LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

Residents of the Peace region have filed a complaint against the David Suzuki Foundation for allegedly using a picture of Wyoming (above) to depict the Montney region in B.C. (Bruce Gordon/EcoFlight)

OTTAWA — The David Suzuki Foundation has repeatedly used false and alarmist imagery to exaggerate the ecological impacts of natural gas development in northeastern British Columbia, a new complaint to Canada’s Competition Bureau alleges.

The complaint, put forward by eight B.C. residents, says that the Vancouver-based environmental charity repeatedly misled the public by using an aerial image depicting

a dense cluster of natural gas wells scarring a landscape in Wyoming

, taken in 2006, to falsely depict modern natural gas development in British Columbia’s northeast.

“(T)he Wyoming image paints a picture (that is) dirty, desolate and packed with natural gas well pads, as opposed the reality of a green area where natural gas development takes place around farms and public infrastructure,” reads the complaint.

The 11-page complaint includes multiple screenshots of foundation materials that use the Wyoming photo, dating back to 2019. In one case, the foundation included text acknowledging the photo was from Wyoming, but it did not do so in other cases, the complaint alleges.

One June 2024 Instagram post, for example, uses the image to promote an investigative report into the Montney Formation in northeastern B.C. and northwestern Alberta, a region that accounts for roughly half of

Canada’s natural gas production

.

The foundation continued to use the image after being made aware of concerns surrounding its use that summer, according to the complaint.

The complaint also says the outdated image fails to reflect present-day horizontal drilling techniques being used to extract natural gas from the Montney Formation.

“Many horizontal drills can be performed from one site, taking away any need for the densely packed wells shown in the Wyoming image used by David Suzuki Foundation.”

Deena Del Giusto, one of the complainants, said in a statement to the media that the principle of truth in advertising should apply equally to charities.

“This is about fairness and truth. The people of Northeast B.C. … deserve honest debate, not scare tactics and misleading imagery used to raise millions in donations,” said Del Giusto, a resident of Fort St. John, B.C.

“We’re asking the Competition Bureau to hold the David Suzuki Foundation to the same standard businesses face: tell the truth.”

Del Giusto told the National Post she was inspired to take action when a client of hers in the trucking industry brought the foundation’s use of the image to her attention.

“I just didn’t feel like it fairly reflected what was happening in the community, and felt strongly that I needed to do something about it,” said Del Giusto.

Representatives from the David Suzuki Foundation did not immediately respond to National Post questions about the Competition Bureau complaint.

The complaint also claims that the Wyoming image has in several instances appeared in close proximity to messages soliciting donations to the foundation.

“It is clear that (the image) is being used … to benefit the organization through donations.”

The group is asking that the foundation to issue a corrective notice informing the public of its deceptive practices and pay a fine of up to $15,000,000 per offence.

The environmental charity raised $12.1 million in Canadian donations and $38,000 from abroad last year, according

to publicly available filings

.

It has roughly $22.5 million in reserve funds, of which $8.9 million are donor-endowed.

The registered national charity is headquartered in Vancouver, with offices in Toronto and Montreal.

National Post

rmohamed@postmedia.com

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


CBC host Travis Dhanraj announced his resignation Monday.

Despite journalist Travis Dhanraj’s very public resignation from CBC, the national broadcaster says that he is an employee.

He is “still an employee although he is currently on leave,” said CBC’s head of public affairs Chuck Thompson to National Post via email on Wednesday morning.

Dhanraj’s lawyer Kathryn Marshall told National Post that “CBC is refusing to accept his resignation.”

“This refusal is indicative of their abusive work culture. However, to be clear, Travis has resigned, albeit involuntarily. We intend to commence a human rights lawsuit,” she said in an emailed statement.

In a letter to CBC leadership on Monday, Dhanraj said he felt that he had to step down because CBC made it impossible for him to continue his work with integrity. He called out the broadcaster for its “performative diversity, tokenism, a system designed to elevate certain voices and diminish others.”

He said he was denied access to “key newsmakers,” and described an atmosphere where barriers were in place for some, while others were empowered. “When I questioned these imbalances, I was met with silence, resistance, and eventually, retaliation. I was fighting for balance and accused of being on a ‘crusade,’” he wrote.

CBC has denied Dhanraj’s allegations.

The broadcaster “categorically rejects” the claims, CBC spokesperson Kerry Kelly said

in an emailed statement to National Post

on Monday. In February, CBC

confirmed to publication Broadcast Dialogue

that Dhanraj was “on a leave,” as

speculation swirled online

after the time slot of the television show he hosted, Canada Tonight, was replaced with another show.

On Monday, Dhanraj shared a note with his followers on social media.

“The dream that turned into a nightmare,” he wrote.

He said his resignation was not just about him. It was about CBC being “a public institution” that is “supposed to serve” Canadians.

“It’s about voices being sidelined, hard truths avoided, and the public being left in the dark about what’s really happening inside their national broadcaster,” he wrote. “I have no doubt there will be efforts to discredit me — to paint me as bitter or disgruntled. That’s what happens when you challenge power.”

Dhanraj’s journalism career spans 20 years.

He was a reporter for CBC News in Edmonton and Toronto before continuing on to CP24, Global News and CTV News. In 2021, he returned to CBC as a senior parliamentary reporter. He eventually ended up as the host for CBC’s Marketplace and Canada Tonight.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


A for sale sign is seen in front of a home on June 22, 2016 in Miami, Florida.

There has been a nationwide effort among Canadians to

buy local

and

travel domestically this year

, as a strained relationship with the United States continues. And now, a new report is suggesting that the number of Canadians interested in U.S. real estate has declined.

Nearly 30 per cent fewer Canadians searched for properties to buy or rent in the U.S. this May, compared to last year, according to a

report by real estate company RedFin

. The decline began in February. That was around the same time tensions were rising between the neighbouring countries, sparked by U.S. President Donald Trump’s heated rhetoric about Canada becoming the 51st state and the beginning of a trade war, when 25 per cent tariffs were implemented on Canadian goods going to the U.S.

“The Canadian dollar has been relatively weak this spring, making it harder for Canadians to afford already-expensive U.S. real estate,” RedFin said in its report.

The steepest drop came in April, when Canadian searches for U.S. homes fell by 34.2 per cent year over year.

The decline has affected 48 of the largest metro areas in the United States, according to RedFin. That includes Canadians searching for homes in Houston, which dropped 55.2 per cent year over year in May, as well as Philadelphia, by 53 per cent, and Chicago, by 47 per cent.

The report also noted that the housing market in Florida for both American and Canadian buyers “has cooled.” The state is a popular destination for Canadian snowbirds. In April, lawmakers in the U.S., including a Florida congresswoman,

cosponsored a bill that would allow Canadian snowbirds to visit for longer

. The report cited the lack of interest in the state was likely due to

a surge in insurance costs

in its coastal regions as well as intensifying climate disasters.

Canadians searching for homes in Miami and Orlando declined by about 30 per cent year over year in May, the report said.

Canadians have made up a large portion of international buyers in the United States. In 2024, they were listed as the top foreign buyers — at 13 per cent — spending US$5.9 billion,

according to the National Association of Realtors

.

The head of economics research for Redfin Chen Zhao told National Post in an emailed statement on Tuesday that the U.S. real estate market is “already weak.” She added that it has had historically low sales volume for the past three years and prices are starting to fall in many parts of the country.

“If Canadian demand continues to fall, then that means further weakness for the U.S. real estate market,” she said. “The importance of Canadian buyers will vary by geography, so the impact will be large in places like Florida, Palm Springs in California, Texas and Arizona.”

Zhao said she found it “striking” how the decrease in interest lined up so well with tariff volatility.

“The White House first announced tariffs on Canada at the beginning of February, and there was a sharp decline from January to February in traffic from Canada,” she said. “I think that it will take some time for the sentiment to change. Canadians will need to no longer feel like the U.S. is treating them unfairly in its trade policy.”

