Harper government to fast track anti-terrorism bill

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 12:27 AM
link   
im surrounded by crown land
just sayin...
trouble is if we were to be reasonable like so many expect from canada
so as to prevent winding up on the wrong side of a terrorist bomb plot
we would get false flaged and wind up on the wrong side of a terrorist bomb plot
which is a terrorist bomb plot




posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Oh Canada! What gets me about Mr. Harper, why push garbage legislation that has already been road tested by someone else, and has proven to be totally useless for all practical purposes. Here in the good ole U.S. of A., the government gave us DHS & the Patriot Act, and hey presto! we now have a 'nationalized secret police system' (re: NKVD). I know, as soon as I get stopped, by any law enforcement person, anywhere in the US, I'm boned. I'm a veteran. The feral government of the United States classifies me as a 'domestic terrorist'. Nice. Another one that I'm sure they thought all of 5 seconds about before saying, Meh, that should do it. Yeah, 'Anti-Terror' laws should be VERY terrifying to any citizen in any country, they are useless. Moulder was right, we're gonna have to fight the future !



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 



Canada is not a country and has never been a country, it is a colony as evidenced by the 1947 Letters Patent.

Obviously you didn't read my post. Canada has been governing itself since 1982... Canada legally OWNS Canada..Read all about it here


Canada cannot be on the UN security council because it's not a country.

You didn't know that the council has a limited number of seats? Didn't you know that we have also served on the council for 12 years before losing our seat in 2010 because of 8 votes? Read more here
The Governor General is an historic symbollic position

I could go on, but your shameful lack of education in your own country's politics demonstrates a level of ignorance that is quite frankly appalling.

reply to post by Danbones
 


The Native Canadians are taking lands back, this includes any lands currently labeled "Crown Land". See Land Claims, and Algonquin Claims for more details... The Algonquin deal is almost finished.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


We've had some good lawyers, notably a hero one, that my family really respects, and my father met, the Honorable Thomas Berger, who won native rights in BC Pro Bono. I've read essays by constitutional lawyer who said that the legislation that is put out by our "leaders"/employees, is not law, its legislation. The Constitution is the basis for law, and things that violate it are not only unlawful, but anyone enforcing unlawful legislation that violates the constitution, and Common Law as well as the Nuremburg Trials exluded no german who followed unjust laws, that our common sense tell us is wrong as well, as common law is based on common sense and thou shalt no harm. Anyone, be it a police officer, or public employee who enforces an unjust law is breaking the law, committing a crime, whether or not they are aware of the law or not!

There are White Hats and we need them more than ever at this point.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Invariance
 


The argument that Canada is not a country stems from the Freeman movement of true common law...blah blah blah..

Although it's a compelling story, there isn't any sufficient evidence that shows any of it actually works. It may certainly be true, some of the history is just well, irrefutable, but it doesn't mean that those that control things will let you beat them at their own game.

I'm glad the Natives are having their lands returned, it's the smallest thing we can do to make amends for the ongoing 400 year genocide we politely deny.

I will say one thing, I've longed stated Canada isn't a real country, but only because of the giant mess of a bureaucracy it is. How could a real country be so mis-managed?

~Tenth



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Our government only follows suit.. how could America be so mismanaged?
At least we're not quite so bad off as compared to some in the world.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Invariance
 


Well America sold itself into slavery when it gave up it's ability to control the currency. We did that too, but the Bank Of Canada could still be reverted to what it used to be.

But yes, there are places that have it worse. They treat our countrie's like their private playgrounds however and I have more of a problem with that than probably anything else.

~Tenth



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


Oh man,. thats a serious bill. Not sure how ethical this is really in the scheme of things.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


My view is if they dont want people who are terrorists dont let people in the country who are already known terrorists or have terrorist connections. Why risk it.

Cant they bring out a bill like that?



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by jude11
 


He's actually the 2nd coming of G.W Bush or Canada's version of G.W Bush.


thats always been the way i saw it..as much as i dislike gwb i think id rather have a beer with him than harper..he is turning canada into something im not so proud of.
im afraid he is not going away anytime soon



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Invariance
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 



Canada is not a country and has never been a country, it is a colony as evidenced by the 1947 Letters Patent.

Obviously you didn't read my post. Canada has been governing itself since 1982... Canada legally OWNS Canada..Read all about it here


Canada cannot be on the UN security council because it's not a country.

You didn't know that the council has a limited number of seats? Didn't you know that we have also served on the council for 12 years before losing our seat in 2010 because of 8 votes? Read more here
The Governor General is an historic symbollic position

I could go on, but your shameful lack of education in your own country's politics demonstrates a level of ignorance that is quite frankly appalling.

reply to post by Danbones
 


The Native Canadians are taking lands back, this includes any lands currently labeled "Crown Land". See Land Claims, and Algonquin Claims for more details... The Algonquin deal is almost finished.


