Names of Canada truck convoy donors leaked after reported hack(reuters.com)
reuters.com
Names of Canada truck convoy donors leaked after reported hack
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/leak-site-says-it-has-been-given-list-canada-truck-convoy-donors-after-reported-2022-02-14/
954 comments
wayback machine FTW https://web.archive.org/web/20220214093323/https://www.reute...
It appears this was the result of terrible security at GiveSendGo. I'd agree it could be state sponsored, but I am certain there are enough people with the skills to do this on their own downtown Ottawa (even if it turned out they work for the gov't).
That said, I am thoroughly disappointed the Federal gov't and much of the media coverage. They have done nothing but make the situation worse. I think it is intentional (I assume some political end game), but their actions are fueling even more outlandish conspiracy theories.
The most insane was that all layers of government did nothing to stop the noise (truck horns), but it ended when a 21 year old who simply filed a court injunction and the protesters complied.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/injunction-ottawa-granted-1...
I've watched the Toronto Police Service play their A game through this entire debacle. They shut down the protests hard and were clearly visible throughout the city with heavy trucks and busses to block roads and maintain control of the situation.
https://www.cp24.com/video?clipId=2376560
The idea that Justin Trudeau needs martial law to deal with parked trucks is outrageous. This isn't an insurrection (reference to an MOU was removed from their website and I agree with the assertion that it was a poorly thought out idea, not a threat), there is no violence, and no obvious danger. The last person to use martial law was Trudeau's father (Pierre) for an actual terrorist attack and kidnapping (the diplomat was later murdered). Get some proper police on the job and drop mandates for ineffective measures and let's move on with our lives.
That said, I am thoroughly disappointed the Federal gov't and much of the media coverage. They have done nothing but make the situation worse. I think it is intentional (I assume some political end game), but their actions are fueling even more outlandish conspiracy theories.
The most insane was that all layers of government did nothing to stop the noise (truck horns), but it ended when a 21 year old who simply filed a court injunction and the protesters complied.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/injunction-ottawa-granted-1...
I've watched the Toronto Police Service play their A game through this entire debacle. They shut down the protests hard and were clearly visible throughout the city with heavy trucks and busses to block roads and maintain control of the situation.
https://www.cp24.com/video?clipId=2376560
The idea that Justin Trudeau needs martial law to deal with parked trucks is outrageous. This isn't an insurrection (reference to an MOU was removed from their website and I agree with the assertion that it was a poorly thought out idea, not a threat), there is no violence, and no obvious danger. The last person to use martial law was Trudeau's father (Pierre) for an actual terrorist attack and kidnapping (the diplomat was later murdered). Get some proper police on the job and drop mandates for ineffective measures and let's move on with our lives.
Media coverage of these protests is vastly negative. I remember only a few years ago (2020) when protests were undoubtedly violent across the United States. Video evidence of this violence as well as mass crowd driven theft was widely documented and distributed. I have yet to see video evidence of any violence from freedom convoys, and the ground based video evidence I have seen appears vastly peaceful. This does not mean there isn’t violence. Indeed, blockading roads could be construed as violence based on an argument for different definitions of the word. Yet, from my personal observations, it seems that the protests are essentially peaceful, citizens living in these cities are in support in large numbers, and this is running counter to the narrative being espoused in mainstream media sources, with the possible exception of Fox News. More or less it seems as though media sources are mischaracterizing these protests overall. Furthermore, it can be effectively argued that forcing workers to get vaccinated or lose their jobs is inherently discriminatory and perhaps even anti-freedom. But these are only my personal observations and conclusions, be what they are, a single individuals insight into the times occurring around him, debate as you will.
Yeah, they intend fully peaceful protests and bring long guns, body armor, large cache of ammunition...[0] and call for the overthrow of the democratic government.
This doesn't even resemble a spontaneous protest, it's organized and funded as part of the global push to fascism. The anti-vax component is a thin pretext.
[0] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/coutts-protest-blocka...
This doesn't even resemble a spontaneous protest, it's organized and funded as part of the global push to fascism. The anti-vax component is a thin pretext.
[0] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/coutts-protest-blocka...
Far better than CHAZ which established a "no-police zone", did not even recognise the US government and where gangs regularly carried assault rifles. And of-course the shootings and the deaths were just glossed over and the whole movement glorified by the media.
The global push to communism is far, far stronger than any step to fascism.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/980814/heavily-armed-leftist-gu...
