to see someone other than the police, let's say, tell me I can't walk thru a public area in Halifax etc.  Good luck.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 03, 2017, 21:20:45
... How many 'Indigenous' Members of Parliament and Senators have we seen over the years?  Quite a few.  Elijah Harper played a prominent role as a Member of Parliament.
Yup on both, for sure, but on the bit in orange, his most prominent role (like it or not) was his voting against the Meech Lake Accord as a Manitoba legislator (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/elijah-harper/#h3_jump_2), just before he was an MP.
... I have never seen a 'Black' Mi'kmaw before ...
I see lots of Cree & Ojibway in northern Ontario who look like what one might expect Aboriginals look like, but I've also seen First Nation folks here and in southern Ontario who look lighter than olive-skinned me.  Drive into Minnesota, and (because of the history of the area), some are even fairer with Scandanavian family names.  It's almost like saying what an Italian looks like - depends on where they're from & what the history of the area is.
... Anyone here ever heard that the old Canadian flag ... is considered the "equivalent to the Confederate flag? I've never heard that before ...
First I've heard of that specific comparison, too.  That said, based on the narrative of "we've been screwed over by the old bosses over the years" (more on that in this book (https://goo.gl/B6Q9nd) - links to Amazon), one interpretation of that narrative is that a flag from those older days could be seen to represent the old bosses and their screwing over.  Your read/mileage may vary ...
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ArmyVern on July 03, 2017, 21:21:36
I'm not sure 129 is a valid option here as I don't fully see the military nexus. That being said, Remedial Measures are absolutely the way to go.

Hmmmm, I'm thinking that the pics screen-capped from their facebook pages prior to them battening down their hatches wearing that alt-right hate group shirt may cause them to have some serious explaining to do.  Belonging to such groups is a sound "nada" for serving members.

Having visited this groups web-site this morning, all I can say is ugggghhhh.

Oh - and they also made the alt-right group's main webpage --- they seem quite pleased to see these five out "representing" in their polo shirts.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: MCG on July 03, 2017, 21:25:30
The CTV news coverage about the RCN members involved in the protest disruption, with MND's comments.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/this-is-a-british-colony-group-disrupts-mi-kmaq-ceremony-in-halifax-1.3487246
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 03, 2017, 21:35:14
Having visited this groups web-site this morning, all I can say is ugggghhhh.

So much wrong with that blog; bordering on hate speech.  It is inciting others to take action against these five persons.  It is slanderous.  It fringes on invasion of privacy.

[Edit:  This is the blog I was referring to:  http://anti-racistcanada.blogspot.ca/2017/07/military-proud-boys-disrupt-mikmaw.html ]
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ArmyVern on July 03, 2017, 21:39:51
So much wrong with that blog; bordering on hate speech.  It is inciting others to take action against these five persons.  It is slanderous.  It fringes on invasion of privacy.

I'm talking about the hate group's website ... they are pretty proud of their 5 proud boys representing in  their colours.

Both sides are wrong here, but it doesn't excuse these five as possibly serving CAF members.  NDA is only applicable to them (if serving, if RegF).
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Chief Stoker on July 03, 2017, 21:41:21
So much wrong with that blog; bordering on hate speech.  It is inciting others to take action against these five persons.  It is slanderous.  It fringes on invasion of privacy.


No one seems to care about that George, they're out for blood. If the protesters were burning a Canadian Flag and the five members did the same thing, no one would be saying anything. I also noticed the protestors are using the publicity of this to garner donations. ::)
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Chris Pook on July 03, 2017, 21:41:46
http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/le_loutre_jean_louis_4E.html

http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/mascarene_paul_3E.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ligonier,_1st_Earl_Ligonier
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: recceguy on July 03, 2017, 21:43:57
I've been looking up Proud Boys. There is no consensus out there. Far left call them alt-right, others say they are centrist on western values and it goes on and on. Nobody is quite sure of what they are. They are an enigma, per se.

I don't think their site is anything special. It's not full of hate speech and confederate banter. They appear to have members of most ethnic and political stripes.

They are right of centre, but the site appears only to counter the bullshit from the left.

They certainly appear NOT to be an alt-right hate group.

A fraternal organisation based on western values (as they see them). There is nothing wrong with that.

Let's remember who controls the MSM and pushes the leftist agenda, that is pigeon holing the group, before we clamour over ourselves to be first in line to condemn them.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ArmyVern on July 03, 2017, 21:45:30

No one seems to care about that George, they're out for blood. If the protesters were burning a Canadian Flag and the five members did the same thing, no one would be saying anything. I also noticed the protestors are using the publicity of this to garner donations. ::)

Difference is that one group is not subject to the provisions of the NDA while others within the group of 5 may be. The NDA-liable folk don't get a walk or a bye because both groups happen to be moronic idiots.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 03, 2017, 21:47:08
I'm talking about the hate group's blog ... they are pretty proud of their 5 proud boys representing.

I don't usually even venture into, on, around sites like that...ever.  I don't want them in my History or them to have my IP, that kinda stuff.  I've never heard of this group Proud Boys before...however, watching the majority of the 8 minute video that is on the web about this, the female with the glasses was the one I felt was being the most...ignorant, racist-leaning talker, whatever the right term is.

I don't know about Proud Boys and all that stupid kind of stuff, I stay away from that crap.  I don't agree with protestors, of any kind, for any reason, telling other Canadians they can't go here or there, you have to be quiet, get rid of your flag, etc because it is the opposite of their message.  Something about double standards...

If the citizens protesting the treatment of natives from XXX years ago have the freedom of association, peaceful protest, speech etc then everyone else should have it, too.  Serving members included.

I was also not ******' impressed to see an upside down Canadian flag with writing or drawing or whatever was on it.  I think you're asking for trouble when you do stupid crap like that, and I don't care one rats *** what the reason is. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ArmyVern on July 03, 2017, 22:15:17
... Serving members included ...

Yet, you know that is not the case.  We are expected to hold, and are held, to a higher standard.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Chief Stoker on July 03, 2017, 22:17:22
Difference is that one group is not subject to the provisions of the NDA while others within the group of 5 may be. The NDA-liable folk don't get a walk or a bye because both groups happen to be moronic idiots.

True, it was stupid. If I was walking by and saw the Canada flag being burned or in this case it was being flown upside down, I may of intervened and been stupid as well. From the video footage I have seen there were more words being thrown on the protest side then on the other, still they were in the wrong and must reap the consequences.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ArmyVern on July 03, 2017, 22:21:55
True, it was stupid. If I was walking by and saw the Canada flag being burned or in this case it was being flown upside down, I may of intervened and been stupid as well. From the video footage I have seen there were more words being thrown on the protest side then on the other, still they were in the wrong and must reap the consequences.

I think it's the hate group bit that's the difference between you and them and  the bit that will eventually cause the greatest fallout from this.  Many of us who serve would be pissed to see disrespect to the Flag we serve under and would really think about intervening.  But, thank frig, I don't think many of us - ideally none of us - would belong to hate groups either.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 03, 2017, 22:23:59
Yet, you know that is not the case.  We are expected to hold, and are held, to a higher standard.

According to the Charter, that is the case.  Mark my words...someone, sooner or later, will challenge this is a court (CAF rules contrary to the Charter) and they'll win.  Why should my rights and freedoms be less than any other citizen? 

*I don't agree with racist crap and association with racist crap groups...that's not my argument. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ArmyVern on July 03, 2017, 22:28:07
According to the Charter, that is the case.  Mark my words...someone, sooner or later, will challenge this is a court (CAF rules contrary to the Charter) and they'll win.  Why should my rights and freedoms be less than any other citizen? 

*I don't agree with racist crap and association with racist crap groups...that's not my argument.

And yet the Supreme Court continues to rule that the NDA is acceptable as it applies to CAF members and our "unique" requirements of service when Charter Challenges have been brought before it.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Humphrey Bogart on July 03, 2017, 22:41:24
And yet the Supreme Court continues to rule that the NDA is acceptable as it applies to CAF members and our "unique" requirements of service when Charter Challenges have been brought before it.

If they are CAF members, what they did was very stupid and they should be charged.

"Pour encourager les autres"
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: recceguy on July 03, 2017, 22:44:53
Proud Boys are a hate group simply because that's what the lefties and the press are calling them. Please stop reinforcing the false narrative.

Unfortunately, it is not illegal to desecrate the Canadian flag. If you get into a physical altercation with the idiot with the match, you run the chance of being charged. Don't expect the CoC to have any sympathy for being patriotic. Years ago, there was a fellow in a bar that was talking down the military including a certain Regiment I was with. I took his glasses off, put them in his pocket and drove him in the face. That was it. One punch. When the RSM marched me into the old man, I was asked why I did it. Straight out told him the guy was insulting the CAF and Regiment. That just seemed to make matters worse with the boss. That was back in the '70's. The CoC is much more CYA than it was then. If they have to hang a few sailors to save themselves, they will.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ballz on July 03, 2017, 22:47:04
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is designed to limit the government's powers. It guarantees that the *government* will not infringe upon your freedom of speech / expression etc... in other words, creating a law that could put you in jail for expressing yourself. It does *not* guarantee you against the social consequences of your actions.

These members, whether on duty or not, whether in uniform or not, whether they identified themselves as CAF members or not, conducted themselves in a manner that is below the standard of our profession. It's the same reason we put people on remedial measures for conduct when they commit a crime. Just like in the civilian world, this can have consequences.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/man-fired-over-fck-her-right-in-the-pssy-tv-confrontation/

Let's see, if one of these members were in the above article, would we be defending their "right" to go out and be and idiot? If it was one of my troops and they were identified as CAF members and it was on the news bringing the CAF into disrepute, I'd put them on a remedial measures in a heartbeat. Grievance? Go ahead. It's administrative law and there is video evidence of you doing said act. It's not hard to justify that this is below the standard expected of a CAF member conducting themselves outside of work. This is an easy win for the CoC.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 03, 2017, 22:51:30
http://www.mediaite.com/online/man-fired-over-fck-her-right-in-the-pssy-tv-confrontation/

Hydro One rehires man fired after FHRITP incident
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/hydro-one-rehires-man-fired-after-fhritp-incident-1.3300059

See also,

Harrasment in public..Hydro One fires "jerk" for reporter prank 
https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=119361.25
8 pages.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: MCG on July 03, 2017, 22:52:08
If they are CAF members ...
The CAF has confirmed that two are RCN members.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/canada-day-halifax-indigenous-ceremony-proud-boys-1.4189020
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 03, 2017, 23:01:47
Proud Boys are a hate group simply because that's what the lefties and the press are calling them. Please stop reinforcing the false narrative.


Agreed.  One of the individuals identified himself as being Cree.  Metis was also brought up.  Labeling these guys as members of a "far-right ultra-nationalist group (http://anti-racistcanada.blogspot.ca/2017/07/military-proud-boys-disrupt-mikmaw.html)" is really grasping at straws. 

[Edit.....Lost connection and had to resubmit.]
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 03, 2017, 23:08:41
In the end these guys are mostly guilty of annoying/offending people who are professional crap disturbers.

I'm actually surprised they had as much restraint that I know I wouldn't of had seeing the protesters defacing the Canadian Flag, on Canada day no less. They claim the group of 5 'proud boys' were being inflammatory, intimidating, etc. To me what they did the flag is all of that and more.

If they(protesters) never went and DOX the 5 guys (which is illegal in Canada), this would of probably blown over. But again I go back to my point of them being  professional crap disturbers. 

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 03, 2017, 23:13:29
And yet the Supreme Court continues to rule that the NDA is acceptable as it applies to CAF members and our "unique" requirements of service when Charter Challenges have been brought before it.

If this particular one has been challenged (freedom of speech, or association or peaceful assembly...whichever this would be...I am not a LawOp so...), I'd be very interested to read the ruling.  (Seriously)

Maybe FJAG will stumble into this one... 8)

I, for one, am getting tired of all the double-standard in this country lately, this one included.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ballz on July 03, 2017, 23:17:42
Hydro One rehires man fired after FHRITP incident
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/hydro-one-rehires-man-fired-after-fhritp-incident-1.3300059

See also,

Harrasment in public..Hydro One fires "jerk" for reporter prank 
https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=119361.25
8 pages.

He may have been rehired while the arbitration was ongoing, he may have even won arbitration, but that doesn't mean he didn't face social consequences of his actions despite not facing *legal* consequences (which is what the Charter protects your from... which was my point).

Regardless, you can be held accountable by your employer for your off-duty conduct. This website amplifies and provides a list of real examples...

http://www.hrreporter.com/columnist/canadian-hr-law/archive/2015/05/19/whats-the-deal-with-off-duty-conduct/

Quote
A Toronto Symphony Orchestra performance by a Ukrainian-born pianist cancelled due to comments she made on Twitter regarding the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
Two Toronto firefighters dismissed due to inappropriate comments and Twitter, and a third due to FaceBook comments.
Jian Ghomeshi, star radio host of our national broadcaster, fired due to harassment and sexual assault which came to light after his miscalculated FaceBook post.
An Ontario Hockey League referee suspended after posting insulting comments about the women of Sault Ste. Marie on Twitter.
Two Ontario Hockey League players also suspended due to offensive comments about women on Twitter.
Perhaps most offensive of all, an individual who wrote “Thank God the b*tch is dead” on a Facebook wall created in memory of a 15-year-old girl who committed suicide after years of bullying.

People often forget that "freedom of association" is also a right for a very good reason.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 03, 2017, 23:36:51
I won't be surprised to hear these guys get hung, drawn and quartered by the system.  At any rate, they're in for a few one way conversations come tomorrow, no doubt.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 03, 2017, 23:39:10
Regardless, you can be held accountable by your employer for your off-duty conduct.

Accountable? Our mayor was on crack. But, they couldn't get rid of him.

Meanwhile, guys where I worked were getting fired over juvenile stuff they posted on social media.

Another guy I knew was let go for an off-duty meeting with teenage girls involving beer and cigarettes.
http://www.hrreporter.com/sharedwidgets/systools/_printpost_.aspx?articleid=853
"Certain jobs require a high level of skill and a high level of trust from both employers and the public. For employees working in those types of positions, it’s possible that off-duty behaviour can call into question that trust, if it demonstrates poor judgment. And if an employer no longer has confidence that an employee has the judgment to perform a job of high skill and responsibility, the result could be dismissal."

They call it, "Professional conduct outside of profession".

I believe what saved the FHRITP guy was that his job was not one of "those types of positions".
He had some sort of technical engineering job with the power company.

ie: As long as the lights go on, electricity comes out of the wall sockets, and the elevators, air-conditioners and subways remain powered, are customers likely to complain?

That seems to be the way the arbitrator saw it.

That could apply to other employers and employees, depending on the type of position they hold.


Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 04, 2017, 08:35:14
Pfftt, 5 guys walking around with an old flag.  Stern talking too, carry on.  Charter rights are foundation law.  As for this whole "we are a profession" thing, we don't punish people for on duty violations let alone have the time to go after folks for thought crimes. 

I am more worried about you guys who think that being part of a racial group requires you to look the part, is ancestry not the primary determinate of race?

Just SJW fakenews media feeding frenzy?  Imagine call folks names long enough and they start to push back...........
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 04, 2017, 08:52:51
I've been looking up Proud Boys. There is no consensus out there. Far left call them alt-right, others say they are centrist on western values and it goes on and on. Nobody is quite sure of what they are. They are an enigma, per se ...
I've seen no shortage of the "they're alt-right" narrative, but where are you seeing the "centrist/western values" read of the group?  Honestly not poking, but interested. 

I've only been able to find that sort of narrative on the U.S. PB FB page ...
Quote
The Proud Boys are a fraternal organization founded on a system of beliefs and values of minimal government, maximum freedom, anti-political correctness, anti-racial guilt, pro-gun rights, anti-Drug War, closed borders, anti-masturbation, venerating entrepreneurs, venerating housewives, and reinstating a spirit of Western chauvinism during an age of globalism and multiculturalism.
... and the Canadian PB FB page:
Quote
The Proud Boys are a fraternal organization of Western Chauvinists who will no longer apologize for creating the modern world. Our values centre on the following tenets:

Minimal Government
Maximum Freedom
Anti-Political Correctness
Anti-Drug War
*Anti-Masturbation
Closed Borders
Anti-Racial Guilt
Anti-Racism
Pro-Free Speech (1st Amendment)
Pro-Gun Rights (2nd Amendment)
Glorifying the Entrepreneur
Venerating the Housewife
Reinstating a Spirit of Western Chauvinism

We do not discriminate based upon race or sexuality. We are not an “ism”, “ist”, or “phobic”. We truly believe that the West Is The Best and welcome those who believe in the same tenets as us.

*We are by no means prudish Victorians. We merely believe that this energy is better spent going out, meeting women, getting married, and having children.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 04, 2017, 10:13:33
I've seen no shortage of the "they're alt-right" narrative, but where are you seeing the "centrist/western values" read of the group?  Honestly not poking, but interested. 

I've only been able to find that sort of narrative on the U.S. PB FB page ...... and the Canadian PB FB page:

Someone might tell them the 1A and 2A are Yank things and never existed in constitutional monarchies.  Drug war is a waste of money beyond border security which is itself a joke, it's harder to get salami into Canada than an illegal.  Everything else is quite agreeable in my personal opinion.  Certainly better than the smash a NAZI ANTIFA crowd who seems to define Nazi as everyone who is not them and are willing to use violence first rather than last. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 04, 2017, 10:27:46
... Certainly better than the smash a NAZI ANTIFA crowd who seems to define Nazi as everyone who is not them and are willing to use violence first rather than last.
And that end of the political spectrum continues to get scarier over time (https://www.redneckrevolt.org/) ...
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 04, 2017, 10:39:52
And that end of the political spectrum continues to get scarier over time (https://www.redneckrevolt.org/) ...

That is quite the set of principles, sorta individual-socialist-liberty bordering on anarchy based around small communities of mutual defense.  Someone has been reading too many survivalist novels. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Altair on July 04, 2017, 12:22:54
I've seen no shortage of the "they're alt-right" narrative, but where are you seeing the "centrist/western values" read of the group?  Honestly not poking, but interested. 

I've only been able to find that sort of narrative on the U.S. PB FB page ...... and the Canadian PB FB page:
Anti Masturbation?

Count me out.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 04, 2017, 12:33:39
Anti Masturbation?

Count me out.

Master of your domain?  :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi68hPMinAI
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Blackadder1916 on July 04, 2017, 15:23:38
And now it seems that all five of the "Proud Boys" are military.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/proud-boys-canadian-military-indigenous-protest-disrupted-1.4189615
Quote
National Defence has confirmed five men who disrupted an Indigenous ceremony on Canada Day in Halifax are members of the Armed Forces.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 04, 2017, 15:31:59
Once again I have under estimated the capacity of the military bureaucrat to blow something minor up into a national scandal.   
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 04, 2017, 15:52:03
What boggles me more is how everyone is ignoring the conduct of the other party and the whole upside down flag deal.  I know some people might not care about that, I sure do.

