If you're going to attack "media mischaracterizations" let's be truthful.
> but because white collar, work-at-home employees are mildly inconvenienced for a week, they're advocating police action against them and calling it an insurrection.
"Mildly inconvenienced" is an interesting term for shutting down a border crossing that handles $350 million in trade per day.
"Mildly inconvenienced" is an interesting term for residents having to put up with medically unsafe volumes of horn honking all throughout the nights. Some had brought train horns and were blaring those.
We're "calling it an insurrection" because that is a stated objective of the organizers, to overthrow the elected government of Canada. The fact that this is being encouraged and funded in large part by Americans is frankly, while unsurprising, an overtly hostile act being done to an ally.
The definition of an insurrection is "a violent uprising against an authority or government." Where is the violence? I'm seeing people dancing and enjoying themselves. So much joy. It's like a big festival. People are helping each other and coming together. I see families and food banks being filled, trash cleaned up. Please post videos of all the violence. Btw, you can see an endless feed of the types of events I've described on Youtube. The only violent act I saw was a confirmed antifa member running over civilians.
Exactly! The media portrayal of the events is so incongruous when you actually watch the videos and see the pictures of the protestors. The headlines do not match what these people are actually doing at all. They are playing hockey in the streets, walking around waving flags with "freedom" on them. Yes they're noisy, but that's what protests are all about right? Making noise to be heard.
Because the majority of media in Canada is funded by the government under the guise of protecting home grown talent and such. It’s heavily subsidized and has all sorts of benefits at taxpayers largesse in order to survive the competition from the US.
Without that regulatory backing, it would be dead under a year.
What do you mean? You realize even private media receives massive subsidies in Canada? And that those subsidies are usually promised at election time meaning there is a clear incentive to not cross the party that promises the most money (vs let's say a party that promises to slash support for the media). Even provincial government are starting to provide massive amount of cash to "support our journalism"
Just about every man, woman, child, dog, or organization in the country receives government subsidies for one thing or another.
What percentage of their budget is 'massive', and what conditions do they have to meet to receive them? Is shilling for the whigs one of them? Who determines that they've shilled enough? Do you have a source? One that's not a tabloid op-ed?
I don't think your take on what 'media ran by the government' matches what media in countries where it is actually ran by the government looks like.
I don't believe there has been a level of violence that has been concerning or comparable to other protests. There has been the usual behaviour you see in these protests, including harassment of people wearing masks, healthcare workers, businesses, etc. A small amount of riot-associated behaviour like breaking windows of businesses. It has largely been peaceful.
Overt violence isn't necessary to the definition of insurrection. Here are some other definitions I found:
- "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government"
- "a usually violent attempt to take control of a government"
2. if violence isn't necessary for an "insurrection", and "revolting against civil authority or an established government" suffices, does that mean rosa parks or MLK are insurrectionists?
Insurrection (?), n.:
1. A rising against civil or political authority, or the established government; open and active opposition to the execution of law in a city or state.
“It is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that rebellion and sedition have been made therein.”
Ezra iv. 19.
2. A rising in mass to oppose an enemy. [Obs.]
Syn. -- Insurrection, Sedition, Revolt, Rebellion, Mutiny. Sedition is the raising of commotion in a state, as by conspiracy, without aiming at open violence against the laws. Insurrection is a rising of individuals to prevent the execution of law by force of arms. Revolt is a casting off the authority of a government, with a view to put it down by force, or to substitute one ruler for another. Rebellion is an extended insurrection and revolt. Mutiny is an insurrection on a small scale, as a mutiny of a regiment, or of a ship's crew.
Requiring an acknowledgement of a government's legitimacy seems like a bad thing. Ultimately I think "insurrection" is just being thrown around far too freely.
> We're "calling it an insurrection" because that is a stated objective of the organizers, to overthrow the elected government of Canada.
I'm liberal, but the far left jumping to call protests an act of "insurrection" makes me want to warn you that this is an extreme characterization that will only further polarize us. We have to stop this nonsense.
