Stephen Harper Is Learning the #1 Most Important Political Lesson

Originally posted by erwalker
reply to post by bobs_uruncle

 

Kindly explain just how Harper has violated Section 46 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Not liking the man, his government, his policies, or his government's legislation is not grounds for charging him with treason.

If you don't like the results of the last election, maybe you should put some effort into convincing the public that they should vote for a party more in line with your views during the next election campaign.

Selling off the colony's resources, implementing policies that invade rights to privacy for Canadians, allowing the continued exportation of bulk water (against federal law), signing UN treaties that erode any chance of sovereignty, allowing and even promoting the infiltration of UN NGO's into the AMO and other local NGO's to convert municipalities into fiefdoms, Bills C36 (formerly C6), 22, 45, the TPP, allowing our nuclear industry to be taken over by the Rothschilds (yes they bought AECL/AECB), Harper's pet dogs in CSIS preventing cross border investigations into past mass murders, using the CRA and the (corrupt) legal system to protect government ministers and universities from malfeasance, tax and public funds frauds, etc. I can go on....

It's Harper's "watch" and from the looks of it, he's having a fire sale. I'd call that and everything else that has happened treason since what he does now, effects all future generations to their detriment. And we are not even going to go into the "old boys club" that included Russel Williams (serial rapist/murderer/Trenton AFB Commander) who used to fly around the Harper asshat (as well as the queen).

Harper isn't a king or czar, he's just another idiot puppet public servant. The question is, "Whom does he serve?" Because it sure as hell isn't the citizens of this colony.

Cheers - Dave

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by bobs_uruncle

 

Hey, if we are going to start hanging politicians count me in.

Can't jump the gun here, they'd have to get a fair trial first and I only suggested hanging as it seems a nice "green" re-usable solution. But I would count in international bankers and a few CEO's and major shareholders. It would seem that in order to achieve a "sustainable" world, we need to remove the sociopaths and psychopaths from power or influence.

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by bobs_uruncle


We've been selling off the country's raw resources for 100s of years. Raw logs, coal, fur pelts, etc.

You claim that the government has instituted policies that invade Canadians' right to privacy. Please specify what specific policies you are referring to. Don't come back with "do your own research" as I'm not willing to play that game. If you make the claim, it's up to you to provide examples.

There is currently no bulk water exports from Canada. There was a permit issued by the Ontario in 1999 which was subsequently cancelled due to the controversy raised. There is no federal law against the export of bulk water other than the International Boundary Waters Act and the International River Improvements Act which only affects lakes that are on the border with the US and rivers that flow across the border. Other rivers and lakes are under provincial jurisdiction when it comes to bulk water exports.

As for the UN treaties, you seem to be referring primarily to Agenda 21, a non-binding agreement on sustainable development. The UN can't force any government to follow the suggestions contained in the agreement, though many of the items included we would be doing with or without the existence of Agenda 21. NGOs have been involved in municipalities for as long as there have been people banding together to promote a common cause. Local sports groups, business organizations, environmental groups, community groups, and others have attempted to influence municipality leadership, with varying degrees of success, for 100s of years.

You do realize that with every new session of parliament the numbering of bills starts over at C-1? Which C-36 are you referring to, the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act passed in 2001 by the Liberal government or the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act? I suspect the latter given the reference to C-6 which was also a Consumer Product Safety Act bill that died.
Which C-22 are you referring to? Is it the Eeyou Marine Region Land Claims Agreement Act, the Act to amend the Criminal Code (age of protection) and to make consequential amendments to the Criminal Records Act, the Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service, or some other act?
I assume by C-45 you are referring to the recent omnibus budget bill. While I don't like the government passing legislation in that manner, it certainly isn't illegal.

The AECL is a crown corporation and is not owned by the Rothschilds. The AECB, which has actually been the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission since 2000, is a federal regulatory agency and not owned by the Rothschilds. The AECL sold its CANDU reactor division to SNC-Lavalin, a Quebec based engineering firm, in 2011. Investment bank NM Rothschild & Sons and the CIBC assisted in the sale but that does not mean either have ownership interest in SNC-Lavalin.

I could go on but this is getting long.

Ultimately, none what you have mentioned constitutes treason. Apparently your extreme dislike of the man blinds you to this.

I'm glad you did not go into the Russell Williams as the fact that he had, as part of his military pilot duties, flown Harper and the Queen on various occasions had absolutely nothing to do with the his being a rapist/murderer.