Since when is it the responsibility of the Canadian Border Services Agency to protect the reputation of the Olympics and its sponsors by detaining and interrogating journalists to ensure they won't say anything about the games that departs from the approved script?
Based on this and other stories out of Vancouver over the last couple of years — and with all due respect to the athletes themselves — my own attitude towards the Olympics has become one of outright hostility. I want nothing to do with it.
I wonder if I can be sued for that.
H/t skdadl at Bread and Roses.
And on top of that, they've told her to get out of the country in 48 hours.
Damn. I want this brought up in the Commons (are they still working?). The CBSA are nasty and arbitrary. They love acting as censors, and they will continue to do that even with court judgements against them. Why have they not been reined in before now?
And then there's the clear implication that our public "servants" are going into panic mode over the Olympics. If they will harass someone as peaceable and reasonable as Goodman, what will they do with street protestors?
I rather liked the part where Goodman actually didn't know that Vancouver was hosting the 2010 Owelympics but she didn't want to offend the CBSA official's sense of national pride.
It's part 1984, part keystone cops out here. There was a huge practice operation rescue of "hostages" from an Owelympic building a few weeks ago involving US troops and some spiffy helicopters.
It would have been scary but the copter couldn't land for nearly an hour because they couldn't get the car parked on the landing pad moved out of the way.
Ok you guys are a little off base here. A journalist comes to Vancouver and doesn't know the the Olympics are going to be held there in a matter of weeks? Seriously, if I was a border guard, that would set off a few red flags with me too. And asking her what she's going to be doing in Canada is part of their job. I really can't see anything in the linked article that indicates any wrong doing on behalf of the border guards. As for the 48 hour thing, seriously, she was leaving anyway, they just woanted to make sure she was doing what she said she was doing and then going home.
Pop quiz, Yeti. Do you know where the next summer Olympics will be held? Not everyone is a sportsfan. As Amy said, she isn't.
Ok you guys are a little off base here.
No, we're not.
A journalist comes to Vancouver and doesn't know the the Olympics are going to be held there in a matter of weeks? Seriously, if I was a border guard, that would set off a few red flags with me too.
But it's clear from the article that the Olympics didn't even enter the discussion until after Goodman had been questioned extensively and hadn't brought the subject up on her own. These guys were obviously on a fishing expedition.
If you think there's no issue here, then explain the demand that she leave within 48 hours.
Yeti, that is the most amazing thing I've ever seen you write.
I do everything I can to avoid knowing anything at all about the Olympics. Somehow I must have learned somewhere that they're happening soon in Vancouver, but I don't know when exactly, and I care only because it sounds as though they're being used as an excuse by the authorities to practise their police-state skills.
Why would someone like Amy Goodman know or care about the Olympics ... except for the obvious reason she now has?
And where does the "Get out of the country in 48 hours" rule come from? To whom is that applied? All American visitors? Are all foreign visitors questioned about their itinerary and then sworn to keep to it? I don't think so, Yeti. So if not, where do CBSA agents get the authority to lower that kind of boom on individuals like Goodman?
Yeti must be one of those charming individuals who believes that human beings must surrender all their rights when they pass from one country to another.
I mean, what's a human being after all? An annoying burden on the state.
Alright - here
Alison, off the top of my head I don't know where the next summer games will be held, but ask me again 8 wks before they open and I'ld be glad to tell you, Especially if they are in the same city as I am going too.
Where you were off base is when you said that they detained her because they were worried about what she might say about the olympics. And I really don't think that that is the case. Border guards ask a lot of questions. that's their job. When a woman claiming to be a journalist is coming to Vancouver and claims to not know about the Olympics a few weeks before they open is suspicious. Of course she didn't bring it up the fact she didn't know they were there, because she didn't know they were there.
So then they searched her stuff, found out she was who she was, and was doing what she said she was doing and sent her on her way. 90 mins at the border is hardly 7 yrs in gitmo. No you don't surrender all your rights when you enter another country. And she didn't. She had to answer questions and prove she was who she said she was because she said something remarkably stupid to a border guard. Happens all the time, and is only news when it happens to someone with a loud voice or deep pockets.
Yeti:
I think you avoided two questions:
1. How would her ignorance of the 2010 Olympics be the cause of close questioning when it appears that her ignorance didn't come to light until after she was already being closely questioned?
2. Why the 48 hrs.-and-get-out order?
Yeti,
Watch what you say on the internet. Because one day soon, people like me are going to prevail in this country. And then we'll pack the agencies of the state with our people, and folks like you, who have cheered on every growth of the anti-terrorism state will find yourselves on the receiving end of that unrestricted bullying.
So, again, watch your mouth.
...
Now you know how Amy Goodman feels.
Why should human beings have to censor their opinions or else have to worry about the dangers of travelling a few kilometers in one direction over some arbitrary human construct called a national border?
yeti - go back to the Himalayas of your f*ck up mind:
'they': "found out she was who she was" - that's it: she's guilty right there, right?
But hey: "90 mins at the border is hardly 7 yrs in gitmo." That's right, too.
So what's the problem? Why don't you go spend seven years in Gitmo, bubba?
(We have our version 'Gitmo North' just outside of Kingston) - can I facilitate your 'security certificate' bozo?
It does not seem as if the questioning was about trying to figure out who she was. To the contrary, it seems they knew who she was at least in general terms and were not best pleased about it. And their expectation was that her type would, if travelling to Vancouver to speak, be badmouthing the Olympics, which is not unreasonable because local Vancouver lefty-activist-types generally do badmouth the Olympics.
The question is, why is their suspicion that she might badmouth the Olympics supposed to be relevant to whether it's OK for her to come into the country and give a talk?
