This isn’t surprising. The father suspended the constitution (because that’s a thing over there??) over a manufactured panic over terrorists planting bombs in mailbox (Feds later got busted doing it, quite literally red-handed) [0]. He also maintained a close personal friendship with dictators such as Fidel Castro [1] [2], a man of great respect for humans right who didn’t hesitate to round up the gays in labor camps.
Seems like the son is trying to do the same with the truckers.
> The father suspended the constitution [...] over a manufactured panic over terrorists planting bombs in mailbox
Without speaking in support of it: as far as I know (and as far as your sources indicate) Pierre Trudeau's infamous 1970 invocation of the War Measures Act to temporarily suspend civil liberties had nothing to do with Operation Bricole, which didn't even start until 1972; it concerned the (real, not manufactured) kidnapping and murder of Pierre Laporte, among various other (real, not manufactured) terrorist activities. See [0] for more details.
Moreover: the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms didn't even exist in 1970, so it's not quite accurate to say that Trudeau "suspended the constitution" then. In fact, he's the one who, in 1982, led the charge to create a Canadian constitution and attendant protected rights [1].
> had nothing to do with Operation Bricole, which didn't even start until 1972
So the feds did get busted planting bombs to blame it on some terror organization. Just, not right away. That kinda makes what happened before they got busted suspicious doesn't it.
> it concerned the (real, not manufactured) kidnapping and murder of Pierre Laporte, among various other (real, not manufactured) terrorist activities
But the feds did get busted for doing the same thing... so that was manufactured. But these incidents were real and not manufactured... ok... Weren’t they famously not even able to rule out a suicide and convict someone not even in the room when he died?
> Moreover: the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms didn't even exist in 1970, so it's not quite accurate to say that Trudeau "suspended the constitution" then. In fact, he's the one who, in 1982, led the charge to create a Canadian constitution
Wow so there was not even a constitution to suspend? And didn't like, a third of the population just not sign it? Honestly the more I hear about it the more it sounds surreal. I don’t think this would fly in America.
> So the feds did get busted planting bombs to blame it on some terror organization. Just, not right away. That kinda makes what happened before they got busted suspicious doesn't it.
Not really, unless you're the sort of person who believes that, say, the FBI's fake terror plots in the wake of 9/11 are proof that Bush did 9/11. Which you might be, I guess.
> Weren’t they famously not even able to rule out a suicide and convict someone not even in the room when he died?
No, it was certainly not a suicide; there's some who think that it might've been an accident instead of a deliberate murder, but there's little case for that. Paul Rose was one of the terrorists convicted of murder and there's some question of whether he was actually present when he died (a government report ten years after the fact believes that he wasn't; a recorded confession from a wiretapped conversation suggests he was), but there's ultimately no question that known Québécois separatist terrorists were responsible for the kidnapping and death. The FLQ took responsibility for the kidnapping and made demands for his safe return; several of the convicted, to their death beds, refused to repent for their actions.
In order to believe that this was some kind of False Flag, you'd have to imagine that people were willing to pretend to be terrorists, ardently support a cause in the public eye for the better part of decade, go to prison for several years, and maintain the act for their rest of their lives, so that...Trudeau could invoke the War Measures act for a brief period of time.
> Wow so there was not even a constitution to suspend? And didn't like, a third of the population just not sign it? Honestly the more I hear about it the more it sounds surreal. I don’t think this would fly in America.
Well, no, it wouldn't fly in America, because (this is a bugbear of mine) Canada is a different country than America, with different laws, values, systems of government, and, yes, constitutional rights, which Canada did not even have at the time. The Canadian system of government was modelled after the UK, and the UK still doesn't have any notion of constitutional rights - nor do most other countries, even first-world democratic nations like Australia or New Zealand. Canada continues to have a Queen, which also wouldn't fly in America.
I'm not sure what you mean by "a third of the population [didn't] sign it". They didn't go door-to-door and ask everyone if they wanted to sign up for constitutional rights. Quebec hasn't endorsed the Canada Act, but that very well may have nothing to do with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that's a part of it; it very well may just be an attempt to stonewall the federal government or fight its legitimacy if they feel it's needed. Quebec's relationship to the rest of Canada is complicated, as the phrase "Québécois separatist terrorists" might imply.
