Is the Emergencies Act a terrorist-financing act? Or is the financing statute within it simply only scoped for terrorism? (I'm just going off the names. Emergencies Act sounds like a Swiss army knife law.)
In any case, thought the original claim that "Canada listed the freedom truckers as a terrorist group" was B.S., and appreciate your confirming as much.
You're splitting hairs intentionally to make it seem like the OP is wrong. Many people that were part of the freedom truckers movement had their bank accounts seized and the Canadian government used an act against them, classifying the movement as a terrorist group. How else could they use the act against them?
Covid brought out authoritarian regimes in Canada and the US. We should have investigations and prison time for many of these leaders, but instead we have boot lickers like you that outright deny it happened it the first place.
I now see how the Nazis took over Germany so easily.
By listing them as a terrorist group. Like they have the IRGC.
There is legitimate criticism of Ottawa's crackdown on freedom truckers. But that doesn't make untrue statements true. Like, warantless surveillance is a problem in America. That doesn't make every derogatory comment about the IC true, and rejecting those untrue statements a defender of warantless surveillance one does not make.
I find analogy in how people who were hysterical with the data on climate change undermined, in the long run, public trust in those data. Echo chambers work in the short run, but they corrode in the long.
> see how the Nazis took over Germany so easily
The Nazis' Big Lie was in the Weimar Republic being illegitimate. (Lying, and then making anyone who corrects the lie out as an enemy of the party was another common tactic.)
My reply - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40734834 - here I wrote more detail in a comment higher up that give some credibility to the idea-sentiment, even if factually the Freedom Convoy was never officially classified as terrorists - in short they did [illegaly] have the Emergencies Act invoked against them which gave them perhaps the same or even more powers to be executed against peacefully protesting Canadians [of which even a judge said they could continue their protest in Ottawa itself, where it can't honestly be called an "occupation" that the mob wants to attempt to demonize the largest peaceful protest in Canadian history - as part of Trudeau's effort to guilt by association paint them all as "dirty" Nazis - using the "disgust" tactic on them].
Re: "The Nazis' Big Lie was in the Weimar Republic being illegitimate. (Lying, and then making anyone who corrects the lie out as an enemy of the party was another common tactic.)"
Perhaps the big lie, starts as, that the Freedom Convoy are dirty Nazis - having the leverage and reach, power, of the state-funded media like CBC et al - to propagate and train-teach people to believe that, to then avoid anyone associated with the Freedom Convoy - or
For example, have you heard about the National Citizens' Inquiry and testimonies that have been being collected, on video and published, starting in 2023 and continuing in 2024? These testimonies include whistle blowers from various Canadian government institutions [medical and otherwise] - and also CBC - as well as those who were harmed/permanently injured by the COVID mRNA shots [and gaslit by the government institutions]: https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/
> even if factually the Freedom Convoy was never officially classified as terrorists - in short they did [illegaly] have the Emergencies Act invoked against them which gave them perhaps the same or even more powers to be executed against peacefully protesting Canadians
Sure. They were treated like terrorists. They weren’t listed as a terrorist group.
This wouldn’t be material out in the open. But in response to an article about another entity actually being listed as a terrorist group, it’s a false equivalence. (In the way saying, in general, sugar and Splenda are basically the same thing is fine, but in response to an article about the health effects of Splenda it’s not.)
I'm confused. Is your reaction stronger to that they were treated as terrorists or that someone misstated that they were officially classified as terrorists?
I think my replies to JumpCrisscross would help clarify a lot for them, however I'm uncertain they'll see - or bother reading my comments - since they were recently successful in helping flag/get other comments of mine blocked; maybe they also setup their forum to hide-block all comments from me?
Maybe reply to them and link my comments so they'll be at least aware there's a more thorough explanation-history shared with them?
The Emergencies Act was a law previously called, renamed, from the War Measures Act.
There was a post-POEC commission required to be held within a certain period of time of the invocation the Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) - where it was the person, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who invoked the act - who selected his long-time family friend to be the commissioner of said commission, Rouleau, to conclude whether invoking the Emergencies Act was valid or not; conflict of interest should immediately come to mind for everyone, along with then questioning the integrity and legitimacy of the POEC - if going by good faith.