I suggest you do a little more research, Canada is not a country. Next you'll be telling us that the Bank of Canada is controlled by Canada LOL. You might want to check HERE for the 1947 Letters Patent which have never been rescinded. Ignorance, I think not, I know many things about the politics in this colony that haven't been made public yet. Also S-7 is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, a lot worse is coming down the political pipe.

BTW, where do I put in a claim for Beothuk land?

ETA: I thought I would give you this as well from a government website, HEAD OF STATE. Symbollic huh? More like parasitic ROFL.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 4/22.2013 by bobs_uruncle because: the ETA



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


We've had some good lawyers, notably a hero one, that my family really respects, and my father met, the Honorable Thomas Berger, who won native rights in BC Pro Bono. I've read essays by constitutional lawyer who said that the legislation that is put out by our "leaders"/employees, is not law, its legislation. The Constitution is the basis for law, and things that violate it are not only unlawful, but anyone enforcing unlawful legislation that violates the constitution, and Common Law as well as the Nuremburg Trials exluded no german who followed unjust laws, that our common sense tell us is wrong as well, as common law is based on common sense and thou shalt no harm. Anyone, be it a police officer, or public employee who enforces an unjust law is breaking the law, committing a crime, whether or not they are aware of the law or not!

There are White Hats and we need them more than ever at this point.


I wish I had the ability to feel some kind of hope for the actions of lawyers, politicians or anything else, but unfortunately after whistle blowing on our government and universities for $150 million in tax and public funds fraud the coverup of which was managed by the CRA, planes being blown out of the sky for political advantage by foreign assets in other countries, the systemic and generally treasonous behavior of everything within the body politic and rampant corruption with the military/industrial complex, I don't have that luxury of optimism for the future. When I blew the whistler, it didn't help that a lawyer dragged out my case for 4 years so I could pay the bill for his kid's university education at the very same university involved in the fraud. It doesn't help that our government used the legal system and the CRA (an agency of the BOC) to hide their crimes.

I have seen many people and even whole countries destroyed by politicians, bankers, lawyers and their greed. It's no different in Canada, they are just more adept at hiding their crimes. How do you fight a corrupt system and expect to achieve just resolve when the corrupt write the laws? You do realise of course that a corrupt system favours the corrupt?

I wish I was ignorant of what has been going on (as that last poster alluded) and still is, but working with governments, the educational system and the military has made me a tad cynical.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 

Why do you still cling to one link from 1947 when in fact in 1982 Canadians became their own country? Forty years after your source, Canada indeed gained it's own sovereign status!


Canada Act, also called Constitution Act of 1982, Canada’s constitution approved by the British Parliament on March 25, 1982, and proclaimed by Queen Elizabeth II on April 17, 1982, making Canada wholly independent. The document contains the original statute that established the Canadian Confederation in 1867 (the British North America Act), the amendments made to it by the British Parliament over the years, and new material resulting from negotiations between the federal and provincial governments between 1980 and 1982.

But, since you can't change your mind or listen to logic, I will go no further. It's clear that you will believe what you want to in the face of evidence to the contrary.

And yes, I agree that the Governor General is a redundant office that should be abolished.

The fact remains that this fast track bill is going to be passed likely before this thread is dead! We can argue the finer points all we want, but in the end this government has an excuse to take more rights and freedoms away.

THAT is the point we should be discussing here!



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Invariance
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 

Why do you still cling to one link from 1947 when in fact in 1982 Canadians became their own country? Forty years after your source, Canada indeed gained it's own sovereign status!


Canada Act, also called Constitution Act of 1982, Canada’s constitution approved by the British Parliament on March 25, 1982, and proclaimed by Queen Elizabeth II on April 17, 1982, making Canada wholly independent. The document contains the original statute that established the Canadian Confederation in 1867 (the British North America Act), the amendments made to it by the British Parliament over the years, and new material resulting from negotiations between the federal and provincial governments between 1980 and 1982.

But, since you can't change your mind or listen to logic, I will go no further. It's clear that you will believe what you want to in the face of evidence to the contrary.

And yes, I agree that the Governor General is a redundant office that should be abolished.

The fact remains that this fast track bill is going to be passed likely before this thread is dead! We can argue the finer points all we want, but in the end this government has an excuse to take more rights and freedoms away.

THAT is the point we should be discussing here!


At this point I think it best to direct you again to our government's own website, listed in my last post, where it states that nothing has changed since 1947 concerning the feeding order. The queen is still the head of state and the groveler general is still the queen's viceroy. The groveler general can still suspend parliament, fire the prime minister (or any minister), order conscription, invoke martial law, etc. etc.

