The Media Co-op

Local Independent News

More independent news:
Do you want free independent news delivered weekly? sign up now
Can you support independent journalists with $5? donate today!
Not reviewed by Media Co-op editors. copyeditedfact checked [?]

Unprecedented covert methods on a Canadian university campus

U of O admin spies on prof and students using hired student journalist; false Facebook identity; covert voice recordings; extensive cover up

by Denis Rancourt

(en francais ci-bas)


Unprecedented covert methods on a Canadian university campus

OTTAWA, January 12, 2010 – Two union grievances (teacher assistants and professors) have been filed against the University of Ottawa for extensive covert surveillance practiced between 2006 and 2008.

The violations of civil and academic workplace rights were exposed through several access to information law requests and appeals to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. 

A detailed report and supporting evidence were made public here:
by former physics professor Denis Rancourt who was fired in March 2009. 

The covert surveillance campaign is unprecedented on a Canadian campus.  Undergraduate student and student journalist Maureen Robinson was hired as an “agent of University Legal Counsel” and took on a false Facebook identity to infiltrate student groups, especially ones supportive of Rancourt’s activism course. 

Former University Legal Counsel Michelle Flaherty abruptly left the University at approximately the time when a covert voice recording went missing from the access to information record.  Flaherty is now a Vice Chair (judge) with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.  Several high executive officers of the university were also involved; in recruiting the student spy and in receiving and using the covertly collected information. 

Rancourt’s talks about anarchism in pedagogical development were covertly recorded at conferences on other campuses (Kingston and Quebec City) and the recordings were exchanged among university high officials. 

The University’s actions were violations of legally-defined academic freedom, the labour law collective agreements with two unions, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Law Society of Upper Canada, and accepted professional norms for journalists. 

The University also enacted an extensive cover up and has steadfastly ignored requests to investigate, including several requests which predated Rancourt’s dismissal. 

These findings are in stark contrast to President Allan Rock’s repeated statements that all due procedures were followed in Rancourt’s dismissal.  Rancourt has consistently stated that his dismissal was politically motivated.


For more information please contact:
Denis Rancourt

Surveillance secrète sans précédent sur un campus canadien

OTTAWA, 12 janvier 2010 – Des griefs ont été déposés auprès de deux syndicats (assistants à l'enseignement et professeurs) au sujet des méthodes de surveillance secrète utilisées par l'Université d'Ottawa entre 2006 et 2008.

Ces violations des droits civiques et du droit du travail ont été mises en lumière grâce à plusieurs demandes d'accès à l'information et appels déposés au Bureau du commissaire à l'information et à la protection de la vie privée de l'Ontario.

Un rapport détaillé ainsi que les documents à l'appui ont été publiés sur la page suivante:
par l'ancien professeur de physique Denis Rancourt, congédié en mars 2009.

Cette surveillance secrète sur un campus canadien est sans précédent. Une étudiante de premier cycle et membre d'un journal étudiant, Maureen Robinson, a été embauchée comme "agente du conseiller juridique de l'Université" et s'est munie d'une fausse identité Facebook pour infiltrer des groupes étudiants, en particulier le groupe appuyant le cours de militantisme de Rancourt.

L'ancienne conseillère juridique de l'Université, Michelle Flaherty, a soudainement quitté ses fonctions au moment où un enregistrement secret a été omis dans les documents obtenus sous la Loi sur l'accès à l'information. Flaherty est aujourd'hui vice-présidente (juge) du Tribunal des droits de la personne de l'Ontario. Plusieurs membres de la haute administration universitaire ont aussi participé au recrutement de l'étudiante espionne et se sont servis de l'information obtenue secrètement.

Des conférences du professeur Rancourt portant sur l'anarchisme dans le développement pédagogique ont été enregistrées secrètement (à Kingston et à Québec) et ces enregistrements ont été diffusés au sein de la haute administration universitaire.

Les actions de l'Universités contreviennent à la définition légale de la liberté universitaire, aux conventions collectives de deux de ses syndicats, à la Loi sur l'accès à l'information et la protection de la vie privée, aux règles de conduite professionnelle du Barreau du Haut-Canada et aux normes de déontologie acceptées par les journalistes.

