Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer
Until a direct conduit from Rath and the other traitorous morons to people in power in Alberta is proven out, then we can't really take the meetings seriously or punish them.
Private citizens are allowed to meet with whomever. It might be entirely stupid, and really dumb, but we can't strip their rights away for being idiots, even if what they are talking about might be some form of treason.
It doesnt matter what they say to Trump, they have no power to act on it.
The link back to party leadership in the province is actually really important here.
|
This is a completely false narrative that separatist buffoons seem to not only think is true but appear to somehow be convincing others because they are steering clear of the specific definition of treason in the Criminal Code.
There is for some reason very little talk about sedition which is much closer to being on point.
Nobody is allowed to meet with and teach, advocate, publish or circulate any writing about "the use, without the authority of law, of force as a means of accomplishing a governmental change within Canada."
That is sedition.
So even the discussion of the US recognizing and 'supporting' an independent Alberta by way of a unilateral declaration of independence (the stated plan for the separatists to use because they have already pre-decided that anything less than getting absolutely everything they want from the rest of Canada no matter how absurd will be proof of Canada's refusal to negotiate in good faith) is
perilously close to committing a serious indictable criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years.
I am not saying they have yet or are going to be committing sedition, but in no way do they have "rights" to say whatever they want to a foreign government in relation to the proposed breakup of Canada. In fact if they were representatives of a democratically elected separatist government that would give them much wider legal authority for discussions.
That they are private citizens spreading falsehoods about their fever dreams (like falsely likening the substance and effect of their petition to a declaration of independence) and acting as though they speak for "the people" of Alberta puts them at much greater risk of crossing into criminal conduct.
In my opinion, refusing to say who they are meeting with, claiming to be meeting in a SCIF and expecting people to just accept whatever they claim was the topic of conversation should be resulting in Canadian national security authorities making use of all lawful means to monitor what is actually happening in those meetings.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/...46/page-7.html