It's like when those on the far left call for an end of free speech. The pendulum has swung completely for these folks. It's not a good idea to perpetuate or associate with these leanings.
Protests on both sides, while kept nonviolent, are a good and healthy mechanism to diffuse pent up anger, air grievances, and open new channels of dialogue.
Because that's not reality. No democracy is going to be overthrown. It's an extreme characterization, and it's wearing down our ability to fight the actual important battles [1].
You can say that there are radical elements within the protest that are anti-Canadian, white supremacist, etc., but to throw around the term insurrection so lightly and characterize the whole movement that way draws very harsh lines that are hard to walk back. I guarantee that you'll find friends and allies on both sides of most issues, yet we're worked up to the point that we're ready to start jailing one another.
The far left are crying wolf way too loudly and often, and it's going to bite come election time. The moderates are not going to listen anymore.
[1] Surveillance and freedom of speech, EARN IT Act, algorithmic manipulation, etc.
"Far left"? I'm a conservative. Most normal conservatives are vigorously against these protests, for exactly the same reason that we were against railway blockades, and against violence and mayhem that occurred under the umbrella of BLM protests. I am simply in awe that so many of the same people that were viciously against BLM protests are supporters of this protest.
Regardless, the literal stated goal of the organizers of this convoy was that the convoy would not leave until the government resign en masse and that the governor general basically decree this protest group the government. That is a textbook insurrection. This memorandum was replaced on February 8th because it was so fantastically treasonous that as it gained wider attention it became unpalatable.
So yes, when people say insurrection, they are absolutely correct. It isn't the "far left" pointing out that fact.
Just as it isn't the "far left" who point out that two of the primary organizers are a long time white supremacist, and the other is a literal separatist who has long petitioned that Western Canada should join the US.
My point is you can't call this an insurrection without shifting the Overton window.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any appreciable number of people are actually trying to overthrow Canada.
We're polarizing everything to the point we can't focus on the topics that matter. We'll forget about this in a matter of years, yet our ears and minds will be deafened.
I see it as wanton hyperbole. Demanding members of the government resign does not an insurrection make. Especially if you sincerely think they have abused their powers and have infringed on human rights.
Me and my brother watched the Super Bowl last night, me rooting for he Rams and him for the Bengals. We saw the same play happen live, resulting in the Bengals getting a penalty for holding and the Rams being awarded free yards.
He saw it as "fucked up" and I saw it as "just".
When the Rams were called for a penalty, the roles were reversed and I felt like the refs were in the pocket of the Bengals for calling such a stupid penalty.
---
All that to say: when _my_ team does stuff, it's okay. When _their_ team does stuff, it's bad. This is the same line of reasoning that is being played out with the above hypocrisy.
The logical case against the legitimacy of BLM protests is primarily predicated on evidence. Specifically, that while police brutality is definitely a problem in the US, there's no evidence that it disproportionately impacts people of color. When you look at the actual data, it seems that police like to brutalize and kill innocent suspects in a relatively colorblind manner. There are even a few outlier studies that suggest police actually show greater restraint with black suspects, although those studies do have some methodological issues.
It's effectively one of those "reals before feels" situations for those of us who prefer to view politics through a lens of actual data rather than baseless emotion.
Nobody batted an eye when Daniel Shaver's murderer was cleared. The protests should have been explicitly anti-police-brutality, not race-baiting nonsense.
It arises when supporting a group is all that matters, and one's "values" morph and twist into whatever is optimal to support the tribe at any given moment. It yields a lot of meaningless words.
This happens all over the political spectrum. It happens in technology discussions. It happens in, as another post said, sports commentary.
Because many on the right (and center and left) are naive enough to think that left-leaning groups/entity protests getting "mostly peaceful" positive coverage during the height of lockdowns in 2020 was actually an unbiased shift of norms, and not just media partisanship.
You're ignoring what I wrote entirely. We're not calling it an insurrection because it's a protest. We're calling it an insurrection because it's a protest with the express stated goal of overthrowing the democratically elected government.
