https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pierre4pm.ca%2Fpoilievre_justin_trudeau_s_government_tramples_on_the_freedoms_guaranteed_in_his_own_father_s_charter%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR00aOV8i0m3Fe0nZFhYlVjwVL39q-jBn4JULRsSLdqfLlOJ8SIZJHungcs&h=AT15AUXl9KGVxDo139HUIyYhd_cShW3DO2eeuFeUDOCh-qGbtaBBaJj_8lf5pU99yKuMLQ27otIRxyJFeYlBh2d9AdNtfW_-ofBU7WWcqUM-ek75F2ilzWa7ZmUFSZD3og&tn=-UK-y-R&c[0]=AT1AK0FXtNafdU3NxWUh297vs8iKv4m9S6yPNl7hdIBueEQ5mTHiO-vEp9DnjdqcfFn66uAiA3vI5edzsI0tgE7fW5jiPAOmzRZFZSLFza-JwFCL0Y3P_xSCvVWCsR5aceXn7OxALBcsAcgJivchQ_ttunejE3s5EdBn7ZyTF-My7rxuo1kcbWhwG1qUW6XRIYRrK8S9
A nations constitution: The thing that essentially makes people human or lack thereof. In Canada that document would actually be, The Canadian Bill of Rights passed by Diefenbaker in 1960.
The Charter of Rights is an adulteration put out by the altruistic and benevolent Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Who actually really wasn't that altruistic or benevolent as far as I'm concerned. The Bill of rights is a vastly superior legal instrument compared to the Charter of Rights. The Charter of Rights is basically easy access to bypass your rights. Like an evil little torch that was passed to the modern day Trudeau by his father.
If you read the wording of it, The Charter is actually a disgrace. Wording like, " accept what can be demonstrably justified". Well, believe it or not "demonstrably justified" is utterly and completely a subjective term. So there by, weather or not the people have human rights is subject to the arbitrary discretions of a few.
The only reason I know anything about this is because
a pretty awesome lady I couldn't help by notice during the Great Canadian Trucker Protest. She did a great video that explains the whole legal situation about these two legal instruments. I think the more the public is aware of this stuff the better. It was so good I put it onto 3speak. Here is a link --> https://peakd.com/hive-181335/@photonium/efakoicb
She also has a website: www.stand4thee.com
Amanda Ridding is her name.
I find it interesting our up and running new champion of freedom candidate Pierre Poilievre decided to use The Charter of Rights as legal reference. I'm still not 100% sure what to make of this guy. Is he using the Charter as his reference because he doesn't want to put light on the Canadian Bill of Rights, or is it that the point he was making just happen to be pertinent to The Charter exclusively?
Here is a video he put up implying that our participation in the democratic process comes with financial obligations: https://www.facebook.com/PierrePoilievreMP/videos/3143644322576917
" You can't vote if you're not a member." I'm not quite sure what that is about.
At the same time, I did really enjoy some of his other videos. Quite refreshingly honest and interesting. Like this video Provided by You Tube Channel (Pierre Poilievre) -->
Or this Video Provided by You Tube Channel (Pierre Poilievre) -->
Epic grilling of Freeland. I enjoyed the shit out of this one, I'll be honest.
One more Video Provided by You Tube Channel (CTV News) -->
(Slipping off topic line)
x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x..x
Then we have going on at the same time what seems to be the People's Party of Canada smear campaign of Pierre Poilievre. Which is shown in a previous post I did --> https://peakd.com/informationwar/@photonium/canadas-freedom-candidates
Do you really think Pierre Poilievre has some kind of relationship with Bill Gates and or The World Economic Forum and or The New World Order? Hard to tell sometimes. I'd like to think Canada found itself it's own Donald Trump, though that is one hell of an act to follow. What do you think? Leave a comment. Thanks for checking this out.
Thanks for the post!
Personally, I like Poilievre. He asks the questions I want answered and seems closer to the common people. For example, after the tsunami / nuclear disaster in Japan (2011) my wife and her friends organized a series of bake / artwork sales to raise money to help the victims. Poilievre is the only politician who showed up on his own - without photographers - to buy a few things and chat with folks. That left a lasting positive impression on me and others.
That said, I can't forget that for the last two years (since 2020), Poilievre has really said NOTHING while our so-called rights and freedoms were being trampled on by all levels of government. In fact, he only started being vocal when it became obvious that - thanks to the Truckers - a large section of the public are against all of these "mandates" and ongoing government over-reach.
So, I'm not 100% convinced that Poilievre is exactly what he's making himself out to be.
It's a shame though, 'cause I really do like the guy.
TBH - I don't think the solution to our problems (in Canada) is a political one. I think people, and businesses need to stop complying. We need to peacefully resist and not comply. We need to stop interacting with governments - as much as possible.
However, if people living in Canada insist on going the political route, then I firmly believe that it would need to be by voting into power pro-freedom / pro-personal responsibility parties and independents . That's for all levels of government; municipal, provincial and federal.
Voting for either the Liberal, NDP, Conservative or Green party will not get us to where we want to go.
Anyway, this is just my opinion and you know what they say about opinions and assholes...
Thanks again for the post.
Yeah for sure. Poilievre really doesn't set off my spider sense anywhere near the levels that Trudeau or Freeland would. The intuition tells me, this guy wants to do good.
I would actually be curious to know how Maxime Bernier and Pierre Poilievre actually feel about each other. Although, the PPC smear campaign, which I find to be in bad taste does rather reveal what Bernier thinks about Poilievre. Strange enough, Bernier used to be Conservative. So to me, seeing him attack Poilievre based on circumstantial evidence is unfortunate. I would think if he had some kind of unassailable evidence that he would be putting that out. A photo with the guy standing beside Bill Gates doesn't really prove he is predatorial. Things like, voting records couldn't be denied.
Part of me would like to see the two parties join up. Are they nemesis merely because they are two separate parties? It's like, if your ideas are the same, then, why fight?
Yeah, at the same time, I think what you're saying about political solutions not being effective, just might be true. Some have suggested that the political system is really just there to provide people with the illusion of choice when there really actually isn't one. I might be clinging to an illusion of a solution.
That 2011 story regarding the Japanese nuclear disaster, that's actually really cool what you guys did, and it's really cool that Poilievre showed up with no camera crew to show support.