all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 46 points 9 months ago (1 child)

Arrest them. Lock them up for life. If you don’t do it now, that shit spreads.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 41 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Good, that is exactly what it is

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago

    Damn, dude. Whatcha gonna do about it?

  • source
  • 53 comments in c/canada@lemmy.ca view that post
    [–] 69 points 9 months ago

    I want a warrant out for their arrests yesterday.

  • source
  • [–] 60 points 9 months ago

    Finally an elected official has said it.

  • source
  • [–] 52 points 9 months ago

    Finally calling a spade, a spade.

  • source
  • [–] 42 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Eby out there spitting truth. And he's right - this is a separatist splinter group trying to drag the majority of Albertans who want nothing to do with them kicking and screaming into the abyss of US annexation.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 38 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Alberta separation is an american operation.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 9 months ago

    I love this quote - it provides a little more context - from CBC's coverage:

    "To go to a foreign country and to ask for assistance in breaking up Canada, there's an old-fashioned word for that, and that word is treason," said Eby, ahead of the closed-door meeting in Ottawa.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 9 months ago

    It is treason. Canada better charge them ASAP.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 9 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    The punishment for treason is worse than prison. As it should be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Seems like a lot of work and probably too slow. Guillotines were invented to automate the process. That means they're basically the AI-enabled "smart" version, and everybody wants to use that for everything nowadays, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 25 points 9 months ago

    Fucking thank God we're on the same page for once

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Hey they're more than welcome to leave. They're not taking the land but they're welcome to go. I'll even help them pack and give them a swift kick in the ass when they're at the border.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago

    Strip everything away and you'll find it's just the convoy crowd that is still pissed off because they are slightly uncomfortable and they threw too much money at their trucks. Most other Albertans are just ordinary working stiffs like most of us.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago

    How is this not an act of war by the US?

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago

    Good. Let’s be honest about what it really is.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago

    Great, now time for action not for talk.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago

    This is a bigger problem and it is being ignored by governments for far too long. It's not just these clowns, the Ottawa protest, all the Alberta "think tanks" and these NFP NGOs like "Canadian Federation of Taxpayers" who get tax free status in Canada but do not reveal that they are being funded by US Fascist Foundations like Atlas.

    You want NFP status in Canada, you should have to be 100% transparent as to who is funding your agenda.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    Please tell me I’m not the only one that read that as eBay

  • source
  • [+] -10 points 9 months ago (16 children)

    Legally speaking? Almost certainly not.

    (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;

    (c) 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 9 months ago (13 children)

    This definition of "high treason" seems close enough to me. And if it's not close enough for you, seems like it's well on its way, no?

    "Waging war against Canada or doing any act preparatory to waging war against Canada."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago

    Yeah, undermining the stability of the country while waging trade war and threatening annexation. It's part of the puzzle. This is hybrid warfare. War is not just bombs and bullets. We have a standard legal term for that, and it's "international armed conflict." War is a more expansive idea, not clearly defined but arguably very appropriate here.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (11 children)

    I think there would have to be an actual military buildup to make that stick.

    To be clear, I'm more than happy to call them colliquially treasonous...I just don't think elected officials should be throwing the term around too casually.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    The president of another country publicly saying, "we will annex you against your will", not once but hundreds of times itself is as threating if not more than military buildup.

    We're so desentisized to Trump's ramblings, that we often forget that he's the PRESIDENT of the US. He wields immense power and can act on what he says (which he has done almost always).

    A foreign power tells us that we'll be annexed. Their president repeatedly refers to our elected officials by names designated to non sovereign entities inside their country.

    This foreign power funds and engages in a separatist movement within our country. How is this not an "act preparatory to war"?

    These assholes should be locked up for high treason.

    Note: Quebecois separatism is different. It's really stupid, but NOT TREASON. Why's that? It would be treason to conspire with a foreign power, and take actions to undermine the sovereignty of Canada.

    Had Alberta separatism not had US involvement, it would not have been treason. It would just be a bunch of really stupid people using their democratic rights to act within what they feel is their interest.