The Wikipedia article is probably your best bet for a summary of factual information at this point.
> One of the main organizers behind the convoy, Canada Unity (CU), acknowledged that they had planned to submit their signed "memorandum of understanding" (MoU) to the Senate of Canada and Governor General Mary Simon, described in the MoU as the "SCGGC". The MoU which was signed by James and Sandra Bauder and Martin Brodmann, was posted on the Canada Unity website in mid-December 2021 and publicly available until its February 8 retraction. (...) CTV cited Bauder saying that he hoped the signed MoU would convince Elections Canada to trigger an election, which is not constitutionally possible. In this pseudolegal document, CU called on the "SCGGC" to cease all vaccine mandates, reemploy all employees terminated due to vaccination status, and rescind all fines imposed for non-compliance with public health orders. If this failed, the MoU called on the "SCGGC" to dissolve the government, and name members of the CU to form a Canadian Citizens Committee (CCC), which is beyond the constitutional powers of either the Governor General or the Senate.
It is indeed stated, I did not know that, thanks for the reference. I don't think it's serious though. By the same measure Extinction Rebellion would be considered an insurrection. I kinda remember BLM stating demands that included a separatist black country in the south. Hardly constitutional.
I think the threat would have to be serious to count as an insurrection, as in an actual credible plan to carry it out to fruition.
Otherwise every crackpot would be guilty of insurrection.
So in other words, overthrowing the government isn't their goal. Their goal is:
"CU called on the SCGGC to cease all vaccine mandates, reemploy all employees terminated due to vaccination status, and rescind all fines imposed for non-compliance with public health orders"
The stuff about dissolving the government is what they want if those other things aren't done.
They were calling on the "SCGGC" to do those things, i.e. they were calling on unelected bodies to bypass the elected House (which, by the way, is currently a minority government and therefore is being held up with opposition support).
Prove to me this effort is centralized and not some loon with zero say-so that a broadcast company quoted in a video to incense people and increase engagement. This is a protest with loads of people, and however much you want to distillate them into a caricature, they're ultimately acting independently and can withdraw their support. That is to say, because some few individuals may have said some extreme thing, doesn't mean that the whole condone that message or the intention.
Just like not everyone in a protest is black block.
Canada Unity is one of the co-organizers of this event.[1]
This is what their "Memorandum of Understanding" stated one month ago[2] (January 13):
ARTICLE 1. SCOPE of ACCORD
Canada Unity (CU) offers this “Memorandum” to the Senate of Canada and the Governor General of Canada, the highest authorities representing the Federal Government (SCGGC) as “The Government of Canada”. Acceptance by endorsement of this “Memorandum” and its valuable considerations, will solidify our mutual accord as further detailed in the understanding.
ARTICLE 2. OBLIGATION and COOPERATION
The appointed “Entities” agree to work together in the true spirit of partnership to ensure there is a united, visible, and responsive leadership of the “Initiative” and to demonstrate fair practice according to the Canadian Constitution, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Privacy Act and as further described in Article 3.d. of this “Memorandum” administrative and managerial commitment to the
“Initiative”.
ARTICLE 3. MANDATE
a. CU & SCGGC agree to form a committee, called the Citizens of Canada Committee (CCC).
b. SCGGC undertakes and appoints authorized (CCC) representatives.
c. CU undertakes and appoints authorized (CCC) representatives.
d. CU & SCGGC adopts and adheres to The Government of Canada’s agreements on transparency in matters related to the Canadian Federal Referendum Act, Canadian Constitution, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act, Canadian Human Rights Act, Canadian Bill of Rights, National Security Act 2017, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act, Tri Council Policy Statement, National and International Human Rights Declarations and such Regulations et al, the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki all as provided by law, and not only limited to latest additions, addendums and revisions; and to be precise including laws, regulations and declarations prior to SARS-CoV-2, and any subsequent variations of SARS-CoV-2.
