Freezland and Turdeau's Tyrannical Hissyfit!
Emergency Act Unjustified and Violated the Charter
It's funny how some things just boil someone's blood and yet somethings aren't even on someone's radar.
For those who follow independent media, new media or media for truth... we are more than familiar with what the Freedom Convoy was about and what it meant for so many Canadians. Yet, if you talk to the average man on the street, the magnitude of the protest is barely on their radar. We are definitely living in parallel worlds, thanks to our completely biased and prostituted mainstream media. I can vouch for that as someone who worked for Global News until I was fired for asking why we weren't reporting truth about Covid.
Last week, Justice Richard Mosely ruled Trudeau and the Liberal Government invoking of the Emergency Act was unreasonable, unjustified and in violation of the Charter. No surprise, the Lib tards want to appeal. They can appeal Section 213 freedom of expression and Section 8, Search and Seizure. I hope the process is lengthy and unsuccessful. In the meantime, all the Emergency Act did was give police more power and allow the government to seize bank accounts. Recently, I spoke to Canadian Veteran, Edward Cornell who went to Ottawa to protest and then found his bank account frozen. He tells me his account of what transpired and he doesn't hold back on what he feels his government did to him.
Here's my interview with Eddie who brought legal action forward which resulted in this positive ruling.
Interview with Veteran Eddie Cornell
Please visit my website for more videos and links:
Thanks Anita, great interview! The reactions of participants in the court case is something you can't get from reading the judge's decision.
Two aspects of the decision itself that stood out to me are:
1) the judge all but urged the government to amend the Emergencies Act, to change the definition of "threat to security of Canada" by removing the reference to the CSIS Act which has specific criteria. He said if that had not been there, he could have granted the Cabinet much more latitude in saying that a threat existed.
2) neither Judge Mosely (nor the Rouleau Commission whose report he read) considered (or allowed any consideration that) the protests might be justified to stop the government causing harm. They lumped all protestor information contrary to what public health officials were saying together as misinformation, implicitly taking "judicial notice"* of government statements. Thus protestors' offers to meet with federal government officials to discuss the reasons for the convoy and negotiate were not even considered as an alternative prerequisite to invoking violent police powers or the Emergency Act.
* What is judicial notice? example at https://canliiconnects.org/en/commentaries/89421