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

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#511

Post by bawolff »

tlear wrote: post #457
vorpalhex wrote: post #8

> The Emergencies Act is the modern-day replacement to the War Measures Act. It allows the federal government to force companies to provide services, it can require public protests to end, and limit mobility rights by preventing people from moving to designating areas. > > The act also allows for the military to be used as police, but several sources said that is not under active consideration. Not a good look for Tr…

It really reminds me of the situation in the USSR in the 1991. Trudeau will call in the army, what the army will do is not what he expects I suspect. He is digging his own grave. Hopefully it will not come down to Ceaușescu resolution

Trudeau says he is not calling in the army, and besides that would be a provincial rsponsibility i think so it would be up to the premier.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#512

Post by _whiteCaps_ »

0cVlTeIATBs wrote: post #501
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it isn't. And this is entire event has been orchestrated by "people with power" with a political agenda which is hostile to most of the population. It has almost exactly zero organic content. No amount of rhetoric and gaslighting is going to change that.

Could you summarize who the "people in power" are and their agenda, in your opinion?

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/anonymous-donations-to-convoy-as-...

> The top donation, $215,000, has a comment that says “processed but not recorded.” The next top donation, at $90,000, is listed as from Thomas M. Siebel. CTV News has reached out to the American billionaire by the same name but has not confirmed it is his donation.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#513

Post by thepasswordis »

There are too many people making making similar comments to reply to all of them, so I'm going to make a top level response to all of them.

The truckers are NOT protesting against the vaccine itself, and if you believe that they are, I would highly encourage you to find different sources for news.

The truckers are protesting the idea that the government can force them to take the vaccine against their will.

I would hope that people could find some more common ground on this, since there is an almost identical debate happening around the idea of bodily autonomy:

Almost nobody, or functionally/practically nobody, is "pro abortion". People who are "pro choice" are saying that they don't believe the government should be able to force women to carry a child until birth, because they believe it violates their right to bodily autonomy.

The truckers are saying the same thing. They aren't "anti vaccine", they are against the government forcing them to take a vaccine, because they believe it violates their right to bodily autonomy.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#514

Post by gruez »

abledon wrote: post #474
tw600040 wrote: post #436

When protests were happening in India this is what Trudeau had to say: "Let me remind you, Canada will always be there to defend the rights of peaceful protesters. We believe in the process of dialogue. We’ve reached out through multiple means to the Indian authorities to highlight our concerns. This is a moment for all of us to pull together,"Justin Trudeau said. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/situation-is-…

was it only the 10% fringe farmers protesting? or the 90% majority of farmers?

> was it only the 10% fringe farmers protesting? or the 90% majority of farmers?

Short of the hong-kong protests, I don't think there were any recent protests that has double-digit percent attendance numbers. For instance, wikipedia says that for the BLM protests, "between 15 million and 26 million people had participated at some point in the demonstrations in the United States, making the protests the largest in U.S. history". That means, the largest protest in the US only has between 4.6%-7.9% attendance.

edit: whoops forgot link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#515

Post by jsjsbdkj »

amscanne wrote: post #142
Jackim wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an exaggerated headline. Accounts being used to fund illegal activities can be frozen. Protesting is not and will not be illegal. Blocking critical infrastructure is illegal.

As usual, the devil is in the details. I would agree that the bridge is critical, and that forceful removal was justified. I’m less convinced that Wellington St. is critical, and I would be concerned that only the broadest brushes will be used to determine which accounts will be frozen and why.

It's not just Wellington St, it's Ottawa from the Canal to Bronson, and Somerset to Welligton. On the weekend it's extended all the way up Bank St. A giant no-go zone where businesses and pedestrians aren't safe.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#516

Post by nameisname »

defaultname wrote: post #277
colechristensen wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't look like , it is authoritarian response to something which should be protected. Using government power intended for things like war to suppress a protest is ridiculous, if this is what being "liberal" is about, I'm out. I hope the response is a protest escalation. Not my country, not my protest, but I know who I'm rooting for. Contrast this to what was happening in Minneapolis a couple of summers ago... p…

