Connect with us

Alberta

Freedom Convoy-inspired border blockade protesters found not guilty of conspiracy to commit murder

Published

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

“So the most serious charges against all the Coutts accused -charges that kept them in jail without bail, in torturous solitary conditions that possibly violated international law- all failed?”

Two men linked to the 2022 Freedom Convoy-inspired border blockade protest in Coutts, Alberta, Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert, have been acquitted of charges of conspiracy to commit murder, but not before being jailed and denied bail for over two years.    

On August 2, a jury in Lethbridge, Alberta found that the two men were not guilty of conspiracy to murder, finding them only guilty of the lesser charges of unlawful possession of a firearm for a dangerous purpose and mischief over $5,000. Olienick was also found guilty of unlawful possession of an explosive device.   

“So the most serious charges against all the Coutts accused -charges that kept them in jail without bail, in torturous solitary conditions that possibly violated international law- all failed?” Pro-freedom lawyer Daniel Freiheit questioned on X, formerly known as Twitter. 

“Will the responsible Crown prosecutors be censured or rewarded for this strategy?” he asked.

Both Olienick and Carbert have been jailed since 2022 when, at the same time the Freedom Convoy descended on Ottawa to protest COVID restrictions, they joined an anti-COVID mandate blockade protest at the Alberta-Montana border crossing near Coutts, Alberta. The men were denied bail and kept in solitary confinement for some time before their trial.  

At the time, police said they had discovered a number of firearms, 36,000 rounds of ammunition, and industrial explosives at Olienick’s home. However, the guns were legally obtained, and the ammunition was typical of those used by rural Albertans. Similarly, Olienick explained that the explosives were used for mining gravel.   

Their acquittal is being celebrated by pro-freedom Canadians across the country, with many pointing out that they were being unjustly held as political prisoners similar to those in communist countries.   

“The Coutts Four political prisoners – some of whom spent months in solitary confinement (which is considered a form of torture in most countries) – in Canada say “hello” to their fellow political prisoners in Venezuela,” a citizen journalist pointed out, comparing the situation to the 2014 human rights violations in Venezuela.   

The men were arrested alongside Christopher Lysak and Jerry Morin, and all four were charged with conspiracy to murder. At the time, the “Coutts Four” were painted as dangerous terrorists and their arrest was used as justification for the Emergencies Act, which allowed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to use draconian measures to end both the Coutts blockade and the much larger Freedom Convoy occurring thousands of kilometers away in Ottawa.  

Under the EA, the Trudeau government froze the bank accounts of Canadians who donated to the protest. Trudeau  revoked the EA on February 23 after the protesters had been cleared out. At the time, seven of Canada’s 10 provinces opposed Trudeau’s use of the EA . 

Recently, Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley ruled that Trudeau was “not justified” in invoking the Emergencies Act.  

Lysak and Morin had already pleaded guilty to lesser crimes of possession of a weapon in an unauthorized place and conspiracy to traffic firearms prior to the August 2 ruling.  

It is important to note that Lysak pleaded guilty despite the fact that he did not attended the protest, and that the gun found by police in his trailer was registered and authorized, according to his lawyer.   

Similarly, Morin’s lawyer Greg Dunn pointed out that “the charge that Mr. Morin pled guilty to does not suggest that Mr. Morin at any time took firearms into Coutts, only that he agreed to.” 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

A Christmas wish list for health-care reform

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail and Mackenzie Moir

It’s an exciting time in Canadian health-care policy. But even the slew of new reforms in Alberta only go part of the way to using all the policy tools employed by high performing universal health-care systems.

For 2026, for the sake of Canadian patients, let’s hope Alberta stays the path on changes to how hospitals are paid and allowing some private purchases of health care, and that other provinces start to catch up.

While Alberta’s new reforms were welcome news this year, it’s clear Canada’s health-care system continued to struggle. Canadians were reminded by our annual comparison of health care systems that they pay for one of the developed world’s most expensive universal health-care systems, yet have some of the fewest physicians and hospital beds, while waiting in some of the longest queues.

And speaking of queues, wait times across Canada for non-emergency care reached the second-highest level ever measured at 28.6 weeks from general practitioner referral to actual treatment. That’s more than triple the wait of the early 1990s despite decades of government promises and spending commitments. Other work found that at least 23,746 patients died while waiting for care, and nearly 1.3 million Canadians left our overcrowded emergency rooms without being treated.

At least one province has shown a genuine willingness to do something about these problems.

The Smith government in Alberta announced early in the year that it would move towards paying hospitals per-patient treated as opposed to a fixed annual budget, a policy approach that Quebec has been working on for years. Albertans will also soon be able purchase, at least in a limited way, some diagnostic and surgical services for themselves, which is again already possible in Quebec. Alberta has also gone a step further by allowing physicians to work in both public and private settings.

While controversial in Canada, these approaches simply mirror what is being done in all of the developed world’s top-performing universal health-care systems. Australia, the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland all pay their hospitals per patient treated, and allow patients the opportunity to purchase care privately if they wish. They all also have better and faster universally accessible health care than Canada’s provinces provide, while spending a little more (Switzerland) or less (Australia, Germany, the Netherlands) than we do.

While these reforms are clearly a step in the right direction, there’s more to be done.

Even if we include Alberta’s reforms, these countries still do some very important things differently.

Critically, all of these countries expect patients to pay a small amount for their universally accessible services. The reasoning is straightforward: we all spend our own money more carefully than we spend someone else’s, and patients will make more informed decisions about when and where it’s best to access the health-care system when they have to pay a little out of pocket.

The evidence around this policy is clear—with appropriate safeguards to protect the very ill and exemptions for lower-income and other vulnerable populations, the demand for outpatient healthcare services falls, reducing delays and freeing up resources for others.

Charging patients even small amounts for care would of course violate the Canada Health Act, but it would also emulate the approach of 100 per cent of the developed world’s top-performing health-care systems. In this case, violating outdated federal policy means better universal health care for Canadians.

These top-performing countries also see the private sector and innovative entrepreneurs as partners in delivering universal health care. A relationship that is far different from the limited individual contracts some provinces have with private clinics and surgical centres to provide care in Canada. In these other countries, even full-service hospitals are operated by private providers. Importantly, partnering with innovative private providers, even hospitals, to deliver universal health care does not violate the Canada Health Act.

So, while Alberta has made strides this past year moving towards the well-established higher performance policy approach followed elsewhere, the Smith government remains at least a couple steps short of truly adopting a more Australian or European approach for health care. And other provinces have yet to even get to where Alberta will soon be.

Let’s hope in 2026 that Alberta keeps moving towards a truly world class universal health-care experience for patients, and that the other provinces catch up.

Continue Reading

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

Trending

X