L'Université a aussi mis tout en oeuvre pour dissimuler ces actions, ignorant de multiple demandes d'enquête, certaines précédant le renvoi du professeur Rancourt.

Cette découverte contraste avec les déclarations du recteur Allan Rock, qui affirmait que le congédiement du professeur Rancourt avait été réalisé en bonne et due forme. M. Rancourt a affirmé à plusieurs reprises que son renvoi était basé sur des motifs politiques.


Pour plus d'informations SVP contactez:
Denis Rancourt

Want more grassroots coverage?
Join the Media Co-op today.

About the poster

Trusted by 0 other users.
Has posted 27 times.
View Denis Rancourt's profile »

Recent Posts:

Denis Rancourt (Denis Rancourt)
Ottawa, Ontario
Member since Juillet 2009


763 words


US Legislation pending to criminalize dissent/coming soon to CAN

More on the RAND corp and this bill's purpose

Dec 05, 2007 08:26PM EST

Robert Jereski

The National Commission will be required to provide legislative recommendations to "prevent, disrupt and mitigate" violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. while it is not clear what these will be, many are concerned that it will lead to further criminal statutes. since the three terms (violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism and ideologically based violence) are vaguely defined, as are terms in the definitions (ie: force, violence, extreme believe system, social and political change), many are concerned that this could mean the commission would study groups of people under a very broad umbrella.

Co-sponsor of HR 1955 – David Reichert (R-WA) stated that the commission would "focus exclusively on homegrown terrorism," and become "a gathering point" for knowledge gleaned from both government agencies and academia. Reichert also said the commission will look at white power groups, new-Nazis and other extremists, too. "We don't want to focus on any one group or leave anybody out," he said.

Note that in the last 3 years the top domestic threat in the US has been named "eco-terrorism," not violent political Islamists or right-wing groups. Thus, it is reasonable to think further eco-related criminal statutes could come down the line, as well as bills criminalizing radical dissent in antiwar groups, anti-global groups, right-wing groups and anarchists. (Look up 2005 RAND Corp. report, "Trends in Terrorism" Chap. 4 on Homegrown Terrorism.)

*********Only a Matter of Time Before same legistation will be in CANADA*******************

This legislation is pending now in the Senate. Obama SUPPORTS it; Clinton typically quiet; Edwards??? Kucinich opposed in the House.

more here:

Patriotic, civil libertarian and/or freedom-loving students at these universities would likely join the nationwide network to oppose this legislation which would create Centers of Excellence to study the sources of "domestic terror and radicalization":

The universities listed in link above are part of the homeland security industrial complex that would benefit $$$ if this were passed.


REPRESS U : an aspect of NWO

Seven Steps to a Homeland Security Campus

Repress U
How to Build a Homeland Security Campus in Seven Steps
By Michael Gould-Wartofsky

Free speech zones. Taser guns. Hidden cameras. Data mining. A new security curriculum. Private security contractors... Welcome to the new homeland security campus

Building a homeland-security campus and bringing the university to heel is a seven-step mission:

1. Target dissidents: As the warfare state has triggered dissent, the campus has increasingly become a target gallery -- with student protesters in the crosshairs. The government's number one target? Peace and justice organizations.Administrators often do it for them, setting up "free speech zones," which actually constrain speech, and punishing those who step outside them.

2.Lock-and-load policies that began in the 1990s under the rubric of "the war on crime" only escalated with the President's Global War on Terror.Most of the force used on campus these days, though, comes in "less lethal" form, such as the rubber bullets and pepper pellets increasingly used to contain student demonstrations. Then there is the ubiquitous Taser, the electroshock weapon recently ruled a "form of torture" by the UN. A Taser was used by UCLA police in November 2006 to deliver shock after shock to an Iranian-American student for failing to produce his ID at the Powell Library. Last September, a University of Florida student was Tased after asking pointed questions of Senator John Kerry at a public forum, his plea of "Don't Tase me, bro" becoming the stuff of pop folklore.

