Canada will never achieve and see it's full potential until the liberal socialists are booted out of office for good and Canada can finally get a real and true conservative party in power that believes in more freedom, less taxes, and less government rules and regulations which is what is killing investment in this country. The hurdles that one has to jump to start a business in Canada must be astronomical. Our dollar(peso)alone tells me that something is going wrong in this once great nation. The government has to be the problem.
B.C. pipeline protests continue to halt Ontario trains for 5th day in a row
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Canada will never achieve and see it's full potential until the liberal socialists are booted out of office for good and Canada can finally get a real and true conservative party in power that believes in more freedom, less taxes, and less government rules and regulations which is what is killing investment in this country. The hurdles that one has to jump to start a business in Canada must be astronomical. Our dollar(peso)alone tells me that something is going wrong in this once great nation. The government has to be the problem.
EXCLUSIVE: Left-wing websites instruct activists to use thermite to “destroy” Canadian infrastructure
Two far-left extremist websites are offering detailed instructions and maps on how to sabotage rail lines and other critical Canadian infrastructure.
The websites in question, North Shore and Warrior Up, instruct readers to disrupt Canada’s rail, pipeline, road, and communications networks.
In one North Shore blog post, the author calls for people to stand in “solidarity” with Wet’suwet’en protestors by attacking rail routes.
North Shore describes itself as a place for far-left extremists from southern Ontario to gather and organize.
“Rail traffic creates excellent opportunity for state and economic disruption; infrastructure is so sprawling it’s relatively indefensible – particularly outside of cities,” says the website.
“Historically even short disruptions – by actions or rail strikes – have had large economic impacts. After just two days of a recent rail strike the Federal government started drafting emergency legislation out of concern for the economy. In 2012, a 9 day disruption dropped the local GDP by 6.8%.”
The website then gives instructions on how to create thermite, a chemical mixture used to weld metal that reaches high enough temperatures to destroy steel rails.
North Shore also gives instructions on how to avoid leaving fingerprint or DNA evidence.
North Shore’s domain has been registered to an IP address in the Netherlands since 2017.
A search on archive.org shows that the website has been active since 2013 but the earliest recorded content was captured on December 27, 2018. By then, the website was already making posts related to Wet’suwet’en protests.
Posts from that day’s archive detail vandalism at a TransCanada Pipelines office in Bolton, Ont. and protests in Kingston and surrounding areas.
A Feb. 10 post on North Shore details sabotage done to the CN Rail in Hamilton, however no reports of damage were covered in local news.
“Overnight, we burned a small road crossing signal box on the CN line. It’s [sic] default is to activate the road crossings if tripped, so no people were in danger,” reads the article.
The blog site Warrior Up also offers instructions on how to disrupt and destroy infrastructure, touting itself as a resource “for anarchists and other rebels carrying out actions against the economy of death.”
“[W]e call on all warriors and revolutionaries around the world to immediately orient themselves around blockading infrastructure.
Collectives must research infrastructure to find the most vulnerable chokepoints and get organized to block them in effective ways,” states Warrior Up in a section titled “Another End of the World is Possible.”
The website also has a section with detailed guides on how to conduct arson attacks on police facilities, rails, and even prisons.
Additionally, it provides guides on how to sabotage Canada’s communications infrastructure, electrical grids, and other critical systems and even goes so far as providing maps to help aid those seeking to conduct terror attacks.
Like North Shore, Warrior Up has its domain registered in the Netherlands.
The earliest archive of the website was first recorded on December 8, 2017, though the site was created in 2005.
True North reached out to Public Safety Canada for comment but did not receive a response in time for this article’s publication.
It would appear as though this spineless twit likes what he is seeing. Indeed most of our problems that we are seeing today in Canada regards these illegal blockades are due mostly to the many eco-terrorist environ"mental" bunch of ANTIFA thugs that have nothing to offer society except anarchy and chaos and job losses or job creations.
