The Royal Canadian Mounted Police are acting like their own authority to re-classify, ban and confiscate certain rifles contemptible actions for which Canadian citizens have no recourse.
Last Wednesday, the RCMP made damn good on their past threats and turned tens of thousands of thousands of law abiding canadians into bloody criminals when they re-classified the Swiss Arms Classic Green carbine, a Swiss made rifle featuring military style characteristics, declaring it "prohibited" even the though this model has been sold in Canada since 2000. Until Monday, the Canadian feds in true fashion had not even offered an amnesty period for gun owners to turn in their newly illegal weapons
Though these rifles cost from anywhere from $3,000 to $4,000 bucks the Canadian government has made no indication it intends to compensate, purchase or otherwise reimburse gun owners, or gun shops, for their surrendered firearms.
On Friday, after Canada's Public Safety Minister had publicly stated he would "take action" against the assault on law-abiding citizens' rights, the Mounties again banned another gun, a Canadian version of the CZ 858, which had been specifically modified to meet domestic laws. Troubling to Canadians is how the RCMP banned these guns without the authorization of elected officials. "The elected government of the day had already made clear it did not want to go this route. the Mounties did it anyway-reported Sun News's Brian Lilley
"It is a dark day when police, not the people's elected representatives, can suddenly transform thousands of ordinary, law-abiding Canadians into criminals with the stroke of a bureaucratic pen" wrote Lorne Gunter of the Winnipeg Sun. Gunter explains, the High River gun grab of June 2013 set the precedent for gun confiscation. Mirroring what happened in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, Mounties in the wake of the tragic floods "decided arbitrarily to break into the homes of nearly 2,000 law-abiding residents and strip the places of guns because they feared residents' anger might be turned on police or politicians once the town's forced evacuation was lifted"
"The government needs to rein in the Mounties or they will find they're no longer in control" Lilly declared and he added: "That means the government not only needs to override the decree from the Mounties, but strip of them of any power they have or think they have to do this again"
One gun shop owner told CBC News that Mounties are disarming citizens to have a monopoly on force. "There is a movement within the RCMP and they don't like to see guns in the hands of anybody but themselves" Also Sun News reported that Canadian gun owners who refuse to give up their guns can face three years in jail
The real irony is the RCMP's ban and confiscation is they are going after a gun the Swiss government actually entrusts their own citizens to arm themselves which illustrates the RCMP and our own government in Canada's absolutely callous disregard for our rights in this country and it is truly appalling to see that as a Canadian myself that they can abuse our rights in such draconian fashions like this.
Also the article notes that on Yesterday's edition of the Alex Jones Show, a caller phone Mr. Jones that he was taking action on the RCMP's gun ban and confiscation agenda by calling the RCMP offices directly. He encouraged others to do the same and get answers as to why the government is allowing the RCMP to behave in this way without any oversight at all
and the video I just posted is of the phone call mentioned so you might want to check it out as it is very interesting
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/06/Chevrongate-capitalism-finally-g...
James Delingpole formerly of the London Telegraph now part of Breitbart London shows how the radical environmentalists suffered a huge defeat at the hands of the mouth that has fed groups like Greenpeace: Big Oil
A U.S. Federal judge ruled that Chevron should not have to pay a $9.5 billion in damages to victims of oil pollution in Ecuador is a victory and here is a why
1) It was not about David Vs. Goliath though that is how the biased left wing media portrayed it as: a plucky maverick lawyer from New York Steven Donzinger, representing the thousands of Ecuadorean natives whose forest lands were polluted and the other oil giant Chevron who is the 3rd largest company in the United States
if anyone was being harassed according to Delingpole it was Chevron themselves. Donzinger knew it was nearly impossible for an oil company to get a fair trial in world where it has been brainwashed by propaganda from the radical environmentalists and Chevron knew it as well and it was their chief executive John S. Watson(no relation to eco-fascist Paul Watson of the Sea Shepherd ship) and fought it the whole way
2. Chevron did nothing wrong as the damage that was done was in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s in the Oriente region of Ecuador by Texaco and another company called Petroecuador. Texaco had reached a settlement agreement with the Ecuadorian government where it paid well over $40 million to clear up the 37% of oil damage in which they took full responsibility for and the rest was supposed to be taken care of by the national Ecuadorian oil company but they did not clean up its fair share of the mess
Also Chevron never drilled in Ecuador but when one of their subsidiary absorbed Texaco in 2001 it became a target by the radical environmentalists who still held Texaco partly responsible despite thefact they cleaned up their share but the other company did not
3. The case against Chevron was a rigged game from the start as in 2011, an Ecuadorian court ordered Chevron to pay $19 billion dollars in damages to the native people allegedly poisoned by the oil spills and this was reduced by the Ecuadorian National Council of Justice to the tune of $9.5 billion. Chevron did appeal on the grounds that the case was a total complete utter fraud-extortion of "greenmail" pretending to be concerned for the environment and was confirmed by US District Judge Lewis Kaplan in a 500 page ruling which is linked in the article
4. As I mentioned you can read the judge's ruling and he was quoted as saying: "This case is extraordinary. The facts are many and sometimes complex. They include things that normally come out of Hollywood..."
