Sister of slain soldier delivers emotional appeal for C-51

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Errol Mendes, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, wonders what will happen when judges start acting in secret.The old adage that justice must not only be done but be seen to be done still holds true. Bill C-51 shreds that basic principle. Mendes writes (link is external) that the bill is a vicious attempt to compromise the judiciary:


Problems with the bill are many, although the one [Ron] Atkey was talking about — one that has received very little attention from politicians and the media — is in the section that would authorize CSIS agents to apply for judicial warrants that could contravene charter rights.


This section would amount to one of the most serious attempts by any Canadian government to compromise the independence of the judiciary by forcing them to be silent partners to unlawful acts. Under C-51, CSIS could apply for permission to break the law — short of causing bodily harm or undermining sexual integrity — in order to disrupt threats to the nation’s security. Court hearings for such “disrupt warrants” would be conducted in secret, with no judicial oversight or review to prevent abuses.



Harper has no regard for the courts. He has disbanded the research department at the Ministry of Justice -- the folks who used to check whether or not proposed legislation would run afoul of the Charter of Rights. And, because no one in the Harper government bothers to ask any more if a law is constitutional, the whole of the warrant process will be struck down:

The tragic irony here is that, by introducing a warrant process that is clearly unconstitutional, the Stephen Harper government is putting the entire framework of disrupt warrants at risk of being struck down. It would have been better for the safety of Canadians, and for national security in general, if C-51 had never been tabled in the first place. C-51’s drafters have not learned critical lessons from the tragedy of the Air India bombings, from the O’Connor Commission report and from our closest allies in the fight against global terror.

But Bill C-51 has never been about protecting Canadians. It's about sabotaging the Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- which has always been one of Stephen Harper's prime directives.







Why are we asking judges to break the law in secret?












 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,481
11,487
113
Low Earth Orbit
Bit of a non sequitur. The thing is, if they are peaceful non-law-abiding protestors, they may well be breaking the law, but it does not follow that tehy are terrorists.

Civil disobedience does not equal terrorism. No need to be so frightened.

.

non-law-abiding....

What sort of things do non-law-abiding peaceful protesters do?
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
The basis of this bill is two incidents of crazies running amok and nothing to do with terrorism. Harpo is the one who tried to make it about terrorism. All I can say is this woman fell victim to Harpo's propaganda, Somebody should whack Harpo's pee pee for lying and spreading hysteria. The bozo is a closet terrorist.

Which parts of the Bill do you fear and why?



 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
Which would have been useless.



That my dear is being a law abiding protest.

Follow Rosa's lead.

Revisionist drivel. She was arrested. She was arrested for failing to yield her seat to a white, even when directed by the driver. She was not the first to refuse to yield her seat. There were many before her. They weren't terrorists either.
 

nimrod

Electoral Member
Mar 22, 2015
109
0
16
What's the old saying? When you are sure of the law-pound on the law.When you are unsure of the law-pound on the table.While i feel bad for the sister of Vincent-this is a typical Harper circus act.They don't allow the experts with the knowledge to speak at hearings but trot out a recently bereaved family member.Killer was pretty messed up in the head.Killing for Islam with a car would give him a fail grade by his jihad bosses . This reinforces my belief that this govt will do anything to grub for votes.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,481
11,487
113
Low Earth Orbit
Usually trespassing.

Trespassing isn't in the Criminal Code

Revisionist drivel. She was arrested. She was arrested for failing to yield her seat to a white, even when directed by the driver. She was not the first to refuse to yield her seat. There were many before her. They weren't terrorists either.

She wasn't breaking the law. What was she charged with?
 

relic

Council Member
Nov 29, 2009
1,408
3
38
Nova Scotia
Just don't break the law, you'll have nothing to worry about, WOW, do a bit of research, see how many peoples lives have been ****ed up from government bull****,
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
What's the old saying? When you are sure of the law-pound on the law.When you are unsure of the law-pound on the table.While i feel bad for the sister of Vincent-this is a typical Harper circus act.They don't allow the experts with the knowledge to speak at hearings but trot out a recently bereaved family member.Killer was pretty messed up in the head.Killing for Islam with a car would give him a fail grade by his jihad bosses . This reinforces my belief that this govt will do anything to grub for votes.

Not really. Just the experts you agree with are not being listened to. Mostly for the same reason you are not being listened to. Because they are wrong.
Now the RCMP could reasonably be expected to be experts on crime. BUT they are pushing for making more guns prohibited with no reason. Also pushing to put pot smokers in jail and equate them to real criminals. Could this law have saved the lady's brother? Perhaps, perhaps not but having an honor guard at parliament hill with empty rifles is just plain stupid.

Yes, we've been over this already

And still you are wrong.