The percentages in the technology-based real estate brokerage’s report were calculated based on Redfin.com unique users located in Canada who conducted online searches of homes for sale and for rent in the U.S. Unique users refer to the “number of different people who access U.S. home listings” on the site or the app “within a defined period,” according to RedFin. The user is counted one time for that period.

The latest data from Statistics Canada shows that travel to the U.S. from Canadian airports has also been on

a downward trend

. In May, for the fourth consecutive month, the number of passengers on flights to the U.S. decreased year over year by 8.2 per cent.

Meanwhile, Canada’s largest airports saw higher volumes of passenger traffic. International travel, excluding the U.S., was on the rise — up 4.3 per cent this May, compared to 2024.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


People attend a large Idle No More protest on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, January 11, 2013.

If Liberal MPs experience the “long hot summer” of protest that some Aboriginal activist groups have promised in response to the federal government’s new major-projects legislation, they won’t be feeling that heat anywhere close to Parliament Hill.

Politicians were already starting to flee Ottawa, off to their home ridings or vacations for the summer break, before Bill C-5 received its rubber stamp from the Senate and royal assent on June 26. They left behind what could be a ticking time bomb: the Building Canada Act, allowing the federal cabinet to fast-track major infrastructure projects by identifying them as being in the “national interest” and bypassing the normal conditions and approval rules.

How to define “national interest” is shaping up to be an explosive question. The Liberal government, the Conservative Opposition and most business groups see the new law as a major step forward in allowing Canada to build badly needed projects, especially in mining, oil and gas, to improve lagging competitiveness. The legislation is at least in part a response to American tariffs that threaten much of the national economy, and a backlash to years of what seemed like paralysis in getting government approvals under the Trudeau government.

Aboriginal groups are less sure. Some are eager to see more economic growth too, but virtually all agree they need to be properly consulted and treated as partners when a project infringes on their land or their rights. Certain factions objected to the bill before it was passed, and are digging in for a fight. Some are predicting the revival of the 2014 Idle No More Indigenous protests. That movement led to flash mobs and blockades of critical rail lines and highways over the then Conservative government’s attempt roll back environmental regulations.

“Nothing’s off the table,” said Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, National Chief for the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), referring to options for resistance. Asked if Indigenous activists might rise up forcefully against the bill, she said, “I wouldn’t blame them.”

The legislation has been criticized, including by pro-development advocates, for giving the federal government too much power and discretion — to hurry along projects the cabinet considers important, while leaving behind unfavoured projects. And the Carney government has been trying to convince Aboriginal groups that the legislation in fact includes sufficient provisions to protect their rights, even as it rushed the bill through. It agreed to remove from the bill the initial power for cabinet to override the Indian Act, but the Senate declined to heed appeals from Indigenous representatives to slow the bill for more study, as the government aggressively pushed it through in time for summer.

The question to be answered now is whether the government has done enough to assure Aboriginal groups, or if Canada is weeks away from that “long, hot summer” of protests. What everyone agrees is that an ugly struggle could shatter years of steady progress in the relationships between governments and Indigenous Canadians, while spooking project backers and delaying critical infrastructure projects.

As Prime Minister Mark Carney suggested last week on a visit to Calgary, he can only

approve an oil pipeline if a private company is willing to try proposing one

. The government has the power to promote a project, but “the private sector is going to drive it,” he told Postmedia.

Interviewed last month after her appearance before the Senate in which she pressed senators to slow the bill, Woodhouse Nepinak said the legislation was “rammed through” without reasonable Indigenous consultation. She questioned why a bill backing more pipelines, ports and other projects gets passed in just weeks, while infrastructure needs on Indigenous reserves, such as schools, connectivity and clean water, have lingered for decades.

Alvin Fiddler, the Grand Chief of Nishnawbe Aski Nation, which represents 51 First Nations communities in northern Ontario, has already said the legislation in Ottawa, as well as similar bills in Ontario and British Columbia, has decimated the trust that had been growing in recent years between those governments and Aboriginal communities.

After seeing progress improving life on remote reserves, and a more respectful tone from Ottawa, he said “Canada is going backwards” with the new law.

The Nishnawbe Aski Nation says its land covers about two-thirds of Ontario, including the mineral-rich Ring of Fire area in the northwestern part of the province. That area is often mentioned as a leading candidate to be the site of a big project that could get fast-tracked. But Fiddler has warned that a resistance movement will only unnerve mining investors.

Ontario’s Ring of Fire and Alberta’s oil sands are typically held up as two of the resource bounties that have been held back, or even thwarted, for years under the Trudeau government, whose attitude toward developing resources and infrastructure ranged at times from uninterested to hostile. The story of then environment minister Steven Guilbeault ordering a federal assessment of a planned Ontario highway because of a frog habitat served as a vivid exemplification of the atmosphere: it took a costly, time-consuming court battle to slap back another attempt by the federal government to overreach into provincial jurisdiction.

Plenty of economists agree that Canada needs to export its natural resources, as well as manufactured goods, as easily and efficiently as possible to reach its economic potential. But in many cases, those needed roads, rail lines, ports and pipelines don’t exist, or they’re antiquated and unable to compete, leaving resources in the ground and money and jobs in both native and non-native communities on the table.

The key to the new legislation, the Carney government maintains, is that it will reduce the process time for big projects that can meet all the necessary safety and environmental standards by reducing red tape, namely the assessments, challenges and overlapping regulations. So, in other words, all the regulatory effects without the regulatory runaround that Canada’s system was infamous for.

“Canadian jobs are at risk. Canadians’ livelihoods are at risk and, quite frankly, the prosperity of the country is at risk,” Tim Hodgson, the federal natural resources and energy minister, said earlier this month. “We need to do things that we have not done in a long time, in time frames we have not done since the end of World War Two.”

A lot of Indigenous leaders agree with the urgency of powering up the economy.

David Chartrand, president of the Manitoba Metis Federation, told the Senate that he supports the legislation because the tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump threaten the Canadian economy, which would cause hardship for his people. “We stand with you,” he said.

Natan Obed, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, said he’s concerned about the legislation’s ability to limit native rights but he’s also hopeful that big projects could be very good for Far North communities. “There’s an incredible opportunity to really become an Arctic nation,” Obed said.

 Idle No More disrupt access to the Ambassador Bridge border crossing to the U.S., in Windsor, Ont., on January 11, 2013.

Whatever acrimony has erupted over the legislation obscures the improved relations between Indigenous groups and Canadian governments, said Shannon Joseph, chair of Energy for a Secure Future, a non-partisan group that focuses on energy policy.

One of the recent trends that had helped improve the relationship is the increase in the number of natural resources projects where Aboriginal communities have taken equity stakes, aided at times by government loan guarantee programs.

“Indigenous peoples are at the heart of this (process),” Joseph said.

Carney is now going to great lengths to show that he sees things that way too, emphasizing that Ottawa won’t deem projects to be in the national interest without first consulting with affected Aboriginal communities. The new office responsible for advancing big projects will include an Indigenous advisory council that he said will be responsible for ensuring that Aboriginal rights are respected.

After the federal bill was passed in Parliament, however, Carney acknowledged that there’s more work to be done and said that he plans to begin consultations with Indigenous groups July 17.

“The first thing we will do to launch the implementation of this legislation in the right way is through full-day summits,”

Carney said a week before the bill was passed

.

The federal legislation has company in its intent and controversy: Recent bills have also passed in Ontario and British Columbia that were designed to fast-track major projects. And both were criticized for inadequate consultation with First Nations. Ontario Premier Doug Ford made things worse when he opened old wounds around trust and paternalism when he boosted his provincial bill by arguing that Aboriginal communities can’t expect to continue to get economic support if they don’t support the infrastructure projects that the economy needs.

“You can’t just keep coming hat in hand all the time to government,” Ford said. “You gotta be able to take care of yourselves.” He soon after apologized.

Fiddler was among several Indigenous leaders who accused Ford of racism. Fiddler’s riposte was that native communities are tired of federal and provincial governments coming “hat in hand” for the resources on Aboriginal land.