Indeed. What Kaplan concluded beyond reasonable doubt that the Donzinger case was a full of crap, filled with corruption and deceit. The initial expert assessments of the damage had been conducted by a man driving by the pollution sites at 50 miles an hour and the supposedly neutral and independent expert testimony was written by a US environmental company in the pay of Donzinger, the presiding judge had been bribed with well over $500,000, the judge's decision was written for him by the plaintiffs and Ecuador's left wing president Rafeal Correa- who was a close ally of the late Hugo Chavez of Venezuela-had cheer led this affair
5) Donzinger had a shaky past when he wrote in an email: "I feel like I have over to the dark side? what may have caused this we don't know but he did go to Harvard Law School with globalist puppet Obama and apparently played basketball together
6) Green Greed on the part of not only Donzinger who stood to profit a $600 million dollar pay day from this lawsuit but other companies like Burford Capital(which was going to invest $15 million to help fund the case in return for %5.545 of the $9.5 billion proceeds- but pulled out, having only "invested" $4 million after it smelled a rat. Also the large left wing Washington lobbyist and law firm Patton Boggs also stood to make serious cash from this affair- whose future may be in deep shit no doubt causing chagrin across the Republicans in DC
2 years ago, partner James E. Tyrell Jr. told a Washington District court: "If someone seriously suggests that [the] 50 year old law firm of Patton Boggs would wreck, would risk its professional reputation for a group of Ecuadorans whose case we feel strongly about, that we would be involved in a broad fraud, I suggest whoever might believe that: I have a bridge in New York I might like to try and sell them"
Where is the bridge Jr.??
7) The green parasites who were in the ruling is a Colorado based environmental consulting firm- regularly employed by various branches of government-called Stratus Consulting. The original case as pointed out by Delingpole in Ecuador required an independent environmental expert with impartial advice on how much pollution Texaco caused and how much they needed to pay to clean it up in damages. Supposedly this work was done by a local expert by the name of Caberera. However, on Dozinger's instructions, Cabrera's testimony was written for him by Stratus-which went on to cover up this fact by writing in the first person and then having the words translated into Spanish. It was Stratus that came came up with the insane damages figure of $16.3 billion!!!
Then in order to make Cabrera's "independent" assessment look more plausible, Stratus fired of a series of criticisms of the report(which they bloody wrote themselves keep in mind) which could then be put to Cabrera by the plaintiffs, so they could pretend to attack the man in court for not going far enough
So anyone familiar with the numerous environmental consultant groups which have come up to sign up on the never ending green money machine will know this behavior is typical and Stratus was exposed for it in court no less
8) The complicit mainstream media: If it is green it has to be good right?? wrong. There have been numerous articles about the Chevron/Ecuador story in the New Yorker, Vanity Fair, Bloomberg Business Week and each more sympathetic to the scum Donzinger than to Chevron
The same can be said for all establishment globalist run media from the NY Times, Telegraph, Guardian to the Huffington Post. It is not lazy journalism. It is a reminder just how our media is so enamored with the green propaganda machine
9) Renting celebrities to do their dirty work like Mia Farrow, Sting, Trudy Styler and Darryl Hannah. Popular stars and rich people in movies: Is there anything they don't do to support the eco-fascists who want us to live like a 3rd world nation???
10) Big Green groups gave the illusion of diverse and committed support: Amazon Watch and Rainforest Action Network supported the campaign against Chevron. So did the Sierra Club
Michael Brune praised Donzinger as if he was some kind of god in this quote: "I have tremendous professional respect for Steven. He is the driving force behind what is probably the most important environmental lawsuit in the world seeking to hold an oil company accountable for its actions"
11) Green Hubris: none of this would have seen the light of day in Court had Donzinger had not made a huge fatal mistake. In not so surprising act of complete callousness and arrogance, he decided to turn his legal adventures into a Michael Moore style documentary portraying himself as someone kind of superhero wading through a corrupt legal system, battling against cruel, powerful and heartless oil company, on behalf of the ordinary folks of Ecuador- The move premiered at the Sundance Festival. Donzinger was delusional to think that this so called independent(though it was really not) movie be used as evidence could not be used in court. Judge Kaplan thought differently and got a hold of the 600 hour footage. This allowed the court to demonstrate some entertaining contrasts between what Donzinger had said about the Ecuadorian legal system-ie the decision being reliable- and what he had said about it in the outtakes from the movie known as CRUDE which I have seen on Itunes in their documentary section
"They're all corrupt! It's-it's their birthright to be corrupt"
"These judges are not really very bright"
"I've never seen such utter weakness. It's the same kind of weakness that leads to corruption"
It was however Donzinger orchestrating the corruption in this case
The reason this case was important was it did not nearly happen. Though environmental whackjobs like Michael Mann, James Hansen and Al Gore often claim their enemies are being paid by big oil when its the green groups like Greenpeace getting money from big oil.
Few corporations have pumped money into environmental causes as Big Oil companies- Shell sponsoring the Guardian's environmental pages, BP investing in renewables as part of their Beyond Petroleum rebranding under CEO Lord Browne- because they have been running scared of the green movement as they are big enough to wear the costs of draconian green regulations because it "suits them" to greenwash their image clearly
Which is why it was a good thing for Chevron's CEO John S Watson to fight this case. It represents a victory for a company that clearly did nothing wrong in the first place but got sucked in to all as a result of their subsidiary absorbing Texaco as earlier mentioned but also a victory for non-criminal capitalism and are so damn tired so rarely we see someone growing a pair and standing up for itself.
For too long as I and others have documented it has been held hostage by a bunch of criminal, anti-human anti-freedom and anti-capitalist agenda being given respect from high end law firms to Hollywood and fake green groups pretending to give a shit, expert scientists, so called independent filmakers and a controlled and corrupt mainstream media who give these pieces of trash the time of day
Sometimes they have gotten away with their crap but this time the good guys fought back and won
