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

331–340 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#331

Post by mmastrac »

sojournerc wrote: post #83
tyleo wrote: post #39

I’m not in Ottowa and I feel like I’m not sure what to believe here. On one hand, if the protests really were peaceful, I do not believe the government should shut them down. On the other hand, I’ve heard the protests have caused millions in trade to be shut down which I would not consider a peaceful act. If some non-citizen entity shut down millions in trade, I don’t think it would be viewed as peaceful. Should the…

> On the other hand, I’ve heard the protests have caused millions in trade to be shut down which I would not consider a peaceful act. Since when did economic disruption become violence? I just don't understand. It makes zero sense to redefine violence to mean "something that inconveniences me, that I disagree with", Where does that end? When next the liberals want to protest something - an oil pipeline for instance (…

> When next the liberals want to protest something - an oil pipeline for instance (economic disruption) - would that also be called violence?

Just so it's clear, there were environmental protests that _were_ cleared out for the same economic disruption reasons. There were concerns that it was not the right thing to do and too aggressive at the time, but I believe in retrospect that many consider it to have been the right course of action.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/what-you-need-to-know-about-th...

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#332

Post by armagon »

> 5:05 p.m.

> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he has invoked the Emergencies Act as a “last resort” to bolster the police response to convoy demonstrators and to “bring the situation fully under control.”

I really feel like there were a number of "resorts" that could've been taken before this "last" one.

Engaging in dialogue with the truckers and not inflaming the situation by calling the truckers names are at the top of my list.

Engaging in dialogue with Canadians would be next on my list.

Using the powers granted to Ontario in their state of emergency would be on my list well before declaring a nation-wide emergency.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#333

Post by gotoeleven »

mmastrac wrote: post #199
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…

Yes, and the emergencies act was required because the police in Ottawa were _letting the protesters violate the law with impunity_. There are multiple _legal_, _judicial_ injunctions in place and the police are failing to enforce them. The rule of law is breaking down and that cannot be allowed to happen.

They should stick to burning down police stations in minneapolis or whatever.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#334

Post by worik »

skrbjc wrote: post #266
kennywinker wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you’re just as outraged by the removal of first nations protesters blockading pipelines last year - because those were more peaceful than the trucker stuff and they were crushed with pretty extreme force by the rcmp

Are you as outraged by this as that?

Hell no!

Comparing privileged truckers to Canadian indigenous people is chalk and cheese.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#335

Post by pkd »

torstenvl wrote: post #238
jsjsbdkj wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no "loss of mandate". The Canadian people are overwhelmingly vaccinated and don't mind wearing masks. 90+% of truckers are fully vaccinated. Canadians re-elected Trudeau during the pandemic. The issue is that Ottawa Police were afraid of media backlash if they did any crowd control for the initial "protest" weekend. This allowed the occupiers to move in heavy machinery as barricades. When the weekend ended an…

> There's no "loss of mandate" https://angusreid.org/trudeau-tracker/ "A new Angus Reid poll showed that 54% of Canadians support an immediate halt to all pandemic restrictions, a stark contrast to the 56% who said as recently as in December they would have supported another round of lockdowns over Omicron." https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2022/02/13/2662060/half-o...

You didn't actually link to an article on Angus Reid. Here's one:

> As the country rolls into another week of uncertainty, nearly three-quarters of Canadians (72%) say the time has come for protesters to “go home, they have made their point.”

https://angusreid.org/trudeau-convoy-trucker-protest-vaccine...

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#336

Post by Benjamin_Dobell »

buscoquadnary wrote: post #256
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)

If you really want to know why I oppose them honest to God? Because whenever the government does something, or is given the ability to do something, whether de jure, or de facto, I ask myself "Would I feel comfortable with my worst political enemy having the power to do this?" EDIT: The answer I was responding to edited his answer before I finished posting, so the original question was just. "Why do you opposse vax m…

> Would I feel comfortable with my worst political enemy having the power to do this?

Why would that be any different than your preferred political party/politician telling you to get vaccinated?

Just because you don't agree with someone on some (many?) topics, doesn't mean you can't ever agree with them.

We're talking about well established scientifically backed public health advice. It doesn't matter who most recently repeated the advice, it's the advice itself that's important.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#337

Post by galosh »

Insightful thread on how (worst case) this might escalate: https://twitter.com/man_integrated/status/149329779603169281...

I'm guessing the more likely option is that the trucker community become "conscientious objectors" and refuse to work, in the hope that their number will cripple services. Does sitting at home still count as terrorism? Because I'd happily fund that

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#338

Post by jpgvm »

nyokodo wrote: post #98
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…

> if you need permission to protest at all. This isn't about protesting "at all" it's about protesting in a way that stings the government. You can protest in a legal way but then you're dismissed. The Truckers are protesting in a way that can't be dismissed. They've chosen to risk serious consequences because to them the status quo is worse. Protests like this are a sign of a failure of leadership and representation…

Then let's hope for serious consequences so that the message is loud and clear, minority positions can't and shouldn't be allowed to overrule the majority in a democracy. Their voice is heard through their elected representatives.

Sometimes that means you don't get your way. Right now in my country the government in power acts in ways I really don't agree with but unfortunately they won fair and square and clearly have the support of the majority. For me that is disappointing and somewhat embarassing but I wouldn't dream of claiming that elections were fraudulent (USA) or simply ignoring mandate and consensus and trying to blackmail the government (CA).

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#339

Post by fishidns »

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.

How do you feel about paying for other people's healthcare who need treatment for getting Covid and have taken no measures of their own to avoid catching it or being severely ill from it?

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#340

Post by daenz »

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)

>You need clothes

This kind of lunacy, where nothing has meaning, since everything is "just like everything else" has got to stop. There's a big difference between the accepted norm of wearing clothing and being forced to inject your body with drugs. Expecting people to explain it to you is a bad faith attempt to let them say enough words so that you can argue semantics endlessly with them.

Post reply on HN