Fiddler says it’s not too late to stop the damage to a slowly improving relationship between governments and First Nations. But that would mean slowing down legislation to give Aboriginal communities more time to review and consult with their communities and potentially push for changes. But politicians across Canada are suddenly in a hurry; they’re taking their chances.

National Post

stuck@postmedia.com

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. She says airline travellers will no longer have to remove their shoes while going through security.

The U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is easing off the policy requiring travellers to take their shoes off for separate scanning while going through the airport security.

Kristi Noem, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (which oversees the TSA) made a formal announcement about the move during

a press conference

at Ronald Reagan Airport in Washington on Tuesday evening

.

She said that as of today, the TSA will “no longer require…every single person” to remove their shoes when going through security checkpoints. She said this is an “immediate nationwide rollout” of passengers being able to keep their shoes on.

The aim of this policy shift, said Noem, is “to improve the travel experience” while continuing to “keep travellers safe.” She referred to several comments the administration has received expressing displeasure over the “no-shoes” policy. And listed several marquee events that the U.S. will soon be hosting, as reasons for doing so, including the Olympics in Los Angeles, World Cup soccer matches, and events geared toward celebrating the 250th anniversary of America’s independence.

Has airport security technology improved?

Noem says security technology has evolved significantly since the shoes-off policy was implemented almost 20 years ago. She said the TSA has “evaluated the technology at every airport … It’s been honed and it’s been hardened.”

She expressed confidence in the multi-layer security now in place, which involves different types of screening individuals, including the relatively new “Real ID,” which encompasses any type of federally recognized identification. Meanwhile, she says the department is looking at even more advanced technology, for example, machines that would result in not having to interact with airport security officers.

Meanwhile, it should be noted that any passenger who triggers the alarm in the scanner or magnetometer, will still be required by the TSA to take their shoes off for additional screening.

What U.S. airports are affected?

So far, reports

airwaysmag.com

, the changes have been noticed in Baltimore/Washington (BWI), Fort Lauderdale (FLL), Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky (CVG), Portland (PDX), Philadelphia (PHL), and Piedmont Triad (GSO) in North Carolina. It says passengers at Los Angeles (LAX) and New York’s LaGuardia (LGA) have also shared stories about being waved through while keeping their shoes on.

Will this happen in Canada?

National Post reached out to Transport Canada, the government arm responsible for establishing regulations regarding security screening procedures for flights originating in Canada. The question was put whether a similar move is contemplated for Canadian airports. A response has not yet been received.

Why were travellers required to remove their shoes in the first place?

The TSA established this unpopular requirement in 2006. It came into effect shortly after terrorist, Richard Reid, subsequently known as the “shoe bomber” tried to detonate a liquid

explosive in his shoe

while aboard an American Airlines flight from Paris to Miami.

“As luck would have it, he encountered technical issues and was unable to carry out the attack,” states a report by the

International Institute for International Terrorism

.

After that taking off your shoes at security became just another part of flying. “While most people never liked it, they grew accustomed to it,” writes

airwaysmag.com

.

Some American travellers were already able to keep their shoes on. They had to go through a background check and pay an US$80 fee to belong to the

TSA’s Trusted Traveler PreCheck

program. Noem says many fliers will still want to retain their membership in the program for the continued ease it provides in checking through security.

The new shift in boarding protocol was first reported by a travel blog,

Gate Access

. The blog stated that a memo went out to TSA officers across the country last week, setting out the change for all passengers in all screening lanes at many airports across the country.

Earlier Tuesday, several media outlets such as the

New York Times

reported on the move as it unfolded in airports across America, citing unnamed sources. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt responded to the reports on X, calling it “big news” from the TSA/Department of Homeland Security.

 

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.


Vehicles arrive at the ticket booths at the Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal in Delta, BC, May, 14, 2025.

A recently formalized policy by B.C. Ferries is restricting damaged electric vehicles from boarding its vessels, leaving some islanders feeling frustrated and stranded.

British Columbia leads the country in electric vehicle adoption, with more than one-fifth of all new light-duty passenger vehicles sold in B.C. in 2023 being EVs. However, as of the end of June, a B.C. Ferries policy — based on Transport Canada rules from 2014 — forbids vehicles with damaged or defective batteries from boarding ferries.

“While the approach has been in place for years, we’ve seen an uptick in these cases (of damaged EVs boarding the ferries) and wanted to ensure our teams and customers have clear direction,” said B.C. Ferries in a statement.

B.C. Ferries says that these restrictions are in place for safety reasons.

But since B.C. Ferries serves more than two-dozen islands, and with so many people owning electric vehicles — sometimes on islands with few options for repair — it has people feeling trapped.

Johnathan Vipond, the owner of Salt Spring Island Towing, says that on average, he tows disabled hybrid or electric vehicles off the island, one to four times a week, and that there’s a huge concentration of these vehicles on the island of less than 12,000 people.

Vipond says customers haven’t been happy since the policy change. With ferries no longer an option for damaged EVs, the only way to transport them off the island is by barge, a costly alternative. While there are some mechanics on the island with EV training, Vipond notes they’re still limited in what repairs they can perform.

“I stand with B.C. Ferries, I totally agree with them … but the problem is, all these vehicles are already on the Gulf Islands, I don’t want to say too little too late, but it’s like, they’re already here,” said Vipond.

Despite the policy’s existence, damaged EVs have regularly been transported on these ferries in the past without an issue, according to residents of the islands.

The B.C. Ferries policy change states that any EVs with major damage — including exposed batteries, fluid leaks, or wiring issues — are not to be transported. Similarly, any EV that cannot be driven on its own, such as those being towed, are not allowed on ferries.

For vehicles with minor damage, such as cosmetic issues, drivers first need to talk with a terminal attendant, who then speaks with the captain, who then watches while you drive on and decides whether it’s allowed.

In 2019, B.C. passed the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act (ZEV Act), which was meant to drive up sales of zero emission vehicles, to ensure provincial greenhouse-gas reduction targets are met. As a result, B.C. has the highest percentage of EVs being sold in any province or territory, in the last few years.

While Vipond agrees with these new restrictions in terms of safety concerns, he thinks there needs to be other options to get these vehicles off the island. As of right now they don’t qualify as dangerous cargo shipping, but Vipond says that could be an option, among others. He says it all comes down to B.C. Ferries and Transport Canada, and whether they are willing to work with these towing companies.

B.C. Ferries understands that this policy poses challenges for people, especially at a time where electric vehicle adoption increases, but they believe it is in the interest of everyone’s safety that these cautions be applied. That being said, they are willing to look into safer alternatives to transport these vehicles in the future.

“As this area evolves and we gather additional data we will look at whether safe, regulatory compliant options to transport damaged EVs can be introduced in the future,” B.C. Ferries wrote in an emailed statement. “In short, EVs can still travel with us. The updates are about safety and clarity, not restrictions on everyday drivers.”

Hon Chan, the B.C. Conservative MLA for Richmond Centre, says he places the blame squarely with the provincial government, not B.C. Ferries.

“They (the government) asked everybody to get an EV, however now if there’s a problem, it’s almost impossible to get it fixed if you’re not located in the mainland,” Chan told National Post in an interview.

Chan says that around two months ago he

introduced a private member’s bill

to amend rules pushing B.C. towards an all-EV light-duty vehicle market by 2035. He where he pointed out that in certain areas in B.C., especially the more rural ones, don’t have proper facilities to repair EVs. However, his bill was voted down.

“They always create some problems, and now scramble to find a solution,” said Chan.

Chan himself is an owner of an EV, and says that he’s concerned that as his vehicle gets older, it could break down, and then would be stranded on the island, which he says is the concern for many British Colombians.

He says that this is something that should’ve been discussed beforehand, because now people are left to deal with the repercussions themselves.

”Why aren’t we looking at the solutions before?” said Chan.

Jim Standen and Tom Mitchell are residents of Salt Spring Island, and have both owned EVs for around 10 years. The recent policy change has them both feeling a little concerned and frustrated as well.

