Tyler Holte

@FrancesWiddows1 Not sure truth-seeking is human. Also, I don't believe that is the activity you are engaged in.

Why am I constantly being referred to as a "Conservative"? Searching for the truth is neither Left or Right. It is human.

@timthielmann That is my point. They were active participants, and you shouldn't white-wash that aspect away. Humans are complicated, and to be so reductionist to push monolithic sanctimonious and barbarism narratives is wrong. It is also correct to characterize British state as subjugators.

@TylerHolte86215 All humans practice slavery until the British ended it. That’s our legacy and we should be proud of it.

Where I started learning about Canada’s colonial past? 1. Colonialism: amoral reckoning by Nigel Biggar - an Oxford ethics professor answers the most common misconceptions about imperial British rule. 2. Journals of early explorers, like Cook, Thompson, and Menzies — these are free and accessible online. 3. The adventures and sufferings of John R Jewett.1- stories of a British trader who was taken as a slave for two years by a chief on Vancouver Island in the late 1700s. Leave your own recommendations in the replies below.

@timthielmann The British showed up MUCH earlier than the 1800s (hence why I said participated for generations). Colonial settlors purchased indigenous slaves for generations. It was a ubiquitous commonality for a long time.

That is not true. The British ended slavery within the British empire in the early 1800s and went to great lengths to eradicate it throughout the rest of the world, including within the colonies, where it was practised by natives. The British did not enslave the natives, they made them subjects into the law and provided protection from external threats as well as food supplies, and other benefits.

@JJ_McCullough @ValerieGamache I expect it was leaked by one of those MPs. If you released the names of all but the source, it would obviously be identifying of the source in that group. You either need to name them all (possibly destroying agreement/ethics with source) or name none.

Dear CBC reporter @ValerieGamache, why did you not release the names? Do CBC reporters have an obligation to protect the identities of MPs in order to avoid damage to their political careers?

This is a bizarrely-reported story. The CBC has obtained a secret letter from a bunch of Liberal MPs expressing concern to the PM. The MPs don’t want to be named, I guess because it might hurt their political careers. And so the CBC… just agrees to keep their names secret! Why!?

@Tim_Pettit_ @AdamZivo Back in the good old days. What a great idea: let's turn personal injury cases into a WCB regime since that works so well (sarcasm for those unfamiliar). Let's also impose that on persons like cyclists and pedestrians. Silly Eby.

@TylerHolte86215 @AdamZivo Oh I meant back when a plaintiff could still sue ICBC in court.

Here’s a great summary of how the CBC engaged in extensive fraud in its attempts to humiliate conservative voices, and how this may open them up to civil lawsuits. thehub.ca/2026/05/20/cbc…

@Tim_Pettit_ @AdamZivo Agreed (except not many jury trials since switch to no fault). CBC still tried to argue it.

@TylerHolte86215 @AdamZivo Makes sense. ICBC is a crown corporation that likewise has no exemption from jury trials.

@Tim_Pettit_ @AdamZivo I went down the rabbit hole about whether CBC could claim Crown exemption from jury trial. They cannot: canlii.ca/t/1dc76

@AdamZivo Subject to proving the element of loss, some trial lawyer should put this case against CBC et al in front of a jury and ask for punitive damages such that CBC and aligned activists never think to do this again. What was CBC thinking?

@Bratt_world Not sure that's responsive. You don't think there's credibility to the story until those things occur? Bit irrelevant at this time IMO. I'll take the statement of the CAO at this time that there is credible corroboration.

@TylerHolte86215 No rebel news website. No go fund me. No convoy/separatist lawyers offering service

If you were a retired, honoured member of the RCMP, a dignified member of society, who dedicated your life to serving the public, would you only tell your story about CBC sabotaging you to a children’s book author ? Or would you contact the ombudsman, CAJ, CBC media relations, a lawyer, RCMP, And other outlets for the story ? I’ve yet to see any confirmation on these traumatized officers 🤔

@Bratt_world @CoryBMorgan @ezralevant It is on their website. Download the pdf (page 26): mainstreetresearch.ca/post/alberta-p…

@CoryBMorgan @ezralevant any link ? It’s not on their website

Ok i need to see this mainstreet research poll everyone keeps referencing that i literally cannot find.

@Bratt_world Ambushing RCMP retirees? Really?

