No Amnesty without Accountability for COVID Crimes: Looking Into and Beyond Canada’s Emergency Act Inquiry

by Prof. Anthony J. Hall | Nov 5, 2022

I dedicate this essay to Prof. Michel Chossudovsky and his new book, “The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity”.  

Click here to download Chossudovsky’s Book

My aim is to highlight the splendid scientific and literary achievement of a great and multi-faceted scholar.

Michel has guided the Global Research vessel since he founded this flag ship of enlightened activism in 2001. It has been my great honour and pleasure to work with Michel and the GR Team in the cause of exposing the lies and crimes of Corona officialdom. This exposure forms a necessary condition for restoring a measure of health to our own now-endangered species.  

***

“You need to designate the group as a terrorist group and seize their assets and impair them.” —Planning Notes of Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister of the Canadian Government. Feb. 13, 2022 in Preparation for a Clampdown on the Freedom Convoy Members 

We are in dire need of some effective reckoning with the culprits who manufactured and who continue to exploit the COVID-19 Apocalypse. The terms for such a reckoning were suggested by the many negative commentaries raised in response to a trial balloon calling for a “Pandemic Amnesty.” Brown University Professor, Emily Oster, floated this much-discussed proposal for an amnesty in The Atlantic Magazine.

If Oster’s concepts were to be implemented, all legal accountability would be bypassed and deleted for a catastrophic crime spree mounted in the name of fighting COVID. This criminal activity gave rise to tsunamis of lies about many topics including COVID tests and deaths. The ongoing COVID Hoax continues to energize the accelerating decline in the viability of many societies worldwide. 

The manufactured COVID crisis has proven to be a catalyst in the radicalization of increasingly authoritarian dictatorships. These regimes are caught up in intertwined globalist agendas whose effect is to unhinge governments from even a semblance of adherence to the rule of law. This decline into lawless tyranny is already well advanced in many polities including Canada, the United States, Israel, and the UK.

Oster’s essay was published prominently in a venue well within the regime whose aim is to impose a template of mental conformity largely through the legacy media’s imposition of lockstep propaganda.

See this. 

Oster is clearly speaking for a large and influential constituency with her request that an amnesty should be granted. This double-edged proposal includes an implicit admission that serious crimes have indeed been committed in the name of fighting COVID-19. 

Many commentators have aligned their voices in rejecting Oster’s proposal. Ever since the WHO-declared pandemic began, Oster has used her academic and journalistic platforms to actively demonize critics of the COVID officialdom.

A key objective of COVID-driven globalism is to transfer jurisdiction over health care from national governments to the UN’s World Health Organization. This uploading of authority from elected officials to unelected operatives at the United Nations is meant to advance the centralization of authority. Such supranational centralization is avidly sought by the leadership of the World Economic Forum and the corporatist agencies and interests its leadership represents.   

Oster argues that the COVID saga developed under a dark cloud of uncertainty and confusion. As she would have it, everyone’s judgment was equally impaired. Getting things right or wrong was, in Oster’s opinion, simply a matter of luck. “We simply didn’t know.”

The Big Kill

Some, however, obviously did know more than others. More important yet, some of those who did hold superior levels of scientific expertise and understanding also had the courage and temerity to speak truth to power. One of them is the outspoken Alberta physician, Dr. Roger Hodkinson. He refers to the unfolding holocaust in our midst as “the big kill.”

Even now, the main critics of the scientific and ethical impoverishment afflicting COVID officialdom continue to face serious recriminations. The critics of lockdowns as well as mandatory masking and COVID jabs are subject to efforts aimed at intimidating them into silence by ruining their careers, reputations, and livelihoods.

As with the assaults on Dr. Charles Hoffe and Dr. Francis Christian in Canada, the persecution of Dr. Peter McCullough in the United States points to the deep corruption permeating many of the medical profession’s governing bodies. 

See this, this, this and this.

There are scores of illustrations revealing the severity of the witchhunt aimed at those engaged in exposing the unscientific bafflegab integral to the COVID-19 power grab.