It's not as if this is an unprecedented thing that should therefore be hard to believe, you know. Before the WTO talks in Quebec City, lots of organizers, speakers etc. were stopped at the border. And let's not forget British MP George Galloway. It has become fairly common for the Canadian authorities to block the speech of people they don't like by blocking the people themselves from entering the country. This is a rather mild case really, although still unconscionable.
Wow, this place has got a lot angrier than the last time I posted.
People get stopped at the border and asked questions. Some people are pulled out randomly for extra questions, and sometimes they are asked extra questions because the border thinks something is suspicous. The whole episode took 90 mins. That tells me she probably said she had no idea the olympics were coming within the first 10 min or so - because the border spent time searching her car and notes to confirm her story.
She was never told she couldn't speak about the olympics, she was never told she couldn't say bad things about Canada. The border guard suspected she wasn't who she said she was because she said something he thought was wierd. (Hi I am a journalist and author coming to speak on international issues, but have no idea that the city I am traveling to is holding a massive international event involving tens of thouseands of people, within the next two months.)
For her to be stopped to prevent her from talking about the Olympics A) someone with the power to stop her had to know in advance that she was coming, and b) they had to think that she was going to talk smack about the Olympics. Anyone who knew she was coming to give a speach would have known the topic of said speach was not the olympics, and anyone looking for her views on the vancouver Olympics would have been stymied by the fact she was completely ignorant to the fact that they existed.
Now pogge, I did avoid mentioning the 48 hr thing. He shouldn't have, but he was probably a little miffed because he thought he had something, and didn't. So that was the extent of his crime. I will withdraw my "no wrong-doing", and hope skdadl will withdraw "brought up in the House", (not holding my breath) as they really have more important things to screw up.
As for thwap and macadavy, yes now I know how she feels, 'cause two people who have no idea who I am and what I beleive in made derogitory comments about me and tried vague threats. I felt momentary confusion, a little frustration, some pity, and then moved on. If I had a syndicated radio show, I could make more noise.
No one should have to censor their opinions. She didn't, and wasn't asked to, she had to wait 90 at an international border, and then went about her business. Big Deal.
That tells me she probably said she had no idea the olympics were coming within the first 10 min or so...
You're speculating. From the original article:
That doesn't support your speculation. I don't think there would be any problem establishing who she was. If they have internet service at the border crossing they can Google "Amy Goodman journalist" and get a resume and photos almost instantly. I still don't see why she gets grilled for 90 minutes when her identity can be so easily verified and her story hangs together because of that. It still sounds like they were fishing for her opinions about the Olympics and as far as I'm concerned, they had no business doing so.
hope skdadl will withdraw "brought up in the House"
How can I withdraw something I never wrote? Wanna know how I knew I'd never written that, even before I checked? Because I NEVER call the Canadian Commons "the House." NEVER. They are the Commons. Cure yourself of the bad habit.
And I would never withdraw that demand. If CBSA are allowed to get away with this kind of violation of the freedom of conscience, thought, and expression guaranteed everyone, not just citizens, by the Charter, then we're already on McCarthyite turf, and that's why I think someone should still be protesting in the COMMONS.
Pogge, yes I'm speculating. So are you. They didn't search her belongings till after she said she had no idea the Olympics were coming to town. An extensive search of belongings and notes by border guards is not something they do very fast. What exactly does "Extensive questioning" mean, - 5 min, ten mins, or 1/2 hour? She doesn't say. None of the articles I've read said that they detained her because they were worried she was going to say something bad, just that they didn't beleive her when she said she wasn't going to talk about them at all. When a border guard thinks he/she is being lied to, they search. They can. and if you don't want them to, you can turn around. I suppose they should have realized she is an american journalist, and so completely ignorant of anything north of the 49th.
I don't beleive her freedom of consceince, freedom of speech and free expression of ideas was compromised in any way here. She got in. She made her speech. A 90 min delay is not unreasonable.
Borders are just imaginary lines existing only in the minds of people. So are countries. If we don't have a border, we don't have a country. The border guard thought he was being lied to, did his job, and turned out to be wrong. oops. "The Commons" should not waste a single minute on this molehill.
Yeti,
That's so idiotic. You lunatic, what does it matter WHAT Goodman was going to talk about? She's a respectable citizen. A heroic journalist. There's no danger to Canada allowing this fine person to come in and talk about anything she wants.
Yeti, you're on my list. People with views like yours are a grave threat to democracy. We'll track you down and keep an eye on you.
No biggie. It's just that you're a threat to Canadian values and without Canadian values we have no nation.
If you manage to keep your pudgy fingers from typing stupid things and your pie-hole from yammering un-Canadian tripe, you'll be fine.
AGREED AGREED AGREED !!!! There was no danger in letiing her in to speak on whatever she wants!!!! That's why she was let in!!!! Do you speak F'n ENGLISH? Can you READ !!!!
A border guard made an understandable error, and she got searched. That's it. Full stop. If you want to paint the government as tyrannical because 1 border guard had the audacity to treat a journalist like they were any other person who said something suspicious, you are going to have a lot of otherwise reasonable people think you are a nut job.
To repeat for emphasis, it was not that they believed that she was going to say bad stuff about the Olympics, it was when she told them she didn't know they were coming, they figured she was lying to them. And if you are lying to a border guard they are going to search you -to find out why you're lying. THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE THERE FOR! Turns out she wasn't lying, she was just remarkably ignorant. So on she went about her business. Not a big deal.
Just to further clairify my position, if she said she was going to give a speech denouncing the Olympics, and had been refused admittance to Canada, I would be standing with you in condemning what happened. But that didn't happen, not by a long shot.
I read you just find "Yeti." It makes as little sense every time you re-state it.
Then I guess we'll leave it there, and I will ponder the irony of being called both "unCanadian" and a "McCarthyite" (it was inferred) at the same time.