I guess only white people can do anything wrong in Canada these days.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Remius on July 04, 2017, 16:17:23
What boggles me more is how everyone is ignoring the conduct of the other party and the whole upside down flag deal.  I know some people might not care about that, I sure do.

I guess only white people can do anything wrong in Canada these days.

Correct me if I am wrong but the Upside down flag thing, is not an international symbol of distress?  I'm pretty sure that is the meaning. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 04, 2017, 16:23:09
Correct me if I am wrong but the Upside down flag thing, is not an international symbol of distress? 

It is in America,

"The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property."
http://www.webcitation.org/6OJaMkhtM?url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-1996-title36/html/USCODE-1996-title36-chap10-sec176.htm
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: PuckChaser on July 04, 2017, 16:23:41
Correct me if I am wrong but the Upside down flag thing, is not an international symbol of distress?  I'm pretty sure that is the meaning.

So the CAF members were coming to render assistance.  >:D
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 04, 2017, 16:30:29
Correct me if I am wrong but the Upside down flag thing, is not an international symbol of distress?  I'm pretty sure that is the meaning.

Could be...but in Halifax on Canada Day?  That's more than a little stretch of the imagination.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Remius on July 04, 2017, 16:41:25
Could be...but in Halifax on Canada Day?  That's more than a little stretch of the imagination.

Actually it isn't that far of a stretch given the current climate.  Aboriginal groups have been using that for a bit now to highlight their plight and given the current political climate with the 150 stuff it does not seem to be that far of a stretch to be honest.

That group is from the region.  They're not too found of who they consider to be a genocidal murderer (if you read his history he seems to have a habit of using genocide as a tactic), so they go to have what by all accounts is a quiet ceremony to mourn the past on a day they aren't too keen to commemorate with fondness.

Now I also see a group of guys who thought that this was an anti Canada protest and showed up to obviously disrupt it and when they saw what it really was after a few minutes left the scene.  As far as I can see they didn't incite violence or spew any real hate.  It was pretty insensitive sure but I fail to see anything legally wrong with what they did.  Just like the flag, Nothing wrong with that as far as I can tell. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on July 04, 2017, 18:23:57
Correct me if I am wrong but the Upside down flag thing, is not an international symbol of distress?  I'm pretty sure that is the meaning.

I'll correct you: It is not repeat not an international distress signal. It is in fact not a distress signal at all. Even the American regulation quoted is in the respect for the flag section and I am pretty sure it is not listed anywhere in the US Coast Guard list of recognized distress signals.

The whole thing is actually urban folklore. Think about it, just to name a few, how would you know that the French flag, the Japanese flag, the Belgian or Italian flags, etc. are flown upside down?

See this American site that confirms that, at least at sea or in US Inland waters, it is not used: http://www.seaflags.us/signals/warning.html
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 04, 2017, 18:33:36
Correct me if I am wrong but the Upside down flag thing, is not an international symbol of distress? 

The whole thing is actually urban folklore.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 04, 2017, 19:10:02
https://www.facebook.com/cbcnews/videos/10155655189734604/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on July 04, 2017, 19:30:47
Well, I'm speechless ... which admiral Newton obviously ain't.

I'll just go and crawl under a rock in disbelief.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ModlrMike on July 04, 2017, 19:32:47
So I guess some questions going forward should be analyzed, without the associated passion:

1. Is membership in the group they belong to unlawful?  No
2. Is the group classically white supremacist?  Not according to their own website, nor according to informal internet research.
3. Were their actions unlawful?  No
4. Did they bring disrepute onto the CF?  Questionable - from the video they don't identify as CF.
5. Did they actually disrupt the event?  Hard to say... the video does not support that contention, but that depends on the viewer's perspective.
6. Did they do something foolish?  Possibly

Much will depend on what action the CF takes. I fear though that these guys will be scapegoated and find their careers finished.

It's easy for us to say "hang the bastards", but they are still entitled to due process.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Kat Stevens on July 04, 2017, 19:37:09
They're going to get keelhauled.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 04, 2017, 19:41:13
The thing that pisses me off mostly about this, is how our military is blowing it up more.

The comment by the Admiral alluding to White Supremacy don't help things at all.

This would of went away if they dealt with it by simply saying the members are being dealt with internally.

Yet the people who DOXed the 5 men are getting a pass. Which is illegal last I checked.

It's sad that the more of this SJW stuff I see every day, the more I feel the world needs another World War to sort out what is really important. Too many people have gotten too comfortable.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 04, 2017, 19:43:22
What boggles me more is how everyone is ignoring the conduct of the other party and the whole upside down flag deal.  I know some people might not care about that, I sure do.

I guess only white people can do anything wrong in Canada these days.

Good point.  They are claiming that the Red Ensign is equivalent to the Confederate flag in the US, and displaying it is a sign of disrespect; all the time they have desecrated the national flag with their protest 'slogan' and flown it upside down, not to mention used it as an article of clothing.....Disrespect?  Sadly, we now have a society where we are no longer "democratic"; but instead ruled by a vocal minority.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Altair on July 04, 2017, 19:49:18
The thing that pisses me off mostly about this, is how our military is blowing it up more.

The comment by the Admiral alluding to White Supremacy don't help things at all.

This would of went away if they dealt with it by simply saying the members are being dealt with internally.

Yet the people who DOXed the 5 men are getting a pass. Which is illegal last I checked.

It's sad that the more of this SJW stuff I see every day, the more I feel the world needs another World War to sort out what is really important. Too many people have gotten too comfortable.
If the were going to be doing that kind of stuff they should have covered their faces.

Just saying.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 04, 2017, 19:54:42
If the were going to be doing that kind of stuff they should have covered their faces.

Just saying.

Who? The protesters, or the Admiral?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: daftandbarmy on July 04, 2017, 20:32:08
I hate Illinois Nazis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ukFAvYP3UU

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 04, 2017, 20:34:37
Well, I'm speechless ... which admiral Newton obviously ain't.

I'll just go and crawl under a rock in disbelief.

Interesting that he finds Twitter and Reddit as reliable sources.   >:D
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: FSTO on July 04, 2017, 21:24:19
The Navy and CAF are falling over themselves to ensure the outrage is properly dealt with. Right now the mob wants those guys heads and it looks like they are going to be handed over.

If they are released 5F the military can reasonably cover their arses. But if they go the route the mob wants them to go (1A 1 Sentenced to Dismissal. where sentenced by court martial to dismissal or dismissal with disgrace from Her Majesty's service;) then first place I would go is to Marie Henein Law Office and have her sue the arse off the Government of Canada.

http://torontolife.com/city/crime/marie-henein-jian-ghomeshi-lawyer/

In the end, those young servicemen should have just stayed away.
Oh well, we all make choices, some are poorer than other.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 04, 2017, 21:29:54
But if they go the route the mob wants them to go (1A 1 Sentenced to Dismissal. where sentenced by court martial to dismissal or dismissal with disgrace from Her Majesty's service;) then first place I would go is to Marie Henein Law Office and have her sue the arse off the Government of Canada.
http://torontolife.com/city/crime/marie-henein-jian-ghomeshi-lawyer/
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 05, 2017, 00:08:28
The Navy and CAF are falling over themselves to ensure the outrage is properly dealt with. Right now the mob wants those guys heads and it looks like they are going to be handed over.


It's good that we're placating the SJW mobs now.
Proud Canadian moment for sure.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 05, 2017, 08:16:55
I am absolutely shocked at the handling of this and the response by some CF members to this.  Talk about situating the court outcomes.  Did the possible convening authority really used the term "white supremacists" in a public forum about subordinates?  Even more funny is that one of these white supremacists is a Cree.  There is no way that the SJW will accept anything less than full public destruction of the lives of these men.  Poorly handled. 

Now to the members of the Canadian Forces on the Proud Boys Facebook page, and the fleet Comdr page, especially the three commissioned officers, including one major, who are not serving the cause of justice or even giving the impression of military justice impartiality.  The Sub Lt who used his social media accounts to release the names of the individuals on the SJW webpages is extremely disturbing.   The Lt(N) contacting people by messenger and threatening to "Expose" them to their chain of command as racists was interesting, especially since I have no chain of command and arguing what place the charter of rights has here is not racism.  Given the leadership of the navy I observed in the last 24 hours, I have to say WOW!  I thought we army types were the experts at kicking our own pee pees.  There has been a lot of detoxing back and forth yesterday.

All round you got some serving folks who should know better that need some serious PA training.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 05, 2017, 10:11:19
Quote from: Lightguns
   The Sub Lt who used his social media accounts to release the names of the individuals on the SJW webpages is extremely disturbing.   The Lt(N) contacting people by messenger and threatening to "Expose" them to their chain of command as racists was interesting,

That's mind blowing. Will the sub Lt be disciplined?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Kat Stevens on July 05, 2017, 10:29:18
That's mind blowing. Will the sub Lt be disciplined?

Don't talk silly, he/she's a hero.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 10:34:14
That's mind blowing. Will the sub Lt be disciplined?

Probably promoted and given a commendation. Or at the very least an Admirals Coin.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: FSTO on July 05, 2017, 11:42:08
Did the officers actually threaten sailors on social media? Totally unsat if true.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 11:51:51
Did the officers actually threaten sailors on social media? Totally unsat if true.

These officers should be exposed to their CoC. Threatening people, especially civilians is actually worse than what the 5 guys done.

Also DoXing people is illegal , but I doubt any of those involved with that will see any repercussions.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 05, 2017, 11:55:10
These officers should be exposed to their CoC. Threatening people, especially civilians is actually worse than what the 5 guys done.

Also DoXing people is illegal , but I doubt any of those involved with that will see any repercussions.

I am sure at this point that the MPs are on it.  This is getting too public to be ignored. 

Edit:  that being said there is likely a lot of military folks sanitizing their social media today as a lot of posts on Proud Boys have disappeared since last night.  Kinda looks like the non military are talking to themselves now!
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 05, 2017, 12:13:05
Don't talk silly, he/she's a hero.

I'd say his or her actions caused me to be harassed and feel my life is in danger. Then I'd sue for 10 million  ;D
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: JesseWZ on July 05, 2017, 12:39:40
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is designed to limit the government's powers. It guarantees that the *government* will not infringe upon your freedom of speech / expression etc... in other words, creating a law that could put you in jail for expressing yourself. It does *not* guarantee you against the social consequences of your actions.


The above is easily the most mis-interpreted part of the Charter. People seem to think it protects you against other peoples conduct, but that isn't what it's for. It exists to prevent government over-reach, whether by unlawful detention, search and seizure, or to break up lawful and peaceful protests, just because the government of the day doesn't like the message. That's why Charter arguments aren't present in civil litigation, unless you're suing the government, a private citizen or organization cannot violate your Charter rights.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 05, 2017, 12:52:07
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is designed to limit the government's powers. It guarantees that the *government* will not infringe upon your freedom of speech / expression etc... in other words, creating a law that could put you in jail for expressing yourself. It does *not* guarantee you against the social consequences of your actions.

These members, whether on duty or not, whether in uniform or not, whether they identified themselves as CAF members or not, conducted themselves in a manner that is below the standard of our profession. It's the same reason we put people on remedial measures for conduct when they commit a crime. Just like in the civilian world, this can have consequences.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/man-fired-over-fck-her-right-in-the-pssy-tv-confrontation/

Let's see, if one of these members were in the above article, would we be defending their "right" to go out and be and idiot? If it was one of my troops and they were identified as CAF members and it was on the news bringing the CAF into disrepute, I'd put them on a remedial measures in a heartbeat. Grievance? Go ahead. It's administrative law and there is video evidence of you doing said act. It's not hard to justify that this is below the standard expected of a CAF member conducting themselves outside of work. This is an easy win for the CoC.

Yeah he got his job back, the arbiter ruled it off duty conduct not associated or ID'd to the company in anyway.  Back pay and allowances restored.  He is also remorseful.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: trooper142 on July 05, 2017, 14:13:50
I am absolutely shocked at the handling of this and the response by some CF members to this.  Talk about situating the court outcomes.  Did the possible convening authority really used the term "white supremacists" in a public forum about subordinates?  Even more funny is that one of these white supremacists is a Cree.  There is no way that the SJW will accept anything less than full public destruction of the lives of these men.  Poorly handled. 

Now to the members of the Canadian Forces on the Proud Boys Facebook page, and the fleet Comdr page, especially the three commissioned officers, including one major, who are not serving the cause of justice or even giving the impression of military justice impartiality.  The Sub Lt who used his social media accounts to release the names of the individuals on the SJW webpages is extremely disturbing.   The Lt(N) contacting people by messenger and threatening to "Expose" them to their chain of command as racists was interesting, especially since I have no chain of command and arguing what place the charter of rights has here is not racism.  Given the leadership of the navy I observed in the last 24 hours, I have to say WOW!  I thought we army types were the experts at kicking our own pee pees.  There has been a lot of detoxing back and forth yesterday.

All round you got some serving folks who should know better that need some serious PA training.

I highly, highly encourage you to report what you know to the Military Police Unit at your base.  Officers threatening subordinates is unacceptable regardless of the events that have unfolded as of late.
 
It could also be argued the Sub Lt would released their names placed them, knowingly or ought to know, at risk.

So I will again encourage you to report what you know to the Military Police; just posting on this site is not going to solve anything.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 05, 2017, 16:15:29
I am absolutely shocked at the handling of this and the response by some CF members to this.  Talk about situating the court outcomes.  Did the possible convening authority really used the term "white supremacists" in a public forum about subordinates?  Even more funny is that one of these white supremacists is a Cree.  There is no way that the SJW will accept anything less than full public destruction of the lives of these men.  Poorly handled. 

Now to the members of the Canadian Forces on the Proud Boys Facebook page, and the fleet Comdr page, especially the three commissioned officers, including one major, who are not serving the cause of justice or even giving the impression of military justice impartiality.  The Sub Lt who used his social media accounts to release the names of the individuals on the SJW webpages is extremely disturbing.   The Lt(N) contacting people by messenger and threatening to "Expose" them to their chain of command as racists was interesting, especially since I have no chain of command and arguing what place the charter of rights has here is not racism.  Given the leadership of the navy I observed in the last 24 hours, I have to say WOW!  I thought we army types were the experts at kicking our own pee pees.  There has been a lot of detoxing back and forth yesterday.

All round you got some serving folks who should know better that need some serious PA training.

I'll admit, I am trying to not wade too deep into the fallout over this...but where is this coming from about a Lt(N) contacting people on messenger and threats to expose, the SLt using his social media accounts to release names, etc coming from?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 05, 2017, 17:00:30
I am sure at this point that the MPs are on it.  This is getting too public to be ignored. 

Edit:  that being said there is likely a lot of military folks sanitizing their social media today as a lot of posts on Proud Boys have disappeared since last night.  Kinda looks like the non military are talking to themselves now!

They only think that they are sanitizing their social media.  Once it is posted on the internet, it is there for eternity. 

How many of your quotes have been shared or reposted by others?  How many programs are out there like the "Wayback Machine (https://0.r.bat.bing.com/?ld=d3y97LsWUBg9fEnZg10c0X8zVUCUwr3oOirPhbNimIADyInxez_fWleBKIXiCqDedrgtmk_MYVeO10839Gc0tEvZ9pta3kfRYFvOovyuIyIGYuIk0fLZSLe7eYAqB-mjhDM6wcu2aJM6p_UBZJXxDDDvysjHSFTMjYbSpjNggqpMTvUaWp&u=http%3a%2f%2fwww.informationvine.com%2fslp%3f%26q%3dway%2bback%2bmachine%26sid%3d18426582-c1c8-4583-98a3-656fba31bf32-0-iv_mse%26kwid%3dwayback%2520machine%26cid%3d14974529265)"?  How many screenshots have been made of posts, or even printed off as hardcopy?  It is too late to clean up once you have posted on the internet.

As for identifying the individuals; that was done within hours by the Maritime Anonymous group and posted on a blog. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ballz on July 05, 2017, 17:21:35
Yeah he got his job back, the arbiter ruled it off duty conduct not associated or ID'd to the company in anyway.  Back pay and allowances restored.  He is also remorseful.

You're a little bit late to the party. Read the other posts regarding being held accountable for off-duty conduct in the civilian world.

Regardless, the key point was that it has *nothing* to do with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 05, 2017, 17:51:05
Yeah he got his job back, the arbiter ruled it off duty conduct not associated or ID'd to the company in anyway.  Back pay and allowances restored.  He is also remorseful.

He was a unionized employee. His union grieved his dismissal through arbitration. The arbitrator agreed.

In a non-unionized environment his employment could have been terminated without cause.

The union was able to demonstrate that he was genuinely remorseful for his actions.

34 of his male and female colleagues wrote statements offering their support.

He made a charitable donation.

He apologised to the reporter.

The arbitrators decision was not released to the public, and the employer refused comment.

One wonders if the employer would have been able to justify discipline had he not been publicly identified as an employee?
It would have been difficult to establish a clear nexus between his off-duty antics and their corporate brand.

Not sure where you read, "off duty conduct not associated or ID'd to the company in anyway. Back pay and allowances restored." ?

The company was ID'd in this discussion,

Harrasment in public..Hydro One fires "jerk" for reporter prank 
https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=119361.25
8 pages.

I have read no mention of back pay.





Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Humphrey Bogart on July 05, 2017, 18:07:23
They only think that they are sanitizing their social media.  Once it is posted on the internet, it is there for eternity. 

How many of your quotes have been shared or reposted by others?  How many programs are out there like the "Wayback Machine (https://0.r.bat.bing.com/?ld=d3y97LsWUBg9fEnZg10c0X8zVUCUwr3oOirPhbNimIADyInxez_fWleBKIXiCqDedrgtmk_MYVeO10839Gc0tEvZ9pta3kfRYFvOovyuIyIGYuIk0fLZSLe7eYAqB-mjhDM6wcu2aJM6p_UBZJXxDDDvysjHSFTMjYbSpjNggqpMTvUaWp&u=http%3a%2f%2fwww.informationvine.com%2fslp%3f%26q%3dway%2bback%2bmachine%26sid%3d18426582-c1c8-4583-98a3-656fba31bf32-0-iv_mse%26kwid%3dwayback%2520machine%26cid%3d14974529265)"?  How many screenshots have been made of posts, or even printed off as hardcopy?  It is too late to clean up once you have posted on the internet.

As for identifying the individuals; that was done within hours by the Maritime Anonymous group and posted on a blog.