Oster’s many critics, including me, have made it clear that we reject the core concepts supporting her proposal for an amnesty. Such a concession makes no sense, but especially now that we are gaining a fuller sense of the enormous scale and intensity of the drive to cull the human population. This depopulation is happening simultaneously with the onslaught of transhumanist projects aimed at altering the genetic, biological and physical characteristics of the enfeebled survivors. 

On a more personal level, we refuse to ignore the treatment that Oster and her cronies directed against those of us who now stand vindicated because of our refusals to take the untested gene-modifying jabs.

Saying No to Oster’s Whitewash

Of many dozens of thoughtful critiques of Oster’s Atlantic essay, Neil Oliver’s commentary stands out for its principled balance and coherence.  An archaeologist and historian who shot to prominence in making documentary films in the UK, Oliver sees as “absurd” Oster’s argument that an amnesty is required to “move forward.” Oster’s interpretation opens the door to what Oliver characterizes as a cynical “whitewash.”  

Oliver reminds us that the Covidian crimes that Oster seeks to sweep under the rug include the hugely destructive travesty of mandatory lockdowns that treated citizens like prisoners to be subdued.

The lockdowns targeted workers and small businesses. The lockdowns were meant to impoverish and demoralize many people; to drive them into depression, substance abuse, domestic violence, and suicide.

Oliver also highlighted the invocation of coercive state power to enforce mandatory masking whose destructive impacts include the extensive damage done to the healthy learning of school-aged children.

“Emergency Measures” as Subversive Means of Grabbing Power and Money

In the prelude to the imposition of the most massive medical procedure ever imposed on the global population, many of even the most basic rules for the development of relatively safe and effective medical products were ignored and thereby transgressed. The requirements for animal and double-blind placebo tests, for instance, were mostly neglected or sabotaged by the drug makers as well as by their cronies in thoroughly captured and corrupted federal regulatory agencies.

One of the main means of bypassing the safety rules was provided by a legal abomination known as Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). The US Federal and Drug Administration (FDA) clarified the distribution of the Pfizer-BionTech shots was “unapproved” yet “permitted.”

Underlying this internally contradictory statement is officialdom’s ill-backed position that the supposedly new coronavirus was so lethal that it created a global emergency, one that justified the emergency release of improperly-tested medical products.

[See Michel Chossudovsly, The Worldwide Corona Crisis: Global Coup d’État Against Humanity. Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, (Montreal: Centre for Research in Globalization, 2022),  Chapter 8, passim]

The legal provisions of EUA were put in place as a one of the sweetheart deals extended by corrupt lawmakers seeking inclusion in Big Pharma’s financial bonanza. The EUA protects drug makers from being sued for the injuries and deaths caused by their hastily produced products. When seen in the light of the abundant evidence of the millions of injuries and deaths caused by the COVID injections, the EUA can be seen as a federal license to kill and to maim on a grand scale.

The criminal abuses of the authoritarian powers claimed in the name of emergency measures, draw on many of the precedents established following the pervasive misrepresentations of the 9/11 false flag. See this.

The widespread mischaracterization of the events of 9/11 in 2001 was exploited to justify the massive inflation of arbitrary powers available to the executive branches at all levels of government. With the new powers came the capacity of top executive authorities to designate, incarcerate and sometimes torture and kill suspected “terrorists” without the safeguards of due process.

Many governments abused the authority to classify their most effective political opponents as terrorists, a travesty being attempted again in the 2020s by the Biden government in USA and the Trudeau government in Canada.

The manufactured COVID crisis resulted in the further expansion of emergency measures powers far beyond those seized in 2001. Beginning in 2020 many governments pushed their agendas forward by invoking the shortcut of regulatory fiat to bypass the more demanding requirements of legislative procedures.

An elaborate collection of emergency measure declarations piled up across Canada culminating in the federal executive branch’s decision in February of 2022 to invoke the outgrowth of the War Measures Act. Some facets of the process attending the Canadian government’s invocation of the Emergency Act on 14 Feb. 2022 will be highlighted below. 