Commissioner Rouleau concluded it was valid - but also concluded that any reasonable person could come to the completely opposite conclusion that he did, giving no backbone to his conclusion - but definitely producing the narrative talking points and conclusion that state-funded media then heavily propagated to all Canadians.
In the actual Canadian courts however, once it went through the actual judicial system that was bound by law and where the non-government lawyers actually had the tools of the courts to use - and where the judge/commissioner couldn't play favourites - where the judge wasn't assigned by Trudeau himself, where Rouleau wasn't a filter/shield in place having to approve any witnesses (etc) and that were asked to testify, while allowing improper processes that aren't acceptable in normal courts for very good reason [like dumping 1,000s of pages of evidence, on the desks of the lawyers prosecuting the government, the day before certain witnesses would be testifying] - the courts found that the Emergencies Act was illegally invoked, that it didn't meet the very clear prerequisites-criteria to determine if it was a national emergency or not.
The fraudulent nature of the POEC process listed above was far more egregious than this, however most who have already been convinced the Trudeau government are honest and with integrity, already scoff and dismiss the courts findings, and so there's little point to point to sharing the even more blatant corruption of law and order processes by the government and its lawyers-representatives.
Re: Terrorist-financing act & intent
The current Canadian government in power (a coalition between Trudeau-Liberals and the NDP party, giving them the power of a majority - the NDP playing "good cop" as part of their theatre for Canadians who aren't aware of more than the shallow level of what is presented them in state-funded media) didn't succeed specifically in defining the Freedom Convoy under the Terrorist Act, however it was clear that the intent-hope of the Liberal-Trudeau political party was in fact wanting to have the Freedom Convoy labeled as a terrorist group was their intent-hope; this is the epitome of guilt by association - eliminating the fundamental "innocent unless proven guilty" rule of law, if I may be so bold point out.
E.g. Chrystia Freeland during the POEC had notes brought into evidence while she was testifying, where I can't remember if now if it was 1) her notes, or 2) the notes of the head of RCMP (our national police force's name) stating that she wanted the Freedom Convoy classified as terrorists - so then they could be treated as such under the current law; Freeland, the current Finance Minister of Canada, and Deputy Prime Minister - the #2 to Prime Minister Trudeau - same position as the US' Vice President - where she who has practically no education or experience in regards to finance.
But that's moot really because as they invoked the Emergencies Act - found to be illegal by the courts [not by their long-term family friend] - they had at least the same ability by actions they could execute on under that law to seize assets/property like money-bank accounts, etc. So if the government had the same capabilities allowed under a terrorist-finance act, and used some of them - that's akin, just as bad, right?
13 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 35.4 ms ] threadSource? I see no reference to this in the Wikipedia article.
Is the Emergencies Act a terrorist-financing act? Or is the financing statute within it simply only scoped for terrorism? (I'm just going off the names. Emergencies Act sounds like a Swiss army knife law.)
In any case, thought the original claim that "Canada listed the freedom truckers as a terrorist group" was B.S., and appreciate your confirming as much.
Covid brought out authoritarian regimes in Canada and the US. We should have investigations and prison time for many of these leaders, but instead we have boot lickers like you that outright deny it happened it the first place.
I now see how the Nazis took over Germany so easily.
By listing them as a terrorist group. Like they have the IRGC.
There is legitimate criticism of Ottawa's crackdown on freedom truckers. But that doesn't make untrue statements true. Like, warantless surveillance is a problem in America. That doesn't make every derogatory comment about the IC true, and rejecting those untrue statements a defender of warantless surveillance one does not make.
I find analogy in how people who were hysterical with the data on climate change undermined, in the long run, public trust in those data. Echo chambers work in the short run, but they corrode in the long.
> see how the Nazis took over Germany so easily
The Nazis' Big Lie was in the Weimar Republic being illegitimate. (Lying, and then making anyone who corrects the lie out as an enemy of the party was another common tactic.)
Re: "The Nazis' Big Lie was in the Weimar Republic being illegitimate. (Lying, and then making anyone who corrects the lie out as an enemy of the party was another common tactic.)"