It's actually possible to partially sanitize yourself but involves spending lots of money paying a professional to do it for you. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: MCG on July 05, 2017, 18:17:58
You're a little bit late to the party. Read the other posts regarding being held accountable for off-duty conduct in the civilian world.

Regardless, the key point was that it has *nothing* to do with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Unless, maybe, your employer is government.  Yes?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 18:46:31
So the same group of Mi'gmaq now are even more empowered and are planning a 'Removing Cornwallis' Event.

Quote
Come Join Us to Peacefully remove Cornwallis statue, a statue that for too long has been representing genocide in Mikmaki. We are calling on our Warriors, Protectors, Allies, Friends and Lovers to join us in this historic event."

https://www.facebook.com/events/1904629933090599/?acontext=%7B%22ref%22%3A%2222%22%2C%22feed_story_type%22%3A%2222%22%2C%22action_history%22%3A%22null%22%7D&pnref=story

Also in a few of the social media posts they are also seeking donations to their cause through e transfers.

I'm actually curious if they go so far and destroy public property for their cause. I wonder how many of their Supporters on Social Media is going to support them then.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: PuckChaser on July 05, 2017, 18:51:12
Bring the jail bus and throw each and every one of them who touches the statue in the clink for public mischief. There are legal ways to have a statue removed, public vandalism isn't one of them.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ballz on July 05, 2017, 18:52:40
Unless, maybe, your employer is government.  Yes?

No... it's about *legal* protection from the government. Aka a law can't be created that would make it illegal for you to express yourself. Aka the police can't search you without a warrant. If the government is your employer and it fires you, that is not a "legal" consequence of your actions (like being imprisoned would be), that's a social consequence (which the Charter doesn't protect you against).

From an employment perspective, the government is tied to the same regulations as everyone else.

EDIT: Key piece for CAF members here.... it is not the government's employment policies that limit CAF members... its the National Defence Act, a piece of legislation, that ultimately limits us and makes x, y, or z, a chargeable offense. See Section 1 of the Charter, or "the limitations clause," for why the NDA has not been ruled as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

"1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

In other words...

"When the government has limited an individual's right*, there is an onus upon the Crown to show, on the balance of probabilities, firstly, that the limitation was prescribed by law namely, that the law is attuned to the values of accessibility and intelligibility; and secondly, that it is justified in a free and democratic society, which means that it must have a justifiable purpose and must be proportional."

*like the NDA does in some instances, for example it limits our freedom of association in some ways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_1_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms#Text
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 18:54:47
Have to remember, these group are the same types who protested Bill C51, organize demonstrations while wearing Guy Fawkes Masks, were part of the Occupy movement, among many other discressions that fall under public Mischief.

Its quite obvious our laws regarding such things don't have sharp enough teeth.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Kat Stevens on July 05, 2017, 19:00:34
So the same group of Mi'gmaq now are even more empowered and are planning a 'Removing Cornwallis' Event.

https://www.facebook.com/events/1904629933090599/?acontext=%7B%22ref%22%3A%2222%22%2C%22feed_story_type%22%3A%2222%22%2C%22action_history%22%3A%22null%22%7D&pnref=story

Also in a few of the social media posts they are also seeking donations to their cause through e transfers.

I'm actually curious if they go so far and destroy public property for their cause. I wonder how many of their Supporters on Social Media is going to support them then.

All of them. Public violence and vandalism are part of the acceptable tactics playbook of social activists of all stripes. Smashing this statue will somehow undo all the ills that have befallen FN on the east coat since Cabot came on a two week fishing trip way back when.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Underway on July 05, 2017, 19:25:12
Few things from the thread.

Being identified as a status Indian is a complicated process that differs depending on province and your local First Nations.  Some First Nations have the treaty ability to decide who is and isn't a member of their Band.  It also relates to family who were status and how far back you go.   Also status was originally granted due to census takers visiting reserves.  If you were around then you got status.  If you weren't you didn't.  This meant historical weirdness that included visiting "white people" or missionaries getting status, while prominent community members who were out hunting and such did not get status.

Also there are plenty of different ethnic groups within First Nations communities.  Some were blonde haired and green eyed (Many Metis), some have complections that wouldn't  be far off the Mediterranean or Eastern European..  It's not just a european thing.  This is all to say that you don't have to "look like" a First Nations to be one.  You could have two generations of marrying into other bloodlines (friend of mine looks first nations like his father who's mother is Sask first nations, his brother looks exactly like his Ukranian mother.  The both have status.).

Moral of the story.  Skin colour and "look" have absolutely nothing to do with your status as First Nations.

Second thing.  The persons in question are probably being investigated by the MP's to see if there are any Code of Service violations.  After that its over to the Divisional system for administrative action if necessary.  My bet is that it will be C&P and that's the end of it.  If we accept people with drug addiction problems, I'm sure they can take a sensitivity course or more importantly some remedial counseling about taking actions that embarrass the CAF in public.

Third thing. Where are you getting that an officer can't threaten their subordinates?  I think this needs to be expanded upon.  Supervisor cursing you out for being a bag of hammers and threatening you with extra duties (sorry training) if you don't sort your crap out happens all the time.  I've done those extra duties (XO to me... so do you want evens or odds Mr. Underway...).
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 19:43:22
Few things from the thread.

Being identified as a status Indian is a complicated process that differs depending on province and your local First Nations.  Some First Nations have the treaty ability to decide who is and isn't a member of their Band.  It also relates to family who were status and how far back you go.   Also status was originally granted due to census takers visiting reserves.  If you were around then you got status.  If you weren't you didn't.  This meant historical weirdness that included visiting "white people" or missionaries getting status, while prominent community members who were out hunting and such did not get status.

Also there are plenty of different ethnic groups within First Nations communities.  Some were blonde haired and green eyed (Many Metis), some have complections that wouldn't  be far off the Mediterranean or Eastern European..  It's not just a european thing.  This is all to say that you don't have to "look like" a First Nations to be one.  You could have two generations of marrying into other bloodlines (friend of mine looks first nations like his father who's mother is Sask first nations, his brother looks exactly like his Ukranian mother.  The both have status.).

Moral of the story.  Skin colour and "look" have absolutely nothing to do with your status as First Nations.

Second thing.  The persons in question are currently being investigated by the MP's to see if there are any Code of Service violations.  After that its over to the Divisional system for administrative action if necessary.  My bet is that it will be C&P and that's the end of it.  If we accept people with drug addiction problems, I'm sure they can take a sensitivity course or more importantly some remedial counseling about taking actions that embarrass the CAF in public.

Third thing. Where are you getting that an officer can't threaten their subordinates?  I think this needs to be expanded upon.  Supervisor cursing you out for being a bag of hammers and threatening you with extra duties (sorry training) if you don't sort your crap out happens all the time.  I've done those extra duties (XO to me... so do you want evens or odds Mr. Underway...).

I have to agree with the skin color thing. I'm Metis with  Mi'kmaq (I always pronouced it MicMac) roots. I'm pasty white with blue eyes.

One thing I have to disagree on is though a threat of extra duties is one thing, threatening to expose someone as racist is quite a different matter all together, and goes into the territory of giving a person doubt to their personal health and safety.

Also contacting a person through non military channels with regards to military context is a big unsat especially WRT them facing possible punishments. . There is a reason why facebook can't be used as a recall list. If there really was an officer or any other member for that matter giving threats through social media, I do hope they are exposed internally through the military. As it is beyond their scope of power.

Also to the Sub Lt who participated in releasing personal details of the 5 men, there is no exception for military members on committing crimes in Canada. It don't matter if some of the details were public before that, adding to it makes matters worse, and still illegal. One thing you may have noticed, any official correspondence from the military haven't listed the names of the Men, even though they are already public knowledge.


Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: MCG on July 05, 2017, 20:12:32
Ack & agree on the majority of your post. I would go farther in one area and note that the Supreme Court has not simply never found the NDA to be unconstitutional; it has in fact specifically found that the NDA is constitutional.

But, I am still confused here: 
No... [the Charter of Rights is] about *legal* protection from the government. Aka a law can't be created that would make it illegal for you to express yourself. Aka the police can't search you without a warrant. If the government is your employer and it fires you, that is not a "legal" consequence of your actions (like being imprisoned would be), that's a social consequence (which the Charter doesn't protect you against).
So, the government can't impede freedoms of association or speech through legislation, but it is okay to do so by non-legislated regulations?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 05, 2017, 20:28:38
... The Sub Lt who used his social media accounts to release the names of the individuals on the SJW webpages is extremely disturbing ...
Just catching up and spotted this - ouch!
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 20:33:43
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VelZdp5DEAg

Gavin McInnes is now involved. This is getting more interesting by the moment.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Underway on July 05, 2017, 20:40:21

One thing I have to disagree on is though a threat of extra duties is one thing, threatening to expose someone as racist is quite a different matter all together, and goes into the territory of giving a person doubt to their personal health and safety.

Just to be clear, I asked that the point I was referring to be expanded upon.  Which you did quite well.  There are few  places for persons outside of your chain of command to contact with you with threats or complaints outside of an immediate correction or safety issue (ie: fix your shirt its untucked... don't stand there you could get hurt). 

However I have seen this many times and when the divisional staff get hold of that info there usually is quite the ahem... discussion between the officers involved (Who the *&&$#@ do you think you are pulling this crap with my people.  You have a problem you contact me first!).
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on July 05, 2017, 20:43:43
One thing you may have noticed, any official correspondence from the military haven't listed the names of the Men, even though they are already public knowledge.

I did notice. And it's probably  (in my mind) one of the few things that was done right in this case.

What I did notice also, however, is that the Admiral claims that, together with his Fifth Division counterpart (another two maple leaves, or whatever MGens wear these days - I haven't look since last week, so I am not sure), he personally met and gave the five members a "one way" conversation.

I can understand the MP's being involved in determining wether or not infractions, criminal or the NDA/CSD, have been committed here. But, can anyone tell me just what absolutely heinous action against the fabric of humanity these poor seamen and soldiers have committed that warrants involvement, from the start and at the first level, by not only someone else than their own commanding officer, but by a superior commanding officer at least three degrees above?

Wether the Admiral likes it or not, these seamen and soldiers have rights, including one to due process - even in administrative action - and were I their actual commanding officer, I can tell you that the admiral would have had me right in his face for jumping over me and dealing with MY personnel. Some people referred to the Hydro One employee situation above, and one mentioned that many of his co-worker made statements and interventions in his favour that help make the final decision.

Who is going to stand up for these seamen and soldier and their (possibly - I don't know but assume that absent contrary information it is the case) good conduct otherwise? In a direct one way talk from the admiral to lonely (and probably scared stiff) seamen and soldier, was there anyone there with them on their side? And who would have the guts to take their defence straight before the highest authority on the East Coast?

If that is the type of Navy we have become, I am glad I am retired.

But, I am still confused here:  So, the government can't impede freedoms of association or speech through legislation, but it is okay to do so by non-legislated regulations?

Actually, MCG, you are citing on an important distinction, as Ballz position is an oversimplification.

The Supreme Court has found some sections of the NDA to be in conformity with the Charter, and has annulled some others - the whole redesign of the disciplinary process both for summary trials and court martial results from the prior system being found unconstitutional under the Charter.

As for the application to government only, not private parties, it is more complicated than what Ballz makes it to be. If you are interested, check out the Dolphin Delivery case ( [1986] 2 SCR 573. But it is irrelevant in the present case. They fully expressed themselves, as they have the right to, and there is no protection (at least in Canada, yet, contrary to many other nations such as Germany) when in public against being photographed or recorded and using same without consent.

But your main point is of interest. While the Charter, for our purpose here,  does not apply to common law, which includes the law of contract, and in such cases the Government is like any other employers, the Military is in a distinct category, as a very large part of our so called "contract" is actually made of laws and regulations (NDA, QR&O's, etc.), and these laws and regulations are subject to the Charter and the constitution. To the extent that this what is used to "punish" a deportment that constitute the exercise of a Charter right there may be a remedy for a member of the CAF. I say may because I am unaware of such case being brought before any court at this point in time.
 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 20:51:34
Just to be clear, I asked that the point I was referring to be expanded upon.  Which you did quite well.  There are few  places for persons outside of your chain of command to contact with you with threats or complaints outside of an immediate correction or safety issue (ie: fix your shirt its untucked... don't stand there you could get hurt). 

However I have seen this many times and when the divisional staff get hold of that info there usually is quite the ahem... discussion between the officers involved (Who the *&&$#@ do you think you are pulling this crap with my people.  You have a problem you contact me first!).

I apologize as I overlooked the
Quote
I think this needs to be expanded upon
.

I hope you are right that they only end up with C & P, but somehow I think they are going to be burned at the stake. I have a few friends who are still serving in halifax,  and it seems the witch hunt is in full force, and there are many service members, at least the vocal ones, wanting blood.

I think in the end its going to be hard for these guys to get a fair shake. A proper punishment, instead of a Socially Appeasing one. I really think its going to end with these members being forced out of the military, either through a 5f or even a 1a. The military seems to already have set precedence in bending over backwards to befriend the extremist views of the SJWs. Like someone said earlier, they will not be suprised if the Navy hangs a few sailors to save face.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ballz on July 05, 2017, 21:07:17
But, I am still confused here:  So, the government can't impede freedoms of association or speech through legislation, but it is okay to do so by non-legislated regulations?

I am not a lawyer, so take this for an "over a beer" explanation from my own personal understanding / reading.

No, they can't use "un-legislated" regulations to limit someone's freedom, all government "regulations" ultimately come from legislation. Legislation gives the executive branch the authority to do things (like create it's own policies.... they have to be within the scope / constraints of that legislation). If the executive government is found to be violating someone's charter rights through their application of the legislation, then the legislative branch needs to step in and fix the executive's application, or the Supreme Court needs to rule that the legislation is unconstitutional and order that the legislation be changed. That's our "three branches of government" approach with checks and balances working in theory.

However, for what we are talking about... disciplining someone for their off-duty contact.... this is *not* treading on their freedom of speech/expression, it is the other party exercising it's own freedom of association. Individuals and corporations both enjoy this right. Within the existing employment legislation, employers are allowed to do this.. if they weren't allowed (aka they would face legal repercussions for doing so) then the government would be violating the employer's freedom of association. And so they should be allowed... if my employee wants to be a shitty human being, that's his business, the government should stay out of it..... but if I don't want to employ him, that's mine, the government should stay out of it.

The government in this case is just a corporation that is an employer and exercising it's own freedom of association. Now, if the government were charging, convicting, and imprisoning it's employees for off-duty freedom of expression, then that would be violating that individuals freedom.

These two freedoms (expression and association) in particular are yin and yang in my mind. One really doesn't work without the other.

We've also crossed into the legal discussion about whether the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to corporations which is quite an interesting topic.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ballz on July 05, 2017, 21:15:26
As for the application to government only, not private parties, it is more complicated than what Ballz makes it to be. If you are interested, check out the Dolphin Delivery case ( [1986] 2 SCR 573. But it is irrelevant in the present case. They fully expressed themselves, as they have the right to, and there is no protection (at least in Canada, yet, contrary to many other nations such as Germany) when in public against being photographed or recorded and using same without consent.

But the argument being made by some on this thread (not necessarily MCG) is that there is protection because of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And there is... there is *legal* protection. There is no protection from social consequences (aka being fired).

But your main point is of interest. While the Charter, for our purpose here,  does not apply to common law, which includes the law of contract, and in such cases the Government is like any other employers, the Military is in a distinct category, as a very large part of our so called "contract" is actually made of laws and regulations (NDA, QR&O's, etc.), and these laws and regulations are subject to the Charter and the constitution. To the extent that this what is used to "punish" a deportment that constitute the exercise of a Charter right there may be a remedy for a member of the CAF. I say may because I am unaware of such case being brought before any court at this point in time.

There is an important distinction between discipline and administrative measures here. I'd think that using the disciplinary system against these folks might actually be unconstitutional... those are legal repercussions for using your freedom of expression.... but using remedial measures / conducting an administrative review to see if they should be released would not...
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 05, 2017, 21:17:01
......... The military seems to already have set precedence in bending over backwards to befriend the extremist views of the SJWs. Like someone said earlier, they will not be suprised if the Navy hangs a few sailors to save face.

I highly doubt that the Navy or the CAF will in any way save face in the end.  They will become a public embarrassment for a few days, and then the Public will once again forget about the military.  That is one of two things about the Canadian Public, besides believing that everything on internet is true, they soon forget.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Private_John_Winger on July 05, 2017, 21:33:29
When I first heard about "Racist Canadian military troops disrupting first nations religious ceremony" I cringed, memories of the "Somalia Affair" coming to mind. Then I watched the video.

As is often the case, the CBC narrative didn't really align with the facts of the case. These troops are being pilloried both in the media and by their own command staff for some pretty innocuous behaviour. That's just plain wrong.

I recognize that, as some members on this board have pointed out, members of the military are held to a higher standard than other members of the public. That's fair and had those guys marched down to the park waving swastikas and hurling racist epithets I'd be one of the first calling for their heads. But that's not what happened. If you watch the video, all these guys did was wander over and politely challenge the participants on some of their more extreme assertions for ten minutes before walking away. They brought with them a flag which a generation of Canadian military personnel fought and died  under to defeat the real Nazis, and after being subjected to a fair bit of verbal abuse which included racist comments from the black protestor on the scene, they turned and walked away.

How is that prejudicial to good order and discipline? People on this thread are getting bogged down with sophistic arguments about the Charter and military regulations. How about the basic right to free expression which has its roots in 800 years of common-law dating back to the Magna Carta? People don't surrender those kind of fundamental rights when they join the military.

On some mischevious level, I kind of hope that the system does try to make an example of these guys. Gavin McInnes has already started a "Save the Five" campaign with which he hopes to turn them into Alt-Right martyrs:           

https://www.therebel.media/save-the-five

Seeing the whole affair turn into a viral embarrassment for the military would be a just lesson for some of those in the chain of command who seem so quick to dispense with the fundamental freedoms the institution claims to defend when they prove inconvenient. But I don't want to see these guys lose their careers either.

I suspect that won't happen though. More likely the poor guys will be bullied, threatened and ground down by the system until they are forced to attend some Maoist struggle-session where they'll be "re-educated" and forced to apologize. It's quite creepy when you think about it. And totally unfair. But at least they'll keep their jobs.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 05, 2017, 21:41:50
And now a different view:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Quote
Head of Canada's Indigenous veterans group hopes Proud Boys don't lose their CAF jobs (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/indigenous-veterans-group-proud-boys-1.4191749)
'They just showed up there with a flag. They didn't beat up on anybody,' Richard Blackwolf says
CBC NEWS
By John Paul Tasker, CBC News Posted: Jul 05, 2017 6:45 PM ET Last Updated: Jul 05, 2017 7:00 PM ET

The head of Canada's national Indigenous veterans organization hopes the Canadian Armed Forces members who confronted activists at an Indigenous ceremony in Halifax can stay in the military even if they were "silly" to engage in such a confrontation.