A Turn Against the Sanctity of Life and the Mysteries Animating the Unique Spirit of Every Human Being   

The COVID emergency measures are already creating the prototype for many “Green” emergency measures to follow. To help this process along we are being subjected to a series of cabal-created and cabal-augmented catastrophes. From war mongering to attacks on food supplies, energy sources, supply chains, as well as on any and all platforms providing economic security for average working people, an unprecedented plan of global depopulation and enfeeblement is well underway.

See this.

Suddenly even the façade of respect for the sanctity of human life is being abolished by many of those engaged in our top-down governance. Such governors and their agents apparently want to make a virtue of creating the conditions for the breakdown of human fertility as well as for surges of injury, sickness and premature deaths.

What are we to make of this turn, a turn by some of the most powerful people on earth against any reverence for the eternal mysteries animating the unique spirit of every human being? The obsession with shrinking and eliminating carbon footprints is being stretched to outrageous extremes.

The Green preoccupation with eliminating carbon, the primary ingredient in the chemistry of all life, is forming the basis of the eugenic drive to eliminate people along with our footprints. This genocidal event is well reflected by a growing body of compelling evidence. The evidence includes statistics showing startling rises in all-cause mortality since the COVID injections began.

See this, this, this and this.   

We cannot allow recognition of the lethal crime wave in our midst to be waved aside any longer as “conspiracy theories.” The stakes have become too high to allow for the continuation of such willful blindness especially on the part of those most responsible for the depopulation event unfolding in our midst.

See this.

Conflict of Interest Built into the Emergency Act Inquiry 

Neil Oliver presents a succinct list of the criteria that would have to be met before there can be any consideration of amnesty for those who maliciously engineered and continue to broaden the manufactured COVID crisis. He asks, “How can you seek an amnesty and seek to put behind you things you are still doing now?” Oliver stipulated that no amnesty should be put on the table without

1. confessions of guilt
2. acceptance of culpability
3. taking of responsibility
4. necessary punishment
5. assurances that nothing similar will ever be done again

See this video.

A common thread running through all these criteria is that there would have to be some sequence leading from probing investigations to fair and objective trials of those credibly accused of pushing and exploiting the COVID crisis. Such a process would have to include provision for studying, formulating, implementing, and enforcing appropriate terms as the preconditions for any kind of amnesty settlement.  

In Canada a federal investigation known as the Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC) is presently taking place. This inquiry veers quite far from the kind of procedures we most require across many configurations and levels of governance as exercised in both the public and private sectors.

Nevertheless, in spite of the abundant shortcomings of the inquiry, the Canadian example opens the door of national and international consideration to some aspects of what a proper investigation of the COVID crisis and its attending crimes might look like.

The Emergency Act was initially invoked by the Liberal Party minority government led by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The enactment came in response to the many-faceted public education activities generated by the Truckers Freedom Convoy and its supporters over a three-week period in late January and February of 2022. The Truckers’ Convoy touched down in Ottawa and in several sympathy protests organized along the Canada-US border.

The Public Order Emergency Commission was established to fulfill the provision of the Emergency Act that calls for a Canadian government inquiry to be followed by a report to both legislative bodies of Parliament. This inquiry is “to examine and assess” the soundness of the Canadian government’s decision to invoke the Emergency Act which it did from February 14 to February 23 of 2022. See this.

The biggest problem with the POEC is that it was largely created of, by, and for the Liberal Party government of Justin Trudeau. Trudeau thus finds himself in a classic conflict of interest. The Trudeau government has engaged in establishing the makeup and procedures to investigate federal actions and decisions for which Justin Trudeau is ultimately responsible.

This setup reflects the problem that Neil Oliver anticipated. In rejecting Emily Oster’s call for a COVID amnesty, Oliver predicted that the main protagonists in creating and exploiting the COVID crisis “are going to investigate themselves and each other.”

How might this Catch 22 be transcended in future processes of investigation? What new  departures in procedure would be required to move beyond the phenomenon of having COVID culprits investigate other COVID culprits? In the Canadian context this problem is compounded because of the actions and decisions made by many judges. By and large Canadian judges abandoned their judicial independence by making themselves enforcers rather than objective arbitrators of government COVID measures. See this.