Why would those leftist liberals care what goes on in Canada anyway? They are mostly made up of a bunch of anti-Canadian globalist anyway and the twit is friends with George Soros the biggest fundraiser of environmentalism going on in the world. Soros is probably funding that Greta Thorninthside little brat. Sad thing is that the conservative party leader appears to be just as much a spineless twit as globalist Turdeau is. Scheer would not change a bloody thing because all the conservative party is is just another liberal party. There is not a bit of difference between them two political party's. The illegal blockades will continue on until we finally get a Trump like leader in Ottawa. And that Trump leader must not be another leftist liberal french man from Quebec when all their leaders coming from Quebec are pretty much all anti-Canada. If these big job creating projects were to be started up in Quebec there would have been any blockades. Trudeau would no doubt make sure that blockades did not happen in Quebec. In Canada, it is all about Quebec. Even English Ontario kisses Quebec's fat butt. And you can take that to the bank and make plenty of interest off that.
Director of Communications.
Congratulations Honorary Hereditary Chief 2 Skidoos, you have a new title!
+1000
No fancy words needed, just outright demands followed by outrage ought to work
Did Pilsner foresee this day coming?
BTW can you count the rabbits?
I still love the old Lethbridge Pilsner after all these years
Delgamuukw did not settle the question of Wet’suwet’en title
As protests in support of Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs opposed to the Coastal GasLink pipeline continue to rage across the country, a number of Wet’suwet’en and their supporters have pointed to the landmark Delgamuukw decision to support their position.
That position is that the hereditary chiefs are the rightful title-holders of traditional land, and that only they can make decisions about what happens on that land. They cite the landmark Supreme Court of Canada Delgamuukw decision as affirming Wet’suwet’en title.
Except it didn’t.
“There are people who are saying that the Delgamuukw decision affirms Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en title, and that is not correct,” said Geoff Plant, former B.C. attorney general, treaty minister and lawyer for the Crown in the original Delgamuukw trial. “It affirmed that title exists in law but said that the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan would essentially need to start all over with a new trial.”
“We’re not talking about proven Aboriginal title,” said Thomas Isaac, author of Aboriginal Law and former chief treaty negotiator for the B.C. government. “We’re talking about asserted title, and we’re talking about the rule of law. And the same courts that recognize Section 35 [Canadian Constitution] rights are the same courts that put limits on those rights. It scoped out what title meant, should it be proven. That decision didn’t prove title. It was sent back to trial.”
The Delgamuukw decision was an important legal precedent in Aboriginal rights and title law. The case was brought by members of the Wet’suwet’en and neighbouring Gitxsan First Nation.
It became one of the cornerstones for other rulings, notably the William decision, in which the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the Tsilhqot’in Nation had established title to a portion of claimed territory through continuous and exclusive occupation.
Aboriginal title is a higher form of Aboriginal rights. First Nations may hold Aboriginal rights to use land and waters for activities such as hunting, fishing and trapping, but that does not mean they own it. It may be shared territory used by other First Nations.
Title is a form of ownership of specific land, although that ownership is communal.
In William, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed Tsilhqot’in title based on the definitions established in the Delgamuukw case. It ruled that 1,750 square kilometres of Crown land southwest of Williams Lake now belongs to the Tsilhqot’in, not the Crown. That’s 2% of the Tsilhqot’in traditional territory originally claimed.
Unlike in the William case, the Supreme Court in Delgamuukw stopped short of declaring that the Wet’suwet’en or Gitxsan had proven title to any specific lands.
It affirmed that Aboriginal rights and title exist and were never extinguished. But to establish title, a second trial would be needed. As the William case demonstrated, proving title would require establishing continuous and exclusive occupation to certain lands. It would also need to address overlap issues with other First Nations in shared territory.
It’s not clear why the Wet’su-wet’en never pressed forward with a second trial. As of press time, a representative for the Office of the Wet’suwet’en could not be reached to comment.
Even when Aboriginal title to specific land is proven, it is “not absolute” and can be infringed, if there is a reasonable justification for that infringement, the Supreme Court ruled.
“The aboriginal rights recognized and affirmed by s. 35(1), including aboriginal title, are not absolute,” the Supreme Court notes in the Delgamuukw decision. “Those rights may be infringed, both by the federal … and provincial … governments. However, [Section 35] requires that those infringements satisfy the test of justification.”
