By R.C.
Sat, Apr 9, 2022 9:06 p.m.
TRUCKERS WERE RIGHT: Freedom Convoy protest was legal, judge says, and Ottawa is now being sued
 | Farmers Forum Staff. MONTREAL — The Canadian government trampled on fundamental human rights with its COVID restrictions, then overreached on dealing with the Freedom Convoy and must now answer to numerous lawsuits, including one by a former premier, says a well-respected constitutional lawyer. farmersforum.com |
4 comments:
WE'RE RIGHT too--those of us who believe blacks should be knocked down a few notches,Mex should NOT be welcomed,but deported and Ukranians not allowed to come to the U.S. (or Poland).
As with the truckers,a latent understanding of what White people's strategy should be--long after the time when it could have mattered-- will,in practical terms,be too late to save the U.S.
By taking in refugees from the Ukraine,foreign countries are letting Ukraine's leaders off the hook.Zelensky would HAVE to seek an agreement with more people in the country to worry about getting caught in collateral damage. With 4 million(and counting) emigrating to the West,he can try to outlast Putin--a strategy he might not have tried without Poland or the US offering sanctuary.
--GRA
There is no text/article at the link -- if you search for the title 'TRUCKERS WERE RIGHT: FREEDOM CONVOY PROTEST WAS LEGAL, JUDGE SAYS, AND OTTAWA IS NOW BEING SUED', you find several articles, all the same -- here is one:
TRUCKERS WERE RIGHT: Freedom Convoy protest was legal, judge says, and Ottawa is now being sued
A passage:
The Canadian government trampled on fundamental human rights with its COVID restrictions, then overreached on dealing with the Freedom Convoy and must now answer to numerous lawsuits, including one by a former premier, says a well-respected constitutional lawyer.
So far nothing about a court decision -- a vague mention of some lawsuits, nothing concrete however.
Later:
In fact, an Ontario supreme court judge sided with the convoy. When an injunction against honking horns was declared, the court also stated that “provided the terms of this Order are complied with, the defendents and other persons remain at liberty to engage in a peaceful, lawful and safe protest.”
This is the only court decision mentioned -- but this is nothing new: it refers to a court order to silence the honking, which was issued on Feb 07, more than two months ago, when the demonstration in Ottawa was ongoing:
Feb 07, 2022 -- Court grants injunction to silence honking in downtown Ottawa for 10 days -- Judge said taking protesters' horns away does not rob them of their right to protest
The judge just carefully said the order applied only to the honking, nothing else, i.e. nothing else about the demonstration itself should be inferred from it.
So other than in the headline, and a vague mention in the text, there is nothing specific in the article about a lawsuit against any person, the city of Ottawa, or the Canadian federal government (Ottawa is the capital of Canada).
It's a little bit weird that someone would see this and post it as if was something new -- I can only conclude that many people (aka conservatards) are too lazy to actually read past headlines.
A caveat: I have no idea about how a higher court in Canada would rule about the later legal maneuvers that were used to justify clearing the demonstration -- that question is probably worth pursuing.
Of course, there's an article at the link.
>Of course, there's an article at the link.
Thanks for the hint.
When I disable my ad-blocker, I see the article -- I do not recall this ever happening before: my ad-blocker, which I regard as the best freeware ad-blocker available (so I will definitely continue using it), detects (or mis-detects) the entire article as an ad (or ad-like) and blocks/filters it out -- I just checked and there is no update for the ad-blocker: I have the latest version of the plug-in installed.
But the article which is now visible on the Farmers Forum is exactly the same as the one you can find elsewhere if you search for the title -- and it contains nothing about a new court decision, nor anything concrete about lawsuits (which would have to challenge the later legal maneuvers used to declare the demonstration illegal, which was the first step in having the cops clear it).
Post a Comment