e. SCGGC will effective as of midnight on this ___, day of ___________, 2021 instruct all levels of the Federal, Provincial, Territorial, and Municipal governments to immediately cease and desist all unconstitutional human rights, discriminatory and segregated actions, and not limited to, immediately instruct all levels of the Federal, Provincial, Territorial and Municipal governments to not only stop, but furthermore waive all SARS-CoV-2 (and not limited to SARS-CoV-2 subsequent variations) fines that have been issued and imposed upon its citizens, institutions, and private enterprises.
f. SCGGC will effective as of midnight on this ___, day of ___________, 2021, instruct all levels of the Federal, Provincial, Territorial, and Municipal governments to re-instate all employees in all branches of governments and, not limited to promote the same to the private industry and
institutional sectors employees with full lawful employment rights prior to the wrongful and unlawful dismissals that stem from the SARS-CoV-2 (and not limited to SARS-CoV-2 subsequent variations) vaccine passport mandates.
g. SCGGC will effective as of midnight on this ___, day of ___________, 2021, issue a cease-and-desist order abolishing all Federal, Provincial, Territorial, and Municipal Vaccine Passport requirements, Vaccine discriminatory regulations, initiatives, and mandates in regard to SARS-CoV-2 (and not limited to SARS-CoV-2 subsequent variations).
h. Further, SCGGC will effective as of midnight on this ___, day of ___________, 2021, issue a cease-and-desist order to the respected Honorable Members of the Government of Canada with the consequent instructions to further instruct the Premiers of the Provinces and Territories, the
Mayors of the respected Municipalities and, the respected Federal, Provincial, Territorial, and Municipal Medical Officers to stop all such unlawful activities pursuant to ARTICLE 3. MANDATE section d. of this “Memorandum.”
i. Canada is a lawful member of the Helsinki Declaration to name one but not limited to additional Canadian and International Human Rights Laws and Regulations et al and therefore enacts its duty and responsibility to make any and all laws and regulations available to its citizens; further, to enforce and uphold such laws, regulations, and declaration(s) on behalf of its Citizens of Canada.
j. By signing this “Memorandum”, CU will immediately stop “Operation Bear Hug Ottawa”, demonstration / convoy and Federal Referendum activities and will strive to work with all groups and entities et al to bring this country together in unity.
k. CU & SCGGC agree to have the CCC committee formed within 10 days of acceptance and signing of this “Memorandum”.
l. CU & SCGGC agree to have a final “signed” and publicly released agreement in place within “no later than 90 days” of acceptance and signing of this “Memorandum”.
m. CU & SCGGC agree to only release jointly approved media / press statements on a daily basis during the time schedule specified in ARTICLE 3. MANDATE section paragraph k. and l.
n. SCGGC will immediately make available all schedules as described in ARTICLE 3. MANDATE section paragraph d. available to the CCC committee.
(Document continues)
Effectively they want to appoint a governing body to this committee and usurp the governance of the duly elected MPs of the government, effectively dissolving it, and then end all federal and provincially-imposed imposed mandates. The problem is, the Federal government cannot force provinces to end mandates.
They have since withdrawn this memorandum specifically because they found out their movement was not as popular as they believed.[3]
This is not convincing, source 1 reads like a hit piece, and ultimately only lists 12 people with zero authority out of thousands of other participants. Organizers have questionable sway in any case. Everything else is an aside, except for source 3, which indicates to me that it was probably a product of internal pressure. I came to that conclusion independently, and upon looking:
"It has come to the attention of Canada Unity that the Memorandum Of Understanding (herein referred to as MOU) does not reflect the spirit and intent of the Freedom Convoy Movement 2022"
I'm not sure how familiar you are with HackerNews but this sort of trite dismissive reply is usually considered in exceptionally poor taste around here.
If you are rejecting those sources, please provide any sourcing of your own to demonstrate the information I've provided is wrong in some way.
You might be unconvinced but your return argument lacks substantiation beyond handwaving.