"The whole military has become politicized, we're living in a politically correct era and they [the CAF members] should have realized that this thing would be a media event," Richard Blackwolf, the national president of the Canadian Aboriginal Veterans and Serving Members Association (CAV), said in an interview with CBC News.

"But, hopefully, it won't affect their overall careers. I mean they just showed up there with a flag. They didn't beat up on anybody, it's not like that."

Blackwolf, a 77-year old Métis who served in the Navy for 13 years, said the activists assembled at the statue of Edward Cornwallis in Halifax are "point one per cent-ers" who do not adequately represent the country's Indigenous peoples.

"I saw several races down there [at the statute], it's just a hodgepodge of activists, they're not productive people at all," Blackwolf said.

Chief Grizzly Mamma, an Indigenous woman originally from B.C., shaved her head on the steps of the statue of the controversial British military officer on Canada Day to symbolize the violence First Nations people faced under colonial rule.

"These point one per cent-ers, they did some silly stuff, because they know what the hot-button issues for the media are. They're the bottom feeders."

Gen. Jonathan Vance, Canada's top general, has taken a different tack and said in a statement to CBC News Tuesday night that "their future in the the military is certainly in doubt."

"What happened in Halifax over the weekend is deplorable, and Canadians should rest assured my senior leadership is seized of the matter," Vance said. "The members involved will be removed from training and duties while we conduct an investigation and review the circumstances."

'This is just gobbledygook'

Chief Grizzly Mamma, and a group of some 50 others, were confronted by five men who said the whole affair was "disrespectful" to Cornwallis, the city's founder. These men, who are members of the Proud Boys, a so-called "Western chauvinist" organization that is associated with the far right, were later revealed to be part of the armed forces.

The tense but nonviolent confrontation lasted for about 10 minutes, as the men took issue with assertions from organizers that they were interrupting a sacred rite on Mi'kmaq territory.

"This is Canada," one of the men said, his comments captured on a cellphone video posted on social media. "It might have been Mi'kmaq territory."

Rebecca Moore, the woman who organized Canada Day event, and a member of Pictou Landing First Nation in Nova Scotia, said people were praying to their ancestors for lives lost since the beginning of colonization.

After the confrontation, Moore told CBC Nova Scotia she wants the Canadian Armed Forces to acknowledge their operations are on unceded Mi'kmaq lands, urging them to improve education among its members on First Nations issues.

Blackwolf said demonstrations like this one simply give Indigenous people a bad name.

"This Chief Grizzly Mamma ... I mean real Native people don't have names like that," Blackwolf said. "This is just gobbledygook. The [servicemen] were silly enough to go there under those circumstances, they should have known better."

'We have stabbed our servicemen in the back'

Gavin McInnes, a co-founder of Proud Boys, who has been the source of controversy for inflammatory — and anti-Semitic — remarks, defended the members of his men's club.

"I think we have stabbed our servicemen in the back, we should be ashamed of ourselves," he said in an interview with CBC's Power & Politics. "They didn't do anything ... they tried to have a civil discussion."

He said his group is not restricted to whites, adding two of the CAF members in question actually have Indigenous ancestry, and one of them is gay.

Blackwolf said he hoped the standoff doesn't have an impact on his organization's efforts to drive recruitment among Indigenous youth.

He said a career in the military is very rewarding, and there is a proud history of First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples serving the armed forces.
People who identify as Indigenous make up 2.5 per cent of the regular force and primary reserve force.

Daniel Le Bouthillier, a spokesperson for the Canadian Forces, said Indigenous peoples are "core members of the defence team and deserve to be celebrated as such."

"The defence team works hard to foster a diverse, inclusive organization and will continue these efforts to ensure a respectful, dignified environment for all Canadians," he said in a statement.

(https://i.cbc.ca/1.3309529.1446953804!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_300/richard-blackwolf-1963.jpg)
Richard Blackwolf joined the Royal Canadian Navy at 18, completing basic training on the HMCS Cornwallis. (Facebook)

With files from the CBC's Elizabeth McMillan and Anjuli Patil, and The Canadian Press



More on LINK (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/indigenous-veterans-group-proud-boys-1.4191749).
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 05, 2017, 21:50:43
And now a different view:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

More on LINK (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/indigenous-veterans-group-proud-boys-1.4191749).

Probably the most honest and accurate overview of things. I'm glad it was him saying this and not some 'White' person. He hit off on a lot of points, may others were too afraid of saying so.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 05, 2017, 21:56:33
I hate Illinois Nazis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ukFAvYP3UU
I was thinking something more like ...
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 06, 2017, 07:47:21
So the same group of Mi'gmaq now are even more empowered and are planning a 'Removing Cornwallis' Event.

https://www.facebook.com/events/1904629933090599/?acontext=%7B%22ref%22%3A%2222%22%2C%22feed_story_type%22%3A%2222%22%2C%22action_history%22%3A%22null%22%7D&pnref=story

Also in a few of the social media posts they are also seeking donations to their cause through e transfers.

I'm actually curious if they go so far and destroy public property for their cause. I wonder how many of their Supporters on Social Media is going to support them then.

That's good, it just makes them look like the point one percenters they are.  Who cares about a silly statue, it's not a hill I would die on.  That damn statue is the funniest part of this whole event.  It's marble, nothing more.  If you fight inanimate objects, you will always lose. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 06, 2017, 07:56:46
... If you fight inanimate objects, you will always lose.
That's true, but it sounds like they're also fighting a narrative - that's a different fight.

Meanwhile, for the record, this from the CDS (https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2017/07/statement_from_thechiefofthedefencestaff.html) ...
Quote
“I detest any action by a Canadian Armed Forces member that is intended to show disrespect towards the very people and cultures we value in Canada. We are the nation's protectors, and any member of the Canadian Armed Forces who is not prepared to be the defender we need them to be will face severe consequences, including release from the forces.

“What happened in Halifax over the weekend is deplorable, and Canadians should rest assured my senior leadership is seized of the matter. The members involved will be removed from training and duties while we conduct an investigation and review the circumstances. Their future in the military is certainly in doubt.

“On behalf of the Canadian Armed Forces, I apologize to Indigenous Peoples for the behaviour of a few, who certainly do not represent the broader group of proud women and men who serve our country. I expect better.”
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 06, 2017, 08:03:21
So.....paid vacation.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 06, 2017, 09:13:11
And no need to worry about merit listings for some years to come either.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 06, 2017, 09:20:07
Bruce MacKinnon cartoon 6 Jul 17 (http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorial-cartoon/2017-07-06-editorial-cartoon)
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 06, 2017, 10:20:01
And no need to worry about merit listings for some years to come either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY4LGECbjTg
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Sandyson on July 06, 2017, 13:38:08
3 points:
   The media once again made a minor event into a 'news' story that is sensational. They repeatedly do this form of exaggeration.

   I cannot understand why the CDS--a full general, even comments on an happening that should be handled by a sergeant-major.

   As to the lesser ranks, the event proved an opportunity for people looking for career promotion, to get much needed attention for themselves. The party line seems to be their theme of 'criticism'. In that other country, Kim Jong-un would certainly be pleased.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: MARS on July 06, 2017, 14:11:16
3 points:
   I cannot understand why the CDS--a full general, even comments on an happening that should be handled by a sergeant-major.

I would speculate it is because the CDS understands quite clearly that Indigenous groups 'have the floor', so to speak, in the current public discourse and that the details don't and won't matter - there is no winning move, in terms of the reputation of the CAF, other than to condemn, without reservation, the actions of those sailors/soldier.

I mean, you even have the MND offering apologies, so obviously the entire CoC will follow with their own.

To be charitable, these young men had to be pretty tone deaf to current climate vis-a-vis indigenous issues in Canada, if they seriously thought that their actions weren't going to be pilloried, quite roundly, all over social media, and thus by their superiors.  Lots of discussion here about Charter rights and such.  That is not the water cooler conversations being had about this in the general public.  I wonder how big of a rock you have to be living under to seriously think it would have played out in their favour....



Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Colin P on July 06, 2017, 14:17:54
Perhaps the fact that 1 or 2 of them were also First Nation made the issue personal and perhaps they were fed up with no one wanting to challenge the protesters?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 06, 2017, 14:37:33
I would speculate it is because the CDS understands quite clearly that Indigenous groups 'have the floor', so to speak, in the current public discourse and that the details don't and won't matter - there is no winning move, in terms of the reputation of the CAF, other than to condemn, without reservation, the actions of those sailors/soldier.

I mean, you even have the MND offering apologies, so obviously the entire CoC will follow with their own.

To be charitable, these young men had to be pretty tone deaf to current climate vis-a-vis indigenous issues in Canada, if they seriously thought that their actions weren't going to be pilloried, quite roundly, all over social media, and thus by their superiors.  Lots of discussion here about Charter rights and such.  That is not the water cooler conversations being had about this in the general public.  I wonder how big of a rock you have to be living under to seriously think it would have played out in their favour....

Really!  May I ask how two First Nations men can be "tone deaf" to their own racial issues?  I am half breed, never lived on reserve and am by no means tone deaf.  It is hard to live in the brown skin suit everyday and be tone deaf in Canada. 

I think this protest was silly and not deserving of the status of "sacred ceremony".  It is not like any sacred ceremony I ever attended and there were no elders present which is usually required at sacred ceremonies since they are usually about affirmation of shared community values as defined by elders.  Chief is a sacred position in a community whether elected or appointed by elders or recognized through military deeds.  Chief Grizzly Mama does not appear on the political rolls of any First Nation of any federation.  This was a simple protest that got counter protested.  That being said the counter protest was silly too. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Bird_Gunner45 on July 06, 2017, 14:48:48
Really!  May I ask how two First Nations men can be "tone deaf" to their own racial issues?  I am half breed, never lived on reserve and am by no means tone deaf.  It is hard to live in the brown skin suit everyday and be tone deaf in Canada. 

I think this protest was silly and not deserving of the status of "sacred ceremony".  It is not like any sacred ceremony I ever attended and there were no elders present which is usually required at sacred ceremonies since they are usually about affirmation of shared community values as defined by elders.  Chief is a sacred position in a community whether elected or appointed by elders or recognized through military deeds.  Chief Grizzly Mama does not appear on the political rolls of any First Nation of any federation.  This was a simple protest that got counter protested.  That being said the counter protest was silly too.

I think the point was that there was zero chance this was going to work out well for them regardless of race, gender, or sexuality. The pers would moat likely have seen the teepee protest and the reaction so should have known how this would look.

That's the poor judgment they showed- regardless of their beliefs, which at best sound outdated, their actions were definately going to make the CAF look bad.

Besides- if this is the level of judgement and decision making they're capable of than they shouldn't be in the military.  We need leaders and soldiers capable of making sound judgment. Also, why would tge CAF put these people in leadership positions when they are clearly aligned with a political movement of dubious quality. Could they be trusted yo lead natives if they can't even be trusted to celebrate Canada Day without looking like idiots?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on July 06, 2017, 15:03:11
Lots of discussion here about Charter rights and such.  That is not the water cooler conversations being had about this in the general public.  I wonder how big of a rock you have to be living under to seriously think it would have played out in their favour....

Really MARS?

I hate to disagree, but around here (Montreal), I read two national newspapers and three local ones every day, I monitor public forum radio shows in the morning and watch the CTV and Global newscast at noon and the CBC's National at night. Then I also have numerous conversations with my work colleagues.

Well guess what: Other than CBC trying to make this into a scandal of sorts, the whole matter never made it out of a minor 25 lines article on the back of the national sections around here and absolutely nobody is paying attention or caring about this.

It may be the big thing in the naval world of belly button gazing Halifax but it's no big deal anywhere else in Canada.

I would love to hear from other part of the country to let us know if it is getting any traction where they live.

The only place that overreacted is the Admiral's office as far as I am concerned.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Altair on July 06, 2017, 15:07:49
I think the point was that there was zero chance this was going to work out well for them regardless of race, gender, or sexuality. The pers would moat likely have seen the teepee protest and the reaction so should have known how this would look.

That's the poor judgment they showed- regardless of their beliefs, which at best sound outdated, their actions were definately going to make the CAF look bad.

Besides- if this is the level of judgement and decision making they're capable of than they shouldn't be in the military.  We need leaders and soldiers capable of making sound judgment. Also, why would tge CAF put these people in leadership positions when they are clearly aligned with a political movement of dubious quality. Could they be trusted yo lead natives if they can't even be trusted to celebrate Canada Day without looking like idiots?
Hat, dark glasses, all visible tattoos covered, something to cover their faces. All that was required to avoid this outcome.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Colin P on July 06, 2017, 15:48:08
I think the point was that there was zero chance this was going to work out well for them regardless of race, gender, or sexuality. The pers would moat likely have seen the teepee protest and the reaction so should have known how this would look.

That's the poor judgment they showed- regardless of their beliefs, which at best sound outdated, their actions were definately going to make the CAF look bad.

Besides- if this is the level of judgement and decision making they're capable of than they shouldn't be in the military.  We need leaders and soldiers capable of making sound judgment. Also, why would tge CAF put these people in leadership positions when they are clearly aligned with a political movement of dubious quality. Could they be trusted yo lead natives if they can't even be trusted to celebrate Canada Day without looking like idiots?

I can bet you that most of the Snr NCO you served with exercised poor judgement as young plug, except there was far less social media and scrutiny by the "New Puritans" back then. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ModlrMike on July 06, 2017, 15:56:47
Hat, dark glasses, all visible tattoos covered, something to cover their faces. All that was required to avoid this outcome.

Except for that pesky Bill C-309, which might then make them subject to CCC Section 351(2). A whole other set of problems.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: MARS on July 06, 2017, 16:07:10
I think Bird-Gunner accurately summarized what I was trying to say.

OGBD, my poor wording...I wasn't implying that there is much of any conversation around the entire affair at all - I agree with you there - simply that any conversation is not going to centre on the Charter rights and freedoms of the individuals, simply their boneheadedness.

Lightguns...I meant tone deaf to the reaction from the media, their superiors, the MND, etc.  I can't fathom what other outcome the sailors would have possibly expected. When you have the PM visiting the tepee erected on Parliament Hill under the guise of "respect and reconciliation', well, what other reaction would anyone expect from the MND, and thus the CDS?  And once the CDS made his statements, is it really any surprise that COMMARLANT would follow with his?

I don't think these folks did anything illegal, immoral or what not.  Poor judgement is all and hopefully no lasting fallout for them.  My point is, currently, today, and likely for the coming generation or more, there is no way to 'win' in a situation like this, not for the CAF at any rate. 

I posit that the Indigenous group in question could have even lit the statue on fire...and there would still be no upside to any folks from the CAF showing up, not even to put the fire out.  That is what I mean by tone deaf. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: PuckChaser on July 06, 2017, 16:25:43
And finally a sober voice of reason: http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/indigenous-veterans-group-proud-boys-1.4191749 (http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/indigenous-veterans-group-proud-boys-1.4191749)

Quote
Head of Canada's Indigenous veterans group hopes Proud Boys don't lose their CAF jobs
'They just showed up there with a flag. They didn't beat up on anybody,' Richard Blackwolf says

John Paul Tasker · Parliamentary Bureau · CBC News July 5, 2017
First Nations veterans honoured in Winnipeg

Richard Blackwolf, far left, says the Canadian Armed Forces members who confronted Indigenous activists were 'silly' to have gotten involved in a standoff, but should not be forced out of the military. (Michael Fazio/CBC)

The head of Canada's national Indigenous veterans organization hopes the Canadian Armed Forces members who confronted activists at an Indigenous ceremony in Halifax can stay in the military even if they were "silly" to engage in such a confrontation.

"The whole military has become politicized, we're living in a politically correct era and they [the CAF members] should have realized that this thing would be a media event," Richard Blackwolf, the national president of the Canadian Aboriginal Veterans and Serving Members Association (CAV), said in an interview with CBC News.

"But, hopefully, it won't affect their overall careers. I mean they just showed up there with a flag. They didn't beat up on anybody, it's not like that."

Blackwolf, a 77-year old Métis who served in the navy for 13 years, said the activists assembled at the statue of Edward Cornwallis in Halifax are "point one percenters" who do not adequately represent the country's Indigenous Peoples.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Colin P on July 06, 2017, 16:29:47
What I found cringe worthy is the response from the Grownups. It should have been short and curt to the media; “We have heard of the alleged incident, will review any video and interview the members involved to determine if any breech of regulations occurred and we have nothing further to say on the matter until then. Any further inquiries can be made to our Media Relations Officer who will respond at the appropriate time.”
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 06, 2017, 16:55:24
One thing I have to disagree on is though a threat of extra duties is one thing, threatening to expose someone as racist is quite a different matter all together, and goes into the territory of giving a person doubt to their personal health and safety.

Also contacting a person through non military channels with regards to military context is a big unsat especially WRT them facing possible punishments. . There is a reason why facebook can't be used as a recall list. If there really was an officer or any other member for that matter giving threats through social media, I do hope they are exposed internally through the military. As it is beyond their scope of power.

Also to the Sub Lt who participated in releasing personal details of the 5 men, there is no exception for military members on committing crimes in Canada. It don't matter if some of the details were public before that, adding to it makes matters worse, and still illegal. One thing you may have noticed, any official correspondence from the military haven't listed the names of the Men, even though they are already public knowledge.

I still haven't read or seen anything on this whole Navy Officers threaten to expose names/people/etc stuff...but as devils advocate, couldn't their actions also be considered somewhat in line with this?  (again, not knowing what was actually said/done...more in line with the concept of can an Officer take action to discipline, stop further possible service offences, uphold CAF Ethics and Values...that sort of thing).

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-01/toc-04.page

4.02 - GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF OFFICERS

(1) An officer shall:
a.become acquainted with, observe and enforce:i.the National Defence Act,
ii.the Security of Information Act,
iii.QR&O, and
iv.all other regulations, rules, orders and instructions that pertain to the performance of the officer's duties;

b.afford to all persons employed in the public service such assistance in the performance of their duties as is practical;
c.promote the welfare, efficiency and good discipline of all subordinates;
d.ensure the proper care and maintenance, and prevent the waste, of all public and non-public property within the officer's control; and
e.report to the proper authority any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions governing the conduct of any person subject to the Code of Service Discipline when the officer cannot deal adequately with the matter.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 06, 2017, 17:22:36
What I found cringe worthy is the response from the Grownups. It should have been short and curt to the media; “We have heard of the alleged incident, will review any video and interview the members involved to determine if any breech of regulations occurred and we have nothing further to say on the matter until then. Any further inquiries can be made to our Media Relations Officer who will respond at the appropriate time.”

