Trudeau announces intention to freeze bank accounts of protestors • Hacker News Board

Re: Trudeau announces intention to freeze bank accounts of protestors

#161

Post by TMWNN » Thu, Feb 17, 2022, 9:56 PM UTC

fortuna86 wrote: post #159

TMWNN wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I've been struck by how often the "constant honking = terrorism" claim has been made. It indicates that there is seemingly no better argument against what the truckers are doing; if there were, it would be cited instead.

I'm assuming you have never had an 18-wheeler parked outside your window honking non-stop. Terrorism isn't the right word, but that is disruptive beyond a protest. Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them.

>Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them.

Oh, good grief. I'd sarcastically say "Yeah, right, whatever" with an OK hand sign to you, except you'd claim that that is also a "far right"/"alt right"/"Nazi"/[insert epithet here] symbol, too.

Re: Trudeau announces intention to freeze bank accounts of protestors

#162

Post by fortuna86 » Fri, Feb 18, 2022, 11:16 PM UTC

TMWNN wrote: post #161

fortuna86 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm assuming you have never had an 18-wheeler parked outside your window honking non-stop. Terrorism isn't the right word, but that is disruptive beyond a protest. Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them.

>Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them. Oh, good grief. I'd sarcastically say "Yeah, right, whatever" with an OK hand sign to you, except you'd claim that that is also a "far right"/"alt right"/"Nazi"/[ insert epithet here ] symbol, too.

Prefect example. The Ok hand sign signals everyone it has to, remains deniable for everyone else. Don't know if you are willingly playing along with this game, but others are.

Re: Trudeau announces intention to freeze bank accounts of protestors

#163

Post by dennis_jeeves1 » Sun, Feb 20, 2022, 5:53 PM UTC

tyleo wrote: post #3

I’d like to expand on some thoughts I had in another thread that provoked some interesting discussion: If the protests are peaceful, the government should not shut them down. But at what point do the economic impacts of a protest cross a line such that they aren’t peaceful? I personally feel that the slippery slope runs in both directions: * The government expanding its power to block more protests is a slippery slop…

>This really seems like a situation with no good options.

I think several fundamentals are wrong to start with, for example a simple definition of democracy appears to be that 51% gets to dictate the other 49%. With so many fundamental flaws even the concept of a typical protest is surreal where the person protesting is supposed to stand in harsh weather in front of a building to do so. This is not my idea of a civilized society.

Re: Trudeau announces intention to freeze bank accounts of protestors

#164

Post by Chris2048 » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 11:22 AM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #145

Chris2048 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Create new, targeted laws quickly. per guidelines: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.

Even though your new caveat reduces the frequency by which governments do it, this is still absolutely how they operate. I’ve had to delay a meeting with my local MP back before I left the UK because they had an “emergency” debate (IIRC due to a court ruling that one of their laws was bad). I genuinely, sincerely, can’t see how your new version is supposed to strengthen your comment — there just isn’t enough in it fo…

Emergency powers allow the overruling of safe-guards, grace/response-periods and due process. It is not "how they operate", it is explicitly outside the norm, and the emergency powers invoked by Trudeau had never been used before, let alone against non-violent civilians.

> because they had an “emergency” debate

Was it about (seldom used) emergency powers, and what was it in response to? A terror attack?

An "emergency" debate about bad laws isn't the same as "emergency" powers.

> a different hill to climb

The missing context is the context of the thread - that we are talking about the actions of Trudeau actions against the protestors.