Politics in 2018

[Altair]

I highlighted a name in the last paragraph that I included. I see that as another indicator of the likelihood of continuing Liberal inaction.

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-the-ugly-pipeline-war-is-no-accident-it-was-the-plan

Terence Corcoran: The ugly pipeline war is no accident. It was the plan

The Canadian pipeline crisis is developing along the usual constitutional divide and within the tired context of party politics punditry. Will Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government use its federal powers to overrule the unconstitutional moves by B.C.’s NDP government? Will B.C.’s attempt to block the $7.4-billion expansion of the Trans Mountain oilsands pipeline to the West Coast lead to a trade war with Alberta’s NDP?

And what will the Liberals’ new plans, announced Thursday, to gut the National Energy Board’s power and responsibilities, and new environmental rules released this week to protect the lives of fish against human encroachment by pipeline do to the state of the federation?

Wake up, Canada. This is not another political game show about the powers and rights of different levels of government. Nor is it about ritual inter-party rivalries among Liberals, New Democrats and Conservatives. The Trans Mountain constitutional meltdown is the product of an aggressive radical campaign by green extremists to rip up the Canadian economy.

<mucho snippage>

Among the Canadian green groups cited by Marx as eager recipients of funding were Environmental Defence Canada, World Wildlife Fund Canada, ForestEthics Canada, Greenpeace and others. At the time, in 2008, the head of World Wildlife Fund Canada was Gerald Butts, currently Prime Minister Trudeau’s principle secretary and top adviser. Other green activists sit on panels and outside cabinet rooms, providing bad advice and misguidance to politicians and business leaders.

if the liberals do use their nuclear option and shut down any attempt by BC to block kinder Morgan,  I wonder if the people writing these articles will give them any praise.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bc-alberta-pipeline-trans-mountain-expansion-1.4529422

As B.C. looks for a way to fight back, Carr said he and his colleagues working on the issue stand ready to shut the dispute down.

If B.C. makes good on its threat to restrict the bitumen shipments, Ottawa will act "immediately," Carr said.

Carissima Mathen, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, said that the federal government has always held the constitutional right to the final word on pipelines.

"No province is able to intervene in that process and they can't use their own law-making authority to try and create other obstacles or barriers to do that," she said

 

[ballz]

Do you think the other members of the vehicle will be charged with trespassing, theft/attempted theft, drinking and driving, illegal possession of a firearm (which was probably stolen), having a loaded weapon in a vehicle or anything like that?  Seems they got a free pass.

Free pass? I think they've clearly been victimized enough.

 

[Cloud Cover]

The feds obviously have the final word- how else would Trudeau's father have imposed the NEP.
What is almost certainly going to happen is the Supreme Court will, in the end, be the final decision maker. It seems apparent that even if all governments were aligned on this, the environmental lobby and other special groups are not aligned and so they will have their day in court.(after they finish wreaking enough political destruction on everything else.)  Trudeau et al already know this.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Free pass? I think they've clearly been victimized enough.

They haven't been charged with anything.

Not trying to come across as snarky but do you mean the trauma of having a victim fight back and turn the tables on them? 

 

[Altair]

They haven't been charged with anything.

Not trying to come across as snarky but do you mean the trauma of having a victim fight back and turn the tables on them?

Probably meant seeing their friend die in front of them.

 

[Cloud Cover]

According to the CBC news article, the victim had in his hands a .22 long rifle, with the stock cut off, 5 rounds in the mag and one in the chamber, the safety was off and of course no trigger lock.  Now, the place is full of coyotes and other things like that, but that does not seem a likely explanation for having that firearm at that time.
These kids were looking for trouble and they were going find it one way or another. Imagine if Stanley had simply called the police, and then an RCMP officer pulling that car over in the middle of nowhere and to his/her detriment, not seeing that rifle until it is too late.
Frankly, if Boushie had lived he should have been the one charged.

 

[ballz]

I was being 100% sarcastic. My apologies for not using a [/sarcasm] tag to be clearer, but the thought and post were a bit of a knee-jerk reaction that I have been trying to hold back for the last 24 hours.