"Using government power intended for things like war" This isn't the war measures act. It is a response specifically targeted to situations like this. "I hope the response is a protest escalation" That's neat. I hope that every protester that misused a privilege of their CDL lose their truck license, lose insurance, have their bank accounts locked, and face enormous fines. I guess we have differing hopes. Sign petiti…

Have you ever done what you're talking about? I have. It's borderline impossible to get even 100 votes and you have to start by cold calling minimum 100 people to sign consent to candidacy. If you actually believe anything you've said you're completely out to lunch.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#517

Post by sleepingadmin »

This legislation has never been invoked before. It's very difficult to invoke. Virtually any other law must be used first. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/page-1.html

>AND WHEREAS the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights and must have regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly with respect to those fundamental rights that are not to be limited or abridged even in a national emergency;

The right to peacefully protest still stands even with the invocation of this act. The Ottawa police have been incapable of ending this protest because it has been peaceful. Nobody has even raided/trespassed in the capital buildings like the January 6th 'insurrection' in the usa. If the protesters were anything but peaceful, the Ottawa police would easily be able to arrest them. Logically concluding that this protest has been peaceful. You can confirm this to be true simply by watching the myriad of livestreams online.

>3 For the purposes of this Act, a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that

>(a) seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it, or

>(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada

>and that cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.

There are an awful lot of 'any other law of Canada' that could be used before this act. Some peaceful protests are not going to justify using this act. In fact not even possible to use this act against peaceful protesters. Trudeau is moving against a foe that isn't described by this protest.

The accusation or allegation by Trudeau is that the USA has a military occupation over Canada. The funding is being organized in the USA.

This to me doesn't ring true. If the USA wanted Canada, a squadron of F22 could annihilate our armed forces in a day. B2 bombers could lay waste to everything else. Canada could do nothing, none of our allies would come to save us. Our allies could never protect us against the USA. Nuclear bombs wouldn't be needed. Plus, we have an extensive and fantastic alliance with the USA. Why would Biden who is worried about Russia, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan invade Canada? It makes no sense.

The alternative is that Trudeau has deployed this against his political opponents who are peacefully protesting.

What do you think?

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#518

Post by thepasswordis »

Jackim wrote: post #54
makomk wrote: post #24

Headline on the front page of BBC News right now: "Trudeau vows to freeze anti-mandate protesters' bank accounts" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 This feels downright dystopian, especially if the move away from cash and towards centrally-controlled electronic payment systems is anywhere near as widespread in Canada as elsewhere.

That is an exaggerated headline. Accounts being used to fund illegal activities can be frozen. Protesting is not and will not be illegal. Blocking critical infrastructure is illegal.

Okay now define "blocking" and "critical" and "infrastructure".

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#519

Post by akomtu »

sailingparrot wrote: post #491
daenz wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The Canadian people are overwhelmingly vaccinated and don't mind wearing masks. 90+% of truckers are fully vaccinated. Then why require the mandate? I haven't seen any answer to that question besides the implied: "because we demand full compliance."

Because otherwise there is approximately nothing the federal government can do to end the blockade if the protestor don't leave by themselves. No matter if most of the population want it to end. This allows the federal government to send the army if necessary (although Trudeau said they wouldn't), allows the police to fine and detain protestor that do not want to leave the blockade. And allows the federal government…

A proper answer would be to lift the mandate to vaccinate all truckers, because it doesn't make any sense anyway, give them 2 days to clear the roads, and bring in troops if they refuse. Problem is, Trudeau's ego is too big to yield to a bunch of unwashed truckers.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#520

Post by jsjsbdkj »

kerneloftruth wrote: post #303
Jackim wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an exaggerated headline. Accounts being used to fund illegal activities can be frozen. Protesting is not and will not be illegal. Blocking critical infrastructure is illegal.

Trudeau is calling the whole protest illegal. Last week they arrested an old man for merely honking his horn to show support. So, anyone attending a protest is joining an illegal activity...and can have their accounts frozen. There's no guarantee of due process in Canada's constitution?

They haven't arrested anyone for doing anything. The cops literally just stand around and watch people.
Post reply on HN