What deeply amueses me is Trudeau's quote:
"When a government starts trying to cancel dissent or avoid dissent is when it’s rapidly losing its moral authority to govern"
https://twitter.com/justintrudeau/status/205322201187106816
Protest is terrific only when it doesn't happen in my backyard.
The global push to communism is far, far stronger than any step to fascism.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/980814/heavily-armed-leftist-gu...
What deeply amueses me is Trudeau's quote:
"When a government starts trying to cancel dissent or avoid dissent is when it’s rapidly losing its moral authority to govern"
https://twitter.com/justintrudeau/status/205322201187106816
Protest is terrific only when it doesn't happen in my backyard.
There's a lot to unpack here, but Ottawa residents are largely against the truckers occupying the roads of their city.
How about citizens of Seattle when the CHAZ was operating? Were they majority for that?
Considering that the CHAZ was in Capitol Hill, I assume the people in that neighborhood were supportive. As for the rest of us in Seattle, most of us never even visited or saw the place (how often does someone who doesn't live in Capitol Hill visit Capitol Hill?), so it was just something we would see on CNN if we were bothering to watch the news at all (it was cool to see FoxNews have some of our buildings burning down even if it wasn't true, their media narrative was pretty messed up).
I've got a friend who lives on Capitol Hill in Seattle. She hated it - it had all the negative effects of the convoy in Ottawa, about not being able to get where you want to go safely.
I suspect that's how it goes for most instances of protest or civil unrest - the apolitical people in the area hate it, because they're the ones you're inconveniencing to make a point, while distant folks' feelings are determined by whether the protesters are on their side.
I suspect that's how it goes for most instances of protest or civil unrest - the apolitical people in the area hate it, because they're the ones you're inconveniencing to make a point, while distant folks' feelings are determined by whether the protesters are on their side.
> Considering that the CHAZ was in Capitol Hill, I assume the people in that neighborhood were supportive...
Frustrated residents near Seattle's 'CHOP' zone want their neighborhood back:
https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/frustrated-resident...
Capitol Hill residents and businesses sue city of Seattle for failing to disband CHOP:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/capitol-hill-resid...
Two teenagers shot in Seattle's Chop autonomous zone:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53224445
Another Fatal Shooting in Seattle’s ‘CHOP’ Protest Zone:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/29/us/seattle-protests-CHOP-...
> It was cool to see FoxNews have some of our buildings burning down even if it wasn't true, their media narrative was pretty messed up
What do you mean "it wasn't true" ? It was certainly true. People were formally charged for carrying out the act.
https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/spd-rioters-tried-trap-offi...
"According to the criminal complaint, DAVID-PITTS had arrived in Seattle from Alaska just three days before Monday’s protest. After marching with the group in downtown Seattle, DAVID-PITTS is seen on surveillance video piling up trash against the sally-port door at the Seattle Police East Precinct. Over an eleven minute period the surveillance video captures DAVID-PITTS not only piling up the trash, but repeatedly lighting it on fire and feeding the flames with more trash. While DAVID-PITTS was lighting the fire, other people who appeared on the surveillance were attempting to use crowbars and cement-like materials to try to disable the door next to the sally-port to prevent officers from exiting the building" https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/alaska-man-charged-fede...
Frustrated residents near Seattle's 'CHOP' zone want their neighborhood back:
https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/frustrated-resident...
Capitol Hill residents and businesses sue city of Seattle for failing to disband CHOP:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/capitol-hill-resid...
Two teenagers shot in Seattle's Chop autonomous zone:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53224445
Another Fatal Shooting in Seattle’s ‘CHOP’ Protest Zone:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/29/us/seattle-protests-CHOP-...
> It was cool to see FoxNews have some of our buildings burning down even if it wasn't true, their media narrative was pretty messed up
What do you mean "it wasn't true" ? It was certainly true. People were formally charged for carrying out the act.
https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/spd-rioters-tried-trap-offi...
"According to the criminal complaint, DAVID-PITTS had arrived in Seattle from Alaska just three days before Monday’s protest. After marching with the group in downtown Seattle, DAVID-PITTS is seen on surveillance video piling up trash against the sally-port door at the Seattle Police East Precinct. Over an eleven minute period the surveillance video captures DAVID-PITTS not only piling up the trash, but repeatedly lighting it on fire and feeding the flames with more trash. While DAVID-PITTS was lighting the fire, other people who appeared on the surveillance were attempting to use crowbars and cement-like materials to try to disable the door next to the sally-port to prevent officers from exiting the building" https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/alaska-man-charged-fede...