I am quite angry with the reaction to this whole thing, to the point that I have been trying to make myself take a pause to collect myself because my comments are very very unsympathetic to the family and friends of the person who was killed... and at the end of the day it's too bad someone had to die, but people have completely lost their ability to think straight at all. The person who died and the people who were with him have no one to blame but themselves for their own personal choices which led to a situation that did not work out in their favour.

The perpetrators, followed then by the legislative and executive branch of the government are the ones who victimized the actual victim, and it's the justice branch and our justice system that actually stood between an innocent man (who did not ask for these drunken misfits to come onto his property to trash and steal his stuff) and a cage. And I am very very sick of our justice system being defamed by a bunch of people who need to go back to grade school to learn some personal responsibility. Our justice branch is not perfect but it's probably the only part of government left I hold in any esteem and to see people trying to trample it because they want to use majority opinion against innocent people is putting me quite on edge.

"Justice does not mean that you are guaranteed the result that you want." - Marie Henein

 

[Jarnhamar]

I was being 100% sarcastic. My apologies for not using a [/sarcasm] tag to be clearer, but the thought and post were a bit of a knee-jerk reaction that I have been trying to hold back for the last 24 hours.

I am quite angry with the reaction to this whole thing, to the point that I have been trying to make myself take a pause to collect myself because my comments are very very unsympathetic to the family and friends of the person who was killed... and at the end of the day it's too bad someone had to die, but people have completely lost their ability to think straight at all. The person who died and the people who were with him have no one to blame but themselves for their own personal choices which led to a situation that did not work out in their favour.

Ahh, sorry for not being more astute. I've seen some pretty wacky commentary on this. 

I actually thought he Stanly was guilty because I recall reading some stuff about the guy being shot in the back of the head when they were driving away. Seemed pretty clear cut to me.  Hearing the details (and seeing enough browning NDs) I can see why the jury chose not guilty (though still pretty surprised).

Sask farmers seem to be routinely victimized without very much support or relief (this from friends in Sask and reading).

 

[jollyjacktar]

I will admit, l haven't read any of the stories on CBC about this trial until now.  The only weapon l see mentioned at the link is the one Mr. Stanley had.  I don't believe those who are upset by the verdict are going to take any notice of what the young men were doing that night or what they had with them.

The story linked below is about all the rallies springing up across Canada.  Like the Cornwallis statue or the MMIW, they want blood and won't be satisfied until they get what they want as a verdict.  As far as l can determine it's another white man's injustice on First Nations people, in their eyes.

Truth, reasonable clarity and acceptance of whatever the real facts are will be lost to the people on both sides whom feel justice wasn't served.

PM Trudeau's comments seem to be one sided (to me) and are only going to pour gas on the fire.  I wish he could keep his gate closed at times like this.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/saskatoon/boushie-rallies-saskatoon-regina-stanley-not-guilty-verdic-1.4529956

 

[Remius]

I’ll admit to also not knowing all the facts.  But I did I hear some stuff on the radio about it being an all white jury and the risk that the crown took in going after first degree murder charge rather than a criminal negligence approach.

I’m sure this evening factors are playing into this.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Justin Trudeau chiming in on the verdict:

"Just spoke with @Puglaas. I can't imagine the grief and sorrow the Boushie family is feeling tonight. Sending love to them from the US"



While Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Jody Wilson-Raybould says:
"As a country we can and must do better - I am committed to working everyday to ensure justice for all Canadians"





Being impartial is not a part of the job I guess.

 

[Old Sweat]

This could get real ugly very quickly, and I fear the remarks of JT and his Justice Minister will not help.

 

[kratz]

[quote author=Old Sweat]
This could get real ugly very quickly, and I fear the remarks of JT and his Justice Minister will not help.[/quote]

Agreed.
The rush to condemn and demand censure through social media, despite the judicial system, is disturbing. 

