blackbird

That's not true. A court has issued an injunction against the occupation. It is illegal.

No, you are trying to make that link yourself. Dishonest. Read my comments. I was speaking about those who were arrested in Coutts, Alberta, and I referred to those in Ottawa who defied the law and said they were willing to die for their cause. There is an ideological link between the extremist law-breakers. They are part of the extremist far right. I said nothing about the millions of peaceful demonstrators and it might not be millions. Maybe tens of thousands.

The organizer's stated goal is to overthrow the democratically-elected government. That is certainly enough reason by itself to impose the Emergencies Act. The Act is limited to those who are involved in this illegal and seditious action and will not have any effect on the rest of Canadians. It is specifically targeted at the illegal occupiers and those who would blockade critical infrastructure and border crossings. We have already heard the anarchists tried to blockade the Ambassador Bridge again but were stopped a day or two ago. The Act enables authorities to use extra powers to quickly take action to stop illegal actions and freeze funds that would be used for these illegal acts. It also sends a vital message to those who think they are free to break the law that there will be serious consequences.

Yes, law-breaking anarchists and illegal occupiers hiding behind children and a carnival atmosphere. Obviously all very strategically planned.

Are you serious? A cache of guns and ammo and body armor has already been found in Alberta and 13 people arrested, four charged with conspiracy to murder RCMP officers. These people have been linked to the same far right types that are occupying Ottawa. Some occupiers in Ottawa defied the laws and police already and said they are not leaving and are willing to die for their cause. What does that mean? These are terrorists.

Rights exist within the framework of the law of the land. You have no rights to break the law or support lawbreakers as you do. When an unelected group such as the truck convoy threatens to overthrow the democratic system and set up a dictatorship, that is not defending human rights or dignity. It is a threat to our freedom and democratic system. All and every measure must be taken to stop them cold.

We live in a Parliamentary democracy and have a democratically-elected government and we have more freedoms that most countries in the world. The fact you are able to speak on here constantly is clear proof of the freedom you have. You should show appreciation for your freedom and democracy. Instead you whine like a spoiled child. Shame.

Con'd quote “Evolution is a change in the gene pool of a population over time. A gene is a hereditary unit that can be passed on unaltered for many generations. The gene pool is the set of all genes in a species or population”. Note that it says nothing about progress or development, just change. So damage to a gene is now evolution (it gives a change in a gene pool) so it is possible to claim that this lame kind of “evolution” has been observed because both degeneration and change without increase of complexity have been observed. Also, note that this definition does not allow for the origin of life, since there is no gene pool without a living population to start with. The lame definitions of today’s professional evolutionists cause confusion and enable them to hide behind a smoke-screen whenever it suits them. In what follows the term “evolution” is used, not in this weak, emasculated, lame form, but with the normal meaning as used in the media, all school text-books and most university text-books. Not all professional biologists are up to the sleight of hand that the leaders of the theory have come to adopt. Colbe notes: “very few people - the majority of biologists included - have a satisfactory grasp of it … People who have a general interest in science are likely to dismiss evolution as a soft science after absorbing the pop science nonsense that abounds. The impression of it being a soft science is reinforced when biologists in unrelated fields speculate publicly about evolution.” So here we have one evolutionary biologist calling the statements of other evolutionary biologists “nonsense” and dismissing their pronouncements as mere speculation. I certainly agree with him on that, but wonder on what grounds he exempts himself from the same criticism! A point that needs to be noted is that professional biologists know perfectly well that the evolution stories being told to the public - and found in most college textbooks - are totally untenable. I challenged one such scientist, Dr. Joel Duff, on this after a meeting in Chicago. His response was that they could not tell the public the truth (i.e. the current theory believed by the majority of “experts” at the present moment) about evolution - the public would not understand and would be confused. Now it is certainly true that variation is observed in species. In practically any population there are different variants of some genes (called alleles), and different combinations of them occur at each mating. Also changing the arrangement of genes on the chromosome causes differences in such features as colour of hair and eyes, length of feathers and size of ears. Considerable rearrangement occurs at each mating. But such variation is not the kind needed for evolution, evolution does not call for a range of possible size of feathers, length of ears or colour of eyes, it requires the appearance of feathers, ears and eyes in the first place by chance mutations. It does not call for the rearrangement of existing information, it calls for the accidental generation of information - extremely complex information! No such event has ever been observed. Even observed resistance to poisons, often cited as evidence for evolution, seems to be produced by duplicating existing genes, not producing new ones by random chance events. On the first requirement of science for a theory or hypothesis - measurement - any meaningful formulation of evolution fails. To be taken seriously any theory of science must make serious predictions, and those predictions must be borne out in practice. Darwin made serious predictions about his theory. One of the most important was this: “ … the number of intermediate and transitional links, between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great. But assuredly, if this theory be true, such have lived upon this earth.” He predicted that they would be found in the fossil record. No such intermediate and transitional links have been found. Unquote Creation, Evolution, Christian / Philip Stott | Evolution | Scripture & Science | Reformation International College As you can see, the whole theory of evolution which is based on random chance processes is bunk.

