Greenpeace activists arrested

[charter.rights]

Ah, but don't you see what's the REAL reason for the apparent non sequitur?

If it is legal for Greenpeace protesters then it is also legal for Aboriginals!

CR appears to have only one agenda.

Incorrect!

The whole point is that protest and civil disobedience are important democratic tools. Even stopping corporations from their destruction of the earth is legitimate if government fails to do on our behalf.

As an example a garbage dump proposed to be constructed over one of the most pristine aquifers in the world was stopped through protests...and the governments attempted to criminalize the protesters there also in order to get them out of the way. However, despite the charges that were laid and court prohibitions made, the dump was successfully stopped to our common benefit.

This is not about aboriginals but you brought it up first so I was merely taking it to a truthful and logical conclusion because you inject your myth into everything.

[ReeferMadness]

I wasn't calling Greenpeace a terrorist group like I said it's usually one of the calmer ones I was saying some enviromentalist groups like the ones I mentioned (Sea Shepard, HSUS, PETA, ALF, etc) could easily be considered terrorist groups. In the end these Greepeace activists broke the law and were arrested if the want to protest there are legal ways to do it.

Terrorism (and by extension terrorist) has become a political pejorative. I would suggest that the main reason it is so widely used is that it has been so effective at instilling fear in the population. The word is almost interchangeable with the word 'communism' as used in previous generations. It's a rallying cry for all right-minded people to close ranks against the threat (real or perceived). Indeed, it could be argued that the rampant fear-mongering about terrorism constitutes a form of terrorism itself. ie. it's the usage of a threat to instill fear in people for political purposes. Admittedly there is a key difference in that they're using the threat of someone else doing something but the end goal is the same.

If you look back in history, I would say there is a good case to be made that states themselves are by far the biggest users of threats and violence for political purposes. The main tools have been armies, security agencies and police forces - the very same actors that have spent the last decade demanding more money and authority to protect us from terrorism.

So, when I see people sprinkle the word terrorist to describe everyone whose actions they don't like, I find it hard to take it seriously.

[ReeferMadness]

If Canada were to start holding public hangings in Dundas Square I'm sure it would be packed that doesn't make it the right thing to do. I don't support this at all Reefer.

Oh, you're worried that this would attract too much of a crowd? No worries. Capitalism has the answer to everything. We'll sell tickets. That'll weed out the riffraff.

[Mr.Canada]

Oh, you're worried that this would attract too much of a crowd? No worries. Capitalism has the answer to everything. We'll sell tickets. That'll weed out the riffraff.

This topic isn't about capital punishment. I oppose the death penalty.

Greenpeace needs to follow the laws of this land. They aren't above the law, no one is.

[M.Dancer]

This topic isn't about capital punishment. I oppose the death penalty.

We need to stiffen the penalties and bring back the death penalty for murder that can be proven by DNA or eyewitness evidence by two or more people.

You are a joke.

[M.Dancer]

This topic isn't about capital punishment. I oppose the death penalty.

I think your positions are as firm as jello

Rape by any means is wrong and rapists along with murders should be put to death.

[noahbody]

The whole point is that protest and civil disobedience are important democratic tools. Even stopping corporations from their destruction of the earth is legitimate if government fails to do on our behalf.

So anti-gambling associations should be allowed to blockade the entrances to native owned casinos?

Edited October 6, 2009 by noahbody

[Mr.Canada]

No individual or group is above the law. every Canadian regardless of race, religion or sexual orientation must follow the same laws of Canada just as everyone's basic freedoms are provided for by the Charter.

Edited October 6, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[charter.rights]

So anti-gambling associations should be allowed to blockade the entrances to native owned casinos?

Not "should be" allowed, ARE allowed.

Peaceful assembly is a right guaranteed under the Charter. If you want to block a casino then go ahead, it is your right.

However, the police have often used tactics in which they unlawfully try to remove peaceful protesters from a site and then when there is resistance to their unlawful act, they charge the protesters with criminal mischief, or resisting arrest. The courts don't care if the original action by the police was lawful or not and bullies like Julian Fantino and his OPP goons have gotten away with it for years. Just ask Gary McHale about mischief charges. He is an expert at stirring up crap and then getting slapped.

[charter.rights]

No individual or group is above the law. every Canadian regardless of race, religion or sexual orientation must follow the same laws of Canada just as everyone's basic freedoms are provided for by the Charter.

That is another of your myths.

The law is not absolute, so there are all kinds of circumstances where the law does not have application, or has limited application where in other cases it might fully apply. That is why we have judges and courts to sort it all out. And while we have agreed that the Charter is Supreme law, and therefore no Canadian is above the Charter Law, domestic law is always to be protested, whether in court, in peaceful assembly, or in Parliament. That is the way of democracy.