3. Keep an eye (or hundreds of them) focused on campus: Surveillance


4. Mine student records: Student records have, in recent years, been opened up to all manner of data mining for purposes of investigation, recruitment, or just all-purpose tracking.

5. Track foreign-born students, keep the undocumented out: Under the auspices of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been keeping close tabs on foreign students and their dependents through the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS).Compliance Enforcement Unit (ICE) has also done its part to keep the homeland security campus purified of those not born in the homeland. The American Immigration Law Foundation estimates that only one in 20 undocumented immigrants who graduate high school goes on to enroll in a college. Many don't go because they cannot afford the tuition, but also because they have good reason to be afraid: ICE has deported a number of those who did make it to college, some before they could graduate.

6. Take over the curriculum, the classroom, and the laboratory: To exploit these assets, the Department of Homeland Security has launched its own curriculum under its Office of University Programs (OUP), intended, it says, to "foster a homeland security culture within the academic community."The record so far is impressive: DHS has doled out 439 federal fellowships and scholarships since 2003, providing full tuition to students who fit "within the homeland security research enterprise." Two hundred twenty-seven schools now offer degree or certificate programs in "homeland security," a curriculum that encompasses over 1,800 courses. Along with OUP, some of the key players in creating the homeland security classroom are the U.S. Northern Command (Northcom) and the Aerospace Defense Command, co-founders of the Homeland Security and Defense Education Consortium.

OUP has also partnered with researchers and laboratories to "align scientific results with homeland security priorities." In Fiscal Year 2008 alone, $4.9 billion in federal funding will go to homeland security-related research. Grants correspond with 16 research topics selected by DHS, based on presidential directives, legislation, and a smattering of scientific advice.

But wait, there's more: DHS has founded and funded six of its very own "Centers of Excellence," research facilities that span dozens of universities from coast to coast. The latest is a Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism, the funding for which cleared the House in October. The Center is mandated to assist a National Commission in combating those "adopting or promoting an extremist belief system... to advance political, religious or social change."

7. Privatize, privatize, privatize:The Department of Homeland Security's on-campus National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), for instance, features Lockheed Martin on its advisory board. The Center for Food Protection and Defense relies on an industry working group that includes Wal-Mart and McDonald's offering "guidance and direction," according to its chair.

While vast sums of money are flowing in from these corporate sponsors, huge payments are also flowing out into "strategic supplier contracts" with private contractors, as universities permanently outsource security operations to big corporations like Securitas and AlliedBarton.

In the age of hired education, such collaboration is apparently par for the course.

what will be next..

Following these seven steps over the past six years, the homeland security state and its constituents have come a long way in their drive to remake the American campus in the image of a compound on lockdown. Somewhere, inside the growing homeland security state that is our country, the next seven steps in the process are undoubtedly already being planned out.

8. Use the entertainment and news media to foster suspicion of and/or ridicule academia, teachers and professors, scholarly-research backed information, and all things rational.

9. Subsidize and, whenever possible, publicly encourage cretinous religious-based false dichotomies between scientifically-arrived at, evidence-based conclusions and faith-based ‘theories.’

10. Attack and defund the secondary school system to reduce the number of students who actually make it to college (eventually, reducing the number of universities) to maximize ruling class recruits – hopefully corralling ‘radicals’ in a manageable, easily monitorable pool.

Corollary to 10: Manipulate economic and public policy to ensure as few students as possible gravitate towards liberal arts or social science majors. Give big business a big fat sponsorship finger in scholarship processes, to help the College of Business Management turn out legions of corporate career climbers with as few critical/ethical thinking skills as possible.

Hhhuummmm, why does this seem familar?



Those that refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it

What always happens when a dictator tries to take over? Where do they start? With the press and with the schools, generally:

"Apart from the policy of crushing the potential opponents of their regime, the Nazi Government took active steps to increase its power over the German population. In the field of education, everything was done to ensure that the youth of Germany was brought up in the atmosphere of National Socialism and accepted National Socialist teachings. As early as the 7th April, 1933, the law reorganising the Civil Service had made it possible for the Nazi Government to remove all " Subversive and unreliable teachers ", and this was followed by numerous other measures to make sure that the schools were staffed by teachers who could be trusted to teach their pupils the full meaning of National Socialist creed.