It didn’t really affect anyone who wasn’t on tv. I’d only think about it when a friend from out of state would ask what it’s like.
The BLM marches closed freeways once in a while but it’s hard to make I5 noticeably worse. I’ve sat in longer backups more frequently in Seattle due to drunk drivers in Tacoma, for example.
It really wasn’t a big enough deal for there to be a majority opinion either way, I’d imagine. I’d completely forgotten about it until I read your post.
The BLM marches closed freeways once in a while but it’s hard to make I5 noticeably worse. I’ve sat in longer backups more frequently in Seattle due to drunk drivers in Tacoma, for example.
It really wasn’t a big enough deal for there to be a majority opinion either way, I’d imagine. I’d completely forgotten about it until I read your post.
I’m a Seattlelite, my perception from amongst friends was that the Capitol Hill experiment was very supportive, at least initially
There certainly was quite a bit of community support for the protests on Capitol Hill and the liberation of Cal Anderson Park and the surrounding area from being flooded with tear gas for weeks on end.
Most of the people who were in my scout troop participated at one point or another, the Capitol Hill Business Alliance was broadly supportive, albiet they were focused on business centric issues. Many of the businesses in the area operated like normal as well.
Eventually though the park was looking like a Nicklesville (old Seattlites know the etymology of this), and the crowd that had driven back the cops, painted the street with a mural, and acted in solidarity with their neighbors had dwindled, leaving just those that saw free food, free camping and few people left encouraging sociable behavior.
Most of the people who were in my scout troop participated at one point or another, the Capitol Hill Business Alliance was broadly supportive, albiet they were focused on business centric issues. Many of the businesses in the area operated like normal as well.
Eventually though the park was looking like a Nicklesville (old Seattlites know the etymology of this), and the crowd that had driven back the cops, painted the street with a mural, and acted in solidarity with their neighbors had dwindled, leaving just those that saw free food, free camping and few people left encouraging sociable behavior.
Support in large numbers and largest against are not necessarily contradictions. There can be a majority against something and still have a large minority for something. For example, if 1 in 4 support something, that 250k Ottawa residents.
[deleted]
https://youtube.com/c/Ottawalks Hours of footage here
> Furthermore, it can be effectively argued that forcing workers to get vaccinated or lose their jobs is inherently discriminatory and perhaps even anti-freedom.
From my understanding, this is only the case for truckers crossing the border. Most of the vaccination mandates I have heard of have been at the provincial or municipal levels and only affect employees of the government or publicly controlled institutions (health, education, police). Even then, it is typically on unpaid leave. Relatively few mandates have come from Ottawa, simply because it isn't their jurisdiction. They aren't leaving much room for human rights complaints, particularly since I believe employers were already within their rights to demand certain vaccinations. I very much doubt that it would even qualify as discriminatory, since it does not affect protected classes.
From my understanding, this is only the case for truckers crossing the border. Most of the vaccination mandates I have heard of have been at the provincial or municipal levels and only affect employees of the government or publicly controlled institutions (health, education, police). Even then, it is typically on unpaid leave. Relatively few mandates have come from Ottawa, simply because it isn't their jurisdiction. They aren't leaving much room for human rights complaints, particularly since I believe employers were already within their rights to demand certain vaccinations. I very much doubt that it would even qualify as discriminatory, since it does not affect protected classes.
It is not the employers that are demanding these people be vaccinated, They just want their products delivered. The government wont allow drivers to cross an imaginary line without submitting to vaccination: an even more egregious trespass of an individuals liberty than their usual practice of extortion and/or delay.
If by imaginary line you mean an international border and by government you mean the US government, at least the first part is factual.
As for the second part, the US has been asking for a whole host of vaccinations in order to get a visa for multiple decades, same for the Canadian one, so I don't see how it's "an even more egregious trespass of an individuals liberty than their usual practice".
As for the second part, the US has been asking for a whole host of vaccinations in order to get a visa for multiple decades, same for the Canadian one, so I don't see how it's "an even more egregious trespass of an individuals liberty than their usual practice".
Do you actually think that referring to borders as 'imaginary lines' is productive? Like do you think that it ads to the conversation, or persuades people to agree with you?
Why do you do it?
Why do you do it?