The Liberal Party bias of the Emergency Act Inquiry was well reflected in Trudeau’s choice of a well-known Liberal Party insider, Justice Paul S. Rouleau, to lead the POEC. Before becoming a judge, Paul Rouleau helped elect and staff the Liberal governments of Prime Ministers John Turner and Paul Martin. Paul Rouleau was briefly a partner in Heenan Blaike, the Montreal law firm that hired both Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien after each of them left the job of prime minister. See this and this.

True to his reputation for speciousness, Trudeau explained to the public that the Emergency Act Inquiry was initiated through the Prime Minister’s benevolence rather than on the basis of legislative requirement. Trudeau announced,

“We called this inquiry so Canadians could see exactly why we needed to invoke the Emergency Act, and how, when we invoked it, we invoked it in ways that were responsible, limited and targeted on solving the problems as quickly as possible.”

Whose Violence Against Persons and Property?

The question of whether or not the Trudeau government had “reasonable grounds” to invoke the Emergency Act is the subject of the report being prepared by Justice Rouleau on behalf of the Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC). Commissioner Rouleau’s final report is due on February 6, 2023.

See this.

A key aspect of the Commissioner’s findings will be based on his assessment of whether federal authorities acted in accord with a key provision of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act (CSIS ACT).

Section 2 (c) of the CSIS Act, which was reproduced in February of 2022 as part of the Proclamation Declaring a Public Order Emergency, stipulates that a threat to Canada’s security exists when “ activities within or relating to Canada [are] directed toward or in support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political, religious or ideological objective within Canada or a foreign state.” See this and this.

A major theme addressed throughout many of the Commission’s examinations of more than 70 witnesses during a six-week period, concerned various perceptions concerning the “threat” of “serious violence against persons and property.” Much of this discussion was based on the perceptions of witnesses about what they feared might happen, rather than what actually did happen.

What did happen is a peaceful protest combined with some expressions of civil disobedience in the form of illegal parking and some early rounds of excessive honking.

The discussion of violence in the inquiry’s proceedings would have been much enriched by a more comparative approach. Many Truckers and their supporters surely conceived of their own actions as attempts to put checks on various types of invasive violence directed at people and property through a series of ill-considered government decisions and actions.

Cancelling Out Diverse Perspectives and Interpretations to Impose a Single COVID Narrative on Canada and the World

These irrational and arguably illegal violent acts of the state were not exclusive to Canada but were replicated in varying degrees throughout many of the world’s 195 countries. A key aspect of the global reproduction of similar sets of wrongful government actions has to do with the lockstep managing and messaging of the legacy media in country after country.

How was this many-faceted coordination of media communications achieved? This subject is one that awaits penetrating rounds of national and transnational investigation. Even in the proceedings of the POEC, there are conspicuous absences when it comes to considering the role of the media.

Much like in many other countries, clearly a decision was made far above the level of Parliament and the Supreme Court that the legacy media would direct the responses of officialdom and the public to the manufactured COVID crisis. The big media venues would publicize and legitimize a uniform COVID narrative no matter how specious. They would develop and coordinate a single narrative rather than provide fair and balanced news coverage so that their audiences could have sufficient access to a range of perspectives enabling them to develop well-informed decisions for themselves and their families.

This same single narrative approach was extended even into the now-discredited medical profession where independent analysis became more the exception than the rule.

The Largest Case of Medical Malpratice Ever

Presently the most intense surge of COVID violence against people is being expressed in the unnecessary injuries, illnesses and deaths caused by the COVID injections. We are well past the point when these harms can be dismissed as occasional aberrations or rare events.

The media-reinforced blindspots concerning injection deaths and injuries are fast giving way to growing public understanding that something is going seriously awry when it comes to the extent of the growing harms being done by clot shots.

Even in the course of the Commission’s proceedings Prime Minister Trudeau and the Deputy Prime Minister, Chrystia Freeland, continued the mantra that the injections are “safe and effective.” In fact Trudeau asserted that his continuing promotion of COVID booster shots was an expression of his responsibility to keep Canadians “safe and alive.” See this.