The court provides examples where Aboriginal title might justifiably be infringed: “agriculture, forestry, mining, and hydroelectric power, the general economic development of the interior of British Columbia, protection of the environment or endangered species, the building of infrastructure and the settlement of foreign populations to support those aims, are the kinds of objectives that are consistent with this purpose and, in principle, can justify the infringement of aboriginal title.”
The imbroglio over the Coastal GasLink pipeline speaks to the failure of the treaty process, which was supposed to resolve the Wet’suwet’en rights and title issue out of court. The Wet’suwet’en reached the agreement-in-principle stage but then abandoned the treaty table about two years ago.
It is worth noting that the BC Treaty Commission recognizes the hereditary chiefs, through the Office of the Wet’suwet’en – not elected band council chiefs – as having the authority to negotiate treaty with the provincial and federal governments.
In other words, the courts and governments recognize the authority of the hereditary chiefs as legitimate representatives of the Wet’suwet’en.
In the Wet’suwet’en’s case, however, there is division over the Coastal GasLink project. Some hereditary chiefs oppose it, while others support it, as do all the elected band councils.
Even where title is not proven – only asserted – provincial and federal governments have a duty to consult with and accommodate First Nations when approving projects that may infringe on their rights.
But the duty to consult and accommodate is not a duty to achieve unanimous consent. That would effectively give First Nations a veto, and courts have repeatedly stated that no such veto power exists.
“There is almost no case where Aboriginal title confers an absolute right,” Plant said. “Canadian law is always about balance. There are always cases where the greater social good will prevail over a private right, no matter how important or passionately held.”
www.princegeorgecitizen.com/news/local-news/delgamuukw-did-not-settle-the-question-of-wet-suwet-en-title-1.24085622
"They asked me if I knew the definition of terrorist activity according to the Criminal Code ... This resident wanted to know if the current illegal blockades that are happening across Canada are being deemed as a terrorist activity?" Shipley asked.
Blair replied: "No they're not."
Shipley pressed Blair, leading to a pointed exchange at the committee table.
"I agree definitely with proper civil demonstrations. I'm all for that. But when we're seeing certain things like I saw yesterday with burning goods on rail lines across Canada, I thought that may have crossed a line ... what's crossing a line, Minister?" said Shipley.
"As the minister I have a responsibility to leave it to the police of jurisdiction in the exercise of their discretion to determine and investigate criminal activity. So I avoid pronouncements of and defining that activity," Blair replied. "It's very appropriate that I be careful in doing that because I do not want to interfere with the operational independence of both the police and our prosecutors. But at the same time that was terribly unsafe, deeply concerning. I have confidence in the police to deal with it appropriately."............More
OK...Stating "No Comment" or something along those lines avoids pronouncements of & defining that activity. Stating "No they're Not" is a pronouncement of & defines that activity.....which interferes with the operational independence of both the police and our prosecutors. Thanks you big hypocrite arsehole.
B.C. Liberals call for ban on foreign funds to pipeline protesters
As a gas pipeline protest camp continued to grow in front of the B.C. legislature Wednesday, Skeena MLA Ellis Ross called on the NDP government to end a “coordinated assault on the Canadian economy” financed by U.S. charitable foundations.
The B.C. Liberal opposition compiled contributions to protest groups including the Wilderness Committee, Sierra Club B.C., West Coast Environmental Law, Dogwood B.C. and Stand.Earth (formerly ForestEthics), questioning the NDP government as police began dealing with railway and roadblocks opposing the Coastal GasLink pipeline project in northern B.C.
Ross has been a vocal critic of efforts to stop the LNG Canada natural gas export facility under construction at Kitimat, where Ross worked on the proposal as chief of the Haisla Nation before being elected MLA for the region.
“The Haisla Nation chief and council have been working hard for 15 years to bring an end to the social issues that plague not only our own band but bands all across B.C. and Canada,” Ross told the legislature. “We’ve been successful over the last 15 years. Through hard work, we now have jobs. We have training programs. And we have taken the real first steps 15 years ago to break the cycle of poverty. But now you see these groups, funded by American money, coming in and trying to tell my people that they’re ignorant and don’t know what’s best for them.”