Standen says that although EVs are reliable cars, there’s a large number of them on Salt Spring Island, and many of them are old, increasing their chances of breaking down. And in terms of repairing an EV, on the island there are not many options.

Dangerous goods ferries come to the island once a week, and there’s also a marine landing craft. Mitchell says that the landing craft could potentially be used to help transport damaged EVs, but something needs to be done.

“It cannot be left standing like that. It’s a dead stop to EV growth,” said Mitchell.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


A copy of the report by the Dinah Project on sexual violence committed on Oct. 7, 2023 by Hamas is displayed by a journalist before a ceremony presenting the report to Israel's first lady Michal Herzog in Jerusalem, Tuesday, July 8, 2025.

A groundbreaking legal report presented Tuesday to the wife of Israel’s President provides the first comprehensive framework for prosecuting Hamas terrorists for the systematic use of sexual violence as a weapon of war during the October 7 attack.

“The report presents the truth as it is – shocking, painful, but vital and necessary,” said First Lady Michal Herzog upon receiving the document in Jerusalem. “On behalf of all those who were harmed, we are committed to continuing to fight until their cry is heard everywhere and until justice is done.”

The 84-page report — written by Professor Ruth Halperin-Kadri, retired District Judge Nava Ben-Or, and Col. (res.) Attorney Sharon Zaggi-Pinhas, former Chief Military Prosecutor of the Israel Defense Forces — represents the most extensive legal and factual documentation to date of sexual crimes committed during the assault on Gaza border communities. Produced as part of “The Dinah Project,” the report analyzes dozens of sources to establish clear patterns of systematic sexual abuse.

The findings reveal consistent patterns of sexual violence committed by Hamas terrorists both at murder scenes and in captivity. The report documents gang rape, public humiliation, forced nudity, genital abuse, and direct shooting of intimate body parts. It also includes accounts from abductees describing repeated sexual assaults, threats of “forced marriage,” and attempts to erase sexual identity, including attacks on men.

According to the report, investigators found recurring descriptions of half-naked female bodies, sometimes tied to buildings and trees, alongside reports from personnel identifying casualties from military bases. The authors conclude unequivocally that Hamas used sexual violence as part of an overall plan of terror, collective humiliation, and dehumanization of Israeli society.

Several Palestinian terrorists captured by Israel have admitted to interrogators they raped and sexually abused women.

‘I’m not really free’

The presentation included testimony from Ilana Gritzewsky, a survivor of 55 days in Hamas captivity who spoke about her experience of sexual abuse. “On October 7, I was in my house, in Kibbutz Nir Oz, with my partner, Matan [Zangauker]. And suddenly – noise. Explosions. Screams. Then a door was broken open. We were kidnapped,” Gritzewsky recounted.

Describing her ordeal, she continued: “When I woke up, I was half-naked. Surrounded by terrorists. They beat me, touched me. I didn’t know what happened to my body in those lost minutes. But my soul already knew: nothing would be the same.”

Addressing her ongoing trauma, she said, “I was released after 55 days. But I’m not really free. Because true freedom only exists when no one has to go through what I went through.”

The report’s authors stressed that sexual violence in conflict is systematic rather than random.

“We say this in a clear voice: sexual violence in conflict is a weapon. It is not random, it is not directed only at the individual and it is not done without direction from above. It is time for the international community to treat this phenomenon as such,” Halperin-Kadri stated.

The Legal Framework

The legal framework proposed in the report calls for applying joint criminal responsibility to all participants in the October 7 attack, even those who did not directly participate in rape. The authors argue that shared responsibility should apply because participants “knew, could have known, or took part in the use of sexual violence as part of the attack.”

Joint criminal responsibility (JCR), also known as joint enterprise or common purpose, is a legal doctrine used in international criminal law and some domestic legal systems to hold multiple individuals responsible for a crime committed by a group, even if not all participants physically carried out the criminal act. It has played a role in war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide cases in Rwanda and Yugoslavia.

“When individuals join a coordinated, ideologically-driven assault aimed at destruction and dehumanization, they bear responsibility for the full range of atrocities committed as part of that assault — even if they did not personally commit each specific act or were not aware of its commission by a co-perpetrator,” the report said.

The report outlined several next steps, including calls for the Israeli government to apply shared responsibility doctrine in prosecuting terrorists, appeals to the UN Secretary-General to blacklist Hamas for using sexual violence as a weapon of war, and the development of new legal protocols for handling sexual violence cases in armed conflicts.

“This is a groundbreaking report, not only in the scope of the findings, which all existed but we knew how to look at them and put them together, but also in the tools it provides to the legal world,” said Halperin-Kadri. “Our goal is to show how leaders and perpetrators of crimes can be prosecuted even when there is no direct evidence against each of them individually.”

The report also aims to influence international proceedings, including potential cases before the International Criminal Court in The Hague and UN human rights institutions. Unlike other post-attack summaries, this document provides what the authors said is a concrete legal roadmap for prosecution based on established international and Israeli law doctrines.

At least 1,180 people were killed, and 252 Israelis and foreigners were taken hostage in Hamas’s attacks on Israeli communities near the Gaza border on October 7. Of the 50 remaining hostages, around 30 are believed to be dead.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Image shared by RCMP showing 'military-style' exercises in which the accused allegedly took part.

Active members of the Canadian Armed Forces are among four people facing terrorism charges in Quebec for allegedly plotting an anti-government militia.

At least three of the four are accused of taking “concrete actions to facilitate terrorist activity,” including a plot “to forcibly take possession of land in the Québec City area,” according to the RCMP. The alleged target was not specified.

“They took part in military-style training, as well as shooting, ambush, survival, and navigation exercises. They also conducted a scouting operation. A variety of firearms, some prohibited, as well as high-capacity magazines and tactical equipment were allegedly used in these activities,” the RCMP said in a written release Tuesday morning.

Marc-Aurèle Chabot, 24, of Québec City, Simon Angers-Audet, 24, of Neuville and Raphaël Lagacé, 25, of Québec City, face a charge of knowingly facilitating a terrorist activity, with a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison.

Matthew Forbes, 33, of Pont-Rouge, faces charges including possession of firearms, prohibited devices and explosives, and possession of controlled items. Forbes faces charges under the Defence Production Act, that regulates military procurement and access to military or national security goods, suggesting some of the weapons or equipment involved were sourced from Canada’s Department of national Defence.

 This photo shared by the RCMP shows military-style weapons seized during a search of the an area in Quebec City.

The RCMP deems it a case of ideologically motivated violent extremism.

The investigation has stretched more than a year and includes searches in the Quebec City area in January 2024 in which 16 explosive devices, 83 firearms and accessories, about 11,000 rounds of ammunition, nearly 130 magazines, four pairs of night vision goggles and military equipment were seized, the RCMP said. Among the weapons seized were military-style assault rifles.

Photos released by the RCMP show a group of seven people in military camouflage armed with rifles in an apparent shooting and tactics training exercise in what looks like a rock quarry.

One of the accused allegedly created and administered an Instagram account to recruit new members to the anti-government militia. The Instagram account featured photos of people in combat fatigues and guns outdoors, some of the scenes are in winter, surrounded by snow, others in summer or fall in woods, and at least one appears to be inside a vehicle.

 Screenshot of the alleged instagram the militia used as a recruiting tool.

Other charges against the accused in this case include the possession of prohibited devices, transfer of firearms and ammunition, careless storage of firearms, possession of explosives and possession of controlled items.

The investigation was led by the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team (INSET), considered a top-tier response to fighting domestic extremism and terrorism. INSET units are led by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police but are made up of officers from multiple law enforcement agencies who are specially trained.

The RCMP describes the mission of INSET as tracking, deterring, disrupting and preventing criminal activities of terrorist groups or individuals who pose a threat to Canada’s national security.

 High-capacity magazines seized by the RCMP following a year-long investigation into a Quebec-based anti-government militia.

The four charged are scheduled to appear today in court in Québec City. None of the allegations have yet been proven.