11 people were arrested on weapons charges at the Alberta blockade (handguns and body armor) and one person was arrested and charged with conspiracy to commit murder for trying to run over police with his tractor
That says a lot if that's what a violent protest looks like in Canada when the "peaceful" ones in the US involve millions of dollars in property damage and numerous injuries or deaths.
Well yeah, it's not like we lost a hockey game or anything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Vancouver_Stanley_Cup_rio...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Vancouver_Stanley_Cup_rio...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Vancouver_Stanley_Cup_rio...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Vancouver_Stanley_Cup_rio...
Strangest to me there is actually the realisation that 'loo' being a mainly British word (I knew that), over there they're not called 'portaloos'. ('Porta-potties'!)
(Further, both trademarks. Or at least were.)
(Further, both trademarks. Or at least were.)
While we're on the subject of the fallacy of relative privation, you'll surely acknowledge that the closure of the Ambassador Bridge for a week is a couple orders of magnitude worse than the 2020 protests. After all, the appropriate measure of a protest is dollars lost, and hundreds of millions of dollars of goods cross the bridge every day.
According to Wikipedia there was up to $2b in insured damages and 25 deaths during the 2020 riots. Now regarding the bridge closure; there will be costs for delays and those will be substantial, but it's not like they just throw $400m of goods in the river because the border is closed.
Where do you see $2 billion? Wikipedia seems to clearly state $500 million
$550 million in Minneapolis–Saint Paul (May 26–June 6, 2020)[5]
$1–2 billion in insured damages in the United States (May 26–June 8, 2020)[6]Not really that fallacy - no claim was made that it wasn't a problem. If anything, it's a musing on how media bias may affect how things are portrayed. Specifically with calling something violent. If violence is the adjective we are examining, the loss (or delay) of revenue from the protest would not fit in this model.
I am curious though, are goods not being rerouted?
I am curious though, are goods not being rerouted?
Absolutely that fallacy. You're holding the 2020 BLM protests up as being far worse. In fact, you've quantified just how bad they were, as a means of demonstrating that these protests are not as bad. The fallacy is not the claim that this isn't a problem, but that its not nearly as bad as this other problem, and therefore not worthy of the reaction.
Many of the large auto manufacturers shutdown production lines in response to the bridge closure. Delayed revenue is lost revenue.
Many of the large auto manufacturers shutdown production lines in response to the bridge closure. Delayed revenue is lost revenue.
"Fallacy of relative privation (also known as "appeal to worse problems" or "not as bad as") – dismissing an argument or complaint due to what are perceived to be more important problems."
I have not dismissed the issue. Do you have a source to back up your claim? Also, can you quote where I say this protest is not an issue or not worthy of being addressed?
Again, this was mostly about bias in reporting.
"Delayed revenue is lost revenue."
Here's a fallacy - false equivalent. Delaying revenue does not mean that revenue is lost. Demand and orders do not cease to exist simply because production temporarily halts.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
I have not dismissed the issue. Do you have a source to back up your claim? Also, can you quote where I say this protest is not an issue or not worthy of being addressed?
Again, this was mostly about bias in reporting.
"Delayed revenue is lost revenue."
Here's a fallacy - false equivalent. Delaying revenue does not mean that revenue is lost. Demand and orders do not cease to exist simply because production temporarily halts.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
@giantg2
The fallacy is claiming that one is not as bad because the other exists. You seem to be defending your comments from absolute privation. I refer to the first comment I replied to,
>That says a lot if that's what a violent protest looks like in Canada when the "peaceful" ones in the US involve millions of dollars in property damage and numerous injuries or deaths.
Isn't pedantry fun?
The fallacy is claiming that one is not as bad because the other exists. You seem to be defending your comments from absolute privation. I refer to the first comment I replied to,
>That says a lot if that's what a violent protest looks like in Canada when the "peaceful" ones in the US involve millions of dollars in property damage and numerous injuries or deaths.
Isn't pedantry fun?
Perhaps you read that with a different meaning than it was written with. As I've repeatedly said, it's about the bias in reporting. You seem to not be accepting this. Might I remind you that one of the guidelines of this site is to interpret comments charitably.
You misinterpreted my comment and attacked it as being a fallacy. I explained myself and you attacked further, in the process stating a fallacy of your own. Now you are calling this pedantry. Yet you have not responded to the majority of my comments.
Why would I not correct you when you are saying that I'm saying things I'm not?
You misinterpreted my comment and attacked it as being a fallacy. I explained myself and you attacked further, in the process stating a fallacy of your own. Now you are calling this pedantry. Yet you have not responded to the majority of my comments.