Public Safety Minister Mike Farnworth, whose government created tax incentives to proceed with Coastal GasLink and LNG Canada, said all NDP MLAs oppose illegal protests, such as the blocking of tracks that has paralyzed rail traffic across the country.
“We completely reject foreign interference in the affairs of British Columbia, whether it be through money or otherwise,” Farnworth said.
The B.C. Liberals released totals gleaned from U.S. tax documents, showing that that five American-based organizations “have funnelled at least $4,218,311 to six Canadian groups.” Records up to 2017 detail payments from the Tides Foundation, Wilberforce Foundation, Bullitt Foundation and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. (See document below.)
Blockade US Funding 260220 BCLiberals by Tom Fletcher on Scribd
www.vancouverislandfreedaily.com/business/b-c-liberals-call-for-ban-on-foreign-funds-to-pipeline-protesters/
Varcoe: Alberta First Nations fight to have pro-energy voices heard
Chief Isaac Laboucan-Avirom wants to see more jobs and economic development come to the Woodland Cree First Nation in northern Alberta.
That’s why the First Nation northeast of Peace River is pressing for more energy projects to go ahead, as long as they’re developed in the right way.
It’s also why the Woodland Cree First Nation has signed on to a legal battle against Ottawa’s controversial Bill C-69, receiving a $187,000 provincial grant to intervene in Alberta’s constitutional challenge of the new federal legislation.
It marks the first financial assistance from the provincial government’s new $10-million Indigenous Litigation Fund, designed to help Indigenous groups “voice their support for resource development.”
“Right now, our area, the Peace River area, is basically at a standstill in jobs. Even as we speak here today, I am getting texts of, ‘Do you know of any work?’ ” Laboucan-Avirom said Wednesday on the sidelines of the Indigenous Participation in Major Projects Conference in Calgary.
“There is no work in our area. Peace River, there was a major oil project a few years ago that got cancelled . . . due to a lack of access to pipelines and lack of access to tidewater. So now with no resource development in our areas, we’re back into poverty,” he told reporters.
“I am hoping we’re able to create our own destiny by creating our own resource companies.”
Laboucan-Avirom’s comments are an example of more First Nations leaders speaking out in favour of oil and gas development in the country.
Much of the public attention in recent weeks has focused on opposition to energy projects, as anti-pipeline protests against the Coastal GasLink project continue, while court challenges have been launched by some First Nations against the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion in the past.
On Sunday, Teck Resources withdrew its application for the $20.6-billion Frontier oilsands mine, less than a week before the Trudeau government was poised to make a decision on the proposed project. The project had the signed support of all 14 Indigenous communities in the area between Fort McMurray and Fort Chipewyan.
The communities saw Frontier as a chance for jobs, revenue and a voice at the table in determining how such projects are developed.
“It’s disappointing. We worked hard and put a lot of effort into what we accomplished on this whole thing,” Chief Allan Adam of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) said Sunday in an interview, shortly after Teck pulled the plug on its oilsands project.
“Teck was a wonderful company to deal with. They went overboard in regards to (environmental) mitigation with ACFN, above and beyond.”
Before a federal decision came down, Teck said it saw no path forward for the Frontier development.
The project became a political football in a much larger tussle over energy development and Canada’s climate action.
Bill C-69, also known as the Impact Assessment Act, is another such case. Passed by the Trudeau government last year before the federal election, the legislation has overhauled the way major resource projects are reviewed.
The Alberta government and industry contend the bill will effectively prevent any future pipelines from being constructed.
The Kenney government announced last year it would make a legal reference to the Alberta Court of Appeal, asserting the act violates the province’s exclusive constitutional jurisdiction to control natural resource development.
Some First Nations leaders have also criticized the bill.
Last spring, Chief Roy Fox of the Kainai/Blood Tribe told a Senate hearing that Bill C-69 “jeopardizes and sabotages future resource development by opening projects to inevitable court challenges.”
Laboucan-Avirom is also a member of the Eagle Spirit Energy Corridor Chiefs’ Council, which wants to develop a corridor to transport energy from northern Alberta to a port near Prince Rupert, B.C., including two large-diameter oil pipelines.
