ExFlyer

When the EMA was enacted, by law, a commission was required. Okay?? But hey, you knew that legal requirement??

The commission is not quite over. There are still reports to be presented but not any more witnesses to be questioned. The Commissioner then has to sort out all the material and present a report. I actually suspect that the report will not look good for the government. I am not sure if it will admonish the government but i think it may state that the enactment of the EMA was premature or not needed at all (as I have said before).

The opinion of the people that were there? Probably has more validity than from the opinions of the folks on here that were thousands of miles away. Then again, with all the whining from the folks on this forum, maybe it is their opinion of what it was like there? Police brutality, beatings, gas attacks, etc etc

So, the TSB report on broken wheels is out and .... basically all wheels must be eventually replaced. The big news though is that Ottawa city manager Steve Kanellakos bails out 3 days before the LRT report is due to be made public. He says for personal reasons??? And that there my be speculation as to why he is leaving his $307K per yer job (highest pay in the city). Or, it may hit the fan and he want to be out of there?

I can't even picture you picturing me ... why would you do that?? You don't agree or even like anything I say yet you try so hard. Seems you are the child having a hissy fit every time I post about your BS. Put me on ignore and move on LOL

LOL LMAO

Oh, the imaginary one in your head?? LOL

Visibility here, on one persons single minded posts is nothing. Anyway, my gripe is not with you so, be well and have a good day.

Nope, participating and pointing out redundancies.

I never argued his statistics. I let others do that.... and they did and do it well.

I suppose you are right. I just don't like anyone spreading mis or dis information.

It doesn't bother me except that a person that has nothing but one subject and when shut down, just starts another thread. I am not so sure we agreed that the vaccination had no benefit. I am just tired of the same old same old. And on and on. Another Mikey??

For a guy that did not watch one minute of the proceedings, you sure have a lot to say about what went on during them. I am not going to play hypothetical games with you. No what ifs with you. Your closed mindedness has been obvious for as long as I have read your posts. Give it up Dude, you have no credibility nor any insight on the commission . LOL

Do you realize that you are basically seen on here as a conspiracy theorist? Then again there’s an abundance of foolishness holding court on this forum from some of you.

And on and on and on. Yaaaawwnn ?

100% it is my opinion of watching the commison. The unfortunate thing is that we cannot discuss it very well since you saw none of it so, I am not sure what your opinion is worth? I saw clips. The convoy attorneys never showed them, let alone even brought them up and the first 2 weeks or more were all about what went on at the protest. You are right, "what conspiracy theories"? The protesters lawyers mentioned "events" and then were asked where the evidence was and they had none. That is debunking LOL Prove what? You are correct, what were the convoy lawyers and witnesses trying to prove? The commissioner asked them that a lot. There was plenty of time and opportunity to rip the government a new one and they did not. The protest lawyers did nothing but make statements and then asked if the government witness agreed. If they did, they made more statements. If they did not agree, they just went on anyway. I waited for questions, for zingers to nail the witness and that never happened. Even the commissioner and other lawyers kept asking, is there ever going to be a question. Arguing with me is pointless. I have already said, several times, nothing will become of this. It will just be another report sitting in archives. As for being scripted, are you saying the convoy lawyers and convoy organizers and civil liberty legal staff all scripted their points, statements and few questions they asked? That they all colluded not to cross examine the government witnesses? Or are you saying the convoy legal team and government legal team got together and planned all the 6 weeks of questions and answers?? FFS Dude, wake up. LOL

You are correct. That is where the convoy lawyers and witnesses failed miserably. The government witnesses answered all the questions it was asked by all adversaries and lawyers and organizations. As I saw it, there were lots of questions and time spent about the first weekend and a few days thereafter. Too much in my opinion. The outcome of that, again in my opinion, was that the whole police actions were completely disorganized and they got in each other way. The protest ended up what it was because the authorities on the ground could not reach consensus on what to do. When it finally got to the enactment of the EMA, they asked what the provinces thought and Alberta and Ontario were not in favour but, by that time, and the other provinces remained silent. At the point of enactment, the provinces did not need to be asked because it was a federal determination and seemingly pressure form the US was pretty intense and it had to be stopped. I am not sure how the commissioner will see all this but, regardless if he chastises or agrees with the government, it will just be another report that gets sent to public archives and festers there with the hundreds of others. One side or the other will claim victory but, no consequence so......

100% Also as I said, no one is obligated to agree with anyone. What is surprising is that none of the "evidence " (that has been displayed here since February) was deemed true or significant or provable to be used in the commission cross examinations. I was anti convoy because the convoy was for the border crossing issue but when the US prevented Canadian truckers form entering, they no lonnger had a grievance against Canadian government. Then it became a anti vaxx issue but, the vaccination mandates were primarily provincial so that was moot. Then it just became whatever it was and it was disruptive of my city. And then, it was just forum banter here.

You know that it is the law to have this commission after the invocation EMA??? So, yes, they knew. You are incorrect, they provided them all when asked. All lawyers had to prepare and ask for documentation and is was provided. Even ministerial and parliamentary privilege was dropped in most cases hence the telephone call transcripts, emails, text messages and hand written notes were released to all.

I watched because I was interested particularly at what the pro convoy side had to present. Judging by what I have been reading on this forum since February, I honestly thought they would have a truckload of videos, evidence, testimony and more. The presented no videos. The witnesses said things and were quickly dispelled as having no proof of what they were saying. There was no evidence that they presented to support their case. Even when their lawyers cross examined, they only made statements and asked the witness if they agreed with a innocuous statement. Left you wondering if there was a question or accusation coming but there never was. It was a very disappointing display and they did nothing to discredit the government. I had high hopes they had their stuff together and were going to nail the government or officials but they were all powder puff questions. The only one that was defiant in any way and tried to push the pro convoy side was James Bauder but his off topic excursions and refusal to directly answer did not help is cause. I think Lich, King and Barber testimonies were really lame but, in their defence, they may have held back because they still have court dates pending. All in all, in my opinion, the pro convoy side was ineffective.

Not at all. As I have always said, it is your choice for your personal reasons and you live with that choice. Everyone is entitled to agree or disagree with anyone. Would be a unusual place if all agreed with each other. The only time I ever get 100% agreement with me is when I talk to myself.

Yes, it is clear, to you and your ilk.

Dude, you need to get informed.

Your opinion, not fact or law. Clearly did not read https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art1.html

Nice try but, like normal, epic fail. OK. The host said extremists. He said "they don't believe in science, they are often misogynists, also often racist". In response to Quebecers that the host called extremists.