And agina, First Nation people are not Canadian by definition (or as prescribed by the Charter) so all your nonsense doesn't apply to them or us, equally.

[Oleg Bach]

Judges in Canada do NOT 'sort things out'. The are appointed and do the bidding of those that installed them. Usually high ranking lawyers who are also huge in the big buisness community...who have vested interests in strickly their own interests. Pollution and poisoning of the common public is not acceptable. We all have a right to life and good health. It is not just the domain and privledge of the fabulously rich and powerful - who have puppets called judges to do their bidding.

[ReeferMadness]

This topic isn't about capital punishment. I oppose the death penalty.

Greenpeace needs to follow the laws of this land. They aren't above the law, no one is.

Really? So, do you agree that Stephen Harper should be punished for breaking the fixed date election law when he called an election last year? Do you think it might be terrorism? The reason I ask is that a lot of us are truly terrified at the thought of Harper with his much-coveted majority government.

I have to say, though, I'm happy you don't want to see him executed. That seems excessive. Maybe it would be fair if he was sent to jail for a bit. Under his rules, though. He has to earn all of his privileges and no early release.

Ya know, I'm happy there is something we can finally agree on. It seems like I'm always disagreeing with you but I knew that deep down, you're a reasonable guy!

[Oleg Bach]

Ha ha...finally we realize that democarcy is Obamaism...a ruse.

[Alta4ever]

Not "should be" allowed, ARE allowed.

Peaceful assembly is a right guaranteed under the Charter. If you want to block a casino then go ahead, it is your right.

However, the police have often used tactics in which they unlawfully try to remove peaceful protesters from a site and then when there is resistance to their unlawful act, they charge the protesters with criminal mischief, or resisting arrest. The courts don't care if the original action by the police was lawful or not and bullies like Julian Fantino and his OPP goons have gotten away with it for years. Just ask Gary McHale about mischief charges. He is an expert at stirring up crap and then getting slapped.

Tresspassing is unlawful

[blueblood]

Tresspassing is unlawful

Standing on the highway is allowed, however taping yourself to the door isn't.

[Alta4ever]

Really? So, do you agree that Stephen Harper should be punished for breaking the fixed date election law when he called an election last year?

Why do you people have such a problem with understanding this. The Law was not broken i have posed the law time and time again. The Terms for calling an election under a minority parliment were not changed. What was changed was that an election must be called every 4 years and that it would in the second week of october. Here is the law please point out what the Harper Government broke, then explain to me why the court and judge who threw out the challenenge was wrong.

"

SUMMARY

This enactment amends the Canada Elections Act to provide that, subject to an earlier dissolution of Parliament, a general election must be held on the third Monday in October in the fourth calendar year following polling day for the last general election, with the first general election after this enactment comes into force being held on Monday, October 19, 2009.

The enactment also provides that the Chief Electoral Officer may recommend an alternate day if the day set for polling is not suitable. .

Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address:

http://www.parl.gc.ca

________________________________________

1st Session, 39th Parliament,

55 Elizabeth II, 2006

HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA

BILL C-16

An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act

2000, c. 9 Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:

1. The Canada Elections Act is amended by adding the following before the heading “WRITS OF ELECTION” before section 57:

DATE OF GENERAL ELECTION

Powers of Governor General preserved 56.1 (1) Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Governor General, including the power to dissolve Parliament at the Governor General’s discretion.

Election dates (2) Subject to subsection (1), each general election must be held on the third Monday of October in the fourth calendar year following polling day for the last general election, with the first general election after this section comes into force being held on Monday, October 19, 2009.

Alternate day 56.2 (1) If the Chief Electoral Officer is of the opinion that a Monday that would otherwise be polling day under subsection 56.1(2) is not suitable for that purpose, including by reason of its being in conflict with a day of cultural or religious significance or a provincial or municipal election, the Chief Electoral Officer may choose another day in accordance with subsection (4) and shall recommend to the Governor in Council that polling day be that other day.

Publication of recommendation (2) If the Chief Electoral Officer recommends an alternate day for a general election in accordance with subsection (1), he or she shall without delay publish in the Canada Gazette notice of the day recommended.

Making and publication of order (3) If the Governor in Council accepts the recommendation, the Governor in Council shall make an order to that effect. The order must be published without delay in the Canada Gazette.

Limitation (4) The alternate day must be either the Tuesday immediately following the Monday that would otherwise be polling day or the Monday of the following week.

Timing of proclamation (5) An order under subsection (3) shall not be made after August 1 in the year in which the general election is to be held.