Perhaps the big lie, starts as, that the Freedom Convoy are dirty Nazis - having the leverage and reach, power, of the state-funded media like CBC et al - to propagate and train-teach people to believe that, to then avoid anyone associated with the Freedom Convoy - or
For example, have you heard about the National Citizens' Inquiry and testimonies that have been being collected, on video and published, starting in 2023 and continuing in 2024? These testimonies include whistle blowers from various Canadian government institutions [medical and otherwise] - and also CBC - as well as those who were harmed/permanently injured by the COVID mRNA shots [and gaslit by the government institutions]: https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/
Sure. They were treated like terrorists. They weren’t listed as a terrorist group.
This wouldn’t be material out in the open. But in response to an article about another entity actually being listed as a terrorist group, it’s a false equivalence. (In the way saying, in general, sugar and Splenda are basically the same thing is fine, but in response to an article about the health effects of Splenda it’s not.)
Maybe reply to them and link my comments so they'll be at least aware there's a more thorough explanation-history shared with them?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40734834 & https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40734859
There was a post-POEC commission required to be held within a certain period of time of the invocation the Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) - where it was the person, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who invoked the act - who selected his long-time family friend to be the commissioner of said commission, Rouleau, to conclude whether invoking the Emergencies Act was valid or not; conflict of interest should immediately come to mind for everyone, along with then questioning the integrity and legitimacy of the POEC - if going by good faith.
Commissioner Rouleau concluded it was valid - but also concluded that any reasonable person could come to the completely opposite conclusion that he did, giving no backbone to his conclusion - but definitely producing the narrative talking points and conclusion that state-funded media then heavily propagated to all Canadians.
In the actual Canadian courts however, once it went through the actual judicial system that was bound by law and where the non-government lawyers actually had the tools of the courts to use - and where the judge/commissioner couldn't play favourites - where the judge wasn't assigned by Trudeau himself, where Rouleau wasn't a filter/shield in place having to approve any witnesses (etc) and that were asked to testify, while allowing improper processes that aren't acceptable in normal courts for very good reason [like dumping 1,000s of pages of evidence, on the desks of the lawyers prosecuting the government, the day before certain witnesses would be testifying] - the courts found that the Emergencies Act was illegally invoked, that it didn't meet the very clear prerequisites-criteria to determine if it was a national emergency or not.
The fraudulent nature of the POEC process listed above was far more egregious than this, however most who have already been convinced the Trudeau government are honest and with integrity, already scoff and dismiss the courts findings, and so there's little point to point to sharing the even more blatant corruption of law and order processes by the government and its lawyers-representatives.
Re: Terrorist-financing act & intent
The current Canadian government in power (a coalition between Trudeau-Liberals and the NDP party, giving them the power of a majority - the NDP playing "good cop" as part of their theatre for Canadians who aren't aware of more than the shallow level of what is presented them in state-funded media) didn't succeed specifically in defining the Freedom Convoy under the Terrorist Act, however it was clear that the intent-hope of the Liberal-Trudeau political party was in fact wanting to have the Freedom Convoy labeled as a terrorist group was their intent-hope; this is the epitome of guilt by association - eliminating the fundamental "innocent unless proven guilty" rule of law, if I may be so bold point out.
E.g. Chrystia Freeland during the POEC had notes brought into evidence while she was testifying, where I can't remember if now if it was 1) her notes, or 2) the notes of the head of RCMP (our national police force's name) stating that she wanted the Freedom Convoy classified as terrorists - so then they could be treated as such under the current law; Freeland, the current Finance Minister of Canada, and Deputy Prime Minister - the #2 to Prime Minister Trudeau - same position as the US' Vice President - where she who has practically no education or experience in regards to finance.
But that's moot really because as they invoked the Emergencies Act - found to be illegal by the courts [not by their long-term family friend] - they had at least the same ability by actions they could execute on under that law to seize assets/property like money-bank accounts, etc. So if the government had the same capabilities allowed under a terrorist-finance act, and used some of them - that's akin, just as bad, right?
The v...
This unfortunately isn't true.