Friday, February 1, 2013

Canadian on trial in Mexico

This case infuriates me. Here we have a Canadian on trial in Mexico not for a drug related offense but for being a peacemaker protecting human rights. She is a political prisoner. If she is guilty of what they accuse her of and there is discrepancies in the evidence, then that is the crime she is accused of. Trying to make peace and protect human rights. Now they want to send her off to Guantanamo with Martha Stewart.

A Canadian mediator named Cynthia Vanier has been accused of trying to help Gaddafi’s son and family escape Libya during the war and try to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Now she is sitting in a Mexican prison facing four charges including attempted human trafficking. That is astounding.

Private security contractor Gary Peters claimed he and Cynthia Vanier had worked on a plan to fly Saadi Gaddafi to Venezuela as part of a scheme to mediate talks with the Canadian government and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to end Libya’s civil war.

Ms. Vanier, a professional mediator from Mount Forest, Ont., has denied any involvement with Mr. Gaddafi. Speaking from the Mexican prison where she remains in custody, she has said that Mr. Peters “has made a lot of things up,” should not have credibility and had ruined her life with his “delusional portrayal” of events.

Let’s pause for one minute and remember who the real criminals are in the invasion of Libya and the murder of Moammar Gaddafi: Canada. We went in as peace keepers to create a no fly zone. We did not do that. Instead he helped one side bomb the other side and helped the rebels murder Moammar Gadaffi and his children without a trial in a cruel and inhumane manner. We carry that liability. We had a Canadian General who was a poster boy puppet oversea that mission. He ran public relations interference so the secret objective would be accomplished and the no fly zone mission broken. We are liable for breaking that mission.

Some people say, Oh Gaddafi was a dictator. Is that so? Then why did Nicolas Sarkozy publicly try and convince the world in 2007 that we should trust Gaddafi with nuclear weapons so France could sell him a French Reactor? If Gaddafi was a dictator then why did Sarkozy say he wasn’t and try to convince the world we should trust him with nuclear technology? The claim that Gaddafi was a dictator and deserved it fails miserably when you take three seconds to look at the facts.

We helped Sarkozy murder Gaddafi for deciding to buy a reactor from Argentina instead of France. That is what that lie was really about. Sarkozy was accused of doing the same thing in Pakistan - Blowing up someone for changing their mind about buying arms from France. Nicolas Sarkozy is a dirty dog who was not re-elected. We helped him commit that fraud under the blood stained banner of peace keeping.

Remember Donald Trump’s bold declaration about the war in Libya when he was running for the Republican nomination? He said he would go in to Libya and take their oil. He said in times of war, that’s what you do. You go in and take the spoils of war. If he was president, that is what he would do. No beating around the bush there. Donald Trump was simply an honest George Bush. Gadaffi was a socialist. He believed in nationalized oil. That is the other reason we helped over throw him.

This whole charade with Cynthia Vanier rotting away in horrible conditions in a Mexican prison is a stain on all of us. Stephen Harper and Nicolas Sarkozy should be in prison, not Cynthia Vanier.


Update: After 18 months in prison Cyndy Vanier has finally been released and has returned to Canada. A tribunal of the Supreme Court of Mexico upheld her appeal.


  1. AK: "Gadaffi was a socialist. He believed in nationalized oil."

    Since there were no real, normal, Government institutions in Libya, could you describe exactly how that oil wealth went directly to benefit all Libyans, as a socialist would do? For instance, in Kuwait they receive a large yearly stipend, free University, etc.. Which of those programs did Ghadaffi have in Libya...?

  2. lol, now that is a good point. Gaddafi was insanely rich and did benefit personally from the country's "nationalized" oil. Just like the Monarchy in Saudi. Only the monarchy in Saudi contributed to US political campaigns. Idealistically, the profits from nationalized oil would help offset tax revenue and go to social programs that benefit the people. As well as lower price of gas at the pumps of course. Unlike here where we are shafted at the pumps despite the amount of oil Alberta produces.

  3. If your desire is to simply refuse, to directly answer the question put; & ramble on about other things, fine...But, no...No; back to please answering the pertinent question, raised by YOURSELF, not I.

    You've claimed that Ghaddaffi, as a Socialist; was great for Libyans and you obviously support his staying in power forever.

    I'll again ask you the question; describe exactly how Ghaddaffi's oil wealth was distributed amongst his people...? Plse.; Describe to your readers your insider knowledge of the Ghaddafi regime's equal-for-all; oil socialist, distribution-of-wealth Plan?

  4. I did answer the question. I'm not going to argue about it so this conversation is almost over. We are guilty of murder. We supported Sarkozy's lie. History has recoded that fact. If you haven't noticed, I am not a fan of Communism. However, Gadaffi's Communism was way better than China's and we don't seem to have a problem selling our sovereignty to Chinese Communism. I do. You did make a valid point in that Gadaffi himself was rich. Just like the Royal Family in Saudi. However, there is no question some of those oil revenues did go to building schools and infrastructure. That is a fact. This from Wikipedia:

    "The Libyan economy depends primarily upon revenues from the oil sector, which constitute practically all export earnings and about one-quarter of gross domestic product (GDP). The discovery of the oil and natural gas reserves in the country in 1959 led to the transformation of Libya's economy from a poor country to (then) Africa's richest. The World Bank defines Libya as an 'Upper Middle Income Economy', along with only seven other African countries. In the early 1980s, Libya was one of the wealthiest countries in the world; its GDP per capita was higher than that of developed countries such as Italy, Singapore, South Korea, Spain and New Zealand. High oil revenues and a small population gave Libya one of the highest GDPs per capita in Africa and have allowed the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya state to provide an extensive level of social security, particularly in the fields of housing and education."

  5. “People want practical laws to govern their affairs and fast, effective resolution of legal conflicts that interfere with their lives and businesses,” said (BC Bar) association president Kerry Simmons on Tuesday."

    “Today, the justice system in British Columbia is not meeting these objectives.”

    "In any three-year period, a B.C. resident has a 45 per cent chance of coming into contact with the justice system. Yet since 2000, the province has cut $113 million from justice, states the report."

    "Legal-aid funding is so limited, states the report, that in provincial cases 90 to 95 per cent of family court participants are unrepresented by a lawyer, 40 per cent are unrepresented in criminal cases and 90 per cent in civil court cases." (KamloopsNews)

    Isn't that shocking; forty % of folks going into a serious criminal trial have NO lawyer!

    Same with the civil law cases, which appear to be even worse...


Comments are moderated so there will be a delay before they appear on the blog.