No opinion on the separatism that’s for smarter people to figure out but that flag looks dumb
What, just throwing the coat of arms on a blue flag isn’t good enough for you? I bet you want it to have meaningful designs and to be recognisable at a distance…
Sounds a lot like Treason to me.
So sedition boils down to:
Actions and speech in support of the use of force as a means of accomplishing a governmental change within Canada.
The relevant law on treason I think boils down to:
Communicating military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that may be used by another state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada.
Economic data is scientific in nature, Alberta separation is prejudicial to the safety and defence of Canada. I think there’s a case for treason charges.
Isn’t that the kind of treasonous action that typically still can get you the chair / rope / bullet?
Alberta separatists are traitors, selling AB out to the fascists down south
What is most revealing is they are willing to sell natural resources for pennies on the dollar which is proof they dont actually care about the betterment of Alberta. This was always grievance (aka prejudice) politics. Maple MAGA is an extremists movement.
“Pennies on the dollar” for something they otherwise wouldn’t be allowed to sell, is still a massive windfall. These people are not just traitors to their country…they’re thieves.
Untrue for oil and gas. Alberta has seen windfall gains on oil and gas growing year over year. Under trudeau profits rose their fastest and most sustained in albertan history. Carney now building a second pipeline, more markets equals better asking price. Offering even cheaper rates for products already on a market is self defeating.
I guess you meant water though. Alberta actually is more water sensitive than most of the country, so that wouldn’t be wise.
Ummm, no…I was talking about the oil royalties. That’s the equivalent of “ownership stock” in Alberta’s most profitable resource. If they give that to the US, then they collect a share of everything the oil companies pull out of the ground. That’s revenue that belongs to everyone in Alberta, and these fucks are planning on selling it to the Americans in exchange for treason.
Ah that is my point too. Selling out resources to the Americans as opposed to finding new markets at market rates, means these people are dont care about albertan prosperity.
they want to be the Vichy state
The liberals in power will never label them as such because they’re all in the same fucking camp
Ive never voted Liberal and wont. But to be fair. These separatists are suggesting way below market rates to a single buyer as an incentive for US support. Carney is buying another pipeline (after Trudeau did which is at 95% export capacity) which means more markets at market rates. Not below it.
Canada is in spend mode for unity building. The short sighted delusion of separatist movements is looking to the US as a possible prosperity improvement. Not only is US at collapsing debt levels, begging for statehood is going to be at ultra weak bargaining position relative to Canadian federation. Territory, or Venezuela status, is the most optimistic/realistic possible outcome. The 51st state talk is not out of any love for any Canadian/Province inhabitant. It is purely for theft and oppression.
How is this not illegal? Shouldn’t they be in jail for treason?
I once looked into whether Danielle Smith’s known instances of collusion with Donald Trump against the territorial integrity of Canada constituted literal treason, and found that it did according to the relevant laws . But it appears that the feds are unwilling to arrest and try her for treason, for fear of the backlash among the Maple MAGA crowd.
The consequences of not enforcing laws are, severe. Case in point, the US.
Arrest those who would provide the backlash too. If law is good enough for traitor, it’s good enough for supporters of traitor too.
I’d say arrest her and wait for the backlash then arrest those who commit crimes.
last thing you want is to set a precedent that everyone on a ‘side’ is a criminal. wait for the crimes.
If your side is “I don’t like the fairly elected government so let’s go against the people’s will and secede while selling off the land to a wannabe dictator”, then I’m sorry, you ARE a criminal traitor.
isn’t that sort of the problem with the confederates, they weren’t all tried for treason after the civil war?
deleted by creator
it wouldn’t hurt to string up a few of the traitors as well.
Removed by mod
found that it did
How so?
Every one commits treason who, in Canada,
- uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
Not so far…
- without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
Maybe? I don’t see military or scientific secrets being described here, but I’m open to the possiblity if there’s any evidence.
- conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
Again, not so far.
- forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
Again, not so far.
- conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.
And that’s another maybe, but I don’t see anything in this article that screams “military or scientific secrets.”
Here is the actual code (obviously from when Queen Elizabeth was Monarch):
High treason
46 (1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,
(a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;
(b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or
© assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.
Treason
(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,
(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
(b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
© conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
(e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.
Recall that Danielle Smith visited Trump at Mar-A-Lago shortly after he was reelected to the Presidency of the USA, for a meeting with undisclosed purpose. Rumours indicated that she and Trump discussed Smith opening the way to allow Trump to seize control of Alberta, after which she would be installed as Governer of occupied Alberta. Everything that she has done since that meeting regarding this astroturfed referendum campaign is consistent with this rumour. Not proof, but highly suspicious.
Treason may be less appropriate a statute than bribery. Offering to become the Delcey Rodriguez puppet of Alberta for corrupt political/$ support is extreme corruption and diminishment of the people of Alberta, but fascist oligarchist and foreign subservience, when its US or Israel, is SOP. Offering China free money/resources, would create more appoplexia.
Yeah, I omitted High Treason, because it obviously doesn’t apply.
And the laws sound treason are pretty much entirely focused on facilitating a foreign military invasion. Based on what we know so far, I don’t think there’s anything there that would hold up in court.
But like I said the last time this came up, by all means, investigate away. I just think it’s far more likely that they’d get nailed on lesser charges like foreign interference-related stuff (but I don’t really know anything about our foreign interference laws, save that they seem to be woefully inadequate).
Does Alberta not have private prosecution available?
Trump should hang here down south
All while Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro told Canadian lobbyists to “get the hell out” of the U.S. and warned Canada would “pay even more dearly” if it interfered in the upcoming midterm elections.