The adults are risk adverse and running scared nowadays.  I was really disheartened by the situation of the GG recently, who made a positive, truthful, supportive message about FN peoples by saying we're all immigrants, including FN who have been here for thousands of years.   Following some hurt feelings reports from the Grizzly Momma crowd the GG (or someone) felt he needed to walk back to stop the temper tantrums.  Bollocks,  he was correct and it was sad to see even him have to bow down to these people.  I'm getting tired of the hissy fits and finger pointing by the 1%'ers.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Bird_Gunner45 on July 06, 2017, 17:23:11
I can bet you that most of the Snr NCO you served with exercised poor judgement as young plug, except there was far less social media and scrutiny by the "New Puritans" back then.

I'm not arguing that point and am quite aware that people did all kinds of things in the "bad old days". I'm also in the belief that a lot of what they did would now get them booted from the army.

I think that your point makes my point- in the bad old days you could go downtown and do what you wanted and the worst one could expect was to be put in jail and pulled out by the Adjt. Like it or not, those days are gone forever. And it has nothing to do with "new puritans" but rather with technology and its ability to put out anything you do. Today, a bunch of drunk soldiers fighting university students in Fredericton can be filmed, put on youtube, and seen by the world, hurting the image of the CAF. That's the reality for the soldiers of today, full stop. The world, and the army, has changed.

That, and arguably their world view, is the poor judgment part. They should have known or at least expected that their actions would be filmed and put out for the world to see. Having their facebook pages and everything else was just asking for trouble when they decided to go to that park.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Underway on July 06, 2017, 17:30:16
Really MARS?

I hate to disagree, but around here (Montreal), I read two national newspapers and three local ones every day, I monitor public forum radio shows in the morning and watch the CTV and Global newscast at noon and the CBC's National at night. Then I also have numerous conversations with my work colleagues.

Well guess what: Other than CBC trying to make this into a scandal of sorts, the whole matter never made it out of a minor 25 lines article on the back of the national sections around here and absolutely nobody is paying attention or caring about this.

It may be the big thing in the naval world of belly button gazing Halifax but it's no big deal anywhere else in Canada.

I would love to hear from other part of the country to let us know if it is getting any traction where they live.

The only place that overreacted is the Admiral's office as far as I am concerned.

I partially agree.  However it's not just Halifax.  This is big news in the Maritimes, all the Maritimes.  Those national newspapers you read, well they have different issues for different places.  Globe and Mail Maritime Issue has had 4-5 stories covering the situation.  Ontario (well Metro TO) has .... zero.  But yes, the rest of the country has already moved on to oil going lower, 5% of houses in TO are foreign buys and whatever The Donald has tweeted lately.

As for the overreaction, I don't think it was an overreaction.  It's the exact proper reaction.  I felt the Admiral (aside from the white supremacy comment) was very balanced, speaking on youth, stupidity and how we need to see if we can salvage the members.  The CDS was more irritated but he's speaking to the Ottawa press and didn't want to give them even the tiniest crack to accuse us of being soft on potential racism etc...
 
Our entire organization is under fire for being old boys white bigots and need to go the extra mile to fix these problems, because well, we have historically acted like old boys white bigots for the most part (and in so many cases continue to do so).

As for the repercussions,  I will be surprised if they get anything more than C&P.  That's bad enough, as they are removed from training or ship for the duration of the investigation, and are unable to do any coursing while on C&P or advance their career while on their Probation period (max 6 months though I have in rare cases seen 9 months given under special circumstances).  Their career just got approx a 1-2 year delay in it for advancement, unless the MP's move at lightning speed to investigate this.  The fact that the media blew it out of proportion won't change the repercussions all that much as the violation was not sufficient enough for release, and if that was attempted be prepared to have ALL your ducks in a row because we can't even get rid of real terrible people.

They might catch them on a violation of QR&O 19.44, or Conduct contrary, but I see that as a stretch.  The accused would just ask for a proper trial with a judge and get off the charges (if I was their assisting officer I would advise that).
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Bird_Gunner45 on July 06, 2017, 17:37:02
I partially agree.  However it's not just Halifax.  This is big news in the Maritimes, all the Maritimes.  Those national newspapers you read, well they have different issues for different places.  Globe and Mail Maritime Issue has had 4-5 stories covering the situation.  Ontario (well Metro TO) has .... zero.  But yes, the rest of the country has already moved on to oil going lower, 5% of houses in TO are foreign buys and whatever The Donald has tweeted lately.

As for the overreaction, I don't think it was an overreaction.  It's the exact proper reaction.  I felt the Admiral (aside from the white supremacy comment) was very balanced, speaking on youth, stupidity and how we need to see if we can salvage the members.  The CDS was more irritated but he's speaking to the Ottawa press and didn't want to give them even the tiniest crack to accuse us of being soft on potential racism etc...
 
Our entire organization is under fire for being old boys white bigots and need to go the extra mile to fix these problems, because well, we have historically acted like old boys white bigots for the most part (and in so many cases continue to do so).

As for the repercussions,  I will be surprised if they get anything more than C&P.  That's bad enough, as they are removed from training or ship for the duration of the investigation, and are unable to do any coursing while on C&P or advance their career while on their Probation period (max 6 months though I have in rare cases seen 9 months given under special circumstances).  Their career just got approx a 1-2 year delay in it for advancement, unless the MP's move at lightning speed to investigate this.  The fact that the media blew it out of proportion won't change the repercussions all that much as the violation was not sufficient enough for release, and if that was attempted be prepared to have ALL your ducks in a row because we can't even get rid of real terrible people.

They might catch them on a violation of QR&O 19.44, or Conduct contrary, but I see that as a stretch.  The accused would just ask for a proper trial with a judge and get off the charges (if I was their assisting officer I would advise that).

1-2 year career delay is a conservative guess... I'd say that being in an incident that the CDS had to comment on will get them blacklisted for their foreseeable futures.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 06, 2017, 17:41:14
I know I am not the most eloquent poster here with a Ph D in *anything*, but...

Chief Grizzly Mama and her supporters are upset that General Edward Cornwallis committed genocide against her people's.  Canadians shouldn't be carrying historical flags in Canada, on Canada Day.  Etc.

- General Edward Cornwallis lived from March 1713 to January 1776.  He was appointed as Governor of Halifax  (task - establish a British Settlement to counter France's Fortress Louisberg in what is now Cape Breton), arriving in June 1949.  *Note - he died in 1776.

- Canada, as a nation, was formed in 1867.

Obviously I am not a great historian or a mathematician, but I don't see the Cornwallis = Canada and present day Canadians stuff.

British killed French, French killed British, Natives killed both and were killed by both.  The whole *Cornwallis was bad* thing seems to be just one side of the story, but apparently the only side anyone in the general public acknowledges, because there just isn't enough room for all the facts in Tweets and FB messages.

Now back to (un)reality...I guess we (Canada and Canadians) can go on arguing about who did what, when, and to who for the near future without establishing a basis of facts first; I bet the Vikings love this whole debate.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Underway on July 06, 2017, 18:03:38
1-2 year career delay is a conservative guess... I'd say that being in an incident that the CDS had to comment on will get them blacklisted for their foreseeable futures.

They are too Jr. to worry about PER's (for the few I know of directly).  Their careers are currently based on getting courses and OJT as far as I understand.    I wouldn't be surprised if the career manager in a year even knows who they are aside from a number, or if they do, actually cares.  If it takes longer than 2 years I would be surprised and probably chock it up to bad scheduling and time on PAT platoon because they are out of the normal coursing stream.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: E. B. Korcz Forrester on July 06, 2017, 20:21:35
I would speculate it is because the CDS understands quite clearly that Indigenous groups 'have the floor', so to speak, in the current public discourse and that the details don't and won't matter - there is no winning move, in terms of the reputation of the CAF, other than to condemn, without reservation, the actions of those sailors/soldier.

I mean, you even have the MND offering apologies, so obviously the entire CoC will follow with their own.

To be charitable, these young men had to be pretty tone deaf to current climate vis-a-vis indigenous issues in Canada, if they seriously thought that their actions weren't going to be pilloried, quite roundly, all over social media, and thus by their superiors.  Lots of discussion here about Charter rights and such.  That is not the water cooler conversations being had about this in the general public.  I wonder how big of a rock you have to be living under to seriously think it would have played out in their favour....


Exactly.

To add to that: the CDS's involvement was important for image. A lack of response could have further hurt the CAF's image.

Offending and alienating large swaths of Canada's identifiable groups (whether indigenous, LGBQT, Muslim, Jewish, etc) is not in our interests. This will involve some self-censorship and a decency filter, but so does being employed in nearly every other occupation. I don't think anyone is asking that we all entirely self-censor, but just to exercise good judgment and that involves remaining cognizant of the social issues of the day.

For these five, I don't think they should reprimanded with a discharge, but their off-colour standoff surely shows their lack of good judgment.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 06, 2017, 20:28:35
And finally a sober voice of reason: http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/indigenous-veterans-group-proud-boys-1.4191749 (http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/indigenous-veterans-group-proud-boys-1.4191749)

Late to the party....http://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,126080.msg1494901.html#msg1494901...... [Xp
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 06, 2017, 20:33:27
]

...... but their off-colour standoff surely shows their lack of good judgment.

Perhaps poor judgement; but I never saw any signs in any of the videos of them being in a "off-colour standoff".  I did see them having a civil discussion with one lady, before being accosted by another loudmouth, 'in your face' woman and a Black man, and then leaving, still in civil discussion with the lady they were talking to in the first place.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Private_John_Winger on July 06, 2017, 21:06:45
Insipid Venture-A Tale of Soldiering in the Age of Culture Wars

Act I

The morning sun peered through clouds that had finally broken overnight. July 2nd, 2017 looked like any other day initially. The brave men and women manning the Canadian Racism Action Centre (CRAC) were finishing their overnight shifts after spending a particularly soggy Canada Day scanning social media and other open sources for evidence-any evidence-of racism, bigotry or unauthorized opinion among Canadian military members on the internet.

Private John Taylor was just 19 years old. A native of Thornhill Ontario, this was his first operational post. Working on the front line in the war against racism was a daunting task, but an important one-and he knew it. In basic recruit training, many of his infantry colleagues would scoff at his job description. Especially that ******* Ryan McTaggart. “What the fook”? the brash Newfoundlander would chortle in the mess hall, “You call sittin’ behind a computer all day surfing da net solderin’? Get fookin’ real booddy, the RCR is da real soldiers!” Taylor seethed as he recalled the indignities. “Someday, they’re gonna understand” he thought to himself…”someday.”
It was then that he came across it. It seemed like nothing at first. A Youtube video of a bunch of guys in black and gold golf shirts having a polite, if at times irreverent, discussion with some people in a park. The caption indicated the men were sailors from CFB Halifax. Watching the video, it was clear that the men were being quite reasonable and polite while members of a protest group hurled vitriolic abuse at them. “Nothing to see here” Taylor muttered to himself as he prepared to move onto the next video. Still, it warranted a mention to the boss….”Sir, got something here you might want to take a look at.”

Capt (N) Mark Griswold had been promoted to his current position after a decade spent with the fleet. He was a combat veteran, having commanded an anti-submarine frigate in Kandahar during the Afghan war. His new role, as the Canadian Racism Action Centre Commander (CRACC) was on the cutting edge. His highly trained team of internet commandos spent their days utilizing data mining programs to search every corner of the net for armed forces members who might utter a racist, bigoted or unauthorized opinion. “Griswold, this isn’t the sixties anymore” the Admiral told him on his appointment. “We’re not just recruiting out of the jails anymore. The modern military person has to be able to think. But it’s our job to ensure they don’t think too much! The last thing this organization needs is people who think up things that we don’t want them too. It’s your job to catch them when they do so we can put a stop to it immediately.”

Griswold’s first impression of the video was similar to that of his young charge. The men were polite, and from their appearance and comments, it wasn’t even clear that they were associated with the military. “Why is this even an issue?” he thought to himself. But then something that had been eating at him since the beginning of his appointment occurred to him. “For six God-damned months I’ve been running this command centre, and we haven’t been able to find one skin-head, Nazi or Rush Limbaugh listener in the whole time. If we don’t find something soon, I’m going to have to go back on a ship. Months away from home, sea-sickness and five minute showers. Screw that!” He reviewed the video again. And it was clear, the sailors were very aggressive. In fact, one of them had a red flag. Griswold wasn’t sure, but it might even be a Confederate flag. Yes, that’s it. A Rebel flag!  It was then that he knew it was time to hit the panic button. “We’ve got one!” he exclaimed. He reached for the Racism Alarm and slammed it with his palm. Claxons began sounding and the command centre lighting immediately switched to subdued red. “Petty Officer Morgan” shouted Griswold. “Sir” replied Morgan. “Notify the Admiral we have a Code 1-military personnel arguing with left wing extremists on Youtube.” “Yessir!” barked the petty officer. And the ball began to roll…..

Act II
Admiral Newman was cranky. He’d spent the previous day at a ceremony dedicated to recognizing Canada’s tolerant diversification of tolerant diversity, but it degenerated into a fiasco when a group of Antifa activists showed up to protest the Navy’s lack of LGBTQ bathrooms on submarines. His voice betrayed his irritability when he answered the phone call from Capt(N) Griswold. “Admiral Newman” he said gruffly. His stern manner melted when Capt(N) Griswold broke the news. Racist sailors had crashed a solemn First Nations religious ceremony in Halifax, and assaulted a woman while waving a Confederate flag.  “Thank you Captain,” replied the Admiral. “I will address it.”

The Five lay in their bunks at CFB Halifax nursing headaches. It had been a fun night. They’d started off watching Gavin McInness videos on Rebel Media and drinking Jagermiester shots before heading to downtown Halifax for pints. For a laugh, one of them had brought a Red Ensign with him. While downtown, they saw a group of protestors at the Lord Cornwallis statue waving an upside down Canadian flag and defacing the statue with stickers and paint. They had walked over and argued briefly with the group before backing off when the conversation became too heated. After all, they weren’t there to start a brawl. They had a big laugh over it as the day wore on and didn’t give it much more thought until…..BOOM! The door crashed in and the flash-bang grenade left each of them stunned. Before any of them could recover their senses a black clad entry team burst into the room dragging each of them out of their bunks in their underwear. “Don’t move! Don’t move!” the team leader screamed. The room filled with the smell of cordite and chemicals as each of The Five were pepper sprayed, hand cuffed and dragged to a waiting black van which peeled out of the parking lot and down the street to oblivion.

Act III
General Prance was elated when the phone rang. He’d been waiting for an update from Admiral Newman all afternoon. “Admiral Newman here sir, we got ‘em!” “Excellent” replied the Chief of Defence Staff who had been on tenterhooks, terrified that the miscreants would escape before Griswold’s Anti-Racism Commandos could bring them into custody. “Now that we’ve got them” instructed the General, “We have to ensure due process.” “I couldn’t agree more” replied Admiral Newman. “We’ll start by marching them before me and I’ll upbraid them all afternoon.  Then we’ll have some underlings release their names publicly via social media so that they can be shamed online. Then we’ll suspend them before holding a show trial. At the end of it, after a fair hearing taking into account all available evidence, we’ll find them guilty and have them drawn and quartered. I believe you can still do that under the National Defence Act.” “Good plan” General Prance offered. “By the way, what is it they did exactly?” “Well” the Admiral sighed, “it seems these bastards attended a solemn native ceremony wearing red suspenders, combat boots and shaved heads with SS lightening bolts tattooed on their necks. They began shouting ‘White Power’, before kicking a pregnant First Nations woman in the stomach and stomp kicking an elderly Sikh. Oh yeah, they had a Nazi flag too. A God-damn Nazi flag. Can you believe it!  It was absolutely appalling behaviour.” “They’re done” intoned the Chief of Defence Staff sharply. “They’re done...” his voice tailed off.

Act IV
The court room was tense and sweltering. The crowd had started lining up well before dawn and by the time the court martial opened its doors a throng of stakeholders pushed past the harried security staff to claim their seats. Idle No More was there. So was Black Lives Matter, although after being granted standing at the proceedings they refused to participate claiming it was all an exercise in white supremacy. Antifa activists showed up but refused to enter the room after they decided as a collective that it would be more productive to smash out the windows of a coffee shop located across the street from the court house.

The murmuring crowed hushed as The Five were led in. Shorn heads bowed, their orange jumpsuits glowing with defeat, none of them dared look up toward the glaring throng. The prosecution called its first witness, Capt(N) Griswold. “Captain” the prosecutor asked, “Can you tell us how you came to be involved with the men now before the court today?” Captain Griswold described the video he’d seen and how horrified he was by it. Not since the Somalia Affair, when Canadian soldiers beat and tortured a bound Somali prisoner to death then joked about it on video had anyone seen anything like it!

Then it was the defence’s turn. The attorney, Atticus Pinch, rose to his feet. “Captain Griswold, can you tell us a little bit about….” his cross-examination immediately truncated by a vituperative protest from the witness box. “YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!” Capt(N) Griswold bellowed. “I beg your pardon?” replied Pinch. “YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!” retorted Griswold. It was going to be a long day.

The next witness was the Minister of Defence, Harjitt Sayagain. After a cursory examination-in-chief, Pinch began his cross-examination. “Minister, upon learning of the incident, you issued a media release condemning these men for their actions. Did you ever watch the video in question?” “Yes” replied Minister Sayagain. “And what did you see”? the defence continued. “…Well…I saw a group of soldiers…I mean…sailors.. acting inappropriately…waving a racist flag.” “A racist flag you say? Can you describe this flag minister?” replied Pinch.  “Well”, stammered Minister Sayagain “it was red…with a bunch of crosses on it. Totally inappropriate…” “But minister” the defence pressed on, “I’m going to suggest to you that this ‘racist’ flag you decry was actually the same flag that an entire generation of Canadian soldiers, sailors and air force personnel fought and died under during the Second World War, in the great struggle against fascism. Wouldn’t you agree?” “Of…of course I would…maybe not…” sputtered Sayagain. “For God’s sake, I was the architect of the Juno Beach landings and I led the Third Canadian Division into the Falaise Gap. Of course I know that.” With that, a loud harrumph was heard from the spectator’s gallery and Christie Blatchford rolled her eyes in disgust. “This’ll be in the Post tomorrow” she huffed, before storming out in utter disgust.

The verdict was handed down the next day. To no one’s surprise, The Five were sentenced to 51 weeks of First Nations Anti-Islamophobic Pro-Trans Gender Anti-Black Racism Sensitivity Training at the Ministry of Diversity in Ottawa. A dog barked as the prisoner van rolled through the night towards Room 101.