Legislative staff, MLAs, MPs, RCMP are all paid by the tax payer. So if the tax paid CBC is going to actually do some investigating into people who profited (books and documentaries) i think it’s justified. If it’s comedy/parody then is that nefarious intent ?

@Bratt_world Frankly, the framing that small communities are subsidized needs to be reversed. A lot of public revenue (taxes, royalties, stumpage etc) goes into the public coffers and a small fraction of that is actually returned to the community in services. Rural subsidizes urban generally

If you’re on this app advocating for no more funding to remote northern communities and reserves, i hope you’re advocating the same for your own community. #BCpoli

@CanadaEnRetard @Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 I would concur that 2019 DRIPA was mere virtue-signaling. There are a lot of statutes that are similarly pointless, like the Purple Day Act. My view is we should actually identify where and how the line was crossed here. Have some precision.

@TylerHolte86215 @Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 If it has no teeth, why pass it at all? At best it's pointless virtue signaling and a waste of taxpayer money. At worst, it signals government intent, invites endless litigation from special interests, and creates uncertainty, exactly what we've seen with the chaos post-Gitxaala.

I found the original footage of DRIPA passing through the BC legislature and it's about as ridiculous as you'd expect.

@Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 I think my position is quite clear here. DRIPA objectively had no teeth before 2021. If you want to cry that the sky was falling due to a non-justiciable statute, I will not concur.

@TylerHolte86215 @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 If your position is that you won’t call out obviously bad laws when they are passed, then, I disagree with you. Cheers.

@Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 Is the Purple Day Act a law? It is a statute. Even when DRIPA was passed and fully brought into force, it didn't have substantial legal effect. It didn't have potential until 2021 amendments. DRIPA more akin to a campaign promise to work with FN than an actual law.

A statute that is passed is a statute. It is not a non- law. You can’t know when a statute is passed if the government will do anything about it. You can, however, assess it on its merits at the time of passing. If the Legislature passed racist legislation, would you call it neutral until it was implemented? Or would you call it a bad law at the point of its passage? To call DRIPA neutral at its passage is to ignore its obvious faults. And it’s obvious potential for legal chaos.

@Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 I think we're going around in circles. A law that's not enforced is a non-law. I view it as neutral and hardly anything more than a virtue-signaling policy position. I think we can at least agree that the 2021 amendments were a material change that transformed it to tangible.

Not quite at an impasse necessarily. A bad law that’s not enforced isn’t a good law. It isn’t even a neutral law. It’s just a bad law that is happily not enforced. But the NDP began implementing DRIPA right away. We just weren’t aware. But they were quietly changing policies and amending laws following 2019. Indeed, I assume the litigation strategy that constrained the B.C. lawyers was DRIPA inspired. Certainly the proposed changes to the Land Act that released and then withdrawn in 2024 were. Gitxaala just made obvious that which was quietly already happening. When I asked the NDP Minister if they would be amending the Land Title Act to conform with DRIPA, the answer was “not imminently” as opposed to “not ever” and that was in direct relation to concerns re DRIPA to private property.

@Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 Well, I think we are at an impasse. I'm not sure what substantive enforceability there is if it isn't justiciable. I think the dissent in the BCCA is exactly how the rest of judiciary would've approached s 3 and the Act if it wasn't for Interpretation Act amendments.

@TylerHolte86215 @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 Disagree. I think DRIPA is potentially legally enforceable in its original form given its mandatory nature but no one has either realized it or tried it. Keep in mind, justiciable is only one potential approach

@Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 That wasn't my question. I also don't see how you can view DRIPA as justiciable without the 2021 amendments after reading both BCSC and BCCA decisions of Gitxaala. Language of s 3 favoured non-justiciability, so your "must" is a nothing in a sentence pushing to no enforcement.

@TylerHolte86215 @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 DRIPA is bad because it’s mandatory. Section 3 is must not may.

@Tim_Pettit_ @AmazingZoltan @Dougie57650855 And I come from the view that a law is only as good as its enforcement mechanism (common bit for my clients). Answer me this: Is DRIPA bad if it was never enforced?

Sorry. You can judge a law by its reasonably foreseeable consequences. DRIPA was obviously a bad law in 2019. Anyone who troubled to read it with a critical eye could see it. I spent much of my career predicting the effects of new legislation and advising a Crown Corporation re same. If you are judging by actual legal impact, you’re often too late.