Walt has been following events north of the World's Longest Undefended Border, where a handful of "First Nations" people ("Native Americans" to, errr, Americans) and the usual mobs of ultra-lefties and antifa types have succeeded in shutting down Canuckistan's railways almost completely.They are protesting that the hereditary chiefs (as opposed to the democratically elected chiefs) of an obscure "nation" -- the Wet'suwet'ens -- were not consulted about the building of a natural gas pipeline that crosses their territory in northern British Columbia.
It's a big deal, since many of the things that millions of Canadians depend on to live a normal life -- e.g. water purification chemicals and propane, not to mention food -- move by rail. It's a big enough deal that Just In Trudeau interrupted his latest virtue-signalling world tour to come back to the World's Second-coldest Capital and take a meeting.
When he emerged, blinking in the sunlight, Mr Socks proclaimed that Canada is a country where the rule of law is respected and must be followed. This had Canucks ROFL because the railways have obtained court injunctions against the blockades, orders which the Ontario Provincial Police and Royal Canadian Kilted Yaksmen refuse to enforce. In Canada, apparently, court orders and the country's laws don't apply to the marginalized and oppressed victims of colonialism, white privilege, yada yada yada.
Walt wonders what Blackface Justin thinks of a recent decision by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The Gatestone Institute reports that on February 13th the ECHR issued a decision reaffirming the proposition that in order for migrants or other "victims" to benefit from certain human rights protections, such as access to lawyers, interpreters and the right to remain in Europe, they must first enter European territory in a legal, as opposed to an illegal, manner. Imagine that!
The case goes back to August of 2014, when hundreds of migrants from sub-Saharan Africa stormed the border fence at Melilla, a Spanish exclave in North Africa. After spending several hours perched on top of the fence, two men, one from Ivory Coast and the other from Mali, climbed down and were handcuffed by Spanish border police, who handed them over to Moroccan authorities.
The two Africans said they were never given a chance to explain their personal circumstances or receive help from lawyers or interpreters. In February 2015, with the help of human rights weasels ["lawyers", shurely! Ed.] the pair took their case to the ECHR.
In October 2017, the ECHR ruled that summary deportations were a violation of European law, which is politically correct on such things. The court determined that Spanish border police had failed to verify the identity of the migrants, or to provide them with access to lawyers, translators or medical personnel, and ordered Spain to pay each of the men €5,000 (over $5400 in real money). In December 2017, Spain's previous mildly conservative government appealed.
On February 13th, the ECHR unanimously reversed its previous judgment. In a statement, it explained that "[the migrants chose] not to use the legal procedures which existed in order to enter Spanish territory lawfully. Consequently, the Court considered that the lack of individual removal decisions could be attributed to the fact that the applicants — assuming that they had wished to assert rights under the Convention — had not made use of the official entry procedures existing for that purpose, and that it had thus been a consequence of their own conduct."
How about that?! Here's a photo of some illegal immigrants crossing the World's Longest Undefended Border at Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, Québec. Who's carrying their bags for them? Why it's the very same RCMP who, for some reason (Hello, Liberal government!) are not enforcing the injunctions against the mob blockading Canada's rail services.
Just In (from Africa) Trudeau has probably not heard about the ECHR decision, and it's not binding on Canadian courts or governments in any case. Iván Espinosa de los Monteros, spokesman for the Spanish Vox (= Voice) Party, commented: "The ECHR's ruling determines that a nation state has the right to defend its borders. When someone is dedicated to violating those borders, the nation state has the right to return that person to their place of origin as quickly as possible."
Wouldn't it be nice if Canada's woke government, or the even-more-woke government-in-waiting (?) of the USA did a 180, like the ECHR, and reserved the benefits of the rule of law to those who obey the law?
Further reading, from the National Post, 17/2/20:
"Enough is enough. Clear the blockades, restore the rule of law", by Derek H. Burney, a former Canadian ambassador to the USA and chief of staff to former PM Brian Baloney. "Dialogue is no prescription for those who refuse to listen because they believe themselves to be custodians of the only truth."
"If Trudeau has lost interest in his job, perhaps he should quit", NP editorial. "While cabinet members have struggled to deal with the rail blockades, Trudeau has been flying around Africa and Europe. Over his four years as prime minister, it has become noteworthy how often Justin Trudeau faces problems of his own making. His sanctimony keeps coming back to bite him. Canadians who follow politics have long been aware of the prime minister’s weakness for pious declarations of well-intentioned morality."
UPDATE ADDED 20/2/20: Canada's Public Safety and Emergency Unpreparedness Minister Bill Blair has just announced that the Mounties in British Columbia have agreed to withdraw from their position on Wet'suwet'en territory and barricade themselves in a nearby town names L'alamo. [Ed., please check town name.] So Just In (from Africa) Trudeau's Liberal government has caved to a few dozen radical activists who don't even have the support of the majority of the Wet'suwet'en people, as represented by their elected (as opposed to hereditary) chiefs. In today's Canuckistan, the mob rules!