Every political compass direction has these elements. They're fringe.
This issue is about dialogue with constituents. Meanwhile there are dozens of more pressing matters that actually deserve serious attention. Ukraine, EARN IT (US for now, but it'll go global), etc.
>"Mildly inconvenienced" is an interesting term for shutting down a border crossing that handles $350 million in trade per day.
One lane of the bridge was open and the Detroit tunnel had absolutely no blockade. This is a mild inconvenience. Protests are inconvenient to be sure. If the media you consume portrayed this as if there was no traffic at all between detroit and windsor... time for you to look to new media. I am curious where you have gotten this idea? CBC? Some other 'government accredited media'?
>"Mildly inconvenienced" is an interesting term for residents having to put up with medically unsafe volumes of horn honking all throughout the nights. Some had brought train horns and were blaring those.
Ottawa has a population of 1 million and their downtown area will always have honking. Like you know... every other downtown area of a large capital city. Calling this 'medically unsafe' is quite a stretch. Our homes are quite insulated here in Canada given the cold. The same insulation reduces road noise a lot. If you cant sleep because of road noise downtown... move because that happens year round.
>We're "calling it an insurrection" because that is a stated objective of the organizers, to overthrow the elected government of Canada. The fact that this is being encouraged and funded in large part by Americans is frankly, while unsurprising, an overtly hostile act being done to an ally.
No, that's just not in touch with reality at all. Parking large trucks on roads and having a peaceful protest is not an insurrection. There was absolutely no 'otherthrow the elected government of canada' that's a complete fantasy. They haven't once entered buildings or drawn weapons against anyone or anything.
I highly recommend you consume different media because you are not even in the ballpark here.
Since you donated money to them, you probably would like to know that the manifesto of the organizers who setup the GoFundMe and started the convoy explicitly wanted the Governor General and Senate to meet with the organizers and form a committee to replace the federal government. [1] They only recently stepped back from the manifesto a few days ago. [2]
>Since you donated money to them, you probably would like to know that the manifesto of the organizers who setup the GoFundMe and started the convoy explicitly wanted the Governor General and Senate to meet with the organizers and form a committee to replace the federal government. [1] They only recently stepped back from the manifesto a few days ago. [2]
I never donated to them for the record. I wouldn't even join some solidarity thing.
The first link doesnt load any audio for some reason. So i dunno there.
The second link being from a 'government accredited media' org basically just says this MOU was withdrawn. Never provides a sentence of the MOU of what it says. Though they say:
>The group had been accused by some of using the document to try to legitimize an attempt to seize power from the federal government.
Yes well, the group was also called white supremacists, so lets just look at the real deal.
>By having the Senateof Canadaand theGovernorGeneralof Canadasign this MOU into action, they agree to immediately cease anddesist all unconstitutional, discriminatoryand segregating actionsand human rightsviolations.It calls for animmediate instruction toall levels of the Federal, Provincial, Territorialand Municipal governments to not only stop but furthermore waive all SARS-CoV-2 (and not limited to SARS-CoV-2 subsequent variations)fines that have been issued and imposed upon its citizens, institutions, and private enterprises.Further, to immediately re-instate all employees in all branches ofall levels ofgovernments and not limited to promote the same to the private industry and institutional sectors employees with full lawful employment rights prior to wrongful and unlawful dismissals.Lastly it instructsall levels of government and private Sector that the Illegal use of a Vaccine Passportto cease anddesistimmediately
OK, I can certainly see where some people are coming from, but absolutely don't agree with the conclusion they are trying to seize power. In fact no reading or interpretation of that has them asking for power. They are asking for the GG to simply restore our rights. Which is absolutely something we have in Canada that may seem abnormal to say the USA.
No doubt why the national post doesn't actually copy and paste any of this. This is entirely what the Monarch and GG is supposed to be for. Hurts me to say because I think we should cut all ties to the British monarchy and move toward a republic. Coming back to context of my comments. The use of our monarchy being used as if to be an insurrection is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Our monarchy is still our monarchy. If our monarch decides something, we must abide and that's not insurrection.