Apart from the influence of National Socialist teaching in the schools, the Hitler Youth Organisation was also relied upon by the Nazi Leaders for obtaining fanatical support from the younger generation. The defendant von Schirach, who had been Reich Youth Leader of the NSDAP since 1931, was appointed Youth Leader of the German Reich in June, 1933. Soon all the youth organisations had been either dissolved or absorbed by the Hitler Youth, with the exception of the Catholic Youth. The Hitler Youth was organised on strict military lines, and as early as 1933 the Wehrmacht was cooperating in providing pre-military training for the Reich Youth.

The Nazi Government endeavoured to unite the nation in support of their policies through the extensive use of propaganda. A number of agencies were set up whose duty was to control and influence the press, radio, films, publishing firms, etc., in Germany, and to supervise entertainment and cultural and artistic activities. All these agencies came under Goebbels' Ministry of the People's Enlightenment and Propaganda, which together with a corresponding organisation in the NSDAP and the Reich Chamber of Culture, was ultimately responsible for exercising this supervision. . .

This is the blowback for saving Nazi scientists so many yrs. ago

“Fascism in America won’t come with jackboots, book burnings, mass rallies, and fevered harangues, nor will it come with black helicopters or tanks on the street. It won’t come like a storm—but as a break in the weather, that sudden change of season you might feel when the wind shifts on an October evening: Everything is the same, but everything has changed. Something has gone, departed from the world, and a new reality will have taken its place. All the old forms will still be there: legislatures, elections, campaigns—plenty of bread and circuses. But “consent of the governed” will no longer apply; actual control of the state will have passed to a small and privileged group who rule for the benefit of their wealthy peers and corporate patrons.

To be sure, there will be factional conflicts among the elite, and a degree of debate will be permitted; but no one outside the privileged circle will be allowed to influence state policy. Dissidents will be marginalized—usually by “the people” themselves. Deprived of historical knowledge by a thoroughly impoverished educational system designed to produce complacent consumers, left ignorant of current events by a corporate media devoted solely to profit, many will internalize the force-fed values of the ruling elite, and act accordingly. There will be little need for overt methods of control.

The rulers will act in secret, for reasons of “national security,” and the people will not be permitted to know what goes on in their name. Actions once unthinkable will be accepted as routine: government by executive fiat, state murder of “enemies” selected by the leader, undeclared wars, torture, mass detentions without charge, the looting of the national treasury, the creation of huge new “security structures” targeted at the populace. In time, this will be seen as “normal,” as the chill of autumn feels normal when summer is gone. It will all seem normal.”

— November 10, 2001
Moscow Times (English Edition)



This paper will outline the history of federal and provincial laws applicable to aboriginal people.

Much has been written about discriminatory federal legislation respecting Indians. The exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament over "Indians and lands reserved for the Indians"(1) and the large body of resulting federal legislation(2) are obvious reasons for the emphasis on the federal side of this story. There has been relatively little discussion, however, of the discriminatory provincial legislation and the joint impact of federal and provincial discrimination on the basic human rights of aboriginal people. This paper does not attempt to identify exhaustively every instance of statutory discrimination and its implications. It will, however, review the history of this issue and examine both federal and provincial strands of legislation. The word "discrimination" will be used in the sense of legal distinctions singling out aboriginal people for special treatment and operating to the detriment of their fundamental human rights.


Join the media co-op today
Things the Media Co-op does: Support
Things the Media Co-op does: Report
Things the Media Co-op does: Network
Things the Media Co-op does: Educate
Things the Media Co-op does: Discover
Things the Media Co-op does: Cooperate
Things the Media Co-op does: Build
Things the Media Co-op does: Amplify

Connexion utilisateur

Subscribe to the Dominion $25/year

The Media Co-op's flagship publication features in-depth reporting, original art, and the best grassroots news from across Canada and beyond. Sign up now!