Trudeau’s abject incompetence, let alone his obvious deficit in honesty, integrity and basic common sense, is making his prime ministership increasingly notorious throughout Canada and the world. See video below.

As with many top officials, Trudeau’s empty reassurances in encouraging clot-shot compliance augments the toll of the injured and dead that continue to be cut down by the largest case of medical malpractice ever. Trudeau has not yet even come to grips with the fact that the COVID jabs do not prevent infection from, or transmission of, COVID-19

This failure of the COVID injections to prevent against transmission makes a lewd mockery of coercive vaccine mandates, of vaccine passports as well as of the schemes to segregate and punish the unvaccinated. As times goes by the anti-science diatribes from the likes of Justin Trudeau help to broaden the predations of an injected bioweapon that sometimes kills people and always attacks their natural immunity.

As for the violence to property, the completely nonsensical and economically devastating lockdowns did infinitely more damage than any of slowdowns in commerce attributed to the Truckers and their supporters.  Many of them took action with the goal of bringing an end to the COVID madness, but especially the economic madness done to small business, to wage-earning workers, and to those most endangered by the rapid acceleration of runaway inflation.

The Same Set of Flawed Responses to Similar Bodies of Contrived Evidence

One of the factors that helped mute early public outcries condemning the COVID restrictions and mandates was that the same sets of wrongheaded policies were introduced and implemented on a worldwide basis.

The uniformity of policies and crimes across many international borders helped cultivate forms of groupthink and conformity on an unprecedented scale. How was it that the same set of flawed responses to similar bodies of contrived evidence was replicated in country after country?

The global community requires a global investigation of how it was that the manufactured COVID crisis unfolded worldwide. The United Nations cannot be a credible participant in the conduct of this investigation given its own role, but especially that of the World Health Organization, in the genesis of this fiasco.

Indeed, part of the ongoing COVID-19 power grab and attending crime spree is to advance centralized global governance by empowering the WHO to take the lead role in supplanting the international system of sovereign nation states. Justin Trudeau is a major proponent of this “postnational” globalism. See this.

A major problem with the POEC process in Canada is that it treats the current emergency measures crisis within a national context when this manufactured crisis is best understood as part of a global phenomenon.

Indeed, one of the alarms that helped draw the Freedom Convoy to Ottawa was the realization that Parliament is becoming marginal in Trudeau’s preoccupation with sabotaging Canada’s institutions of national sovereignty. Trudeau and his WEF-groomed cabinet seem especially representative of the thesis that Canada’s current government is more based in Davos than in Ottawa. The appalling reception the Freedom Convoy faced in the national capital could be seen as the reflection of the sickly state of Canada’s Ottawa-based parliamentary democracy.

Government Acts Against the Truckers in the “Fog of War”

Of all the witnesses to appear before the POEC the Finance Minister, neocon Liberal Chrystia Freeland, came closest to setting the crisis in a wider international setting. Her testimony seemed, at least on the surface, to explain much about the genesis of the Trudeau’s government’s main plan in invoking the Emergency Act on Feb. 14.

That plan was to create an “economic incentive” for the Truckers to leave Ottawa by freezing their assets, undermining their businesses, and seizing many millions of dollars donated to their cause on Internet crowd-sourcing platforms. See this.

Freeland explained to the POEC on Nov. 24 that the plan to freeze bank accounts was developed on Feb. 13 in consultation of two unnamed banking officials. One of the bankers proposed to Freeland that the government should “sanction” the Truckers as if they were terrorists.

Within a day, this banker’s advice was adopted and implemented after an early morning First Minister zoom conference. At 4:30 pm on the afternoon of Feb. 14, Freeland and Trudeau announced the Trudeau government’s Emergency Act scheme would include the use of Canada’s financial institution to coerce the Truckers to leave Ottawa.

Without any judicial green lighting and with the proviso that the banks could not be sued for their actions, Canadians learned that financial institutions had started to seize the Truckers’ accounts as part of a larger set of attacks on the viability of their transport businesses. This announcement did result in many Truckers seeking to fend off financial ruin by firing up their rigs and pointing them out of Ottawa asap. See this.

