Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

Anti-Mandate and Anti-Mask protestors say staging protests outside the homes of politicians a suitable response to “government’s excessive overreach”

Published

5 minute read

News Release from Calgary Freedom Central

Multiple media outlets have reached out today for comments from the protesters who visited Jyoti Gondek’s house yesterday and Jason Copping’s home on January 1st.
The protesters have asked Calgary Freedom Central to post their answers to their questions here. The media is welcome to quote from these answers in their coverage of this story.
1. Why are you protesting at these politicians’ homes?
For over a year and a half we have been protesting non-stop the government’s excessive overreach into our lives and businesses on the premise of a public health emergency. We have held in excess of a hundred protests around the city, as well as sent thousands of emails to our MLA’s and city councillors to express our concerns about these measures.
Not once has any politician seriously considered any public input on these policies that have dramatically affected the well-being and livelihoods of millions of Albertans. Instead, they have responded with hate speech and slander against the people they are meant to represent, calling anyone who stands up for their rights and freedoms self-serving racists, misogynists, conspiracy theorists and other names.
Their policies and rhetoric have driven many thousands of Albertans into joblessness, ill-health and despair. They have torn apart families and destroyed childhoods with their fear-based narrative and unscientific mandates. They have forced their overreaching policies into the homes of every Albertan and have ignored all opposing voices.
They have hid themselves away from any form of public accountability for nearly two years. So we now feel it is time to take our message to their homes, and we have received overwhelming support for these protests from the public.
2. Do you feel your message is being heard?
It has become very clear to us that after nearly two years, none of these politicians are willing to listen to the voices of the people they supposedly represent. It seems to us that they are taking their orders from Justin Trudeau and elsewhere, and have relinquished all accountability to the people of Alberta.

Protestors outside the home of Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek

3. Do you plan on protesting at other homes?
Yes. We expect to continue protesting outside their homes until all vaccine and mask mandates and restrictions are removed and an open dialogue is started with the public.
4. Would you welcome a conversation with these politicians?
Yes, we would welcome an open conversation that allows for the voices of the public and uncensored medical professionals to be heard.
5. What do you say to people who think you shouldn’t be protesting at their homes?
These politicians have entered the homes of every Albertan over the past 22 months with their draconian policies, while ignoring or disallowing all voices of dissent. They have neglected their duties as elected representatives and have disregarded the very foundations of our democracy.
They have now decided that they have the right to impose experimental medical procedures on the population through coercion, threats and intimidation. This goes far beyond their responsibilities as elected representatives, making it a personal matter for which they must be held accountable by the people.
They believe it is acceptable for them to threaten and intimidate Albertans, but cry foul when the people show up to peacefully protest at their homes. This reveals the profound level of hypocrisy within our current political establishment.
If they were to actually listen to the voices of their constituents, there would not be a need for protests outside their homes. If they were acting lawfully and in the best interest of the people they are supposed to represent, they would not have any reason to be concerned about people protesting outside their homes.

Before Post

After 15 years as a TV reporter with Global and CBC and as news director of RDTV in Red Deer, Duane set out on his own 2008 as a visual storyteller. During this period, he became fascinated with a burgeoning online world and how it could better serve local communities. This fascination led to Todayville, launched in 2016.

Follow Author

Alberta

Calgary’s new city council votes to ban foreign flags at government buildings

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Western Canada’s largest city has put in place what amounts to a ban on politically charged flags from flying at city-owned buildings.

“Calgary’s Flag Policy means any country recognized by Canada may have their flag flown at City Hall on their national day,” said Calgary’s new mayor Jeromy Farkas on X last month.

“But national flag-raisings are now creating division. Next week, we’ll move to end national flag-raisings at City Hall to keep this a safe, welcoming space for all.”

The motion to ban foreign flags from flying at government buildings was introduced on December 15 by Calgary councilor Dan McLean and passed by a vote of 8 to 7. He had said the previous policy to allow non-Canadian flags to fly, under former woke mayor Jyoti Gondek, was “source of division within our community.”

“In recent months, this practice has been in use in ways that I’ve seen have inflamed tensions, including instances where flag raisings have been associated with anti-Semitic behavior and messaging,” McLean said during a recent council meeting.