Yet, if Bill C-69 continues, “there would be no resource development,” he said.
“As a sovereign nation with our own inherent rights, we want our voice to be heard and to be recognized. We’re here to see how we can develop our lands in a responsible way,” he added.
The CEO of the Indian Resource Council of Canada, which put on the two-day conference, said many First Nations are ready to move forward on natural resource initiatives.
“When you see economic development in jeopardy because of some legislation, the communities have to speak up. With the resource development here in Western Canada, it’s imperative that we participate,” said Stephen Buffalo.
vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/varcoe/wcm/4bc29fd1-da81-45c9-9cac-326e28d1d2cf
What more would you expect from a pissant liberal flunky, Ron? The police do not define what is or is not terrorism - the government does. An anti-terrorism law exists in Canada. Bill C-36
Penal Law
The ATA created measures to take enforcement action against those responsible for terrorist activities, provided new investigative tools and ensured that Canadian values of respect and fairness were preserved.
Part 1 of the ATA amended the Criminal Code to create a new chapter dealing specifically with terrorism. A core provision in this chapter is the definition of "terrorist activity", which has two components and applies to activities inside or outside Canada. Satisfying either component constitutes a "terrorist activity". The first component of the definition is defined in part as an act or omission committed in or outside Canada that would be an offence under the major international treaties that apply to terrorist activities, like hijacking and terrorist bombing. The second part defines "terrorist activity" as an act or omission undertaken, inside or outside Canada, for a political, religious or ideological purpose that is intended to intimidate the public with respect to its security, including its economic security, or to compel a person, government or organization (whether inside or outside Canada) from doing or refraining to do any act, and that intentionally causes one of a number of specified forms of serious harm.
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/ns-sn/act-loi.html
Mr Blair. The fact is that Canadians are being intimidated and it is for political purposes. As a matter of fact, the law covers all three provisions considering all the religious paraphernalia/'ceremony' that accompanies the blockades and, that it is nothing if not ideologically driven. If you were unaware of this clause in the law then you should immediately resign by reason of sheer incompetence. If you are aware of the clause and have chosen to do nothing in the face of blatant terrorism - you must resign for refusing to uphold the laws of Canada.
Terrorism Offences
Comprehensive terrorism offences created in the Criminal Code include:
www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/ns-sn/act-loi.html
Criminal Code of Canada
[FONT="]section 83.18(1)[/FONT]
[FONT="]Participation In Activity of Terrorist Group[/FONT]
[FONT="]83.18(1) Everyone who knowingly participates in or contributes to, directly or indirectly, any activity of a terrorist group for the purpose of enhancing the ability of any terrorist group to facilitate or carry out a terrorist activity is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years.
[/FONT]
www.criminal-code.ca/criminal-code-of-canada-section-83-18-1-participation-in-activity-of-terrorist-group/index.html
Comprehensive terrorism offences created in the Criminal Code include:
- knowingly participating in, or contributing to, any activity of a terrorist group for the purpose of enhancing the ability of any terrorist group to facilitate or carry out a terrorist activity;
- knowingly facilitating a terrorist activity;
- commission of a serious (i.e. indictable) offence for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a terrorist group;
- knowingly instructing anyone to carry out a terrorist activity for a terrorist group; knowingly harbouring or concealing any person who has carried out or is likely to carry out a terrorist activity for the purpose of enabling the person to facilitate or carry out any terrorist activity; and
- collecting, providing or making available, using or possessing property for certain activities/purposes (terrorist financing).
www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/ns-sn/act-loi.html
Criminal Code of Canada
[FONT="]section 83.18(1)[/FONT]
[FONT="]Participation In Activity of Terrorist Group[/FONT]
[FONT="]83.18(1) Everyone who knowingly participates in or contributes to, directly or indirectly, any activity of a terrorist group for the purpose of enhancing the ability of any terrorist group to facilitate or carry out a terrorist activity is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years.