2. Subsections 57(3) to (5) of the Act are replaced by the following:

Election held on a Monday (3) Subject to subsection (4) and section 56.2, polling day shall be on a Monday.

Exception (4) In the case of a general election that is not held on a day set in accordance with subsection 56.1(2) or section 56.2, if, in the week in which the election is to be held, the Monday is a holiday, polling day shall be held on the Tuesday of that week.

Times when polling day is a Tuesday (5) If the day fixed for the vote is a Tuesday because of subsection (4) or section 56.2, any time period specified under this Act before or after polling day is to be calculated as if polling day were the Monday.

Calcul des délais si le jour du scrutin est un mardi

2001, c. 21, s. 6 3. Section 58 of the Act is replaced by the following:

2001, ch. 21, art. 6

Writs forwarded to returning officer 58. The Chief Electoral Officer shall issue a writ in Form 1 of Schedule 1 to the returning officer for the electoral district in which the election is to be held without delay after the proclamation is issued or the order is made under section 57."

Edited October 6, 2009 by Alta4ever

[ToadBrother]

This topic isn't about capital punishment. I oppose the death penalty.

Greenpeace needs to follow the laws of this land. They aren't above the law, no one is.

I'm not defending Greenpeace here, so much as wondering if you think civil disobedience is ever justified. For instance, would you have been applauding Rosa Parks for standing up to the Montgomery bus driver, or have been demanding she obey the laws and move to the back of the bus?

[Wild Bill]

Why do you people have such a problem with understanding this. The Law was not broken i have posed the law time and time again. The Terms for calling an election under a minority parliment were not changed. What was changed was that an election must be called every 4 years and that it would in the second week of october. Here is the law please point out what the Harper Government broke, then explain to me why the court and judge who threw out the challenenge was wrong.

"

They have no problem understanding. They simply don't care!

They don't like Harper so they approve of anything bad being done to him, regardless of legalities!

Legalities only apply to people they like!

It's quite simple, really!

[Mr.Canada]

Really? So, do you agree that Stephen Harper should be punished for breaking the fixed date election law when he called an election last year? Do you think it might be terrorism? The reason I ask is that a lot of us are truly terrified at the thought of Harper with his much-coveted majority government.

I have to say, though, I'm happy you don't want to see him executed. That seems excessive. Maybe it would be fair if he was sent to jail for a bit. Under his rules, though. He has to earn all of his privileges and no early release.

Ya know, I'm happy there is something we can finally agree on. It seems like I'm always disagreeing with you but I knew that deep down, you're a reasonable guy!

He never broke the election law. The GG may be asked by the PM to drop a writ. This has been explained many many times here. As you can read in the entry it explains that the GG still has the power to dissolve parliament so can we please not have any more posts saying that PM Harper broke the law, he did not. As clearly illustrated below.

This is from a MLW blog entry. This isn't my blog entry, it was written by Tom Bateman.

Have the Conseratives violated the fixed election date law passed by Parliament in 2007?

No. The Canadian Constitution requires that the Governor General retain the prerogative to dissolve Parliament at her pleasure. Yes, she takes advice on this from the Prime Minister, but the decision is still hers. Any law depriving the Governor General of the legal capacity to dissolve Parliament would be unconstitutional. Patrick Monahan in the Globe and Mail on Saturday August 30 was very good on this point.

The fixed election date law does allow the Governor General to exercise this reserve power. So no legal problem with the election call.

Source/Full blog entry by Tom Bateman

Standing on the highway is allowed, however taping yourself to the door isn't.

I'm not sure where you live or are from but in Ontario you cannot stand or hitchhike on any 400 series highway. The offending party will be ticketed and removed if the police see someone doing this. Which is why in Ontario you'll see hitch hiking being done on the entrance ramp to the highway.

If the police see someone standing in the middle of any 400 series highway, if the person isn't killed instantly they'd be taken or a psyche eval for sure then ticketed.

Again I'm not sure where you're from but here in Ontario the 401 is 16 lanes wide in most parts in and around Toronto and the 400 highway is 8- 12 lanes wide in same parts and it's the busiest highway in the world. I don't think someone would last very long standing on it...lol.

[ReeferMadness]

Why do you people have such a problem with understanding this. The Law was not broken i have posed the law time and time again. The Terms for calling an election under a minority parliment were not changed. What was changed was that an election must be called every 4 years and that it would in the second week of october. Here is the law please point out what the Harper Government broke, then explain to me why the court and judge who threw out the challenenge was wrong.

Oh, my bad. So what you really mean is that the Conservatives crafted a meaningless piece of legislation and then lied when they said it would provide certainty on election dates. Much better. Thanks for the clarification.