MAGA is apparently trying to use hypocrisy as a strategy.
deleted by creator
This is treason.
Wild how split Canada is right now, you got people wanting to jump ship to the EU or sell their souls to the USA.
Nobody wants to “jump ship to EU”
We should have been closer to them all along. Canada is a European nation
Where is RCMP and CSIS in investigating this treasonous corruption?
They’re full of racist maga types too
I will have to look this up again but the clause that allows for Provinces to possibly leave the Federation has a stipulation that this must be done free of foreign interference. Basically what they are doing has been invalid from the start. When the idiots in Alberta were astroturfed by outside influence to believe that there is a desire for separation, it was already technically invalid. Since they are openly collaborating, it is clearly invalid and parliament can’t accept the result of whatever crap they do. Danielle Smith and the UPC know this and her actions make a lot more sense when you understand that they can do whatever and they know they will never have to deal consequences of running Alberta as a country. The sad part is that conservative politics are so garbage they are doing this instead of helping people.
They don’t need it to be “technically” allowed by esoteric Canadian laws, or areas discussed primarily by law fangirls that find joy in digging through whether a comma in a sentence changes the meaning of a law or whatever.
They just need enough public support, optics data points and soundbites, to justify more forceful action from the Alberta government, and/or the US government.
It’s sorta like the trade dispute. The American side exclusively looks at the goods trade portfolio, and exempts the services trade numbers, because if you look at the ‘whole’ trade scenario, America is way “ahead” of Canada given how they frame trade deficits. They do that to have a data point / sound bite, simple concept, for the idiot base to latch on to and support their nonsense trade actions against Canada. They use that data point as the “real” justification for their actions, while implementing penalties based on totally bullshit official reasons (eg. “Fentanyl! We need tariffs because of Fent!!”). The “ends justify the means” crowd can then get on board, because even if the official reasons are clearly wrong/illegal/unethical, they think the ‘trade imbalance’ emergency warrants taking any action possible to address it.
If Alberta votes strongly in favour of separation, American fascists will feel emboldened to aid Alberta, and punish Canada. Technicalities of the law will not matter.
I looked it up. It is loosely write as you said, however that swings both ways.
There was something else I did notice. The provinces have to agree to the constitutional amendment required to allow Alberta to separate. All it takes is one Premier to say that the referendums were not done democratically. They would have to go through everything that was done in bad faith in front of parliament and be willing to pay the massive political cost of doing so.
The thing that is actually impossible is getting the First Nations to agree to leave Canada. I would guess they have claim to more than 75% of the land, leaving Alberta to be a fraction of the size it once was. Those treaties are a goddam mess and can basically never be modified.
I’d dispute this a bit. Treaties exist and are a concern because Canada tries to do its best to honour them. They are paper, and are a social construct.
A fascist/Trumpian administration will handle treaties in the same fashion as they handled the Gordie Howe Bridge situation: treaties, contracts and so on are paper controls, meaning they lack inherent enforcement, and can be torn up at any time should either party choose to do so, and have the military/power to enforce their side’s interests. Canada as a nation has had that power historically, but has not typically exercised it.
In addition to potentially just ignoring First Nation treaties, a fascist/authoritarian administration could take other broad-stroke steps to impact the treaty process – this is made even more plausible when you look at what Alberta’s other 9 questions are about on their referendum. There’s a chunk of ‘stuff’ in the treaty-process that’s essentially been ‘added in’ by the law society over the years – all of that could get opened up / changed by an authoritarian government deciding the courts got it wrong, and legislating a different course.
For example, the concept of “Shared Exclusivity” didn’t really exist in most treaties. The Charter/Constitution also primarily talk about three specific designated groups. Removing Shared Exclusivity would eliminate land-claim conflicts, drastically reduce the size of land claims, and could easily be justified for removal on progressive grounds even – it was a law society decision interpreting the charter/constitution that was made in the late 1900s, that treats all First Nations as a unified whole, even though many of these nations actually raided each other for slaves / were not friends. It’s like saying Rome had “Shared Exclusivity” of Egypt, because they showed up for a few years and took some slaves from Egypt. Focusing on the three designated groups, the government could re-tool its negotiations to just worry about those three groups from the govts side – you can’t realistically expect the whole government to bend over backward trying to treat with a band that’s less than 500 people. So “First Nations” need to have a representative/singular structure for negotiations, and if they can’t sort it out on their side of the negotiation table, “too bad for them, fascists advance!”. And to reiterate an earlier point – even if these steps may seem dodgey, they could enact them with the support from the people based on the ‘real’ reason being 'democratic principles must be paramount in a democracy": the ends justify the means.
Canada gets shat on constantly by First Nations. They use terms like “Colonial” as pejoratives with gusto, because Canadians are too polite to point out its a slur/racist – it’s so entrenched/accepted to use it as such, that it’s even done in marketing campaigns for schools that are seeking to “de-colonialize” things… Canada’s been pretty good, relatively speaking, compared to other nations in regards to local native populations. But it’d be silly to pretend like these issues couldn’t be handled differently, in ways that are far less charitable to First Nation people.
And I think First Nations understand this at some level, which is why despite all their anti-Canada sentiment, they want to remain in Canada. Because, yes, if another power comes in, they won’t give a shit about treaties.
I come from one of the most conservative little towns in all of alberta and seppies have always been first and foremost, maga/wannabe americans. Since at least the 1980s.
And none of these people are well educated nor well traveled. I don’t think I know a single seppie who has been to europe.
Have they even been outside the province?
Yeah they’ve been to Cranbrook and shuswap lake lol
Elite seppies have probably been to a resort in cancun once
Servitude is not fucking independence!
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