The ban on flag raising came after the Palestinian flag was allowed to be raised at City Hall for the first time.

Farkas, shortly after being elected mayor in the fall of 2025, had promised that he wanted a new flag policy introduced in the city.

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Despite Farkas putting forth the motion, as reported by LifeSiteNews he is very much in the pro-LGBT camp. However, he has promised to focus only on non-ideological issues during his term.

“When City Hall becomes a venue for geopolitical expressions, it places the city in the middle of conflicts that are well beyond our municipal mandates,” he said.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, other jurisdictions in Canada are considering banning non-Canadian flags from flying over public buildings.

Recently a political party in British Columbia, OneBC, introduced legislation to ban non-domestic government flags at public buildings in British Columbia.

Across Canada there has also been an ongoing issue with so-called “Pride” flags being raised at schools and city buildings.

Continue Reading

Alberta

What are the odds of a pipeline through the American Pacific Northwest

Published on

From Resource Works

By

Can we please just get on with building one through British Columbia instead?

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is signalling she will look south if Canada cannot move quickly on a new pipeline, saying she is open to shipping oil to the Pacific via the U.S. Pacific Northwest. In a year-end interview, Smith said her “first preference” is still a new West Coast pipeline through northern British Columbia, but she is willing to look across the border if progress stalls.

“Anytime you can get to the West Coast it opens up markets to get to Asia,” she said. Smith also said her focus is building along “existing rights of way,” pointing to the shelved Northern Gateway corridor, and she said she would like a proposal submitted by May 2026.

Deadlines and strings attached

The timing matters because Ottawa and Edmonton have already signed a memorandum of understanding that backs a privately financed bitumen pipeline to a British Columbia port and sends it to the new Major Projects Office. The agreement envisages at least one million barrels a day and sets out a plan for Alberta to file an application by July 1, 2026, while governments aim to finish approvals within two years.

The bargain comes with strings. The MOU links the pipeline to the Pathways carbon capture network, and commits Alberta to strengthen its TIER system so the effective carbon credit price rises to at least 130 dollars a tonne, with details to be settled by April 1, 2026.

Shifting logistics

If Smith is floating an American outlet, it is partly because Pacific Northwest ports are already drawing Canadian exporters. Nutrien’s plan for a $1-billion terminal at Washington State’s Port of Longview highlighted how trade logistics can shift when proponents find receptive permitting lanes.

But the political terrain in Washington and Oregon is unforgiving for fossil fuel projects, even for natural gas. In 2023, federal regulators approved TC Energy’s GTN Xpress expansion over protests from environmental groups and senior officials in West Coast states, with opponents warning about safety and wildfire risk. The project would add about 150 million cubic feet per day of capacity.

A record of resistance

That decision sits inside a longer record of resistance. The anti-development activist website “DeSmog” eagerly estimated that more than 70 percent of proposed coal, oil, and gas projects in the Pacific Northwest since 2012 were defeated, often after sustained local organizing and legal challenges.

Even when a project clears regulators, economics can still kill it. Gas Outlook reported that GTN later said the expansion was “financially not viable” unless it could obtain rolled-in rates to spread costs onto other utilities, a request regulators rejected when they approved construction.

Policy direction is tightening too. Washington’s climate framework targets cutting climate pollution 95 percent by 2050, alongside “clean” transport, buildings, and power measures that push electrification. Recent state actions described by MRSC summaries and NRDC notes reinforce that direction, including moves to help utilities plan a transition away from gas.

Oregon is moving in the same direction. Gov. Tina Kotek issued an executive order directing agencies to move faster on clean energy permitting and grid connections, tied to targets of cutting emissions 50 percent by 2035 and 90 percent by 2050, the Capital Chronicle reported.

For Smith, the U.S. corridor talk may be leverage, but it also underscores a risk, the alternative could be tougher than the Canadian fight she is already waging. The surest way to snuff out speculation is to make it unnecessary by advancing a Canadian project now that the political deal is signed. As Resource Works argued after the MOU, the remaining uncertainty sits with private industry and whether it will finally build, rather than keep testing hypothetical routes.

Resource Works News 

Continue Reading

Trending

X