A country is a sovereign state governed from within and is not beholding to any other country except for negotiated terms to their own benefit. Colonies, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc., can be partially governed from within, much like a manager for a business owner. But the aforementioned colonies also rely on outside intervention from the UK and our dysfunctional throne sitting welfare family. Can you say "royal ass'ent" sure knew ya could ;-) (Actually spelled ascent)

What is it that you don't understand about the oxymoron of a constitutional monarchy? Do you presume that we have a benign dictator in its majesty the queen?

Cheers - Dave
edit on 4/22.2013 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


You are confusing the British Crown and the Crown of Canada.

Although, currently held by the same person, they are two distinct and separate crowns.

That is why, if you note, the Queen is not called the Queen of the United Kingdom, or Queen of the Commonwealth, etc, etc, while in Canada. Instead, she is called the Queen of Canada.

Here is the Canadian Government website: Canadian Crown



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


You are confusing the British Crown and the Crown of Canada.

Although, currently held by the same person, they are two distinct and separate crowns.

That is why, if you note, the Queen is not called the Queen of the United Kingdom, or Queen of the Commonwealth, etc, etc, while in Canada. Instead, she is called the Queen of Canada.

Here is the Canadian Government website: Canadian Crown


I am not confused at all, they are one in the same "crown." However, your reference to that link, which basically is the same as mine, seems to infer that by presentation of a site you are capable of picking up a turd from the clean end. You know, this crap can't be sanitized by a few silly websites that presume to obfuscate political reality and control.

The simple FACT remains that Canada is not a country. It is a wholly owned and controlled subsidiary corporate entity (re. the Corporation of the Government of Canada) by the brand name "crown" owned and managed by the Corporation of the City of London. Our politicians may have a long leash when it comes to self-ingratiation and nepotism, but not when it comes down to "orders from on high." Next we'll be told that having a choice of three crappy political parties is actually a choice. Someone on here said it was a like a parent telling a child they have a choice in wearing one of three pairs of pants, our "choices" are given to us and limited by the controllers behind the scene.

If S-7 passes the next reading it was meant to pass according to our politician's handlers, it doesn't matter which party is in power as they are all corrupt and controlled by the same people. They (politicians) answer primarily to the "crown" via the BOC (read IMF/BIS). Of course you might also want to look at Desmarais.

Jesse Ventura said it well and I paraphrase, "Politics is like wrestling, it's all entertainment. Two guys make a big noise before the fight, then they both go into the ring, one wins and the other loses, but at the end of the night, they both go to the same bar and have a drink with their boss who pays both of them and then they all laugh together about the money they made and how nobody knew what was really going on."

Cheers - Dave



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


This will be my last post on this, as you are completely incapable of accepting facts.

Here is a nice little exert from a link we both posted, in which you claim that Canada is not independent:


Her Majesty was the first of Canada's sovereigns to be proclaimed separately Queen of Canada. In 1953, a Canadian law, the Royal Style and Titles Act, formally conferred upon Elizabeth II the title of "Queen of Canada".

Her Majesty was proclaimed in Canada with these words: "By the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith."

Queen Elizabeth II became the first monarch to be separately proclaimed Sovereign of Canada. The proclamation reaffirmed the new monarch's position as Queen of Canada, a role independent of that as Queen of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms.


I have underlined the pertinent information, let me know if you need it in crayon.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 


This will be my last post on this, as you are completely incapable of accepting facts.

Here is a nice little exert from a link we both posted, in which you claim that Canada is not independent:


Her Majesty was the first of Canada's sovereigns to be proclaimed separately Queen of Canada. In 1953, a Canadian law, the Royal Style and Titles Act, formally conferred upon Elizabeth II the title of "Queen of Canada".

Her Majesty was proclaimed in Canada with these words: "By the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith."

Queen Elizabeth II became the first monarch to be separately proclaimed Sovereign of Canada. The proclamation reaffirmed the new monarch's position as Queen of Canada, a role independent of that as Queen of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms.


I have underlined the pertinent information, let me know if you need it in crayon.


It doesn't matter, it's the same person/thing, the queen is an inbred absentee landlord and Canada is still not a country, it's a COLONY. BTW, inbred meaning that the genetic pool from which IT was spawned is limited, absentee landlord meaning that IT lives someplace other than the property in question called Canada. You might want to tattoo "Canada is a Colony" across your chest backwards so that every time your thinking processes are impaired by either drugs, alcohol or purely genetic limitation, a simple look in the mirror will provide you with a clue as to your general location of residence.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Invariance
 


I would say absolutely the roots of the NWO will bring up plants everywhere. You have to look under the soil to see that all the plants are connected to a main root.



posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
 
Nice rant...what are you doing about it?





top topics
 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join