Why would I not correct you when you are saying that I'm saying things I'm not?
That's still a considerably small number of people considering the protesters number in the tens of thousands
Near where I live, one of the BLM protestors tried to burn down the local 911 center. He’s currently in prison for arson.
Haven’t seen anything like that in this protest, but honestly I haven’t been looking too close.
Haven’t seen anything like that in this protest, but honestly I haven’t been looking too close.
Why are the extreme examples of other events the baseline threshold for problems at subsequent events?
Because we evaluate the extremity of events relative to each other.
But we don't allow the extremes of barely related events to calibrate what should or shouldn't be alarming about other events.
Comparing civil disturbances with other civil disturbances is fair.
Martin Luther Kings March on Selma can be compared (very favorably) to the Night of Broken Glass.
The BLM protests involved a much larger number of people, and last much longer (so far).
It makes it easier to cherry lick bad examples.
It’s fair to say what we’re seeing in Canada is like the worst of the BLM condensed into a few weeks.
But I stayed away from the BLM protests, so I only saw them when they came to me.
Like so:
https://youtu.be/vSgI0vCoLMY
Edit: to be clear I was present when this happened
Martin Luther Kings March on Selma can be compared (very favorably) to the Night of Broken Glass.
The BLM protests involved a much larger number of people, and last much longer (so far).
It makes it easier to cherry lick bad examples.
It’s fair to say what we’re seeing in Canada is like the worst of the BLM condensed into a few weeks.
But I stayed away from the BLM protests, so I only saw them when they came to me.
Like so:
https://youtu.be/vSgI0vCoLMY
Edit: to be clear I was present when this happened
You're disregarding my premise, and arguing against something else. The severity of the BLM protests in no way sets precedence for other protests, nor informs the minimum level of violence/destruction/disruption that must occur before other protests are criticized and acknowledged as traumatic for the people whose lives have been disrupted. These events stand on their own, and aren't somehow offset by another protest, or absolved by another protest. It's not an overton window.
> The severity of the BLM protests in no way sets precedence for other protests, nor informs the minimum level of violence/destruction/disruption that must occur before other protests are criticized and acknowledged as traumatic for the people whose lives have been disrupted.
But the comparison does inform us on how biased and hypocratical the media and the ruling class are.
But the comparison does inform us on how biased and hypocratical the media and the ruling class are.
You’re arguing that the deprivations suffered by the victims of one civil disturbance are not lessened in any way by the deprivations of a different disturbance.
That BLM, the Night of Broken Glass, and Selma do not make the lives of those affected by the “truckers” any better.
Those events create neither a defense nor condemnation of the “truckers.”
This is true, certainly.
But it does allow third parties (most people on this forum) to create a figure out how bad the situation is.
Likewise, it allows Canadians to assess the actions of their leaders decided if they are appropriate.
That BLM, the Night of Broken Glass, and Selma do not make the lives of those affected by the “truckers” any better.
Those events create neither a defense nor condemnation of the “truckers.”
This is true, certainly.
But it does allow third parties (most people on this forum) to create a figure out how bad the situation is.
Likewise, it allows Canadians to assess the actions of their leaders decided if they are appropriate.
It sets a precedence in regards to the correct way to respond.
If BLM protests were encouraged or tolerated by authorities, yet the trucker protestors are harshly target it raises the question “why?”
It’s possible the response to BLM was wrong. It’s possible that America and Canada have different concepts of political liberty.
But it’s also possible offialdom is playing favorites.
These are legitimate questions, and Canadian voters should seek answers for them.
If BLM protests were encouraged or tolerated by authorities, yet the trucker protestors are harshly target it raises the question “why?”
It’s possible the response to BLM was wrong. It’s possible that America and Canada have different concepts of political liberty.
But it’s also possible offialdom is playing favorites.
These are legitimate questions, and Canadian voters should seek answers for them.
Was he really a BLM protestor or just an arsonist looking for an opening to burn something down?
He had been involved in the protests for a while. He was part of a crowd of very angry protestors when he threw the incendiary.
He had no previous convictions of arson.
He had no previous convictions of arson.
You are trying to associate all BLM protestors with arson and it's simply a logical leap that I don't see how anyone can make.
Obviously a lot of details unknown at this point, but: https://globalnews.ca/news/8600592/trucker-convoy-police-inv...