Freeland’s quick willingness to adopt an anti-terrorist orientation towards the Truckers and their supporters is consistent with her militaristic choice of language in the POEC proceedings. Freeland made it clear that she viewed the Truckers as “illegal protestors” trying “to hold our democracy hostage.” Their strategy of parking their trucks in Ottawa for an extended period was the same as “forcing change at gunpoint.” As Freeland saw it, she was immersed in the “the fog of war” when she spoke to the bankers on Feb. 13. See this.

The advice to Freeland from the other banker was very different. He expressed the trepidation that any seizure of trucker’s accounts might be perceived “as the banking system being used as a political weapon of the government.” He added, “we [bankers] can’t be seen as an arm of the government…we can’t politicize the banks.” The unnamed bank officer concluded by suggesting that the Trudeau government might defuse the protest by dropping the mandates. See this.

Further advice to end the mandates came from Alan Kestenbaum. Kestenbaum is the American CEO of Stelco, the Hamilton-based steel maker. In a text he explained to Freeland, “I know it sucks to reverse course and back down, but does it really pay to carry on a policy in support of a mandate for a vaccine that doesn’t stop the spread of omicron.” See this.

What Transpired in the Absence of Formal Talks and Deliberations?

Prominent among the witnesses that appeared before the POEC were some of the main figures that played leading roles in getting the Freedom Convoy rolling and then instrumental once the truckers reached their destinations.

The combined testimony of the Trucker leadership has created a very valuable record of how one of the most significant protest movements in Canadian and even world history came to be. This group of witnesses included Tamara Lich, James Bauder, John Barber, Pat King, Tom Mazarro, Brigitte Belton, Daniel Bulford, Benjamin Dichter and Marco Van Huigenbos.

Like all the witnesses to appear before the POEC the Convoy leaders were cross-examined by lawyers for the POEC, for the government of Canada, and for Ottawa residents and businesses. Other groups permitted to ask questions of the witnesses included the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Democracy Fund and the Canadian Constitutional Centre. Police officers were active both as witnesses and as members of law enforcement organizations with legal standing in the proceedings.

Several witnesses from the Freedom Convoy explained how by the time they reached Ottawa they had the sense of being envoys of a very large and enthusiastic constituency. Many in this constituency of Convoy supporters had turned out to greet the Truckers, assist them, share information with them, thank them, and encourage them in their constructive quest for much-needed remedial change.

Instead of finding a decent and civil reception from the Canadian government, however, the Freedom Convoy members and their supporters were stigmatized collectively by an irate Prime Minister. Trudeau will forever be remembered for calling the diverse array of citizens who wheeled into Ottawa a “fringe minority.

In repeated rounds of antagonistic language, Trudeau made it clear that he regarded the Freedom Convoy group as a reprehensible bunch of bigoted, ignorant and hate-filled fools. When asked to explain his attacks in his testimony at the POEC hearing, Trudeau speciously denied he had called the Truckers “names.” In fact his name calling directed at the Truckers is now legendary throughout the world.

After the Truckers arrived Trudeau made himself scarce. His response made it absolutely clear that the PM and his government wanted no part in talks and deliberation. By doing so Trudeau became the primary decision maker in creating the conditions of the ensuing standoff. The Convoy participants dug in for a prolonged stay.

During their time in Ottawa the Truckers hosted many live events on social media. These events highlighted the presentations of invited doctors, lawyers, academics, and other expert practitioners.

Many of the invited presenters shared interpretations that often exposed the poverty of the standard COVID narrative pushed in lockstep by government officials and the legacy media. In this fashion Millions of people worldwide developed an appreciation for perspectives and interpretations denied them by the censorious zealots of COVID officialdom.

With some few exceptions the Truckers took the high ground on responding to the ritual spurning and defaming by their detractors. Most of the Convoy participants and supporters kept their demonstration sites as well as the locations of their parked habitations tidy. Some made a point of trying to contribute to the community of Ottawa by feeding the homeless, shovelling sidewalks and such.

