Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

ottawacitizen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#291

Post by rafale »

jsjsbdkj wrote: post #211
chrisdhoover wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Polling whether rights should be suspended is dangerous. I know nothing of Canadian law, but in the US if 2/3 polled said a peaceful protest should be broken up by the military. The response should condemnation and reassertion of our unalienable rights.

This is not a peaceful protest. There have been multiple documented assaults on the street and of people in the service industry. There were several attempts to burn down residential buildings full of people. The protestors have violated injunctions against making noises at volumes that are harmful to people's hearing, and depriving people of sleep.

I have seen you here for a while. I don't ever remember seeing you call out antifa or blm rioters when they set fire to buildings.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#292

Post by ecf »

jcadam wrote: post #124

An obvious response to this, that doesn't involve blocking any roads, is for truckers to simply go on strike. Imagine if even a quarter of Canadian truckers just decided to sit at home and not move anything.

Driving is something teenagers are expected to handle. Hell, we trust teenagers behind the wheel of a one ton killing machine before we let them purchase cigarettes or consume alcohol.

Something tells me finding replacements wouldn’t be hard to do.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#293

Post by pkd »

busymom0 wrote: post #31
ameminator wrote: post #12

Shameful that a peaceful protest is met with this response. How can a person protest meaningfully if any peaceful protest can be called illegal? I do understand that the truckers were disturbing the peace of ordinary people - I think this should be discouraged. However there must be a way to peacefully assemble without the government's approval. I don't see how we can have meaningful civil discourse if you need permi…

I along with my friends (who are vaxxed but only did so because their work coerced them) have been at the protest in Ottawa for 3 weekends. It's always been peaceful, friendly and almost like Canada day celebrations. It was loud the first week due to honking but even that's stopped. And even if there were honking, that's not violence. I am brown and my buddy is black and neither of us met with anything other than fri…

Are you friends federal government employees? If not, then the vaccination policy is enacted by the corporation they work for, not the government.

I'm glad you have felt at home at the protests, I'm sure if you tried to ask critical questions about vaccine efficiency and the active participation of far right extremists like Pat King in the protests, you'd have received a much colder welcome.

Thousands of people in Ottawa have been affected by the occupation. At least 1000 workers of the Rideau Center are out of a job because the protestors kept trying to force their way into the shops without masks. Covid is a respiratory disease and the use of well fitting masks are shown to significantly reduce transmission. Why are the protestors ignoring the science behind the policies?

If the protestors are rational, why haven't the protestors called out the loud lunatics amongst them who are on bullhorns shouting how Trudeau is a devil worshipper and pedophile?

Why have white supremacists like Pat King been allowed key roles in the protests, and allowed to - literally - dance on the sound stage set up on parliament hill?

Why did the organisers refuse to answer - earlier today - the simple question from a reporter if there were any firearms present amongst the protestors?

What was the rationale behind the "MoU" that called for the democratically elected government to be deposed and replaced with a junta composed of the protest organizers? That wasn't even a fringe demand, it was front and center.

Nobody from the protests has had any rational answers for these questions. I'm sorry, but for the residents to be able to accept the inconvenience of being occupied, they have to sympathise with the elements of the protests.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#294

Post by jsjsbdkj »

ameminator wrote: post #128
barbazoo wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it stops being a peaceful protest if you erect structure and continually inconvenience residents by blasting your horns 24/7. Go on the street, show what you protest against, what you want. But don't permanently take over a part of the city, let alone start swearing in your own peace officers [0]. [0] https://youtu.be/0DvVtDHEizk?t=51

I'm going to be honest, that seems remarkably peaceful, even when compared to the BLM protests from 2 years ago or especially the FLQ crisis of Pierre Trudeau. I don't think the truckers should be going into residential neighborhoods and making noise at all hours - but it's hard to argue that it's violent.

BLM protests in Ottawa were extremely peaceful, and met with harsh police retaliation. Protestors blocked _one_ intersection for one day, and they were all rounded up and arrested by dozens of police officers in the middle of the night.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#295

Post by mabbo »

buscoquadnary wrote: post #209
WesternWind wrote: post #191

Some facts (and a few polls) suggest that the Trucker convoy isn't a broadly popular movement of truckers as much as a well funded tiny minority without broad support even from truckers. First 90% of Canadian truckers are vaccinated. https://newrepublic.com/article/165341/fox-news-vaccine-cana... Evidence suggests that funding for this protest is in large part foreign (IE not from canada) and that most canadian donat…

> First 90% of Canadian truckers are vaccinated. https://newrepublic.com/article/165341/fox-news-vaccine-cana ... My understanding was this was about the mandates and restrictions themselves not about the vaccine. I mean I am vaxxed and oppose vax mandates.

On the surface, yes. But in reality this is the fringe far right using the vaccine as a reason to disrupt the country.

My biggest concern with this all is the timing. The vaccine rules have been around for months, but right at the same time as Russia is preparing an invasion of a Canadian ally, we have unknown foreign money pouring into the country supporting an ill-defined movement with the sole goal of disrupting the country.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#296

Post by brandonmenc »

pas wrote: post #216
buscoquadnary wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First 90% of Canadian truckers are vaccinated. https://newrepublic.com/article/165341/fox-news-vaccine-cana ... My understanding was this was about the mandates and restrictions themselves not about the vaccine. I mean I am vaxxed and oppose vax mandates.

> oppose vax mandates why? could you explain your stande on other mandates/requirements and what's this vax mandate does that makes it so different? (eg. you need a passport/visa-like thing to enter, you need clothes, if you arrive by car that needs papers and a valid safety profile, you need to use the seatbelt, and so on)

None of your examples are "inject this medication to keep your job."

Very, very different, and unprecedented for the general public.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#297

Post by jleyank »

amscanne wrote: post #183
dblohm7 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Canada has a big opt-out for charter rights, in that “reasonable limits” are allowed if they can be “demonstrably justified” Indeed, and there is ample case law from the Supreme Court of Canada that provides guidance to judges as to how to apply that section of the Charter. R v. Oakes was one of the seminal cases in that regard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Oakes

I read a couple of the decisions from challenges to the rules that I thought were overreaching (for example: the hotel quarantine requirement even for vaccinated Canadians), and the bar held by the judges seemed incredibly low — merely that it was “necessary” for public health. No data needed, the mere assertion is enough. I feel like in the US, states, the federal government and the judiciary tend to be more adversa…

If you’re hep on freedom, tool on up the road to Quebec and protest their legalized discrimination based on language, religion and probably gender. Laws that violate their own charter passed via the notwithstanding clause. This is an anti Trudeau protest by the 35% of the population that is right wing. With some “get the Governor General to disband the government” throw in. Some folks just hate being told what to do.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#298

Post by lalaland1125 »

chrissnell wrote: post #255
pas wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> oppose vax mandates why? could you explain your stande on other mandates/requirements and what's this vax mandate does that makes it so different? (eg. you need a passport/visa-like thing to enter, you need clothes, if you arrive by car that needs papers and a valid safety profile, you need to use the seatbelt, and so on)

Because we are free individuals and can make medical decisions for ourselves and our abilities to feed our families should not depend on upon our willingness to take a medication that does not appear to stop the spread of Omicron COVID. The mandates also make no exception for natural immunity which DOES appear to at least slow the spread of Omicron COVID.

> medication that does not appear to stop the spread of Omicron COVID

The current evidence indicates that the vaccine reduces the spread of the virus by about 50% [1]. It's a preprint, so take it with a grain of salt, but it does seem to match our prior 50% estimate for delta. [2]

That is a significant reduction, especially when we are talking about truckers who are inherently high risk as they tend to visit a lot of small towns.

1. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.27.21268278v...

2. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2116597

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#299

Post by argvargc »

joshlemer wrote: post #77
tomohawk wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's right. Only the government is allowed to shut everything down and put people out of work.

Yes that's correct, our democratically elected government with a charter of rights and freedoms and independent judiciary is allowed to impose reasonable restrictions on citizens freedoms under specific circumstances. No, a mob of thugs who represent a minority public opinion are not allowed to impose their will on society. If that's supposed to be a mic-drop comment you're going to have to try harder.

"A mob of thugs"? Really? Type ottawa livestream into youtube, filter by Live and watch. You won't see "a mob of thugs" or even the remotest resemblance, even if you watch for hours. These are ordinary people and their kids.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#300

Post by moralestapia »

Jackim wrote: post #28
ameminator wrote: post #12

Shameful that a peaceful protest is met with this response. How can a person protest meaningfully if any peaceful protest can be called illegal? I do understand that the truckers were disturbing the peace of ordinary people - I think this should be discouraged. However there must be a way to peacefully assemble without the government's approval. I don't see how we can have meaningful civil discourse if you need permi…

I live in Ottawa and I assure you that this protest is not peaceful. I've had friends physically assaulted, spit on, and yelled at just for wearing a mask into a business. Not to mention the constant honking that was reaching levels above 100db inside people's homes. Homeless shelters were raided by protestors, businesses have been forced to close due to threats, and people are afraid to leave their homes.

Sorry to contradict you, but your claims are the complete opposite of what I've experienced first-hand.
Post reply on HN