[ad_1]
The Freedom Convoy protest represents a national warning system that we are being separated from the mooring that built the country.
Commentaryry
Any good police officer will say that if no law is found that limits or prohibits the actions of citizens, those actions are probably legal. This logic is beautiful and simple, emphasizing the coastline where existing legislation has ended and ambitious politics begins. Police independence is a gift given to us by our ancestors. Like the drainage channels of ancient farmlands, the fascinating benefits of hidden engineering are not recognized until they break.
The ability of police to act independently is only one of the issues raised by this recent issue regarding the use of emergency law. This is a serious enough problem in itself, but a closer look at this “coastline” between police enforcement and political policy reveals a desperate and surprisingly consistent necessity in Justin Trudeau’s actions.
The current Congressional obsession with the enforcement of the Emergency Law is only a fatal misdirection for Canadians. Given the real threat to the Charter of Rights and Freedom, it is a departure from the alarming issues to consider now. Our way of life, and even the existence of our country we know.
Even if the Ottawa Police Service or RCMP requests the enforcement of an emergency law, consider it the Government’s sole responsibility to assess whether the legal preconditions of the law and Article 1 of the Constitution are met. .. And unleash this kind of power. Justice Minister David Lametti is familiar with this and is undoubtedly pleased to allow Public Security Minister Marco Mendicino to seize this bucket and continue this flimsy strategy of blaming police. .. If Mendicino doesn’t understand where this is leading him, he may talk to former Finance Minister Bill Morneau about the price tag for protecting narcissists in the midst of a scandal.
This is a difficult situation for Justin Trudeau.
Don’t waste your time talking about procedural and technical questions about who asked for the emergency law. It’s just the wrong direction and is essentially irrelevant when placed within the framework of the actual policy that Trudeau is working on for Canada.
The key question here is why it was so important to crush this peaceful and charter-powered protest by truck drivers, veterans, peasants, also known as decent hard-working Canadians, with such a heavy hand. about it.
Given the courage to ask the “cause and effect” question of this comparison, the fleet’s tacit plea is constitutionally protected freedom: movement, assembly, association, peaceful protest and maintaining our privacy. You can see that it was the right to do. Maintaining medical information, and the autonomy of our bodies not to be forced into medical care-everything was severely violated by our government. Canadians emphasized policy discrepancies with Canadian values and called on Trudeau to use our law to justify policy.
Canadians need to understand that many Canadian free convoys represent a national warning system that reminds us that we are separated from the moorings that built this country. There is a fundamental problem with the relationship between the government and the victims. This was a sincere question by enthusiastic and hard-working people who stood up for their families, communities, and their way of life.
However, it was an impossible question to answer the “reset” “post-nationalist” globalist prime minister. This conversation isolates and actually defines (God is forbidden) the destructive revolutionary policies being developed against Canadians and the national sovereignty of Canadian sovereignty.
From this point of view, Trudeau’s actual reaction seems to be in perfect agreement with the strategically stated “reset” and “post-national” aspirations. It was easy for him. Without discussion, crush the “small fringe minorities” and continue the actual reset agenda for a bright future of post-national and global governance. It’s done.
So I care who requested the use of emergency law! Trudeau’s only choice is that Free Convoy is the only way to escape conversations with the country, and what makes Canada the “first post-nation state”, in fact, his agenda, we know as people. It means seriously dismantling (destroying) the legal framework, culture, and way of life that exists.
Justin Trudeau is not interested in Canadian law, except to use it as a tool to advance his revolutionary agenda and silence critics. The superiority of the Canadian Constitution, designed to enshrine and protect our rights, is simply to him that he must appear to be paying for lip services while he completes his work. It’s annoying inconvenience. He and his cohort want us to go unnoticed.
In the same situation, the “honest” answers provided by true Canadian politicians first listened and then used the Charter as a framework for uniting the country, regaining trust and liberating the country. It’s good to remember that. To that possibility. The reaction from Justin Trudeau’s government was at least in line with his strategy for Canada.
Therefore, Mendicino needs to resign (or whatever), and the liberal-NDP minority government will never have this highly necessary aforementioned conversation.
This experience of emergency law should reveal the truth that Canada cannot grow as a strong independent state and at the same time be incorporated into a “post-state”. More than that, you can build a powerful and proud schooner and doghouse. From the same tree at the same time.
You can now see the ugly cracks in this Liberal-NDP Compact. The country will sooner or later have this necessary conversation.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
follow
Grant Abraham is a lawyer, social impact investor, and defends Canada’s sovereignty in the face of global deconstruction trends.
[ad_2]