[/FONT]
www.criminal-code.ca/criminal-code-of-canada-section-83-18-1-participation-in-activity-of-terrorist-group/index.html
That could be a tough one. I can see that one being used to bust unions, or against any demonstration. I hope that doesn't happen.
It's one of the reasons I generally don't like criminalizing motivation. It's very fuzzy. If you you charge a protestor with "blocking a highway," that's a straight-up factual question: did she or did she not block the highway? When you get into WHY she blocked the highway, you're on much shakier ground. And as I pointed out above, such laws could be used by people of political ill-will to imprison, or at least harass, people engaged in activity that many, perhaps most, consider legal and proper, like strikes and picket lines, or political demonstrations.
Same thing with "hate crimes." OK if a bunch of Klan members beat up a black person, that's pretty clearly because he's black. But what if three white guys jump a black guy because they were drunk and he said something that pissed them off? Stupid? You bet. Criminal? Absolutely. But how can you prove or disprove that they would have done the same thing if the guy who said whatever pissed them off (which could have been as simple as "Go Oilers!") was white?
Last edited:
Nature abhors a vacuum and so does free enterprise and democracies. And Canada is about to show why.
This week, Canada’s massive megaproject, Teck Resources’ giant oil sands mine in Alberta, was obliterated — the biggest casualty of the #ShutDownCanada movement that’s been building and hurting the economy and country’s reputation.
The significance is not so much about a single project. It is the beginning of Canada’s irreversible economic decline caused by the anti-enterprise policies of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s regime.
This week Canada’s living standards peaked. The absence of smart political leadership, or an understanding as to how the country prospers, has atomized the national interest into thousands of vested, warring interests.
Ironically, Teck pulled the plug on the project late on a Sunday night just hours after getting approvals from 14 First Nations communities and after spending nine years’ and $1.1 billion in development preparation. Why now?
The deal was not scrapped due to concern about emissions because Teck is deeply in the emissions business as a huge coal and metals and oil sands producer. The deal was not nixed because of concern about low oil prices because long-term price projections have not changed dramatically. The deal was not killed because of aboriginal issues, because affected First Nations had signed off. And it was not abruptly ended due to concerns that Trudeau and his cabinet would reject the project this week.
Teck pulled the plug because Canada is now an untenable political risk. It no longer matters who does or doesn’t approve resource and infrastructure projects. They simply cannot be finished.
Canada, in other words, is not worth the risk. And that means living standards will fall, capital and jobs will continue to leave, and the country’s million-strong and restive Indigenous people, among other Canadians, face diminishing opportunities.
- Put another way, even if Ottawa approved the project, Teck had no political cover. For the past five years, Trudeau and British Columbia’s NDP-Green regime have piled on obstructions, permitted endless court challenges, allowed illegal railway or road barricades, acceded to NGO and Indigenous misbehavior, and frightened away billions of dollars’ worth of investment.
- Even Teck, a proud Canadian company, gets it, and has joined the ranks of foreign giants who have walked away from Canada, or delayed plans indefinitely. This is the tipping point. Teck did not spend nine years developing a project only to walk away at the last minute. But since the re-election of the Liberals, the idiocy of the NDP and Greens federally and provincially, and an absentee prime minister unable to staunch protests, there was no other choice.
- No one is privy to Teck’s board minutes, but proceeding with its oil sands project — even if given the nod by the Liberals — would have opened up the company and its shareholders to permanent harassment, legal challenges, and attacks on its other mining operations, infrastructure, and reputation.
When the history of this period is written the Liberals, NDP, and Greens, plus United Nations zealots and non-transparent NGOs, will be the villains. Also to blame will be the political culture dominated by people who haven’t a clue as to what provides jobs or pays the nation’s bills.
This week a tragedy happened. It was not about Teck. It was about the future of Alberta and Saskatchewan within Canada. And it was about how the vacuum at the top represents an existential threat to all Canadians.
LINK: http://nationalpost.com/opinion/diane-francis-the-beginning-of-the-end-of-canadas-high-living-standards
Told my Girlfriend. She said she wants to be a Princess. Honorary Princess will do. She said "Honorary Princess TwoFeathers of the Rider House of Clan Anti-Rhubarb".....this work for you?