The RCMP refused to specify which of the accused are active Canadian soldiers but it seems it includes the three younger men facing the terrorism-related charges, at least one of which has his occupation listed on a Facebook profile as a Canadian Armed Forces member.

The RCMP nor the Canadian Forces have responded to requests for more information.

The federal government previously said Ideologically Motivated Violent Extremism (IMVE) “draws from a complex range of grievances and ideas from across the traditional ‘left-right’ ideological spectrum.”

Canada’s national security and intelligence community focusses on four subcategories of IMVE: xenophobic violence, anti-authority violence, gender-driven violence, and other grievance-driven and ideologically motivated violence.

While Canada’s armed forces have fought against terror groups and are a part of Canada’s national security at home and abroad, a few Canadian soldiers have previously been linked to extremist violence and terror plots.

Former army reservist master corporal, Patrik Mathews, of Beausejour, Man., was sentenced in 2021 in the United States for his role in what the FBI calls a plot to trigger a “race war” in the United States alongside a white supremacist group called The Base. His co-defendant, U.S. army veteran.

In 2020, Corey Hurren, a serving member of the Canadian Armed Forces, carrying four guns and anger over the COVID-19 pandemic and restrictive measures, rammed his pick-up truck through the gates of Rideau Hall where Justin Trudeau, prime minister at the time, was living. He said he wanted to arrest Trudeau but was arrested.

Toronto’s Steven Chand was a former Canadian soldier convicted in the al-Qaida inspired Toronto 18 terror plot in 2006.

• Email: ahumphreys@postmedia.com | X:

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


ADDED CAPTION INFO: Woman on left (holding

“I didn’t want to kill anybody,” Eric Nagler says. “And I was afraid if I did go in that, because I was a pacifist, I’d get sent to the front lines and shot. So anyway, I dodged the draft.”

Nagler, who is now 83, grew up in Brooklyn, New York, in the 1940s. Like millions of young American men, he was draft-age when U.S. ground troops first set foot in Vietnam in 1965. “My brother came home from university one day and said that he was a conscientious objector and explained what that was,” Nagler says. “I thought it was a terrific idea.

“I claimed conscientious objection, and I had a student deferment, and we went back and forth like that … Finally, the notice came for me to appear at Whitehall Street on a particular day, and instead I drove across the Vermont border into Canada.”

After settling down in Toronto, Nagler opened a music store and went on to become a beloved children’s television personality on

The Elephant Show

and Eric’s World. He’s written three books for children and released countless songs, with titles ranging from You Got a Place Where You Belong to Sneezes. From time to time, he even plays the sewerphone — a saxophone-shaped instrument made of plumbing pipes.

Nagler isn’t bashful about his choice to leave the United States. “Down there in the States, we were called draft resisters, but it was fine up here just to be a draft dodger,” he recalls. “We’re not very good at war, up here in Canada.”

Over 50,000 Americans came to Canada in opposition to the Vietnam War, based on estimates from John Hagan’s book, Northwest Passage (2001). This was the largest exodus of political migrants from the U.S. since The American Revolution. Some hoped to avoid the draft, others deserted after months or years of service, still others left for ideological reasons. Though they weren’t subject to the draft, Hagan writes that more women migrated than men, “most as partners and spouses, and some on their own.”

An elaborate vocabulary emerged in the 1970s to categorize these American newcomers: they were dodgers, evaders, deserters, resisters, émigrés, exiles or plain-old immigrants. Each term came with its own baggage. “Deserter” carried a sense of national betrayal; “resister” had a more sympathetic ring to it.

These categories concealed the messier and more personal realities of coming to Canada. The National Post spoke to nine U.S. war resisters about their journeys north. Their lives had no unifying narrative. Many were highly educated and went on to make lasting contributions to Canadian politics and industry. Some were musicians, painters and authors who immersed themselves in the growing counterculture of the 1960s — be it in the Yorkville neighbourhood of Toronto or in the mountain towns of British Columbia. The war resisters changed Canada and Canada changed them.

As Canada grows estranged from our neighbours to the south, an age-old question comes back into focus: What sets us apart? Prime Minister Mark Carney says it is our ability to

recall the names of the two puppets

on CBC children’s television show Mr. Dressup. Pierre Poilievre, in a strangely American twist, says it is the

“protective arms of a solid border”

and the promise that “hard work gets you a great life.”

Jeff Douglas

, in his renowned rant from a 2000 Molson Canadian beer ad, says it is our belief that “a toque is a hat” and “a chesterfield is a couch.”

The resisters of the Vietnam era had better answers. Maybe it takes years of living between countries to see the gap fully. Or maybe there was something about that era — a time of national reckoning for both countries — that made our differences easier to discern. Decades later, their stories offer some clarity on Canada’s place in an ever-tumultuous continent.

Eric Nagler is the first to reassure Canadians searching for a sense of national difference. “The United States government is run by a bunch of big-time criminals, and that’s more true now than it ever has been,” he says.

“In Canada, it’s run by small-time criminals. You know, you can get along here.”

How the war began

In 1945, Ho Chi Minh declared Vietnam’s

independence from France

. His speech began with a quote from the U.S. Declaration of Independence. “All men are created equal,” he proclaimed. “They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.”

France reimposed colonial rule less than a month after Ho’s address, beginning a brutal conflict known as the First Indochina War. President Harry Truman, worried about the spread of communism in Indochina, committed vast amounts of American money and arms to the French military. By the middle of 1954, the United States was paying about 80 per cent of French war costs. And so the conflict became, as many Vietnamese still refer to it,

“the American war.”

In the 1950s and early 1960s, U.S. leaders tried to conceal their interest in Indochina. Nancy, a resident of the B.C. Interior and the daughter of a U.S. air force officer, lived in Arizona at the time. “There was a little box in the daily news, and it told you how many American advisers there were in Vietnam,” she recalls. (Nancy wanted to use only her first name to speak more openly.) “Those numbers grew, day after day after day, and then pretty soon the numbers started to not make sense.” By the end of 1964, around 23,000 American advisers were stationed in Vietnam.

Nancy wasn’t the only one to question why South Vietnam needed so much advice. Newspapers, activists and concerned citizens began to interrogate the ballooning U.S. presence in Vietnam as the costs of war grew higher. Graham Greene’s

The Quiet American

(1955) satirized America’s failing efforts to fly under the radar. Alden Pyle, a fictional economic adviser from America, is murdered in Vietnam, and his family receives a cable stating that he died a soldier’s death. “The Economic Aid Mission doesn’t sound like the Army,” Graham’s narrator remarks dryly. “Do you get Purple Hearts?”

Soon enough, the war came out of the shadows. In March 1965, the first U.S. troops landed in Vietnam; by 1969, there were more than 500,000 of them. Mark Atwood Lawrence, a history professor at the University of Texas, notes that public support for the war was initially high. Many young Americans rallied around the flag, driven in part by cultural memories of the Second World War.

Yet support faded as the conflict dragged on and “more body bags came back, with no apparent end in sight,” explained Lawrence in an interview with the Post. Then U.S. president Lyndon Johnson failed to provide a clear rationale for the conflict, and Lawrence says that the public “had a really hard time seeing how American interests were really at stake in a fight so far away from American shores.”

Americans took to the streets to express their discontent. About 35,000 rioters

attacked the Pentagon in 1967

, climbing walls and throwing rocks and vegetables at military officers. The

Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam

— a 1969 demonstration of over 500,000 people — was one of the largest antiwar protests in U.S. history.

Corky Evans, a resident of the B.C. Interior, recalls attending several protests while growing up in California. “I saw the police breaking people’s heads and blood everywhere and hundreds of cops,” says Evans. “My younger brother went to prison that day for the crime of stopping to throw up as people were being beaten up in front of him.”

The antiwar movement was part of a larger wave of political upheaval in the U.S.

The Cuban Missile Crisis of 196

2 led thousands of Americans to convert their basements into nuclear fallout shelters. The 1965 Civil Rights Act banned racial segregation in public spaces, sparking violent backlash against African-Americans.