Post-Script-July 2018

The Five sat at the café table, reading the Huffington Post on their computers and sipping Victory Gin. The Telescreen blared with news of an impending announcement. A great victory had been achieved by the Canadian Forces in their eternal struggle against the forces of intolerance. It came in the form of a new quota to ensure proper representation of transgender studies graduates among the ranks of the special operations command. The Five cheered the news, along with the rest of the patrons of the café. As they sat enjoying their Victory Gin, they were sure of only one thing. They loved Justin Trudeau.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 06, 2017, 21:47:45

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Quote
Christie Blatchford: Proud Boys' behaviour might be goofy, but is hardly ‘deplorable’ (http://nationalpost.com/opinion/christie-blatchford-proud-boys-behaviour-might-be-goofy-but-hardly-deplorable/wcm/c234f37d-4d0a-49e6-9036-a03132fc77a1)
Not a blow was struck. Not a disrespectful word uttered. Then the men were outed as Canadian Forces members and soon were tossed under the bus by their leaders
The National Post
Christie Blatchford
July 6, 2017  7:55 PM EDT

I do not rise in defence of the Proud Boys, a truly goofy sort of organization, so odd I can’t help but think it’s a joke perpetrated by its founder, Gavin McInnes, the Canadian ex-hipster and comedian who co-started Vice Media and is infamous for what in the United Kingdom is known as taking the piss.

McInnes started the Proud Boys just last year, and until recently, the group seemed to have been regarded as kooky but benign.

Two of its weirder tests, for instance, call for the prospective member to be beaten up by at least five guys until he can spit out the names of five breakfast cereals, and, secondly, to stay away from his own member and masturbate no more than once a month (its infamous #NoWanks policy) on the grounds that this gets young men off the couch and talking to actual women.

(I do rise somewhat in the defence of cereal, which like the Proud Boys I adore and eat at least twice daily, and in defence of the other as well.)

In any case, the group has been getting a good deal of ink since Canada Day in Halifax, when one of five young men who approached an Indigenous protest — carrying the old Red Ensign flag (Canada’s de facto flag until 1965) and apparently singing God Save the Queen, though the video I saw didn’t capture the latter — identified them all as Proud Boys Maritimes.

For the record, the protest itself was held at the statue of Edward Cornwallis, the former Nova Scotia governor who founded Halifax and notoriously issued a bounty on Mi’kmaq scalps (the Scalping Proclamation) after Mi’kmaq warriors, objecting to Cornwallis’ chosen site, fought against the English.

A small crowd was gathered around the statue, one of them carrying an upside-down Canadian flag with the word “decolonize” written on it, there to mark the various atrocities committed against Indigenous people while Chief Grizzly Mamma, who is originally from British Columbia, shaved her head.

According to what McInnes later told the CBC, the five were in a bar on July 1, heard rumours of an anti-Canada protest, and decided to go check it out.

Also for the record, the men were well-spoken, polite and respectful; they were met by a young woman, from the protesters, who was equally polite and respectful. The men explained they were curious and wanted to see what was going on; she said they’d be welcome to listen quietly if they didn’t disrupt things.

But a couple of other protesters were not similarly inclined.

One snarled, “This is a ******* genocide.” Someone else said, “This is Mi’kmaq territory, to which one of the Proud Boys replied, “This is Canada.” Members of each side tossed about historically inaccurate facts in the manner of the young and unschooled. Another young woman bristling with hostility kept moving closer to one of the men until she was practically touching him. “You don’t seem to like me standing so close,” she said. “You’re very close,” he replied calmly.

But then the Proud Boys left, having been chastised for their pronunciation of Mi’kmaq and for their disrespectful tone, or, as a protester put it, got “the —- out of here.”

There were no harsh words from the Proud Boys. There was even some humour; once, told by a protester to speak more softly, one of the men said, in effect, “What? This is a library now?” But he did as he was asked.

Not a blow was struck. Not a disrespectful word was uttered, unless, of course, one counts the mere questioning of Indigenous protest as disrespectful. Not a gram of cereal was consumed or thrown.

Then the men were outed on social media as being members of the Canadian Forces. Four, as it turned out, are sailors, one is in the army. (A sixth military person was on the periphery, but not involved.)

In short order, the men were smartly tossed under the bus by their leaders.


More on LINK (http://nationalpost.com/opinion/christie-blatchford-proud-boys-behaviour-might-be-goofy-but-hardly-deplorable/wcm/c234f37d-4d0a-49e6-9036-a03132fc77a1).
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: FSTO on July 06, 2017, 21:54:22
The mob is getting restless and they want blood.

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

There’s no room in Canadian forces for racists: Editorial
A group of five men from the Canadian Armed Forces invaded a Mi’kmaq ceremony on Canada Day. They should be dismissed.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2017/07/05/no-room-in-forces-for-misogynist-racists.html

In the two years since Gen. Jonathan Vance was named Chief of Defence Staff he has spent considerable time and energy trying to change the misogynistic, discriminatory culture of Canada’s Armed Forces.

Now, in one appallingly insensitive and thuggish act, a gang of five members of the military have proven just how deaf they have been to his crystal-clear orders. They don’t belong in the ranks.

It happened on Canada Day when a group of Mi’kmaq women held a ceremony in Halifax to mark the suffering of Indigenous peoples. As their chief cut off her braids and laid them at the foot of a statue of Edward Cornwallis — as a symbol of the scalping and mistreatment of her people that occurred under the Halifax founder’s command — the black-shirted men made their entrance.

They identified themselves as “Proud Boys,” a self-declared “fraternal organization of Western Chauvinists who will no longer apologize for creating the modern world.” One man carrying a Red Ensign declared: “This was Mi’kmaq territory. This is now Canada. This is Halifax, Nova Scotia. This is a British colony.”

So far Vance has called the incident “deplorable,” said the men will be removed from training and duties while the incident is investigated, and apologized to Indigenous peoples. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan was also quick to condemn them.

That’s all good. But if Vance wants to send an important signal that the forces have no place for people with these odious attitudes, he must dismiss these men immediately.

After all, the military is in the midst of a recruitment drive to attract women, LGBTQ people, and visible minorities. It cannot hope to succeed at that goal if it allows men who disrespect women and racial minorities to remain in its ranks.

The Proud Boys Canadian Chapters Facebook page, which now sports a photo of Cornwallis, says the organization does not discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality. But it’s hard to believe it isn’t anything but a front for a bunch of racists.

There’s no room in Canada, never mind the military, for that kind of thinking. Vance should cut to the chase and dismiss those who not only hold these beliefs, but would head out as a gang to impose them on others.

The CBC gets a West Coast Lawyer (who is first nation) to weigh in as well.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/indigenous-lawyer-responds-to-gavin-mcinnes-interview-1.4193748

She calls the Red Ensign the Confederate Flag and CBC does not correct her.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 06, 2017, 22:00:14
*invaded*     ::)
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: cavalryman on July 06, 2017, 22:12:42
Another hit piece by the Red Star.  That bird cage liner's mere existence is proof  of the the theory that MPAI.  And said idiots congregate on the left end of the stupidity spectrum.  Jesus wept.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 06, 2017, 22:14:08
I really didn't know that Mi’kmaq territory extended all the way to Vancouver, where this Chief Grizzly Mamma is said to be from?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Loachman on July 06, 2017, 23:02:20
that involves remaining cognizant of the social issues of the day.

Many of the "social issues of the day" are simply destructive, divisive, and/or just plain stupid. Ignoring them simply encourages the idiocy.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Oldgateboatdriver on July 07, 2017, 00:17:01
Yes, EITS, invaded.

Don't think for a moment that these people don't know what they are doing, and that the "West" useful idiots, like the Star editorial board, is doing the hanging for them.

In a reconciliatory mood, acknowledging that you are on x, y or z first nations ancestral territory is one thing. To acknowledge that your are on unceded x, y, or z t's territory is another. And those people know it even if our governments and the media doesn't.

Acknowledging you are on someone else's "unceded" territory makes you an occupier (a bit like the Israeli occupation of "Palestinian" territory [and I put that in quotes because there hasn't been a Palestinian state in human recorded history that would be recognized as a country at any point in time]) and therefore it validates your international claim to assistance in getting rid of the occupier or in claiming mischief from said occupier and questioning any right to the land. This is important because in international law, one of the criteria for a country to be recognized is borders recognized by all or almost all other states and the actual exercise of your sovereignty over such land. The "unceded" territory discourse aims at taking the land away from a mere "colonized" status and making it, an occupied mig'mak land subject to return to them under international law.

Interestingly enough, this means that those five members may actually have been effectively executing one of the primary duties of the CAF: the role of defending Canadian territory.
   
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Tcm621 on July 07, 2017, 01:10:46
Ok, I have read the whole thread, a number of articles and I still have one question. What did they do? Honestly, I can't find one single thing that is "deplorable", racist or even rude in this whole thing. I have yet to even hear an  accusation of an offense besides being "racist". It is telling that this group of racist Nazis reportedly had two natives and a gay man present.

Can our leadership, just once, defend us in public? No wonder we have recruiting issues. This could literally have been anyone of us. I am from the left coast and I run into protests a lot (although not as much now as when I was in Esquimalt/Victoria) and I have made comments about the stupidity of them. And I am sure as hell going to verbally defend myself if I am berated by some "activist" (although in uniform its a different game). I think most of us would do the same.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 07, 2017, 07:33:45
I really didn't know that Mi’kmaq territory extended all the way to Vancouver, where this Chief Grizzly Mamma is said to be from?
??? If someone born in Toronto as an Albanian citizen according to Albania's rules now lives in Vancouver, does that make all of Canada to the West Coast Albania?
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: E. B. Korcz Forrester on July 07, 2017, 12:02:47
Perhaps poor judgement; but I never saw any signs in any of the videos of them being in a "off-colour standoff".  I did see them having a civil discussion with one lady, before being accosted by another loudmouth, 'in your face' woman and a Black man, and then leaving, still in civil discussion with the lady they were talking to in the first place.


I will concede that not all of them were making off-colour statements. However, I would consider, in light of how poorly Canada's indigenous are treated by ordinary people (sometimes with callous disregard for life and serious consequence (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/trailer-hitch-death-1.4189426)), telling another Canadian of indigenous heritage to "take off all [their] clothes" and return everything they own—become destitute—to the state because none of that belonged, and was given, to them (paraphrased except where quoted) to be off-colour and tasteless.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 07, 2017, 15:19:56
Surprised no one has posted or mentioned these....

QR&O
19.14 - IMPROPER COMMENTS

(1) No officer or non-commissioned member shall make remarks or pass criticism tending to bring a superior into contempt, except as may be necessary for the proper presentation of a grievance under Chapter 7 (Grievances).

(2) No officer or non-commissioned member shall do or say anything that:

if seen or heard by any member of the public, might reflect discredit on the Canadian Forces or on any of its members; or
if seen by, heard by or reported to those under him, might discourage them or render them dissatisfied with their condition or the duties on which they are employed.

DAOD 7021-1, Conflict of Interest (relevant sections, its long)

outside activity (activité extérieure)

Any employment, political or charitable activity, whether remunerated or not, that is conducted outside the official working hours of a DND employee or the authorized hours of duty or service of a CAF member.

Requirement

3.2 All DND employees and CAF members must conform to the following principles in their public roles as well as in their outside activities

Outside Activities   
Only pursuing an outside activity that does not create a COI or a potential for adverse public perception, and that does not otherwise contravene a federal, provincial or territorial act or regulation, or a DND or CAF directive, order or policy.

Participation in Public Events

Not identifying oneself as a DND employee or CAF member when participating in public events held by for-profit or non-profit entities without the prior written consent of the DM or the CDS or their delegates, as applicable, except in the course of the official duties of the DND employee or CAF member.
Note – During participation in public events, DND employees and CAF members must remain aware of their obligation of loyalty to the GC. Also, QR&O articles 19.14, Improper Comments, and 19.36, Disclosure of Information or Opinion, have application to the comments and disclosures of CAF members during their participation.

Social Media and the Internet   
Remaining aware of their obligation of loyalty to the GC and remaining particularly sensitive to COI or the potential for adverse public perception that may arise from the creation, sharing or discussion of information on social media and other Internet sites.

Limitations on Civil Employment or Undertakings

4.1 QR&O article 19.42, Civil Employment, sets out limitations on the civil employment or undertakings of a CAF member who is on full-time service. To ensure any proposed civil employment or undertaking is not contrary to this article, a CAF member must submit a completed form DND 2839-E, Confidential Report, to their commanding officer (CO), requesting permission to engage in the civil employment or undertaking.

Note – A member of the Regular Force is on full-time service at all times, and a member of the Reserve Force is on full-time service when on Class “B” or Class “C” Reserve Service, in accordance with QR&O Chapter 9, Reserve Service.

Factors for a CO to Consider

4.2 When reviewing a form DND 2839-E submitted under paragraph 4.1 by a CAF member, a CO should take into consideration the following:

whether the proposed civil employment or undertaking will only occur during approved leave or outside the authorized hours of duty or service of the CAF member;
whether or not the potential clients of the CAF member will be primarily DND employees, other CAF members and their family members;
the risk that the CAF member will be placed in a position which is not consistent with the principles of conduct set out in paragraph 3.2;
the general practice in the CAF regarding the approval of this type of civil employment or undertaking; and
any other factors that the CO considers to be relevant to the situation.

Review of COI by the DDEP

4.6 Once a CO has confirmed that the proposed civil employment or undertaking is not contrary to QR&O article 19.42, the CAF member must send the completed form DND 2839-E, along with the confirmation of the CO, to the DDEP in order to confirm that a COI does not prevent the CAF member from engaging in it.

5. Criteria Applicable to DND Employees and CAF Members
Applicable Criteria

5.1 In evaluating situations of COI, the permissibility of the holding of a non-exempt asset or liability, the permissibility of the conduct of an outside activity, or any action or decision of a DND employee or CAF member under this DAOD, the DDEP must consider the following:

whether the holding of the non-exempt asset or liability, the conduct of the outside activity or other action or decision of the DND employee or CAF member under this DAOD complies with the principles of conduct in paragraph 3.2, the ethical principles and specific values of the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces Code of Values and Ethics and, in the case of a DND employee, the Treasury Board (TB) Policy on Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment, as they apply in their public roles;
whether the outside activity involves the use of GC property, including intellectual property;
whether the outside activity is in fact to be conducted outside the official working hours of the DND employee or the authorized hours of duty or service of the CAF member;
whether the holding of the non-exempt asset or liability, proposed outside activity or other action or decision of the DND employee or CAF member creates the potential for adverse public perception;
whether the non-exempt asset or proposed outside activity of the DND employee or CAF member will have the GC, DND or CAF as a user or client;
whether the non-exempt asset or proposed outside activity of the DND employee or CAF member will have other DND employees, other CAF members or their family members as users or clients; and
any other factors relevant to the situation.
Note – In this paragraph, “outside activity” includes any civil employment or undertaking or political activity of a CAF member.

5.2 In reaching a determination, the DDEP must always defer to the broader public interest above that of the personal interest of the DND employee or of the CAF member, or the interest of the DND or the CAF.

There is also DAOD 7023-1 and the The DND and CF Code of Values and Ethics, specfically from the latter

Table 1 - Ethical Principles of DND and CF

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES   EXPECTED BEHAVIOURS
1. RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF ALL PERSONS   

At all times and in all places, DND employees and CF members shall respect human dignity and the value of every person by: 

1.1  Treating every person with respect and fairness.
1.2  Valuing diversity and the benefit of combining the unique qualities and strengths inherent in a diverse workforce.
1.3  Helping to create and maintain safe and healthy workplaces that are free from harassment and discrimination.
1.4  Working together in a spirit of openness, honesty and transparency that encourages engagement, collaboration and respectful communication.
2. SERVE CANADA BEFORE SELF   
At all times and in all places, DND employees and CF members shall fulfil their commitments in a manner that best serves Canada, its people, its parliamentary democracy, DND and the CF by:

2.1   Making decisions and acting at all times in the public interest.
2.2   Performing their duty or their responsibilities to the highest ethical standards.
2.3   Avoiding or preventing situations that could give rise to personal or organizational conflicts of interests.
2.4   Providing decision-makers with all the information, analysis and advice they need, always striving to be open, candid and impartial.

Table 2 - Values and Expected Behaviours of DND Employees and CF Members

SPECIFIC VALUES   EXPECTED BEHAVIOURS
1. INTEGRITY   
DND employees and CF members shall serve the public interest by:

1.1  Acting at all times with integrity, and in a manner that will bear the closest public scrutiny; an obligation that may not be fully satisfied by simply acting within the law.
1.2  Never using their official roles to inappropriately obtain an advantage for themselves or to advantage or disadvantage others.
1.3  Taking all possible steps to prevent and resolve any real, apparent or potential conflicts of interest between their official responsibilities and their private affairs in favour of the public interest.
1.4  Acting in such a way as to maintain DND’s and the CF’s trust, as well as that of their peers, supervisors and subordinates.
1.5  Adhering to the highest ethical standards, communicating and acting with honesty, and avoiding deception.
1.6  Being dedicated to fairness and justice, committed to the pursuit of truth regardless of personal consequences.

7. Failure to Comply


7.2 For CF members

7.2.1 A CF member who fails to comply with ethical principles, values, expected behaviour or the policies of the DND and CF Code of Values and Ethics, or fails to comply with the DAOD 7023 series, may be subject to one or more of the following: 

change of duties;
release or other administrative action as set out in the Administrative Review (AR) Career Decisions block of DAOD 5019-2, Administrative Review; and/or
disciplinary action under the National Defence Act.

So yeah, I think these guys are up schitts creek on this one, particularly in regards to their association with "The Proud Boys" and my doubts that they went through the necessary steps outlined in DAOD 7021-1 to get approval.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Underway on July 07, 2017, 15:30:36
You've forgotten  QR&O 19.44 - POLITICAL ACTIVITIES AND CANDIDATURE FOR OFFICE

....snip....
(7) No member of the Regular Force shall:

a. take an active part in the affairs of a political organization or party;
b. make a political speech to electors, or announce himself or allow himself to be announced as a candidate, or prospective candidate, for election to the Parliament of Canada or a provincial legislature; or
c. except with the permission of the Chief of the Defence Staff, accept an office in a municipal corporation or other local government body or allow himself to be nominated for election to such office.

...snip...

Also in my research I have re-read  QR&O 19.36 - DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION OR OPINION in particular para (2), and decided to adjust how I interact on this board with members.   I would strongly recommendother Mil members here read that themselves so they can properly adjust their comments or discussions on the board to their comfort.  This is not as a result of me feeling any sort of big brother chill, or any anticipation of some sort of witch hunt search, just a personal decision based on my own comfort level with following regs I haven't reviewed in a long time.  It's also not a threat or anything like that just a PSA as I was a bit surprised by how encompassing that QR&O was.

