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

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#971

Post by gorwell »

jsjsbdkj wrote: post #192
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…

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…

You're being mislead by corporate and party line propaganda.

Over 1.6 million people tweeted about the Canadian trucker protests over the country’s vaccine mandates, reaching about 330 million users. Of the top 100 most retweeted tweets on the topic, 79% were in support of the protests.

https://twitter.com/NarrativesProj/status/149361219856801792...

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#972

Post by ctrlp »

mod50ack wrote: post #167
mattnewton wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I have no idea how Canada's legal system works but I would not trust the american executive branch with this power without the authorization of a judge. Even then it feels too easily abused, but you can already do a lot worse with a judge's sign off and there are certainly cases where the power makes sense. Is this something that has precedent in Canada?

Yes. Trudeau's father did the same thing (look up "Just watch me"). Anyway, there's no such thing as separation of powers in Canada. It's called Parliamentary Sovereignty.

Trudeau is the spitting image of his biological father both in appearance and approach to government. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#973

Post by cmonagle »

sleepingadmin wrote: post #965
cmonagle wrote: post #957

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think your assessment reflects the current attitudes in Canada. With such a polarizing topic, it's easy to fall into a bubble. I think this is true (and fairly normal) for any political in-group--we tend to overestimate our public support. In this case, though, it's really just not there. > Even those on the left are seeing this as way too far. Generally, people are [sympathetic]( https://globalnews.ca/news/8…

>I don't think your assessment reflects the current attitudes in Canada. With such a polarizing topic, it's easy to fall into a bubble. I think this is true (and fairly normal) for any political in-group--we tend to overestimate our public support. I love reading /r/ontario and /r/canada. Obviously cant comment like I do here without getting banned from those subreddits. So their bubble literally sees the truckers as…

> People generally support what they represent.[...] The smearing is going to have an effect.

It's not smearing to accurately describe them based on their actions and words. We have a free press in Canada and they're right to report on the backgrounds of the organizers. They're holding press conferences demanding the dissolution of the government that we just elected, the organizers (not just participants) have documented white supremacist rants. This isn't popular, and I'm not surprised most Canadians haven't fallen for what some people on the internet are trying to represent them as.

> Like what? That's the thing about peaceful assembly charter right

Repeating "peaceful assembly" over and over again doesn't change the nature of the occupation. Constant 150 decibel noise is damaging to health and well being. Stockpiling illegal arms is not legal. Threats to bodily harm are not peaceful. Attempted arson is not peaceful. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "city bylaws have no [bearing]", we're all subject to the same laws.

Re injunctions:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/protesters-violate-cou...

https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/judge-hears-argument...

https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/judge-grants-injunction-against-no...

You can disagree, but the courts have decided, and they are the authority on legality.

I think the most interesting point is this:

> I have a right to peacefully protest. Someone else showing up and being violent doesn't remove my right.

That's absolutely correct. If you're not violating noise limits, not parked illegally, and comply with the same laws as everyone else, you can ABSOLUTELY continue demonstrating. The Emergencies Act doesn't change that.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#974

Post by disambiguation »

squarefoot wrote: post #917
disambiguation wrote: post #902

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"get vaccinated" is to "one loaf of bread" as "honk for freedom" is to "the bolshevik revolution" people get war fatigue all the same. Further an authoritarian regime is perfectly sound as long as they're perfectly behaved. You shouldn't protest against that, agreed?

A lot of countries already have mandatory vaccinations for children since decades, a practice that helped immensely to stop and often eradicate other dangerous diseases, and nobody thought of protesting against them. The difference here is that protests against Covid vaccinations were created and amplified on social media by entities with vested political interests, and painting those measures as authoritarian is als…

a lot of countries also don't have mandates. in regions where ebola is endemic, the vaccine isn't mandated, though perhaps it should be.

in the USA the flu vaccine is not mandated either, not even in hospitals.

further covid is not apples to apples with measles and smallpox. covid mutates. the vaccines don't achieve herd immunity. those diseases target the young while covid targets the old and infirm.

covid does not affect everyone equally.