 

[Cloud Cover]

Ref: the all white jury. The Supreme Court of Canada has already, recently, ruled that there's nothing wrong with that, but the policy might benefit from om a review.  The key issue would have been bias or prejudice, and there is no factual evidence to support the assertions of the FN in this case. And, it was not Boushie on trial so I really don't see how the composition of the jury is truly relevant. Are the FN suggesting having a Native on the jury would have brought some value here- would such a presence change the law, facts and evidence of the case>>>no.
In my view the justice system worked here by preventing racialized views from tainting the jury. And, I haven't seen any official confirmation that there was not any FN in the jury. You can't tell just by looking at skin color and last names.

 

[ballz]

It's deeply disturbing, the arguments being brought up show that we as a society have forgotten, quite quickly, why we created constitutional democracies, three branches of gov'ts, a judicial system that assumes innocence and a burden of proof being laid on the Crown, etc... all things that we would probably fall apart without.

The argument about an all-white jury shows how much ignorance and bias is involved. The idea is to make the trial fair *for the accused.* Not give the Crown, which already has all the advantages in its favour, even more advantages by letting it stack a jury with people who are going to be prejudiced *against* the accused.

It's f**king mind-boggling.

 

[FSTO]

So federal ministers are commenting as to the grief they feel with the family of the deceased and that the justice system has to do better.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-ministers-boushie-verdict-reaction-1.4530093

Similar retorts when Ghomeshi got off. Is the metoo movement the result?
https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/02/11/closing-arguments-today-in-jian-ghomeshi-trial.html

What will be the result of the Stanley acquittal?

One final note:
If I hear the PM or any of the ministers of the crown speak of white settler farmers extolling their privilege I will lump the entire pathetic group into a Mugabe-like dung heap of idiocy that do not deserve an ounce of our respect.

 

[Rifleman62]

1. The argument about an all-white jury is racism IMHO. Or, is it when someone not white says something about white people?  Reverse racism or reverse discrimination, but you can't say that because you will be called racist!!

2. http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/aboriginal-background-must-be-considered-in-violent-crime-sentencing-top-court

  Aboriginal background must be considered in violent crime sentencing, top court rules - 23 Mar 12
  The Supreme Court of Canada on Friday upheld the principle of differential sentencing for aboriginals in even the most extreme and
  technical cases, such as the violation of long-term supervision orders

3. Think about the Gerald Stanley who killed Colten Boushie. That traumatic event will be his memory/on his conscious until he dies. He may get PTSD. People will always be looking at him and muttering. Stanley is not in an occupation where he has been trained to intentionally take a human life.

4. See 2, above. If Colten Boushie killed Stanley, or beat him to a pulp, or killed a RCMP officer on a traffic stop, what would his sentence be? The first trial with this sentencing was years ago in BC Superior Court with an Indian women getting off after killing  a man/husband/boyfriend (can't remember - FJAG will know). See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladue_report

5.. The PM and the Justice Minister should shut their cake hole and show leadership to all Canada not a tiny segment.

 

[Good2Golf]

The feds obviously have the final word- how else would Trudeau's father have imposed the NEP.
What is almost certainly going to happen is the Supreme Court will, in the end, be the final decision maker. It seems apparent that even if all governments were aligned on this, the environmental lobby and other special groups are not aligned and so they will have their day in court.(after they finish wreaking enough political destruction on everything else.)  Trudeau et al already know this.

As it was in determining the validity of Omar Khadr’s $20M lawsuit. 

Not a comment about your point specifically, W601, but rather that the Judiciary sometimes doesn’t get the last say where the Executive feels its opinion takes precedence.

Regards
G2G

 

[YZT580]

So we have Liberal cabinet members implying that they know better than 12 jurists and a sitting judge.  The implications of that are very, very threatening to the rule of law and should be vigorously opposed by all.

 

[kratz]

ref: CTV local news

It can not be acceptable to take a life of someone who comes on your property. This was clearly racially motivated.

Why bother buying and owning anything, including land, with blanket statements like this for a leading argument?