*edit for spacing*
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 07, 2017, 15:45:45
You've forgotten  QR&O 19.44 - POLITICAL ACTIVITIES AND CANDIDATURE FOR OFFICE

....snip....
(7) No member of the Regular Force shall:

a. take an active part in the affairs of a political organization or party;
b. make a political speech to electors, or announce himself or allow himself to be announced as a candidate, or prospective candidate, for election to the Parliament of Canada or a provincial legislature; or
c. except with the permission of the Chief of the Defence Staff, accept an office in a municipal corporation or other local government body or allow himself to be nominated for election to such office.

...snip...

Also in my research I have re-read  QR&O 19.36 - DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION OR OPINION in particular para (2), and decided to adjust how I interact on this board with members.   I would strongly recommendother Mil members here read that themselves so they can properly adjust their comments or discussions on the board to their comfort.  This is not as a result of me feeling any sort of big brother chill, or any anticipation of some sort of witch hunt search, just a personal decision based on my own comfort level with following regs I haven't reviewed in a long time.  It's also not a threat or anything like that just a PSA as I was a bit surprised by how encompassing that QR&O was.

I didn't forget, just thought my post was long enough, and I am not quite sure if The Proud Boys qualify as a political organization.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 07, 2017, 16:09:12
Improper Comments - 90% of the posts on the whole forum could fall under this.  What, then, in the whole 10 minute video, would one consider improper comments?

I would, personally, go with the whole *give all your clothes back...this is a British colony* blurb from the flag bearer.  IMO, that was the only stuff that *may* have crossed a line.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 07, 2017, 16:26:57
Improper Comments - 90% of the posts on the whole forum could fall under this.  What, then, in the whole 10 minute video, would one consider improper comments?

I would, personally, go with the whole *give all your clothes back...this is a British colony* blurb from the flag bearer.  IMO, that was the only stuff that *may* have crossed a line.

I haven't seen the video in entirety, however I think its more likely the DAOD's and Values and Ethics policy will be the most applicable here particularly their association with the proud boys.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 07, 2017, 16:49:09
their association with the proud boys.

And I think this part is what is giving this the traction it is getting with the media and (some) of the public.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Colin P on July 07, 2017, 18:07:14
I didn't forget, just thought my post was long enough, and I am not quite sure if The Proud Boys qualify as a political organization.

I don't think the "Proud Boys" meet the definition at all. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 07, 2017, 18:14:29
I don't think the "Proud Boys" meet the definition at all.
Agree. 

Political "organization"?  Very >>slim<< maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe, depending on how they deal with governments re:  their agenda & what they want from government, and how the term is defined.  Political "party"?  Can't see it from the group's current public offerings.  YMMV
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Eye In The Sky on July 07, 2017, 18:27:43
I think a group or organization that is contrary to established CAF Ethics and Values  (http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about/code-of-values-and-ethics.page)fits more.

7.2 For CF members

7.2.1 A CF member who fails to comply with ethical principles, values, expected behaviour or the policies of the DND and CF Code of Values and Ethics, or fails to comply with the DAOD 7023 series, may be subject to one or more of the following: 
a.change of duties;
b.release or other administrative action as set out in the Administrative Review (AR) Career Decisions block of DAOD 5019-2, Administrative Review; and/or

c.disciplinary action under the National Defence Act.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Underway on July 07, 2017, 18:42:13
Agree. 

Political "organization"?  Very >>slim<< maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe, depending on how they deal with governments re:  their agenda & what they want from government, and how the term is defined.  Political "party"?  Can't see it from the group's current public offerings.  YMMV

To get to the fourth level of their organization one needs to go to a political protest where there are "antifa's" (antifacists) and counter protest with the goal of getting in a fight and either a) get arrested or  b) get beat up.  They are starting to provide volunteer security for controversial right speakers in the US, and are calling themselves the Alt-Knights.  Yah, thats a political organization.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Kat Stevens on July 07, 2017, 19:01:41
Don't you worry, the legal beagles and defenders of correctness are staying up nights trying to find the biggest, heaviest books available to throw at these golf shirt wearing thugs.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Brad Sallows on July 08, 2017, 00:03:43
"Western chauvinism" is basically another form of cultural dick-waving, of which there is a lot around these days, much of it enjoying a form of socially "protected" status.  But it isn't racism.

Some people - particularly in the chattering classes - need to come to grips with the realization that "the West" (western civilization) is awesome and has a long list of worthwhile achievements along with its black spots, and that there is no racial bar to becoming a member.  I know plenty of people who are not visibly pale, with no or little heritage of European extraction, and who are essentially as western as me.

In other news, archaeologists in Mexico announced the discovery of a legendary tower of skulls.  It is not an achievement of "the West".
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 08, 2017, 09:48:08
I think a group or organization that is contrary to established CAF Ethics and Values  (http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about/code-of-values-and-ethics.page)fits more ...
:nod:
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 08, 2017, 10:10:29
I have to agree with some of their views insomuch as I'm tired of being blamed for all the ills of the world by virtue of my heritage and ethnicity.   I am in agreement that western civilization is a good thing and has contributed to the world overall.  Their golf shirts are tasteful in appearance.  Antifa idiots are annoying at times but then so are the other side idiots.  But that's pretty much as far as I'll travel down the same path as I am not cool with anti-semites and no doubt there's more about the Proud Boys that's disagreeable.

I am very saddened to see the over reaction by the adults and massive shows of men in black spandex with music waving their arms and dancing like in that commercial.  The 5 in question are going to be thrown under a bus I fear to appease the thin skinned mobs who only howl in one direction.  Should something be done with them for their membership and stirring a pot?  Yes, to some degree but this smells of a blanket party in the making, not reasoned response.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 08, 2017, 10:50:12
It appears that the proud boys are more inclusive to gays than the Catholic Church and Islam.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 08, 2017, 10:57:54
I have to agree with some of their views insomuch as I'm tired of being blamed for all the ills of the world by virtue of my heritage and ethnicity.   I am in agreement that western civilization is a good thing and has contributed to the world overall.  Their golf shirts are tasteful in appearance.  Antifa idiots are annoying at times but then so are the other side idiots.  But that's pretty much as far as I'll travel down the same path as I am not cool with anti-semites and no doubt there's more about the Proud Boys that's disagreeable.

I am very saddened to see the over reaction by the adults and massive shows of men in black spandex with music waving their arms and dancing like in that commercial.  The 5 in question are going to be thrown under a bus I fear to appease the thin skinned mobs who only howl in one direction.  Should something be done with them for their membership and stirring a pot?  Yes, to some degree but this smells of a blanket party in the making, not reasoned response.

I highlighted the relevant parts of your post. Do the proud boys, overtly cross any lines? No, not from what I can tell, however they come awful close sometimes, occasionally saying its satire. And it would be naive to think that there aren't those within this organization (and other organizations) who DO hold overtly racist views, they're just smart enough to keep their mouths shut.  All it would take is just one tweet or facebook post or comment in a bar, that crossed the line, and became public, and everyone involved WILL get tagged with the guilty by association brush, deservedly or not. You know this, I know this, and I am sure everyone right on up to the CDS knows this.

Which seems to me the reason why there are rules in place to get approval prior to joining or participating in such groups, and I think that is what will ultimately hang them. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 08, 2017, 11:03:14
It appears that the proud boys are more inclusive to gays than the Catholic Church and Islam.

Difference being Catholicism/Islam are religions which have charter protections.  And if one were to look at from a hierarchical perspective, freedom of conscience and religion is listed first in the charter.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 08, 2017, 11:13:52
.......And it would be naive to think that there aren't those within this organization (and other organizations) who DO hold overtly racist views, they're just smart enough to keep their mouths shut.  All it would take is just one tweet or facebook post or comment in a bar, that crossed the line, and became public, and everyone involved WILL get tagged with the guilty by association brush, deservedly or not. You know this, I know this, and I am sure everyone right on up to the CDS knows this.


I think you can apply that logic to all organizations, religions, societies, etc.  No one is exempt.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 08, 2017, 11:28:37
It appears that the proud boys are more inclusive to gays than the Catholic Church and Islam.

Ah, good.  Yes, missed that point.  No issue with that.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 08, 2017, 17:23:48
I think you can apply that logic to all organizations, religions, societies, etc.  No one is exempt.

The majority don't act in quite the same provocative fashion though, with a "leader" deliberately stirring the pot wherever and whenever he can.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 08, 2017, 17:29:14
The majority don't act in quite the same provocative fashion though, with a "leader" deliberately stirring the pot wherever and whenever he can.

Hmmmm?  I don't know about that.  We have just witness a few leaders really "stirring the pot" in the past couple weeks.  Some recognize it.  Some people just ignore it, or accept it as part of their "leader's" position to do so.  Leaders quite often stir their followers on to do their bidding.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 08, 2017, 18:23:24
Hmmmm?  I don't know about that.  We have just witness a few leaders really "stirring the pot" in the past couple weeks.  Some recognize it.  Some people just ignore it, or accept it as part of their "leader's" position to do so.  Leaders quite often stir their followers on to do their bidding.

Really like who? I haven't seen any local legion halls, Shriners, Masons, Scout/Guide/St. John Ambulance Groups, Church/Mosque/Temple groups, YM/WCA groups, Rotary, Lions, etc. etc. (you see where I am going with this), making ANY news outside perhaps a local/community newspaper.

I think you can apply that logic to all organizations, religions, societies, etc.  No one is exempt.

Perhaps don't take half a quote, and reply to it out of context.

Go away for 2 years and things are still the same around here.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 08, 2017, 18:29:20
Really like who? I haven't seen any local legion halls, Shriners, Masons, Scout/Guide/St. John Ambulance Groups, Church/Mosque/Temple groups, YM/WCA groups, Rotary, Lions, etc. etc. (you see where I am going with this), making ANY news outside perhaps a local/community newspaper.



See that is where this should of ended. This incident should of never made it past the local/community newspaper.

The proverbial 'mountain out of a molehill' applies here perfectly.

The ball of crap from this kept growing and could of been stopped at many levels before certain politicians decided to speak on it, making it national.

The 'damage control' from this has only empowered a very vocal minority.

 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 08, 2017, 18:43:26
See that is where this should of ended. This incident should of never made it past the local/community newspaper.

The proverbial 'mountain out of a molehill' applies here perfectly.

The ball of crap from this kept growing and could of been stopped at many levels before certain politicians decided to speak on it, making it national.

The 'damage control' from this has only empowered a very vocal minority.

Possibly, however it still won't negate that the DAODs (likely) werent followed.  The DAOD's don't list exemptions either so I suspect there are probably quite a number of people who participate in those other community organizations who aren't in compliance either. Again (not that I like the thought), the DAOD's are pretty clear, and if the higher echelons are intent on making an example (which seems likely), that is the ammo they will use.

Common sense should also tell people, if a group is attracting controversy (rightly or wrongly), you are playing with fire, if you get involved with them.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: George Wallace on July 08, 2017, 19:02:51
Perhaps don't take half a quote, and reply to it out of context.

Just perhaps, that was the only part of a rant that I felt like replying to with that answer.  Nothing nefarious there.

Go away for 2 years and things are still the same around here.

I can guess what you are insinuating, but I will let you clear the air. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 08, 2017, 19:07:58
Possibly, however it still won't negate that the DAODs (likely) werent followed.  The DAOD's don't list exemptions either so I suspect there are probably quite a number of people who participate in those other community organizations who aren't in compliance either. Again (not that I like the thought), the DAOD's are pretty clear, and if the higher echelons are intent on making an example (which seems likely), that is the ammo they will use.

Common sense should also tell people, if a group is attracting controversy (rightly or wrongly), you are playing with fire, if you get involved with them.

I agree, there are many groups that participation in runs afoul of the DAODs, some of them are given a pass though.

Look at BLM and Gay Pride, to name a couple. Both are very political, both have many active military who are members. Hell even the  Mi'kmaq/Mi'gmaq protesters from that day have active military members in their group(one of the protesters facebook profile lists themselves as a RMC grad).

The problem that I see will arise from this, and if it actually goes to trial. Is a lawyer could argue that the DAODs are only applied when its convenient to do so.

I feel the most valid point made earlier was to do with our political climate. We have a party in power that is pro social justice. Our PM has embraced that side of the political spectrum to run a very successful campaign as they felt they were largely ignored during the Conservatives Government. It's really not unlike what happened with Trump in the US. Both applied their msg to a group who felt they were under attack from a government in power. 

On a side note, I find it hilarious that some of the 'Grizzly Mamma' supporters are now asking for financial compensation from the CAF. So far it is only posts on a facebook page, but that is how this all started was posts on a facebook page. It's going to be interesting to see if some SJW Lawyer picks this up and runs with it.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 08, 2017, 20:00:16
Why not?  it worked for Omar.....
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: kratz on July 08, 2017, 20:07:34
Why not?  it worked for Omar.....

This is how Ottawa will surpass it's 2% GDP commitment. Canadians will simply
Quote
"pay for their...",
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 08, 2017, 22:43:32
Quote from: gryphonv


On a side note, I find it hilarious that some of the 'Grizzly Mamma' supporters are now asking for financial compensation from the CAF. 

pavlov's law law of temporal contiguity.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Private_John_Winger on July 08, 2017, 23:40:02
Surprised no one has posted or mentioned these....

QR&O
19.14 - IMPROPER COMMENTS

(1) No officer or non-commissioned member shall make remarks or pass criticism tending to bring a superior into contempt, except as may be necessary for the proper presentation of a grievance under Chapter 7 (Grievances).

(2) No officer or non-commissioned member shall do or say anything that:

if seen or heard by any member of the public, might reflect discredit on the Canadian Forces or on any of its members; or
if seen by, heard by or reported to those under him, might discourage them or render them dissatisfied with their condition or the duties on which they are employed.

DAOD 7021-1, Conflict of Interest (relevant sections, its long)

outside activity (activité extérieure)

Any employment, political or charitable activity, whether remunerated or not, that is conducted outside the official working hours of a DND employee or the authorized hours of duty or service of a CAF member.

Requirement

3.2 All DND employees and CAF members must conform to the following principles in their public roles as well as in their outside activities

Outside Activities   
Only pursuing an outside activity that does not create a COI or a potential for adverse public perception, and that does not otherwise contravene a federal, provincial or territorial act or regulation, or a DND or CAF directive, order or policy.

Participation in Public Events

Not identifying oneself as a DND employee or CAF member when participating in public events held by for-profit or non-profit entities without the prior written consent of the DM or the CDS or their delegates, as applicable, except in the course of the official duties of the DND employee or CAF member.
Note – During participation in public events, DND employees and CAF members must remain aware of their obligation of loyalty to the GC. Also, QR&O articles 19.14, Improper Comments, and 19.36, Disclosure of Information or Opinion, have application to the comments and disclosures of CAF members during their participation.

Social Media and the Internet   
Remaining aware of their obligation of loyalty to the GC and remaining particularly sensitive to COI or the potential for adverse public perception that may arise from the creation, sharing or discussion of information on social media and other Internet sites.

Limitations on Civil Employment or Undertakings

4.1 QR&O article 19.42, Civil Employment, sets out limitations on the civil employment or undertakings of a CAF member who is on full-time service. To ensure any proposed civil employment or undertaking is not contrary to this article, a CAF member must submit a completed form DND 2839-E, Confidential Report, to their commanding officer (CO), requesting permission to engage in the civil employment or undertaking.

Note – A member of the Regular Force is on full-time service at all times, and a member of the Reserve Force is on full-time service when on Class “B” or Class “C” Reserve Service, in accordance with QR&O Chapter 9, Reserve Service.

Factors for a CO to Consider

4.2 When reviewing a form DND 2839-E submitted under paragraph 4.1 by a CAF member, a CO should take into consideration the following:

whether the proposed civil employment or undertaking will only occur during approved leave or outside the authorized hours of duty or service of the CAF member;
whether or not the potential clients of the CAF member will be primarily DND employees, other CAF members and their family members;
the risk that the CAF member will be placed in a position which is not consistent with the principles of conduct set out in paragraph 3.2;
the general practice in the CAF regarding the approval of this type of civil employment or undertaking; and
any other factors that the CO considers to be relevant to the situation.

Review of COI by the DDEP

4.6 Once a CO has confirmed that the proposed civil employment or undertaking is not contrary to QR&O article 19.42, the CAF member must send the completed form DND 2839-E, along with the confirmation of the CO, to the DDEP in order to confirm that a COI does not prevent the CAF member from engaging in it.

5. Criteria Applicable to DND Employees and CAF Members
Applicable Criteria

5.1 In evaluating situations of COI, the permissibility of the holding of a non-exempt asset or liability, the permissibility of the conduct of an outside activity, or any action or decision of a DND employee or CAF member under this DAOD, the DDEP must consider the following:

whether the holding of the non-exempt asset or liability, the conduct of the outside activity or other action or decision of the DND employee or CAF member under this DAOD complies with the principles of conduct in paragraph 3.2, the ethical principles and specific values of the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces Code of Values and Ethics and, in the case of a DND employee, the Treasury Board (TB) Policy on Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment, as they apply in their public roles;
whether the outside activity involves the use of GC property, including intellectual property;
whether the outside activity is in fact to be conducted outside the official working hours of the DND employee or the authorized hours of duty or service of the CAF member;
whether the holding of the non-exempt asset or liability, proposed outside activity or other action or decision of the DND employee or CAF member creates the potential for adverse public perception;
whether the non-exempt asset or proposed outside activity of the DND employee or CAF member will have the GC, DND or CAF as a user or client;
whether the non-exempt asset or proposed outside activity of the DND employee or CAF member will have other DND employees, other CAF members or their family members as users or clients; and
any other factors relevant to the situation.
Note – In this paragraph, “outside activity” includes any civil employment or undertaking or political activity of a CAF member.

5.2 In reaching a determination, the DDEP must always defer to the broader public interest above that of the personal interest of the DND employee or of the CAF member, or the interest of the DND or the CAF.

There is also DAOD 7023-1 and the The DND and CF Code of Values and Ethics, specfically from the latter

Table 1 - Ethical Principles of DND and CF

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES   EXPECTED BEHAVIOURS
1. RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF ALL PERSONS   

At all times and in all places, DND employees and CF members shall respect human dignity and the value of every person by: 

1.1  Treating every person with respect and fairness.
1.2  Valuing diversity and the benefit of combining the unique qualities and strengths inherent in a diverse workforce.
1.3  Helping to create and maintain safe and healthy workplaces that are free from harassment and discrimination.
1.4  Working together in a spirit of openness, honesty and transparency that encourages engagement, collaboration and respectful communication.
2. SERVE CANADA BEFORE SELF   
At all times and in all places, DND employees and CF members shall fulfil their commitments in a manner that best serves Canada, its people, its parliamentary democracy, DND and the CF by:

2.1   Making decisions and acting at all times in the public interest.
2.2   Performing their duty or their responsibilities to the highest ethical standards.
2.3   Avoiding or preventing situations that could give rise to personal or organizational conflicts of interests.
2.4   Providing decision-makers with all the information, analysis and advice they need, always striving to be open, candid and impartial.