> Ottawa has a population of 1 million and their downtown area will always have honking. Like you know... every other downtown area of a large capital city. Calling this 'medically unsafe' is quite a stretch. Our homes are quite insulated here in Canada given the cold. The same insulation reduces road noise a lot. If you cant sleep because of road noise downtown... move because that happens year round.
I've had honking in Downtown Vancouver from a group supporting the convoy and it certainly does not resemble the usual city noise. If it was horrible for the couple hours I experienced then it must have been hell for those Ottawa citizens when it went on for days.
>I've had honking in Downtown Vancouver from a group supporting the convoy and it certainly does not resemble the usual city noise. If it was horrible for the couple hours I experienced then it must have been hell for those Ottawa citizens when it went on for days.
Would you say this honking in vancouver was 'medically unsafe'?
am Ottawan, live about 6 blocks from 2 of the main blocked roads (parliament and kent street) noise is not bad for me, headphones block it out completely. Theyve stopped honking for the last 5 days too fwiw.
"hell" is an overstatement for something that can easily be ignored with earplugs/headphones.
construction work is certainly worse when its nearby as. it penetrates buildings better and often produces noise for longer periods of time. Though for people living less then 1 block the first 2 weekend days were probably irritating.
>"Mildly inconvenienced" is an interesting term for residents having to put up with medically unsafe volumes of horn honking all throughout the nights. Some had brought train horns and were blaring those.
I think "loud but mostly peaceful protests" is an apt description.
This is a serious claim, and one that I have not seen coming from the protesters (they want an end to the Covid mandates, from what I can tell) . Can you please provide the source for your allegation?
> One of the main organizers behind the convoy, Canada Unity (CU), acknowledged that they had planned to submit their signed "memorandum of understanding" (MoU) to the Senate of Canada and Governor General Mary Simon, described in the MoU as the "SCGGC". The MoU which was signed by James and Sandra Bauder and Martin Brodmann, was posted on the Canada Unity website in mid-December 2021 and publicly available until its February 8 retraction. Bauder, whose name is at the top of a CTV News' list of "major players" in the convoy, is the founder of Canada Unity. CTV cited Bauder saying that he hoped the signed MoU would convince Elections Canada to trigger an election, which is not constitutionally possible. In this pseudolegal document, CU called on the "SCGGC" to cease all vaccine mandates, reemploy all employees terminated due to vaccination status, and rescind all fines imposed for non-compliance with public health orders. If this failed, the MoU called on the "SCGGC" to dissolve the government, and name members of the CU to form a Canadian Citizens Committee (CCC), which is beyond the constitutional powers of either the Governor General or the Senate.
Well it's a matter of interpretation. You can call it just fundamental misunderstanding of the Canadian constitution, or an attempt to overthrow the government, but either way having the GG, Senate, or Elections Canada force an election while the government enjoys the confidence of the house would be a coup. I'm fine with giving the protesters the benefit of the doubt and just agreeing that they don't understand how the electoral process works in Canada.
It depends whom you petition. If you petition the House to call an early election, that's part of our normal democracy. If you petition the army to remove the government, that's attempting a coup.
In this case the MoU was not petitioning the House to call an early election, it was petitioning the Senate and Governor General to call an early election, who do not have the legal authority to call an election while the government has the confidence of the House.
And whether it's conditional on your demands being met is irrelevant. You can't hold a gun to someone's head and tell them to do something, and then say "well I was only going to fire if they didn't do it". The problem is in the threat, not the ask.
I just read the MoU (https://web.archive.org/web/20220122173201/https://canada-un...). It is a ridiculous document, suggesting that CU and the central government will form a joint committee to set Covid policy together. But nowhere in the document do I see anything about calling an election, dissolving the government, or being beyond any constitutional powers. The Wikipedia quote upthread does not seem like an accurate summary of the MoU.