    But what is happening right now is exactly what happened to Ukraine.

    If the current administration is really as "elbows up" as it claims to be, it should prosecute and shut down this US backed operation in Alberta. Not doing so could make us another Ukraine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -9 points 9 months ago

    is as threating if not more than military buildup.

    I really don't think that would hold up in court, and in any case it is irrelevant to whether the Alberta separatists are sharing military secrets, or doing anything that would meet Canada's legal definition of treason.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    USA is threatening to occupy our airspace (under the guise of NORAD) if we don't subsidize their F-35 program to the tune of 80 Billion USD.

    You are naive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    As was pointed out when that was discussed earlier this week, no they aren't. They're trying to convince us that our military will be weaker if we don't buy their planes, and that they will have to pick up the slack.

    The administration isn't that bright. When they threaten military force, it won't be subtle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    I wouldnt consider what Alberta is doing as causal, it's a coordinated efferts to try and a ex the Provence to fit America wishes, I would consider that treasonous, you can got to court about it but I'd think they'd lose.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    I'm describing Eby's use of the word casual, as I don't think he, as an elected official, should be accusing people of crimes - especially those with an extraordinarily high bar.

    Do I think the Alberta separatists are wrong? Yes.

    Do I consider it a betrayal? Yes.

    Am I fine with the average person on the street using the word "treason" to describe it. Sure.

    Do I think elected officials should do the same? No.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    while i think there's a point to that, there's also the time that leaders need to put voice to what the people are feeling, and using colloquial terms is more effective. in the legislative, judicial and other governmental chambers, yeah pedantry is important. official edicts, also.

    sometimes you need to be able to look at your elected officials and see them saying "shit is fucked yo" too instead of "now this is improper"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago

    Some of those just seem to require conspiracy, not overt action. If they ever discussed those possibilities, even as contingency plans, it might be possible to make a charge stick.

    In the end, if this makes it to court, it's likely to come down to the judge.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -41 points 9 months ago (9 children)

    So if speration, or talking about it is treason, why isn't quebec talked about? Two failed referendums and a possible third on the way, and it's nothing but crickets... also, if it did happen, who do you honestly think quebec would buddy up to to get security?

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 9 months ago

    It's not the separation talk itself that's the problem, it's the meeting with US officials.

    Also, what someone may have gotten away with in the past has absolutely no relevance to what people should be getting away with today.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 66 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Separatism isn't inherently treason. Conspiring with foreign actors to conduct acts that undermine the sovereignty of Canada while promote the interests of that foreign actor(s) is.

    Especially when the said foreign actor has expressed intentions to ANNEX US.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago

    At least Russia had the decency to put a transparently thin veneer of subtlety and justification when they did it to all their neighbors. It was all lies, it was all paper thin, but at least they, y'know, tried. I respect the effort put into the hustle.

    Trump is just like "yeah whatever they can't stop us, we'll take whatever we want if we want to."

    The fucking disguises have been dropped and the gloves are off, time to wake up and start paying attention before our entire planet is stolen from us by despicable, hateful monsters who want to destroy it and then fuck off to Mars and leave us all to die.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Are you being obtuse on purpose?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago*

    Maple MAGA are not welcome and are in no way the same as quebec. Quebec is not conspiring to devide our state up just to join a predatory state, something that can now be proven to be happening in Alberta, just move to America loser.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -14 points 9 months ago

    Gotta love the absolute animosity with internet warriors. How about understanding the issues that people across Canada have due to their individual provincial stupidity. Living in quebec is one of, if not the worst of the provinces, due to ridiculous and unnecessary problems, like a language police, or the countries highest tax rates and even better yet the constant threat of speration, which I might add, hurt Quebecs industrial sector in irreversible ways. When it had its last referendum, a large portion of business left for ontario and other provinces. As a province with a massive abundance of natural resources available, it is a huge problem for the people who live there because quebec can't defend them selves and would be invaded. If your first conclusion is that people are Maga or left, you should probably take a minute before responding. Political affiliation isn't the question, the well-being of the people living there is.

  • source
  • parent