Trudeau Has Been Contemplating the Invocation of the Emergency Act since 2020

In some ways the standoff provided Trudeau with a platform for the kind of wedge politics the Prime Minister embraces. In his testimony to the POEC, Trudeau indicated he was thinking of invoking the Emergency Act since the first hours of the Truckers’ arrival in Ottawa. Other testimony indicated that Trudeau had considered unleashing the Emergency Act back in the spring of 2020 when the manufactured COVID crisis first began gathering momentum.

Some members of the Trudeau government cabinet, including Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino, Attorney General David Lametti and Chyrista Freelandland, referred satirically to the Freedom Convoy as a natural target of martial law and military tanks in the streets of Ottawa. Mendicino tweeted to Lametti asking him, “how many tanks are you asking for?” See this. 

As the announcement of the Emergency Act became imminent, the whole project was more and more poised on the need to outlaw the Truckers as terrorists. Ever since the response to 9/11, the power grabs facilitated by the invocation of emergency measures has depended on the demonization of certain groups.

First it was Muslims that were stereotyped as the primary embodiments of “terror.” Now it is working class Truckers whose opposition to COVID policies is being transformed into “domestic terrorism” by federally-funded spin doctors such as Bernie Farber’s so-called “Anti-Hate” Network of former undercover cops and wonkey spin doctors. See this.

Since 9/11 the invention of terrorist enemies has become a lucrative business and, when successful, a source of considerable political traction for ruling parties. It seems that if Justin Trudeau, Chyrstia Freeland and Canada’s propagandistic media monopolies get their way, the Freedom Convoy is on its way to being rebranded as a “home-grown” equivalent of al-Qaeda.

Designate the Truckers as a Terrorist Group, Seize Their Assets, and Impair Them

In his cross-examination of Freeland on Nov. 24, Brendan Miller, one of the lawyers for the organizational outgrowth of the Freedom Convoy, asked the Deputy Prime Minister if she considered Tamara Lich to be a terrorist. Freeland awkwardly tried to deflect the question indicating that responsibility to designate terrorists belonged to other officials in her government.

Then Miller presented Freeland and the national audience of the POEC with a powerpoint slide picturing her own notes of Feb. 13. The notes referred to a a person described simply as “Dave.” When asked, Freeland indicated she couldn’t remember who Dave was.

In Freeland’s own handwriting the televised note indicated, “ You need to designate the group as a terrorist group and seize their assets and impair them.”

This note describes in a nutshell precisely the process that was initiated late in the afternoon of the next day. Is it possible or credible that the Trudeau government developed the banking plan and began to implement it in one day? Or is there much more to this story than anything that was revealed by the Trudeau government in the POEC proceedings?

The other main aspect of the changes that came about with the invocation of the Emergency Act, was the unleashing of police to commit acts of violent assault aimed at clearing Parliament Hill of peaceful protestors. See video below.

Weapons Said to be Smuggled into the Coutts Protest Site By Undercover Infiltrators Employed by the RCMP

The ever-controversial Brendon Miller emerged pretty much as the legal maverick of the Public Order Emergency Hearings. One of Miller’s projects in his lawyering during the POEC proceedings was to seek further evidence on the possibility that Liberal Party operatives, including a prominent PR firm, planted the much-photographed swastika as well as the Confederate flag, amidst the Parliament Hill demonstrations.

This type of tactic is not uncommon in the rough and tumble world of information wars. Planting objectionable images to smear your enemy is standard procedure for some unscrupulous lobbies.

Near the end of the proceedings Brendan Miller and Commissioner Rouleau exchanged criticisms with the result that the former was asked to leave the building. See video below.

Miller complied with Justice Rouleau’s order and then hosted a spontaneous media scrum on Wellington Street where he described his perception of a number of Liberal Party dirty tricks in the timing and redaction of document dumps. See video below.