I still think Harper belongs in jail, though.

[charter.rights]

Tresspassing is unlawful

No it is not in all cases.

Police officers and firefighters may trespass in order to do their jobs. Building inspectors may enter any property under construction without warrant. Meter readers and other people can enter onto a property at any time. There are also circumstances when people may enter a dwelling at any time without warrant.

As well, there are circumstances where protest can block access to certain properties without trespass. Even though doing this, as well as blocking a road is not illegal, the police often use "mischief" charges to effect an arrest. Mischief charges are most often bogus but are used as a convenience to do something else.

[Alta4ever]

Oh, my bad. So what you really mean is that the Conservatives crafted a meaningless piece of legislation and then lied when they said it would provide certainty on election dates. Much better. Thanks for the clarification.

I still think Harper belongs in jail, though.

It does provide certain election dates, during a majority parliment. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you, read the bloody thing its posted for you.

[Mr.Canada]

Alberta Premier finally does something right.

Sixteen activists were charged with breaking and entering and mischief as a result of the protest at Shell on Oct. 3

Thirty-seven activists have been arrested in the past three weeks after taking part in three separate Greenpeace protests at upgrader sites.

I am very happy this morning to read that the 16 Greenpeace "activists" were also charged with breaking and entering in addition to the mischief charges. Canada cannot take this sort of lawlessness anymore and it's about time. These people have been getting away with their shenanigans long enough often using urban terror tactics to draw attention to themselves it would seem.

After a Greenpeace occupation of Shell's upgrader site in Fort Saskatchewan over the weekend, Stelmach told reporters the protesters would be punished to the full extent of the law.

Hopefully they get the maximum to send a message to the rest of them to not break the law. Become law abiding citizens and get a job and contribute to society.

"He suggested that he would look at whether or not the terrorism legislation would apply," Beresh said

Source/Story

Many people have been calling Greenpeace terrorists as their tactics they employ would certainly fill me with terror. I'd be scared. That is what terrorism is a group of people filling everyday citizens with terror and fear. Greenpeace should be labeled a terrorist organization for sure. They are no different then PETA which also uses terror like tactics.

These tactics are unacceptable in today's society.

[ReeferMadness]

It does provide certain election dates, during a majority parliment. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you, read the bloody thing its posted for you.

Actually I did read it and I think what you're saying is bullshit. There is no mention of minority or majority parliament. If Harper can pull a "The dog ate my homework" excuse and ask the GG to call an election in a minority parliament; nowhere is it stated he can't do the same thing in a majority parliament. From the reading I've done on the web, it seems like nobody can tell what the hell this legislation means. Some claim that it establishes a maximum duration of 4 years but I doubt it even does that. Only the GG can call an election and she is explicitly (and constitutionally) exempt from the legislation. The Conservatives wrote and passed a useless piece of legislation. Either they didn't understand it and they're idiots or they did and they're liars.

Here's what Tom Lukiwski said about the bill when it was passed:

It states that the third Monday of October 2009 will be the date for the next general election unless of course by some strange occurrence the combined opposition determines that it wants to have an election before that date.

Seems pretty cut and dried. unless the combined opposition determines that it wants to have an election. Nothing about the PM.

Quotes from conservatives on fixed election legislation.

After Harper went back on his word, he changed his tune and claimed that his legislation allowed for certain election dates during a majority parliament which is likely what you're parroting now. There's nothing to back it up, though.

They're liars but it's OK because they're Conservative liars, right?

[SF/PF]

I was working at the Scotford Upgrader site at the time the protesters gained entry to the site. I personally saw them enter the site, and watched one of the groups climb one of the stacks and unfurl a banner.

Honestly, anyone calling this group of protesters "terrorists" is simply trying to score points with empty rhetoric. They're not alone, though.. our illustrious premier has taken a fondness to calling the event an "attack", as if entering a site, unfurling a few banners and chaining oneself to a structure is some sort of violent assault.

Of course, one wonders what Shell is up to when they claim that no construction activities were underway when they entered the site... I and a few hundred other tradespeople who were actively engaged in construction at the time would likely disagree with this assessment. Was the Shell spokesman simply misinformed or was he misleading the media?

And what of the much ballyhooed need for better security in Alberta's industrial plants after the events of September 11, 2001? Remember the awful threat terrorists posed to Alberta's heavy industries? Personally, I'm wondering if the publication ban on how the Greenpeace activists gained entrance to the site is an attempt to cover the fact that there is quite literally NO security in any of these plants. In fact, the method they used to gain entry is something the average child figures out before the age of 7 as a way to bypass barriers.