Medgar Evers

was assassinated in June 1963, then John F. Kennedy in November 1963, then Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968.

“It was just all falling apart,” Evans recalls. He eventually migrated to British Columbia in 1969 out of opposition to the war.

Between country and conscience

“Sarge, I’m only 18, I got a ruptured spleen, and I always carry a purse,” sang

Phil Ochs

. “I’ve got eyes like a bat and my feet are flat, and my asthma’s getting worse.”

The Draft Dodger Rag was released on Ochs’ 1965 album I Ain’t Marching Anymore, and was later covered by Pete Seeger, Tom Paxton and John Denver. The song takes on the persona of a “typical American boy” who faces his local draft board. Ochs satirizes the vast and creative set of excuses that American youth used to evade the draft, from allergies to epilepsy to working at a defence plant.

The song was popular because it spoke to a newly surfacing truth: a lot of American boys weren’t going to Vietnam. Students could defer conscription for years at a time, as could some married men. Draftees could also gain medical exemptions if they had a letter from their private doctor, notes Christian Appy, history professor and author of Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers in Vietnam (1993). Well-informed draftees found ways to feign colour blindness, mental illness, homosexuality and so on. “There were actually people who paid to have braces put on to get an exemption,” Appy says in an interview with the Post.

The wealthier the family, the more likely their sons were to benefit from exemptions and deferrals. According to Appy’s Working-Class War, about 80 per cent of Americans who served during the Vietnam War were from working- or lower-class households.

To assuage cries of class discrimination, newly elected president Richard Nixon introduced

the lottery draft in 1969

. Each day of the year was written on a piece of paper and placed inside a plastic capsule. The capsules were randomly drawn out of a jar on live television. If the first day chosen was July 19, then each draft-eligible man born on that day would have Lottery No. 1. The draftees were then called for service in order of their lottery number. It was a “bingo-style system for choosing which 20-year-olds were going to be sent away to die for commercial and political agendas,” recalls Fred Rosenberg, a U.S.-born resident of Nelson, B.C.

Draft calls grew higher when the war expanded and Nixon abolished both occupational draft deferments and deferments for fathers. As evading the draft legally grew more challenging, thousands of young men began eyeing the northern border.

Draft dodgers faced criticism from all directions. A hawkish political right viewed them as traitors to their country. Many of the dodgers’ own parents had served in the Second World War and valued military service as a national tradition. Genevieve, a resident of Nelson, B.C., is the daughter of a Vietnam-era draft dodger. When her father dodged the draft, his parents contacted the FBI and asked for their son to be tracked down.

Even among vocal antiwar activists, draft dodgers were often shunned for taking the perceived easy way out. Students for a Democratic Society, one of the largest antiwar groups in the U.S., urged Canadians to stop supporting Toronto’s draft counselling centres. When Joan Baez performed at a 1969 concert in Toronto, she urged the draft dodgers to return home. “What (the draft dodgers) are doing is opting out of the struggle at home,” she declared. “That’s where they should go, if only to fill the jails.”

These criticisms were tinted by the growing understanding of draft evasion as a class privilege. “These people from the elite don’t go (to Vietnam),” said Richard Nixon in a taped conversation about draft dodgers. “They’re all f-cking running (to Canada) … I don’t buy that repression issue.”

Jack Todd, a deserter from Western Nebraska, spoke to this class dynamic more gently. The draft dodgers “had gone to University of Wisconsin or Berkeley or something,” he said. “They came up with their VW Beetle and their girlfriend or wife, and they already had a job lined up and all that.”

It’s true that the dodgers were disproportionately from college-educated households, according to Frank Kusch’s book All American Boys (2001). It was often at university that men heard about the possibility of migrating north. And, in 1967, Canada introduced a points-based immigration system, which gave priority to migrants with more education, work experience and connections.

Yet the image of the draft dodger conjured by the American public — of a rich, long-haired Ivy League graduate fleeing to downtown Toronto in cowardly avoidance of his national duties — isn’t quite right. For one thing, they weren’t all rich. Many upper-class men were able to gain exemptions earlier in the process, rendering a move to Canada unnecessary.

While knowledge of Canada was limited early in the war, migration became easier after the publication of Mark Satin’s

Manual for Draft-Age Immigrants

in 1968. The manual instructed dodgers on how to rack up enough points to get across the border, how to avoid criminal punishment and how to find housing in major Canadian cities. (“Most Canadians do not live in caves or igloos,” the manual advises.) It sold almost 100,000 copies.

Satin also personally counselled hundreds of draft dodgers in Toronto. “We got huge numbers of middle-class and lower middle-class kids who were very idealistic,” he recalled in a recent interview with the Post. “They didn’t really have options.”

For another thing, the dodgers’ opposition to the war extended beyond a personal unwillingness to fight. “There’s been a real tendency over the years to hang a lot of importance on the draft,” notes Mark Lawrence, the professor from the University of Texas. “I think sometimes that’s a way of dismissing the movement. I wouldn’t say, of course, that it was never a factor, but it’s probably been exaggerated to some extent as a motivator for antiwar activism.”

Even for those who did flee out of personal fear, it’s hard to see their decision as a cowardly one. The draftees’ options were to go overseas for two years to fight in a war they considered destructive and futile, commit identity theft and go underground or end up in federal prison. Conscription presented an impossible choice between country and conscience.

Life in Resisterville

On Halloween of 1969, Corky Evans and his wife ended up in a hospital in Duncan, B.C. “It was midnight, and her water had broken. So we had to go to the hospital to have this baby, but we had no money and we didn’t have a doctor.”

They drove to the hospital and left their two other children in the car parked outside. Evans’ wife was admitted to the maternity ward. “I went and stood at the front door waiting for somebody to come and ask me for money,” Evans remembers. “Because that’s how I had learned the health system works where I had grown up. I’m standing there in the dark. It’s now 1 in the morning or something.”

A nurse came by to ask Evans what he was doing. “My wife is upstairs having a baby, and I’m standing here waiting to talk to somebody about how I’m going to pay,” said Evans. The nurse told him to go upstairs and take care of his wife, and that they would talk about payment the next day.

“I just stood there in the dark. I started to cry. I had never had such an experience in my life where somebody in the health-care system cared more about the well-being of the people than the money.”

Evans migrated from California to Vancouver Island, where he worked as a longshoreman. After a brief stint in the Northwest Territories, his family settled down in the West Kootenays of British Columbia. He would go on to become an MLA for the Nelson-Creston district and hold several cabinet positions in the provincial NDP.

By the late 1960s, the Kootenays had become a hub for the draft dodgers. Many arrived in Vancouver before travelling to the B.C. Interior, where land was cheap and a vibrant counterculture was emerging. The Doukhobors, a Russian religious minority exiled in the early 20th century, helped provide the migrants with housing and jobs. The epicentre of American migration was Nelson, B.C., a small community tucked beside the West Arm of Kootenay Lake. The town became known as “Resisterville.”

The draft dodgers changed Nelson. Professor Kathleen Rodgers, author of

Welcome to Resisterville

(2014), writes that the influx of war resisters was akin to “dropping the population of a large university campus into a remote rural community.” The dodgers took on key roles in local anti-logging protests, made Nelson a nuclear-free zone and, decades later, protested the Iraq War. Many started or led communes — Harmony’s Gate, the Reds and the Blues, and the New Family. One war resister, Jeff Mock, began running a local tofu business.

Of course, Nelson changed the draft dodgers, too. While many dodgers moved to the B.C. Interior with a back-to-the-land aesthetic, they generally came from large cities and lacked the skills to maintain crops or build homes. The residents of Nelson helped the migrants adjust to a rural lifestyle; they wrote books and started community organizations to teach farming and construction.