Brendon Miller questioned Marlin Degrand, an Alberta government intelligence official with a background in the RCMP. The subject was the Trucker’s sympathy protest at Coutts on the border between Alberta and Montana. Here in nearby Lethbridge where I Iive, I have witnessed some parts of a court process involving the Crown’s treatment of four Coutts protestors charged by the RCMP with “conspiracy to commit murder.”

These men were arrested in the early hours of 14 February. The arrests took place shortly before the Emergency Act was announced and a few hours after Freeland penned her note about “the need to designate the group as terrorists.”

This sequence of events raises suspicions that the need was felt in Ottawa on Feb. 13 to have RCMP officials in Coutts immediately come up with some sort of real or fabricated evidence of a terrorist-style event. The RCMP is no stranger to entrapment of targeted individuals with the goal of creating terrorist scares to advance the political agendas of their paymasters. See this.

In his questioning of Degrand, Miller noted that public records show that the RCMP employed two female undercover agents at Coutts “from a very early point in the demonstrations.” Miller continued, indicating that the RCMP infiltrators “smuggled in a hockey bag [with] a whole bunch of guns into the protest.” Is this surprising remark connected to the still-unexplained RCMP photograph of a weapons arsenal alleged to have been seized at Coutts? See this video, see 3 hours, 13 minutes.

Transcripts of the testimony of undercover police agents at Coutts were used in the Crown’s evidence to deny bail to the four men now in jail waiting for their trial sometime in mid to late 2023. These police agents and assets were not present in the bail hearings to be cross-examined. The evidence they have given is thus problematic.

Nevertheless, based on this flawed process four men convicted of nothing were denied bail. They have been sentenced to stay in jail for a year and a half that will culminate in their show trial when their guilt or innocence will be decided.

Who would deny that the Coutts Four can be considered political prisoners in Alberta? When they do get their days in court the judge and jury will be swayed by the fact that they have already been deemed to be dangerous and untrustworthy.

Bail Hearings That Curtail Freedom of Speech, Assembly and Movement When No Guilt Has Been Proven

The abuses of judicial processes in the giving or withholding of bail have been significant in the treatment of those charged with criminal acts in connection to the activities of the Freedom Convoy movement. Many of those so charged are tagged with the nuisance allegation of “mischief.” When bail is allowed, as with the mischief charge directed at Tamara Lich, there are many conditions attached.

These conditions often prohibit the accused from using social media, from talking with certain individuals, and from travelling to certain places. Such conditions imply the accused has already been found guilty of something. Freedom  speech, assembly and movement is thus limited and the concept that one is innocent until proven guilty is violated.

Lich herself was jailed for a second time because she broke a condition of her bail by talking with Tom Marazzo at an awards ceremony in Toronto. The ceremony was organized by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms in order to honour Ms Lich with a Freedom Award. See this.

Looking Beyond the Emergency Act Inquiry in Canada

In its zeal to discredit and criminalize the Freedom Convoy movement, the Trudeau government may have committed crimes of its own that violate domestic and international laws. In this sense the proceedings of the Emergency Act Inquiry have produced new evidence that augments prior suspicions especially in relation to the protests at Coutts. The Coutts protests ended on Feb. 15.

The Trudeau government’s suspected violations are consistent with a well-documented pattern that has unfolded in many countries. After 9/11, the waging of the War on Terror was exploited by many corrupt regimes to discredit their main political opponents by smearing them as terrorists. Are Trudeau and Freeland and their accomplices inside government and law enforcement agencies guilty of the same transgressions?

We must look beyond the Canadian Emergency Act Inquiry. The PEOC can be seen as a procedure that has helped to clarify the need for further investigations not tainted by partisanship. These investigations would have to address the growing body of evidence that the manufactured COVID crisis initiated a broader, more many-faceted process aimed at undermining the remaining rights and freedoms of most people on Earth.

In the final analysis we must grapple with the evidence that a hybrid war is being waged on the largest part of humanity. Rather than meeting the violence we are facing with more violence, the time has come to create the basis for a comprehensive judicial process to address the war crimes and crimes against humanity pointed against us. If such a process were to be mounted, then the conditions would be in place to begin discussing a lasting amnesty.

Subscribe to GlobalResearch