We’re not ‘violent terrorists,’ withdraw Bill C-51
(The remarks in quotation marks below come directly from Tony Clement’s email reply to our email.)
...
Thank you for your reply to our email expressing our deep concern about Bill C-51. We have a few comments to make about your reply.
First of all, we requested that, as our representative in Parliament, you carry our concerns about this bill to your party and to the committee examining the bill. Nowhere in your response did you acknowledge that you will do so. Instead you basically said your party will pass the bill.
Secondly, we find your language about “jihadi terrorists”, “violent extremists” and “radical Islamic extremists” to be offensive, inflammatory, and extreme to say the least. This language is obviously designed to whip up anti-Islamic hatred and to sow fear among ordinary Canadians.
But we guess you are required to stick to your talking notes rather than listening to your constituents.
And, although we are not legal experts, we can clearly see that inclusion of the word “lawful” dissent in the bill indicates that those choosing to participate in acts of civil disobedience (including, but not exclusively, First Nations) would be deemed to be “violent terrorists.”
We also see that our right to oppose “critical infrastructure,” such as new pipelines in vulnerable areas or dangerous shipments in rail cars passing through the centres of our Muskoka towns will be severely limited for fear of our being secretly placed on a terrorist watch list.
Finally, we and many other Canadians feel that with this bill, it is you and your government that “seek to destroy the very principles that make Canada the best country in the world to live in.”
Let us be clear, we expect nothing less than that your government listen to the experts and to Canadians across the country and withdraw this bill.
Sue McKenzie and Len Ring
Constituents, Parry Sound Muskoka
First of all, we requested that, as our representative in Parliament, you carry our concerns about this bill to your party and to the committee examining the bill. Nowhere in your response did you acknowledge that you will do so. Instead you basically said your party will pass the bill.
Secondly, we find your language about “jihadi terrorists”, “violent extremists” and “radical Islamic extremists” to be offensive, inflammatory, and extreme to say the least. This language is obviously designed to whip up anti-Islamic hatred and to sow fear among ordinary Canadians.
But we guess you are required to stick to your talking notes rather than listening to your constituents.
And, although we are not legal experts, we can clearly see that inclusion of the word “lawful” dissent in the bill indicates that those choosing to participate in acts of civil disobedience (including, but not exclusively, First Nations) would be deemed to be “violent terrorists.”
We also see that our right to oppose “critical infrastructure,” such as new pipelines in vulnerable areas or dangerous shipments in rail cars passing through the centres of our Muskoka towns will be severely limited for fear of our being secretly placed on a terrorist watch list.
Finally, we and many other Canadians feel that with this bill, it is you and your government that “seek to destroy the very principles that make Canada the best country in the world to live in.”
Let us be clear, we expect nothing less than that your government listen to the experts and to Canadians across the country and withdraw this bill.
Sue McKenzie and Len Ring
Constituents, Parry Sound Muskoka
No comments:
Post a Comment