Quote How Persuasive is Evolution from a scientific perspective ? Science deals with measurements and observations. Mendleev made the famous remark “science begins with measurement”. Einstein made the even more famous remark “What can be measured is science, everything else is speculation”. What measurements support the theory of evolution? None. None, that is, as long as one is thinking in terms of evolution as it is sold to the public. The idea that life progresses from simple to complex, from molecules to man. The idea that new organs and structures appear because “good” mutations generate new information in the DNA. The idea embodied in Julian Huxley’s definition of evolution: “…a directional and essentially irreversible process occurring in time, which in its course gives rise to an increase of variety and an increasingly high level of organisation in its products”. Has any scientist ever observed any such increase of variety or increase in organisation happening? No. On the contrary, observation shows that if structural changes occur they are changes for the worse - loss of function, damage - never advance or improvement. Many thousands of mutations have been observed. Not one has ever led to the kind of progress that evolution demands. The evolutionary texts in desperation point to one mutation which they claim to be “good” - a mutation which damages the blood and causes a disease called sickle cell anaemia. This is a serious, debilitating disease, so how can it be held up as a “good” mutation. The fact is that the blood cells are so damaged that a parasite called Plasmodium cannot live and multiply in them. Plasmodium causes malaria, so if you have sickle cell anaemia you are unlikely to die of malaria (though more likely to die of almost any other disease!). A better description would be a harmful mutation with one good side effect if you happen to live in a malarial region. In order to get over this difficulty evolution has to be redefined (though the public is not told about this!). The definitions used today by evolutionists have to be very carefully phrased and utterly lame. Take for example that of Chris Colby in “An Introduction to Evolutionary Biology”: Unquote Part of an article by Professor Philip Stott. For the whole article go to: Creation, Evolution, Christian / Philip Stott | Evolution | Scripture & Science | Reformation International College

No, I find you to be a supporter of anarchists, insurgents/ criminality.

Are you a far right anarchist in hiding?

The government has found links between people arrested in Coutts, Alberta with firearm offences /criminality and protesters in Ottawa. They share the same ideology and extremism. The Emergency Measures Act is the best way to deal with anarchists / criminals. Thirteen people have been arrested at Coutts Alberta and four are charged with conspiracy to commit murder. The Act also gives power to prohibit blockades of critical infrastructure such as border crossings, bridges, airports, etc. which would be targeted by insurrectionists/ anarchists. A security expert says there are far right anarchists around which the government has to be prepared to deal with. How did Canada get to this situation?

The convoy donated money is funding illegal activities like blockading borders, illegal occupation of Ottawa, and all the illegal harassment, noise, and stopping people from going to work or do their jobs. No it is not the same as the War Measures Act. It is used for specific actions to stop illegal acts, enable powers to force tow trucks to tow vehicles, etc. It also is different than the War Measures Act in that it has built in accountability to Parliament and must be approved by Parliament.

God has nothing to do with law-breakers, anarchists and criminals. He opposes them. You can't claim to be on God's side and support anarchy, sedition against the government and law-breaking. " 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain." Romans 13: 3, 4 KJV

The Emergency Act is not the War Measures Act and there is no Army being sent in. The Emergency act is not being applied everywhere. You are spreading false information in claiming it is to clear the streets "everywhere". It is not. It is only being applied where there are illegal acts, such as the occupation of Ottawa, the capital city, because it is an insurrection, an attempt by a far right group to overthrow the government and set up an unelected dictatorship. It is 60% funded by far right radicals in other countries, mainly in the U.S. The act gives the police and authorities more tools to effectively deal with the anarchy and occupation as well as stop the flow of money to fund it.

So says an admitted anarchist.

If you don't believe me, listen to the media, listen to Jagmeet Singh, the leader of the NDP, listen to what the government is saying. Singh says this is clearly an insurrection. Their clearly stated goal is to have an unelected group replace the democratically-elected government. They are using harassment of citizens, attacking workers, attacking people and using children as shields.

By continuing to occupy Ottawa they are continuing to break the laws and the emergency act. This is illegal and a revolt against the authorities and government.

insurrection: [noun] an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government.

Police are just now distributing warnings to the protesters. RCMP will be giving a news conference soon.

This is an attempted insurrection. You and a number of others on here appear to be supporting it. Most of the protesters don't even know themselves they are being used by a hard core of highly organized insurrectionists trying to over throw the Parliamentary system and government. They and you are being used. This was all sold as just a peaceful protest for freedom. That is not what it is at all.

Website owner, Why are you accessing my pasteboard?

You are being used and totally deceived. You are actually supporting criminals. Definitely an attempted takeover of government.

Careful bud. This is an attempted insurrection. You and a number of others on here appear to be supporting it which may be accessories to crime. Most of the protesters don't even know themselves they are being used by a hard core of highly organized insurrectionists trying to over throw the Parliamentary system and government. They are being used. The people on here are also being used by them. They was all sold as just a peaceful protest for freedom. That is not what it is at all.

You think this is just a peaceful protest? The truth has been coming out. This is run by a highly organized movement intent on overthrowing the democratically-elected government and Parliamentary system. CTV just reported this again. Wake up goof.