4 ms·

<< The Emergencies Act and how it's applied are governed by the Charter. What you conveniently leave out is that government in its infinite wisdom can simply d

<< The Emergencies Act and how it's applied are governed by the Charter. What you conveniently leave out is that government in its infinite wisdom can simply decide it does not apply under exceptions[1] in section 1 of the charter. Shocking. Government left itself an out. What is more annoying that people defend it as it is not what it actually is. Now compare it to what the act was intended for ( some sort of senior politician kidnapping ) and what it was used for in peace time ( forcibly dismantling a protest ). I guess what I am saying is that it can be governed by Charter all it wants, but at the end of the day it is, apparently, governed by what ruling party considers a crisis. << Absolutely not how the Emergencies act is written or functions. How it is written can be open to interpretation and it functions the way politics does ( expediency of the moment squared ). I am not really writing anything groundbreaking here. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and...

arcticbull 3y ago
> I guess what I am saying is that it can be governed by Charter all it wants, but at the end of the day it is, apparently, governed by what ruling party considers a crisis. Minority government, meaning multiple federal parties, in addition to all the provincial premiers. So basically, every elected official - plus the unelected official, the Governor General. It's why we elect them - and have them, respectively. Literally everyone had to sign off on this. If you think they're malicious then we have much bigger problems because frankly, they could find much easier ways to harm you than this. And again, it can be ended by basically anyone and immediately rolled back. I'm not yet convinced. But we can agree to disagree.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
  I disagree overall, but I appreciate your replies. I agree that I could have made my point better.
  - arcticbull 3y ago
    Nah you're good, I like talking to people I disagree with. I like it when folks change my mind. And for what it's worth, your argument was compelling. Sorry if I came across prickly, lol, I was typing faster than thinking.
908B64B197 3y ago
> ( some sort of senior politician kidnapping ) and what it was used for in peace time ( forcibly dismantling a protest ). The state media and government tried to pin mailbox bombings and an instance of kidnapping to this group called the FLQ until an RCMP agent was caught literally red-handed (with severe burns and a torn off finger) planting bombs in a mailbox to pin it on the "FLQ"! [0] The feds then confessed to more than 400 illegal search and seizures, criminal trespass, breaking and entering and arson incidents and the bomb planter admitted he “had done much worse for the feds” (all of these incidents that were used to invoke the constitution's suspension!). Who was prime minister during that time? You guessed it, Justin Trudeau’s father. What a coincidence. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_the_Royal_Canadian_Mounted_Police#Break-ins_and_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...

arcticbull 3y ago

> I guess what I am saying is that it can be governed by Charter all it wants, but at the end of the day it is, apparently, governed by what ruling party considers a crisis. Minority government, meaning multiple federal parties, in addition to all the provincial premiers. So basically, every elected official - plus the unelected official, the Governor General. It's why we elect them - and have them, respectively. Literally everyone had to sign off on this. If you think they're malicious then we have much bigger problems because frankly, they could find much easier ways to harm you than this. And again, it can be ended by basically anyone and immediately rolled back. I'm not yet convinced. But we can agree to disagree.

A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
I disagree overall, but I appreciate your replies. I agree that I could have made my point better.
- arcticbull 3y ago
  Nah you're good, I like talking to people I disagree with. I like it when folks change my mind. And for what it's worth, your argument was compelling. Sorry if I came across prickly, lol, I was typing faster than thinking.

908B64B197 3y ago

> ( some sort of senior politician kidnapping ) and what it was used for in peace time ( forcibly dismantling a protest ). The state media and government tried to pin mailbox bombings and an instance of kidnapping to this group called the FLQ until an RCMP agent was caught literally red-handed (with severe burns and a torn off finger) planting bombs in a mailbox to pin it on the "FLQ"! [0] The feds then confessed to more than 400 illegal search and seizures, criminal trespass, breaking and entering and arson incidents and the bomb planter admitted he “had done much worse for the feds” (all of these incidents that were used to invoke the constitution's suspension!). Who was prime minister during that time? You guessed it, Justin Trudeau’s father. What a coincidence. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_the_Royal_Canadian_Mounted_Police#Break-ins_and_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...