zero-tolerance and one-size-fits-all was a mistake.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#975

Post by ff317 »

jancsika wrote: post #449
ff317 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question though, which applies to both the Canadian truckers case and the Minneapolis example above - does a right to protest an issue also include a right to inflict economic harm (on broader society, in poorly-targeted fashion) in order to raise awareness? Is the amount of economic harm (say, %GDP of the town, region, or country) or how broadly it's targeted ("random retail stores"? "Anything that relies on…

> Serious question though, which applies to both the Canadian truckers case and the Minneapolis example above - does a right to protest an issue also include a right to inflict economic harm (on broader society, in poorly-targeted fashion) in order to raise awareness? Almost unexceptionally yes? Arab Spring in Egypt, civil rights lunch counter sit-ins, the protests in East Germany in 89... I'm actually having a hard…

I'm not asking whether significant protests tend to cause economic harm. I'm asking whether there should be reasonable limits. I think it's easy to come up with a feel-good answer like "the economic impact of the protest should match the severity and importance of the thing bring protested", but it's hard to have good rules for where that line of reasonable-ness is.

Hyperbolic example: If there was a 0.01% minority in your country/region which was violently opposed to some existing minor local law or regulation, would it be ok for them to shut down half the economy over it? Think of all the secondary damage that's doing every time someone gets upset over something relatively-small in the big picture. I think most would think that's unreasonable. It's this question that gets at the heart of when and/or if it's ok for a heavy-handed government to come in and put a stop to things. When is it reasonable for the powers that be to intervene and "stop a protest" because the toll is too high for the weight and/or popularity of the matter at hand?

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#976

Post by skrbjc »

kennywinker wrote: post #970
skrbjc wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you as outraged by this as that?

One group is protesting a permanent degradation of their home for the rich to get richer. The other is protesting temporary measures to protect the most vulnerable among us. Yeah, my sympathies are a not exactly even. Either way, invoking the emergencies act is stupid - if it wasn’t needed to arrest and remove pipeline protesters, it’s just theatrics now.

Another way to look at it is energy, especially affordable energy is an essential service that many many people rely on, especially in a cold place like Canada.

Regardless, I agree that the emergencies act is overkill. I think the Canadian government should sit down with the protestors and come up with a plan that alleviates the situation. I don't think a police vs protestor clash in the streets is going to end well for anyone.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#977

Post by dang »

absoluteharam wrote: post #850
jsnodlin wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good, blocking critical infrastructure and affecting hundreds of thousands of bottom lines is a crime.

Quoted post unavailable.

We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Posting like this will get your main account banned as well, so please don't.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#978

Post by test-edit »

sdsaga12 wrote: post #726
TravHatesMe wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should be upfront about his political bias (which is in his best interest as it is his source of revenue). Don't get me wrong I like his videos but I also like hearing from the other side for good measure. Perhaps it is pedantic to point out that everyone has a political leaning but I think it is good to be upfront so that people can consider the biases of the input in order to make a more informed opinion. Or pe…

I appear to have rate-limited from editing that comment after double clicking on mobile, but this is what I was going to add: Edit: As I note in the linked comment, this channel is openly supportive of the protests. As I also write there, a quick YouTube search will yield a large variety of other sources. The important thing is finding sources with long and unedited footage. As Jacques Ellul observed, "propaganda cea…

No post body was provided.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#979

Post by silent_cal »

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…

Who cares how popular it is? It only matters if it's justified. Very often the minority position is the correct one.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#980

Post by twoxproblematic »

abandonliberty wrote: post #963
gorwell wrote: post #912

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the real danger of the administrative state. Arresting you requires actual police officers to go out and physically do the act of arresting you. The bureaucratic state can freeze your bank account, revoke your license, and shut down your life, all remotely. And now they've set precedent for future protests. I don't know how anyone who considers themselves a liberal or Leftist can support this.

This isn't some person's bank account. These are foreign-funded terrorists. https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/anonymous-donations-to-convoy-as-... Assuming both police force (as many minorities have experienced) and administrative force can be abused, is one worse for society or more susceptible to abuse?

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN