FOIP records withheld for 2 years show that the government also omitted language describing encampments as “illegal tactics” from key messages on the 2024 pro-Palestine protests.
Previously redacted portions of Daum’s memo state that the issue was “less about emergency management” and “more about public relations and issues management.”
I really appreciate your continuing investigation of the events of May 2024. As I argued in my review of the report by retired judge, Adele Kent, on what happened at the UAlberta, nothing less than Canadians' political freedoms to assemble and peacefully protest are at stake in the legal decisions that will (or will not) ensue. Regarding your most recent findings, I note that while a decision may have been made to delete the mention of the encampments in the Minister of Advanced Education's messaging on the events at the UAlberta, the Premier herself said that the encampments broke "the rules," took place on "private property" (hence the supposed legitimacy of trespass notices), and were not "in compliance with the law." Here is one example: https://www.ctvnews.ca/edmonton/article/alberta-to-investigate-police-crackdown-on-pro-palestinian-campus-protests/. Is this not essentially the same as claiming that the encampments were "illegal"?
Love it:
Previously redacted portions of Daum’s memo state that the issue was “less about emergency management” and “more about public relations and issues management.”
I really appreciate your continuing investigation of the events of May 2024. As I argued in my review of the report by retired judge, Adele Kent, on what happened at the UAlberta, nothing less than Canadians' political freedoms to assemble and peacefully protest are at stake in the legal decisions that will (or will not) ensue. Regarding your most recent findings, I note that while a decision may have been made to delete the mention of the encampments in the Minister of Advanced Education's messaging on the events at the UAlberta, the Premier herself said that the encampments broke "the rules," took place on "private property" (hence the supposed legitimacy of trespass notices), and were not "in compliance with the law." Here is one example: https://www.ctvnews.ca/edmonton/article/alberta-to-investigate-police-crackdown-on-pro-palestinian-campus-protests/. Is this not essentially the same as claiming that the encampments were "illegal"?