Other dodgers embarked on spiritual journeys. Nancy and her husband migrated to B.C. after receiving a draft letter in the mail. They travelled through the province, visiting an ashram and eventually joining the New Family commune. Nancy didn’t cede herself fully to the counterculture. “I was a mother at that point, so I wasn’t going to go winging off in the crazy land,” she says. “But I was interested in the spiritual stuff a lot … I taught myself how to meditate, and then, you know, I became part of that world.”

An extremely forgettable city

“Toronto itself is in many ways an extremely forgettable city, sprawled out on the flat north shore of the lake, with endless ticky-tacky suburbs unrelieved by scenery or imagination,” wrote Canadian historian Douglas Myers in a contribution to Satin’s Manual for Draft-Age Immigrants. Myers assures readers that Toronto is nevertheless “a city of many small important pleasures — quiet tree-lined neighbourhoods, clean streets, good schools.”

By the late 1960s, Toronto had become a mecca for Americans on the lam. While some dodgers enjoyed the remoteness of the B.C. Interior, others were ambitious young professionals who preferred an urban setting.

Toronto was an especially appealing choice because the government of Vancouver — the other large, English-speaking city in Canada — had grown openly hostile to war resisters. “I don’t like draft dodgers,” declared Vancouver mayor Thomas Campbell in 1970, “and I will do anything within the law to get rid of them.” He proposed that the 1914 War Measures Act (which allowed the Canadian government to suspend civil liberties in wartime) be used against “any revolutionary, whether he’s a U.S. draft dodger or a hippie.”

Several organizations cropped up to assist American migrants in Toronto with housing, legal aid and social support. The largest group was the Toronto Anti-Draft Programme (TADP), founded in 1966 by the Student Union for Peace Action (SUPA) at the University of Toronto. They resettled hundreds of dodgers in Baldwin Village, Yorkville, the Annex and other neighbourhoods surrounding the university.

“Within a few months, I had a list of literally 200 Torontonians who were housing (the draft dodgers),” recalls Mark Satin, a key organizer in the TADP. “People were constantly calling the office asking if they could help.” Not all of them were stereotypical leftists who opposed the war, Satin notes. “Many of them were simply people who had empathy for the situation.”

The draft dodgers integrated quickly into the free-spirited, eclectic youth culture of 1960s Toronto. “A popular pastime in Toronto is visiting Yorkville Village to spot the beatniks, oddballs, and Bohemia,” said CBC reporter Larry Bondi

in a 1965 broadcast

. “But now the name of the game for visitors is to spot the American draft dodger.”

Some resisters remained highly engaged with the antiwar movement while living in Canada. Jack Colhoun grew up in a patriotic family in Upstate New York. He deserted the U.S. army, where he had served as a second lieutenant, and moved to Toronto for roughly a decade.

“We didn’t want to forget the war, and we didn’t want the American people to forget the war,” Colhoun says. He became an editor for Amex Canada, a magazine for American war resisters in Canada. Amex sought to publicize the stories of Americans fleeing the war, and worked closely with antiwar veterans’ organizations.

Other resisters kept a deliberate distance from wartime politics. Bob Griesel migrated in 1969 from Tacoma, Wash., to Edmonton. He wasn’t selected for military service, but left the U.S. after seeing the war’s effects on his draft-age peers.

“My friends who I went to high school and college with who’d been drafted were starting to return from their tours of duty,” Griesel recalled in a recent interview. “We caused them to be mentally disfigured and physically disfigured and many of them ruined for life. A couple of them I knew ended up dying from leukemia due to Agent Orange. And my question was, ‘Why did we do that to those young men, for that purpose, at that time? What was the point?’”

Griesel chose to integrate fully into Canadian life, putting memories of the war behind him and avoiding American TV channels. The people of Edmonton “didn’t give a darn where I came from,” he says. “Nobody up there was talking about the war.”

The Last Resort

“There was this marvellous house,” recalls Mark Satin. “It was huge. It was painted army green, ironically enough, and there were two guys sitting in front who looked kind of weird.”

It was autumn of 1968, and that army green house was in the middle of Vancouver, a few blocks from False Creek. Satin, a recently migrated resister from Texas, signed the lease for $75 a month. He and his friends converted the house into a hostel for war resisters from the U.S., and called it “The Last Resort.”

Satin estimates that somewhere between one-third and one-half of the men at The Last Resort were deserters. While dodgers left before joining the military, deserters were people who had served for some time before parting ways. “Many of (the deserters) were in terrible emotional shape,” Satin remembers. “When they came here, some of them were virtually silent. Some of them just sort of mumbled.”

For seven months, Satin cooked, cleaned and washed bed sheets for The Last Resort’s guests. He served dinner every night at 6:30 p.m. — spaghetti three nights a week, chicken livers with rice or beef Stroganoff on the other days. “I knew that they needed structure, whether they were middle-class or working-class or deserters,” he said. On Sunday nights, they would have open houses where Vancouverites could buy dinner for 50 cents and meet the resisters.

Running The Last Resort was gruelling work. Satin personally counselled each migrant, and estimates the hostel served over 1,000 people altogether. Many struggled to adjust. One deserter, after being accidentally woken up, “immediately leaped up in his karate crouch, ready to kill the person who’d woken him.” Another became dependent on hard drugs and had to be forcibly removed.

A few months in, Satin left the hostel unsupervised for a weekend while visiting a friend. He returned to find the house’s inhabitants huddled in blankets by an unlit stove, eating Wonder Bread. “It was kind of funny, but it was horrible, too,” Satin says. “These were 18-, 19-year-olds who really didn’t know how to cope.”

According to Hagan’s Northwest Passage, there were more than 432,000 desertions during the Vietnam War, fewer than one per cent of which happened on the battlefield. No written law in Canada discriminated against deserters, and Hagan notes that Canada had taken in many war resisters from Hungary and Czechoslovakia before the war in Vietnam.

Yet in 1966, Canada’s immigration department covertly instructed officers to deny admission to all deserters. The U.S. wasn’t pressuring Canada to turn the deserters back — at least officially — but Hagan suspects the Canadian government worried about future retaliation.

It didn’t help that almost 70 per cent of Canada’s immigration officers were military veterans, based on a report cited in Hagan’s Northwest Passage. Many veterans believed deserters were shirking their obligations and looked for ways to deny them entry. Points-based immigration, implemented in 1967, attempted to standardize admissions; still, the points rubric was extremely vague, giving officers significant discretion over who was kept out.

This de facto exclusion of deserters became clearer to the public over time. In February 1969, five undergraduates from York University pretended to be American deserters and tried to enter Southern Ontario from the United States. Four out of five were denied entry before even filling out an application.

Pierre Trudeau’s Liberal government faced mounting pressure to admit deserters more freely — from antiwar groups and the United Church of Canada, but also from Canadians wary of American control. “Since when is it a function of the Canadian government to enforce U.S. laws respecting the draft?” wrote one Canadian in a letter to Allan MacEachen, the immigration minister at the time.

In May 1969, the federal government announced that draft dodgers and deserters would be admitted to Canada without consideration of their military status. Whether someone was a draft dodger was “an irrelevant question,” Trudeau declared in a

U.S. news conference.

“We also know that a number — perhaps a superior number — of Canadians come to the United States to join the U.S. Army,” he noted with his signature half-smile, “and there may be some solace in that.” By Hagan’s account, the number of male, draft-age landed immigrants from the U.S. tripled in the five months between April and August 1969.

​Deserters faced a unique set of challenges in Canada. While dodgers tended to be college-educated, most deserters were lower- and working-class Americans who had been forced to serve because they lacked the information, connections or wealth needed to evade the draft. When they moved north, they were less likely to have friends or family to rely on, and their lack of formal education made it hard to find work.

“Living in exile wasn’t easy,” says Jack Colhoun, a military deserter who came to Canada in June 1970. “I learned in August of 1970 that my mother had cancer … My mom was my only living relative. We had to go through her struggles with cancer and eventual death. I couldn’t even go to her funeral without risking being arrested and put in jail.”