Table 2 - Values and Expected Behaviours of DND Employees and CF Members

SPECIFIC VALUES   EXPECTED BEHAVIOURS
1. INTEGRITY   
DND employees and CF members shall serve the public interest by:

1.1  Acting at all times with integrity, and in a manner that will bear the closest public scrutiny; an obligation that may not be fully satisfied by simply acting within the law.
1.2  Never using their official roles to inappropriately obtain an advantage for themselves or to advantage or disadvantage others.
1.3  Taking all possible steps to prevent and resolve any real, apparent or potential conflicts of interest between their official responsibilities and their private affairs in favour of the public interest.
1.4  Acting in such a way as to maintain DND’s and the CF’s trust, as well as that of their peers, supervisors and subordinates.
1.5  Adhering to the highest ethical standards, communicating and acting with honesty, and avoiding deception.
1.6  Being dedicated to fairness and justice, committed to the pursuit of truth regardless of personal consequences.

7. Failure to Comply


7.2 For CF members

7.2.1 A CF member who fails to comply with ethical principles, values, expected behaviour or the policies of the DND and CF Code of Values and Ethics, or fails to comply with the DAOD 7023 series, may be subject to one or more of the following: 

change of duties;
release or other administrative action as set out in the Administrative Review (AR) Career Decisions block of DAOD 5019-2, Administrative Review; and/or
disciplinary action under the National Defence Act.

So yeah, I think these guys are up schitts creek on this one, particularly in regards to their association with "The Proud Boys" and my doubts that they went through the necessary steps outlined in DAOD 7021-1 to get approval.

The only thing you have demonstrated here Baron is that you are familiar with Microsoft's cut and paste function. Anyone with a passing familiarity with law understands that codified law is a starting point, not the final word. There is an abundance of employment law which also applies to the police, emergency services and the military which articulates the nexus that can be drawn between a member's off-duty conduct and their professional obligations. I suspect that your familiarity with that case law may be less profound than your ability to cut and paste sections of QR and O's from Canlii.

Suffice to say this. If the military attempts to discipline these members, I believe they would have a legitimate defence. I saw nothing in that video that indicates they brought the Canadian Forces into disrepute. They did not wear their uniforms, identify themselves as members of the forces, use profane, abusive or vulgar language or otherwise cause a disturbance. All I saw was a group of young men who engaged a group of activists in a discussion in a public place. As I mentioned before, people do not surrender their basic Charter rights as Canadians to engage in a public debate just because they join the forces. It is not enough for the military to say they have brought the service into disrepute. The prosecution still has to establish that they had some intent to disobey, or at least displayed a level of disregard for, established codes of conduct. None of that occurred here. If they are forced out administratively, I hope they sue. If they are court martialled, I hope they fight it tooth and nail.

This whole situation is a strong argument for some type of unionization in the military. I'm not personally in favour of that kind of a system, but at least it would ensure that these troops were treated a little more fairly and it would force the senior command to put a little more thought into their actions before kicking them to the curb.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: mariomike on July 09, 2017, 00:08:24
There is an abundance of employment law which also applies to the police, emergency services and the military which articulates the nexus that can be drawn between a member's off-duty conduct and their professional obligations.

For reference to the discussion,

Forces.ca
"The Code of Service Discipline and Me"
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs-military-law/code-of-service-discipline.page

If you are a member of the Regular Force you are always subject to the CSD, both inside and outside Canada.

If you are a member of the Reserve Force, you are subject to the CSD:
•while undergoing drill or training (whether you are in uniform or not)
•whenever you are in uniform
•while on any military duty
•24 hours a day, 7 days a week during any period of full time service (Class "B" or "C" service)
•whenever you are present on defence property
•whenever you are in a vehicle, ship or aircraft of the CF.

This whole situation is a strong argument for some type of unionization in the military.

See also,

"Unionizing" the CF (merged)
https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=1294.200
11 pages.


 




Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: The Baron on July 09, 2017, 08:37:24
The only thing you have demonstrated here Baron is that you are familiar with Microsoft's cut and paste function. Anyone with a passing familiarity with law understands that codified law is a starting point, not the final word. There is an abundance of employment law which also applies to the police, emergency services and the military which articulates the nexus that can be drawn between a member's off-duty conduct and their professional obligations. I suspect that your familiarity with that case law may be less profound than your ability to cut and paste sections of QR and O's from Canlii.

Suffice to say this. If the military attempts to discipline these members, I believe they would have a legitimate defence. I saw nothing in that video that indicates they brought the Canadian Forces into disrepute. They did not wear their uniforms, identify themselves as members of the forces, use profane, abusive or vulgar language or otherwise cause a disturbance. All I saw was a group of young men who engaged a group of activists in a discussion in a public place. As I mentioned before, people do not surrender their basic Charter rights as Canadians to engage in a public debate just because they join the forces. It is not enough for the military to say they have brought the service into disrepute. The prosecution still has to establish that they had some intent to disobey, or at least displayed a level of disregard for, established codes of conduct. None of that occurred here. If they are forced out administratively, I hope they sue. If they are court martialled, I hope they fight it tooth and nail.

This whole situation is a strong argument for some type of unionization in the military. I'm not personally in favour of that kind of a system, but at least it would ensure that these troops were treated a little more fairly and it would force the senior command to put a little more thought into their actions before kicking them to the curb.

The only thing you have demonstrated is glossing over the part that CAF members are "suppposed" to get APPROVAL for outside activities PRIOR to getting involved. Which if you had read my follow on posts, that is where I think these guys are going to get in crap, since that part is fairly straight forward and unambiguous (enforcement of that provision may be spotty and THAT might be an issue down the road as mentioned a few posts up). But hey thanks for coming out and showing you are also adept at just using the quote button and not reading further posts.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Private_John_Winger on July 10, 2017, 09:24:23
The only thing you have demonstrated is glossing over the part that CAF members are "suppposed" to get APPROVAL for outside activities PRIOR to getting involved. Which if you had read my follow on posts, that is where I think these guys are going to get in crap, since that part is fairly straight forward and unambiguous (enforcement of that provision may be spotty and THAT might be an issue down the road as mentioned a few posts up). But hey thanks for coming out and showing you are also adept at just using the quote button and not reading further posts.

I've had a read of that post I wrote that offended you and you're right Baron, it was vituperative. As I wrote it it sounded like a bit of soldierly banter, but having read it over it actually comes across and snide and nasty. I'll avoid doing that in the future.

That said, I believe these guys are being treated unfairly and that's fundamentally wrong.

That's my last word on the topic.

Cheers.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Shrek1985 on July 11, 2017, 15:30:46
Just a few points, but first a big thank you to everyone who posted; this thread has been an excellent source of "One stop shopping" with all the links and references needed to understand just what the hell went on here.

Looks like another example of what defeat looks like and with some clues on how to avoid it for future civilizations to consider.

Questions.

1. Does anyone else ever look at some of the QR&Os...such as those cited and get disturbed by how subjective they are? Crossing the QR&Os can easily end your career, if not your professional life and It bothers me deeply that such poorly and flexibly worded regulations dictate our lives in the CF. Weasel words bother me in all laws, but I find them especially disturbing here.
2. A chaser to the above; so if I do not "Value Diversity"; a thought-crime, but one bounded in a lot of defensible philosophy and historical precedent, am I; in fact in violation of the QR&Os and subject to discipline for my personal opinion, whether I state it, or not? Should the COC come across a personal diary of mine, containing my most deeply held thoughts and feelings and including a historically sourced and referenced essay on the subject and stating in no uncertain terms my thoughts on the subject; might I be subject to discipline, if someone in my COC felt like it?
3. Had these individuals not been outed as military, would the CF have investigated nonetheless, just to ensure their bases were covered, just in case? Is this done with any and all suspect incidents? Or does any and all claim of CF membership compel the forces to investigate?
4. How is it, with all this sensitivity to the political activity of Canadian Forces members that it is that we are allowed to vote and even, under very limited circumstances; hold elected office? Accepting that humans aren't logically consistent creatures, it still seems rather glaring that as a CF member, I can vote, but not be a member of any political movement or party. Is that not the ultimate political expression? I wonder how far I would have to go to find individuals in the chain of command, who do not think we *should* be allowed to vote while serving in the CF?

Observations.

1. To the extent the QR&Os are objective, I think they should not be applied subjectively and I would doubt the integrity of any leadership structure which did so. As such; as they deal with politically inconvenient groups, such as the Proud Boys and those members who are a part; so too should they deal with any forces members who are part of such as Pride, Idle No More and BLM. Naturally, since Gay Pride is a political movement and the CF is barred from taking official or unofficial part in political activities, either as a force or within it's members, I think that any attendance of on or off-duty CF members at Pride events should be curtailed completely. I think the QR&Os were quite refreshingly clear on that point.
2. Since the QR&Os are quite clear on what I can and cannot say about my leaders and in the finest tradition of internet forums; that's not how I was taught, how I teach others or how I would have done it and I think that's about all I'm allowed to say on the matter.
3. However. If anyone under me ever doxed one of my troops, I would not rest until they were professionally destroyed. These individuals literally betrayed one of their own to those who would do them harm. Don't know about the rest of you, but where I come from; we're sworn to never leave a comrade to fall into the hands of the enemy. I cannot imagine what use their is for such a person in the Forces, but surely, wiser than me must be able to find something. I think that's about all I can say there too. All wholly hypothetical, mind you.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: milnews.ca on July 12, 2017, 12:31:28
Curious:  blue golf shirts with gold collar/sleeve trim - an RCN thing or something else?
FYI (http://www.gq.com/story/fred-perry-wants-alt-right-bros-to-stop-wearing-their-polos), NOT an RCN thing ...
Quote
Fred Perry's classic laurel wreath polo is instantly recognizable—a staple of men's closets since the brand debuted in 1952. Though they were regularly sported by the likes of JFK, they also have a history of being co-opted by the darker side of skinhead culture, particularly the sect of skinheads who aligned themselves with the far-right extremist group called the British National Front in the 1970s. Since then, Fred Perry has worked hard to escape this image by recruiting brand partners such as tennis star Andy Murray and the late great singer Amy Winehouse. But in the era of Trump, with a bolstered far-right movement, a new chauvinistic group called the Proud Boys—which is basically a fraternity of white guys who like to punch each other and harass peaceful protestors—has adopted the Fred Perry polo as a part of its unofficial uniform, much to the chagrin of the label ...
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: FSTO on July 12, 2017, 13:42:10
FYI (http://www.gq.com/story/fred-perry-wants-alt-right-bros-to-stop-wearing-their-polos), NOT an RCN thing ...

Similar to how the Red Ensign seems to have been co-opted by the Canadian far right. Hence the accusation during the Cornwallis incident of the young lady calling the Red Ensign a "Confederate Flag".

I personally feel that the government should get ahead of this and state in no uncertain terms that the Red Ensign was the former national flag of Canada and therefore is a legitimate symbol of this country. Sadly I doubt that many in our current government give a hoot.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Chief Stoker on July 12, 2017, 15:39:20
I guess they are emboldened with all the publicly. How much you want to be a email comes out forbidding any RCN from coming with 5 miles of the place. Notice the Idle no more hashtag.


Mi’kmaq in Nova Scotia split with leadership over Edward Cornwallis statue and Saturday’s ceremony


http://aptnnews.ca/2017/07/12/mikmaq-in-nova-scotia-split-with-leadership-over-edward-cornwallis-statue-and-saturdays-ceremony/

"Come join us JULY 15th @ 12pm for the historical take down of the Cornwallis statue. We the people have had enough with genocidal symbols of colonialism being venerated. To stand in solidarity create an action in your community and call the Mayor’s office in Halifax to demand the removal and to make your statement of solidarity with the Mi’kmaq! Bring your rope, your regalia, your songs, your dances, your medicine, your prayers, and your presence. Calling all peoples to come join in this Historic event! #DownWithCornwallis Idle No More @IdleNoMore4"
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 12, 2017, 16:48:25
I guess they are emboldened with all the publicly. How much you want to be a email comes out forbidding any RCN from coming with 5 miles of the place. Notice the Idle no more hashtag.




Yeah, ever since this started, I've done a lot of snooping through their facebook profiles.

A large amount of these people are what I called before 'professional protesters'. They been at protests for many things, not just Native Issues. I've seen them linked to Idle no more, the Occupy movement, various Anonymous protests, One even had a big thing about boycotting Starbucks. There have been many videos of them posted being arrested by police, sometimes wearing the Guy Fawkes mask, one video of a guy getting arrested was during the Bill C-51 protests. Many of them have a very clear hatred for anything that represents institutions, military included (this goes back farther then when the proud boys incident happened)

A lot of them fit the stereotype of disenfranchised millennials who are attending universities with little to no personal resources. They show up at events, with cameras in hand hoping for an incident to try to further their cause. Look at how often a video garners a public opinion, when it rarely shows what accurately happened.

I honestly feel the event Saturday is going to blow up, a few hundred have said they are going to the event through Facebook,  Over a 1000 are interested. Its not hard for mob mentality to take over if there are a few people brazen enough to start something. And I definitely feel a few of these are brazen enough.

I'm no longer in the forces, but I would imagine people in are being encouraged to avoid the area over Saturday. Nothing good can come from it if these people get you on video doing anything they can make you look culpable of something. Even worse if they find out you are military.

I'm defend the right of people to protest peacefully (though personally I dislike any sort of protester), but often a lot of this group crosses that line. I look at them as social terrorists, as their main goal isn't the protest (seen by their variety of protests) it's to cause anarchy and fight the 'institution'.

I don't envy the Mayor or the HRP in this event. Although I feel the Mayor has approached this very well. The HRP are going to have a tough job Saturday. This is like watching a train wreck from a week before it happens.

In the end, I think the 'Proud Boys' incident and all the public attention that came from that has empowered this group. One thing I am happy for though, even though the public sentiment towards the 'Proud Boys' incident was mostly condemnation for the 5 men(which I'm sad for), that hasn't seem to carry over for support to remove the statue like they plan on.

One thing I hope, is if anything Illegal happens this weekend, either through mischief or assaults. I hope each and every one is arrested and charged with the full weight of the law. Especially the organizers.

Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 20, 2017, 09:38:21

Alt-right group posts names, photos of 'potentially dangerous' Cornwallis protesters

28 people 'doxed' by national socialist group, some labelled as mentally ill


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/doxing-list-antifa-alt-right-cornwallis-statue-protest-1.4210331

Looks like things are going to get interesting between the two sides now.   :pop:
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Chief Stoker on July 20, 2017, 09:57:22

Alt-right group posts names, photos of 'potentially dangerous' Cornwallis protesters

28 people 'doxed' by national socialist group, some labelled as mentally ill


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/doxing-list-antifa-alt-right-cornwallis-statue-protest-1.4210331

Looks like things are going to get interesting between the two sides now.   :pop:

Certainly don't condone this behavior, but the other side had no problem doing the same to the 5 "proud boys"
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: jollyjacktar on July 20, 2017, 10:33:25
Certainly don't condone this behavior, but the other side had no problem doing the same to the 5 "proud boys"

What goes around, comes around it seems.  Karma is a *****.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 20, 2017, 11:47:10
What goes around, comes around it seems.  Karma is a *****.

I'm not surprised but CBC fails to mention anything about the Doxing of the 5 soldiers/sailors but asked the Lawyer about his opinion on the legality of this 'doxing'.

I think both examples are pretty bad, though the 5 guys had it done a bit worse IMO. As the protesters actively encouraged people to call certain phone numbers.

The person who doxed the protesters twitter is a cesspool. I went over a few of the tweets, and they are pretty much the new way of Nazism. Both sides are extremes that we don't need in our society.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 20, 2017, 13:56:28

Alt-right group posts names, photos of 'potentially dangerous' Cornwallis protesters

28 people 'doxed' by national socialist group, some labelled as mentally ill


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/doxing-list-antifa-alt-right-cornwallis-statue-protest-1.4210331

Looks like things are going to get interesting between the two sides now.   :pop:

Not accounting for the character of who did this I think this is absolutely great, and not (just) because I'm an *******.

These professional protestors have zero problems with doxing their weekly targets and turning peoples lives upside down through targeted online harassment which includes threats of violence. If giving them their own medicine is what it takes to cure them of that behavior then it's perfect.

If it's not a deterrent then at least it's a level playing field for their stupidity.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 20, 2017, 14:41:24
anyone got a link, I would like to read the list. 
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Inspir on July 20, 2017, 14:48:46
I was looking for it to but couldn't find it. It's not on their Facebook page either.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Strike on July 20, 2017, 14:50:53
This person posted it on FB. It's pretty ridiculous.

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003540459790&hc_ref=ARQYW3YCil1oKt8MUBCGmBvUKL-VLjvxcvhWWJ-LXmXHay8wq4doO5fQeAZ8EVXI8Kg (https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003540459790&hc_ref=ARQYW3YCil1oKt8MUBCGmBvUKL-VLjvxcvhWWJ-LXmXHay8wq4doO5fQeAZ8EVXI8Kg)
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Lightguns on July 20, 2017, 15:03:18
Not much of an int job and piss poor doxing to boot.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: Jarnhamar on July 20, 2017, 16:57:30
This person posted it on FB. It's pretty ridiculous.

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003540459790&hc_ref=ARQYW3YCil1oKt8MUBCGmBvUKL-VLjvxcvhWWJ-LXmXHay8wq4doO5fQeAZ8EVXI8Kg (https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003540459790&hc_ref=ARQYW3YCil1oKt8MUBCGmBvUKL-VLjvxcvhWWJ-LXmXHay8wq4doO5fQeAZ8EVXI8Kg)


Quote
what if dogs hate fireworks bc they’re afraid of symbolic displays of imperialism

What if indeed.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: gryphonv on July 20, 2017, 17:06:45

What if indeed.

I think the coolaid she used on her hair has penetrated the gray matter.
Title: Re: 'Confrontation' with Mi'gmaq ceremony/protest in Halifax
Post by: ModlrMike on July 20, 2017, 19:09:21
A counter argument from the Chronicle Herald (http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/1299823-scapegoating-cornwallis-who-are-we-to-judge-history#.WW-n6bI8ANa.facebook):

Scapegoating Cornwallis: Who are we to judge history?


While conducting research for my 2012 book, Halifax and Titanic, I came across the following quote from Daniel Allen Butler, the American author of another Titanic book:

“There is something horribly hypocritical about passing judgment on another human being’s actions from the comfort and safety of an armchair. Even more hypocritical is making moral pronouncements on others’ actions having judged them by moral standards that they neither knew nor could conceive.”



More at link.