> Not really, unless you're the sort of person who believes that, say, the FBI's fake terror plots in the wake of 9/11 are proof that Bush did 9/11
But in this case we do have hard evidence the feds did plant bombs and tried to blame it on the FLQ.
> but there's ultimately no question that known Québécois separatist terrorists were responsible for the kidnapping and death
Typically for murder you want to rule out accidental death and have a murdered. At least, in a real court with due process. I don’t know how much of that they were given considering the people were living under martial law at the time.
> Quebec hasn't endorsed the Canada Act, but that very well may have nothing to do with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that's a part of it
Isn't the point of a constitution to have everyone endorse it and sign it? That's how it was done in America.
> But in this case we do have hard evidence the feds did plant bombs and tried to blame it on the FLQ.
We likewise have evidence that the FBI created fake terror plots. You also ignored or failed to connect the dots to the rest of my post - the parts where I mentioned that the FLQ and FLQ terrorists publicly took responsibility for the kidnapping and death.
> Typically for murder you want to rule out accidental death and have a murdered. At least, in a real court with due process. I don’t know how much of that they were given considering the people were living under martial law at the time.
No, they were not living under martial law at the time - the relevant trials (and even arrests) were conducted after the War Measures Act was no longer in force. The fact that some people have disputed the findings of the court, years later, means little - especially in a situation as politically fraught as this, it's almost to be expected. It's certainly not reason alone to accuse the Crown of running a sham trial, as you seem to be implying.
> Isn't the point of a constitution to have everyone endorse it and sign it? That's how it was done in America.
Again, "how it was done in America" isn't relevant at all, because Canada is not America, and the legal relationship that the provinces have with the federal government in Canada is not the same legal relationship that the states have with the American federal government. Indeed, Canadian Confederation happened directly in the wake of the American Civil War, and many of the choices the architects of it made were deliberately different than the choices the American Founding Fathers made so as to prevent something similar from occurring here.
Whether the federal government had a right to pass it or not (it went to the Supreme Court), Quebec's refusal to endorse the Canada Act was and for many years (maybe still) remained a point of contention. If you're interested, you're free to read on Wikipedia and elsewhere all about the history of Confederation, the British North America act, the Canada Act, the Constitution Act, the Patriation Reference, the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords, and so on.
Information about some of the fake terror plots concocted after 9/11 can be found simply by Googling "FBI fake terror plots". Try it! There's an article from The Guardian up near the top for me.
> Didn't they specifically make laws to prohibit prosecutions and inquiries into what happened?
...such as? I'm not aware of any, Google hasn't revealed anything, and there were indeed inquiries afterwards, so I suspect you're misinformed.
> The constitution is the document giving power to the court isn't it... weird to have them rule on the document that grants them powers.
I'm surprised by this comment, because by analogy with the US - which you seem fond of - the Supreme Court in the US of course does this all the time. Even before 1982, the roles, rights, and responsibilities of the federal and provincial governments in Canada were formally agreed upon and legally defined; when disagreements about the interpretation of those laws arose some body needs to arbitrate. In Canada - as in the US! - that falls to the courts.
The federal government tried to get endorsement from all of the provinces - this lead to many changes to the bill as it was being drafted. Ultimately negotiations with Quebec failed (and have continued to fail when it was attempted again, twice, later on). At the time they felt that, given that it was legally viable, it was worth it to proceed without Quebec's support.
Again, I implore you to actually look this stuff up yourself if you're genuinely interested - I'm not an expert on Canadian history, but plenty of people who are have written plenty about this.
The FLQ kidnapped a British cabinet minister then murdered a Quebec politician responsible for immigration. There's a lot more to the October Crisis and the invocation of the War Measures Act than you are alluding to. I hope that you simply haven't been informed about the full picture here.
I don’t know what specific “suspension of the constitution” you’re referring to, but if it was the October Crisis, that was the activation of the War Measures Act (martial law) in response to the FLQ kidnapping of a British diplomat and a regional politician, not bombings.
Money has always trumped (pun intended? up to you) ethics and principle when it comes to foreign policy in the US. Saudi Arabia has a lot of money so they can do what they want. It's probably the same in Canada.
Seems like the son is trying to do the same with the truckers.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...
[1] https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/27/world/justin-trudeau-castro-e...
[2] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ted-cruz-justin-trudeau-castr...