Obviously it takes some suspension of disbelief to take anything in that document seriously, but it suggests that the Senate and Governor General (both unelected) make up the new "Government of Canada", with no mention of the House (elected). It's pretty clear that the intention of the "offer" is to remove the duly elected government from the picture in the mistaken belief that the Senate and GG are of higher authority to the House.
As far as the petition for an early election goes, I agree I can't find it in the MoU. Perhaps it was reading between the lines and combining statements made outside the MoU with what was found within.
No idea why this is being downvoted. This is the PROBLEM, people. Many Canadians support removing mandates but very few of us support removing the government through extra-legal mumbo-jumbo. We just had an election in Canada a few months ago and mandates were very much an issue that was debated and discussed.
Not an insurrection. Not trying to overthrow the government. Not illegal to send money to people you like or across borders. Not an overtly hostile act. Truckers have rights too.
If these people are an 'insurrection' then BLM protests during which 25++ people died, was 'seditions rebellion'. [1]
The 'truckers convoy' is completely within the normal framework or populist protest, this is not new, it's common. Farmers used to bring in their tractors to do this.
The people at the border were moved. The people in Ottawa are concentrated downtown, mostly not near housing, and I believe the honking has ben curtailed.
They are now camping out and dancing to The Macarena.
In Portland, an entire section of the city was taken over by armed bandits threatening violence, not letting Police or emergency services in, two people died, people's rights were very seriously curtailed. Now that was a hard problem to solve.
At this point we just have a bunch of angry people in trucks downtown, that's mostly it.
It will eventually peter out and they will go home ...
Some of us remember the “mostly peaceful” characterization by CNN of the protests in Kenosha.
We also remember the blockade of the rail in Canada.
We’re also not impressed by the pleas by inconvenienced government bureaucrats who couldn't be bothered to investigate the arson of 40 places of worship in Canada.
We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. You can't post like this here. Moreover, it's not in your interests to post like this here, because all it does is discredit the position you're arguing for—a bad trade for a little momentary venting.
Medically unsafe volumes claim has not been substantiated with any real evidence, and quite frankly absolutely false at first glance because the driver located right next to the horn would have permanently ringing ears by now.
There is however evidence of many false claims, later walked back, just like the assault at the shelter, which as it turns out, was: 1) verbal assault 2) did not involve anyone from the convoy. Conveniently that claim
was spread by a charity mostly funded by the City of Ottawa (10mil), of which 9 mil goes to salaries and only 450k to groceries and 850k to programs.
Disgusting.
As for the residents of ottawa, living in the nation capital, and not expecting boisterous protests is plain privledge and entitlement. That’s what you see in the mirror every morning: privilege and entitlement.
Calling a strike an insurrection is an insult to millions in Canada who have fled actual wars. It’s also an insult to every socialist that supports the right of workers to organize and strike, that you want to now shutdown with martial law.
Disgusting.
Oh, truckers can find another job if they don’t like the jab? So you can move to another city too.
Just like the jab, nobody forces you to live in Ottawa, it was YOUR. CHOICE.
Please don't cross into the flamewar style like this. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. You can make your substantive points without that.
Edit: you've been doing this in other threads too (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30333616). Could you please not? Here's an old line from PG, which I love, that expresses what we actually want here: Comments should be written in the spirit of colleagues cooperating in good faith to figure out the truth about something, not politicians trying to ridicule and misrepresent the other side.
> but because white collar, work-at-home employees are mildly inconvenienced for a week, they're advocating police action against them and calling it an insurrection.
"Mildly inconvenienced" is an interesting term for shutting down a border crossing that handles $350 million in trade per day.
"Mildly inconvenienced" is an interesting term for residents having to put up with medically unsafe volumes of horn honking all throughout the nights. Some had brought train horns and were blaring those.
We're "calling it an insurrection" because that is a stated objective of the organizers, to overthrow the elected government of Canada. The fact that this is being encouraged and funded in large part by Americans is frankly, while unsurprising, an overtly hostile act being done to an ally.