President Jimmy Carter

pardoned the dodgers in 1977

, but he didn’t pardon the deserters. Many were unable to return home for fear of military prosecution, even decades after the war. As recently as 2006, a British Columbia resident who had deserted the U.S. Marines in 1968 was arrested and held in an American military jail when he tried to visit Nevada for vacation (he was ultimately discharged after a week-long detention).

Perhaps most significantly, deserters often bore permanent physical or psychological injuries from the war. Alice, a woman from the Kootenays, recalled her husband’s decision to leave the U.S. in the early 1970s. He had served in Vietnam as a medic and helicopter repairman in 1969 and witnessed graphic acts of violence.

After returning to a disintegrating America and being told he had one more year to serve, Alice’s husband fled to Canada. “He had some desperate experiences (in Vietnam),” Alice says, “and just retreated into this place where he could no longer handle confrontation of any kind. He felt he had no other choice but to leave.” Alice’s real name has been changed to protect her family’s privacy.

Vietnam in retrospect

What leads someone to see a war differently? Often, it’s a trickling stream of information — news headlines, television footage, protests on a nearby lawn. But many resisters also describe turning points in their understanding of the war — moments where the conflict suddenly became sharper and more personal.

For Jack Todd, the turning point was a conversation with his childhood best friend, who had returned home from a helicopter base in Vietnam. “I went down to his house one night … (he) had seen some really horrific action, and he had pictures of GIs holding a string of Viet Cong ears that they had cut off and things like that.

“That was the pivotal thing that gave me nightmares,” Todd says. “I just couldn’t get it out of my mind.” He moved to Vancouver and then to Montreal.

The Vietnam War itself was a turning point for America — the thing that would give the nation nightmares for decades to come. The draft dodgers were raised in the glow of the Second World War, amid unprecedented American wealth and dominance. They allowed themselves to imagine a radically equal America. By the time the draft letters came in the mail, both a coveted past and an imagined future were fraying at the edges. The trust, pride and idealism of postwar America were never fully restored.

Less acknowledged is the possibility that the war transformed Canada, as well. The draft dodgers left an enduring imprint on Canadian culture. Todd became an influential sports columnist at the Montreal Gazette, where he’s worked for 39 years. Eric Nagler brought the sewerphone, Jesse Winchester brought the guitar, William Gibson brought the cyberpunk. The dodgers also brought with them a distinctly American form of politics: a propensity for standing on lawns with garish signs and speaking loudly about injustice.

In a larger sense, Vietnam marked Canada’s tentative separation from the foreign policy objectives of our southern neighbour. We had followed America obediently through the Second World War, then the formation of NATO, then the Korean War. Trudeau’s welcoming of American exiles was one of the first Canadian decisions since the Great Depression to openly defy U.S. interests.

It’s easy to find parallels between Vietnam-era politics and our current predicament — an increasingly authoritarian America, a newly defiant Canada, a flock of migrants heading north. Yet many of the war resisters argued that North America is experiencing something new.

Some feel that the current state of American democracy is incomparable to past lapses. “This isn’t just a changed political climate,” says Bob Griesel, who moved back to Washington State in the ’70s to be with his family after spending 17 years in Canada. “This is an absolute coup and revolution. I can’t compare it to anywhere we’ve been.”

Others say that conscription made politics more personal than it is today. “There was no apathy,” says Nancy, who migrated to British Columbia during the war. “You were either on one side or the other side. I walked in peace marches, and the people on the sidewalk would jeer at you and call you names and spit at you.”

Conscription gave the war an immediate, inescapable significance for a generation of draft-age men — and for their girlfriends, wives, parents, siblings, teachers. For most North Americans today, the wars in Ukraine, Gaza and Syria live at a comfortable distance. No matter how much moral outrage we feel, we can always choose to look away.

Most striking was the sense of personal and cultural freedom that many interviewees experienced in Canada. The war resisters lived through an incredibly turbulent decade. At the age of 18 or 19, they became strangers in a strange land. Yet almost all of them spoke about the Long Sixties with a vivid nostalgia.

“I would go off and rent a room here for $9, rent a room there for $12,” says Mark Satin, recalling the years he spent in Toronto in the ’70s. “There wasn’t AIDS. There wasn’t herpes. You could find a girlfriend just by talking to someone in a park or in a grocery store.” He sighs. “By the Summer of Love and the late ’60s, we were talking to each other in ways that I’m not sure your generation does.”

About half of the war resisters remained in Canada permanently. Some have stayed politically vocal over the years, advocating on behalf of the few hundred American deserters who fled to Canada during the Iraq War to avoid military prosecution. But most eventually faded into the woodwork, embracing a new way of life and allowing time to erode their old national ties.

Fifty years after the end of the Vietnam War, the resisters have few regrets.

“It took me a long time to reach this point,” says Jack Todd, “but I’m really proud that I did it. I think it’s the defining act of my life.”


Prime Minister Mark Carney took a visit to the Calgary Stampede before dropping out of public view.

Prime Minister Mark Carney is retreating this week for vacation, but the federal government isn’t saying where.

All that has been revealed is that Carney is staying somewhere in the National Capital Region.

“As he does so, he will remain in close coordination with his team and officials on several priorities, including ongoing negotiations on the economic and security relationship between Canada and the United States,” Carney’s spokespeople told reporters in an email.

Carney could be at Harrington Lake, the country retreat set aside for Canadian prime ministers in the picturesque Gatineau Hills north of Ottawa, or he could be at his personal cottage in the Val des Monts, Que., area.

“For security reasons, we won’t be disclosing his exact location,” said spokesperson Audrey Champoux in an email to National Post.

Harrington Lake sits on a 13-acre property. It has both the main cottage and a farmhouse and is used for regular visits and official functions. Since 2018, the National Capital Commission, which manages the property, has spent $8.7 million on renovations.

It was first acquired in the late 1950s as a personal retreat for then-prime minister John Diefenbaker.

The House of Commons has risen for the summer, but Canada remains engaged in tense negotiations with the United States surrounding trades and Carney, still in his first months in office, has been dealing with bullish premiers, including Alberta’s Danielle Smith.

The two bumped into each other at the Calgary Stampede this weekend and exchanged pleasantries after Carney tried — and failed — to fry and flip a beautiful flapjack.

While the secrecy around Carney’s vacation plans isn’t unusual — in 2015, Canadians only found out where his predecessor, Justin Trudeau, was holidaying because the

celebrity tabloid TMZ published photos

— other nations’ leaders regularly inform the public where they are.

During the Trudeau years, extravagant vacations — and the concomitant secrecy — caused considerable controversy. Most notably, Mary Dawson, then Canada’s ethics commissioner, found that Trudeau broke a number of rules when he vacationed on the private Bahamian island of the Aga Khan, the late Karim al-Husseini.

Trudeau further courted controversy in 2021 when he vacationed in Tofino, B.C., with his family on the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation; his official itinerary had him listed as staying in Ottawa that day.

However, politicians weren’t always so cagey. The Canadian Press reported than when Brian Mulroney was prime minister, he routinely informed reporters where he was vacationing. Former prime minister Jean Chrétien broke from the practice, causing what the media described as a “furor” in 1993 when his office refused to follow protocol and disclose his week-long holiday at Florida’s PGA National Golf Resort and Spa.

 The official rural getaway for Canadian prime ministers in Harrington Lake, Que., seen in 2012.

Yet, holidays have long caused controversy: Free vacations at the hands of the wealthy Irving family caused a major problem in 2003 for Chrétien, who said politicians had every right to accept freebie holidays.

“You know, we have the right to accept hospitality. I do accept hospitality once in a while. I visit my son-in-law, who has a lake, and I fish with him and I’m there with my grandson. Perhaps I should confess that,” Chrétien said at the time. (His son-in-law is billionaire Andre Desmarais.)

It’s not just Liberals, either.

Prime minister Stephen Harper’s Labour Day visit to New York in 2011 — he saw a New York Yankees game and a Broadway show with his family —

cost taxpayers some $45,000

and Peter MacKay, then the defence minister, had a

military helicopter pick him

and his buddies up during a fishing trip in July 2010.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.