> it seems that the protests are essentially peaceful, citizens living in these cities are in support in large numbers
This is not true in any of the relevant cities; it is an extremely vocal, and very small, minority of people who are in support, and I can guarantee you that most of the few people who do support it would change their minds if it was their neighbourhood people were honking in all night.
Note that over 90% of Canadian truckers are already vaccinated, and similar percentages of the large urban centres being harassed are vaccinated as well. Most people are entirely against these "protests", and will be happier when they're over.
> Furthermore, it can be effectively argued that forcing workers to get vaccinated or lose their jobs is inherently discriminatory
It cannot be effectively argued, because it is not discriminatory; "people who refuse to believe in medical science" is not a protected class. If you need to get a background check to get a job, that is not discriminatory. If you need to have a license to do a job, that is not discriminatory. If you need to be vaccinated to do your job (not just COVID, but otherwise), that is not discriminatory.
> and perhaps even anti-freedom.
Freedom has limits. You don't have the freedom to endanger others.
Freedom does not mean "I get to eat my cake and have it too"; it means you're able to make a choice. Do you want to get vaccinated and do your job, or do you want to refuse to get vaccinated and leave that job so that you aren't endangering others?
What these people are protesting is that they made their choice and have to deal with the consequences of that choice. If you don't want to get a driver's license, you can't protest that you should still be allowed to drive a car; if you don't want to get a passport, you can't protest that you should still be allowed to travel internationally. The rules and restrictions are clear and up-front.
Also: I have friends in Ottawa, and am hearing multiple reports of people being harassed or threatened by these "protesters" (many of whom are acting more like terrorists, trying to intimidate everyone around them) for something as simple as wearing a mask.
This is not true in any of the relevant cities; it is an extremely vocal, and very small, minority of people who are in support, and I can guarantee you that most of the few people who do support it would change their minds if it was their neighbourhood people were honking in all night.
Note that over 90% of Canadian truckers are already vaccinated, and similar percentages of the large urban centres being harassed are vaccinated as well. Most people are entirely against these "protests", and will be happier when they're over.
> Furthermore, it can be effectively argued that forcing workers to get vaccinated or lose their jobs is inherently discriminatory
It cannot be effectively argued, because it is not discriminatory; "people who refuse to believe in medical science" is not a protected class. If you need to get a background check to get a job, that is not discriminatory. If you need to have a license to do a job, that is not discriminatory. If you need to be vaccinated to do your job (not just COVID, but otherwise), that is not discriminatory.
> and perhaps even anti-freedom.
Freedom has limits. You don't have the freedom to endanger others.
Freedom does not mean "I get to eat my cake and have it too"; it means you're able to make a choice. Do you want to get vaccinated and do your job, or do you want to refuse to get vaccinated and leave that job so that you aren't endangering others?
What these people are protesting is that they made their choice and have to deal with the consequences of that choice. If you don't want to get a driver's license, you can't protest that you should still be allowed to drive a car; if you don't want to get a passport, you can't protest that you should still be allowed to travel internationally. The rules and restrictions are clear and up-front.
Also: I have friends in Ottawa, and am hearing multiple reports of people being harassed or threatened by these "protesters" (many of whom are acting more like terrorists, trying to intimidate everyone around them) for something as simple as wearing a mask.
> Media coverage of these protests is vastly negative.
Keep in mind that in Canada a lot of the media is state owned and operated. So the media coverage might reflect more on what the ruling party wants the people to think of the protests.
On the livestreams they had music blasting and children playing in the snow near the trucks. Doesn’t look like an “insurrection”, as the state media described it, by any stretch (unless they fear snowballs!).
Keep in mind that in Canada a lot of the media is state owned and operated. So the media coverage might reflect more on what the ruling party wants the people to think of the protests.
On the livestreams they had music blasting and children playing in the snow near the trucks. Doesn’t look like an “insurrection”, as the state media described it, by any stretch (unless they fear snowballs!).
> Keep in mind that in Canada a lot of the media is state owned and operated. So the media coverage might reflect more on what the ruling party wants the people to think of the protests.
Sure, there's the CBC but the rest of our media is not state owned, so that's a weird claim to make.
Sure, there's the CBC but the rest of our media is not state owned, so that's a weird claim to make.
Except in this case the major private Canadian media all participated in taking something like $600 million Canadian dollars in subsidies from the government. Justin Trudeau even had the audacity to joke about having bribed the media. [0]
I think it is reasonable to consider the possibility that these handouts may have biased the media to the point where they may be reluctant to bite the hand that feeds them.
[0] https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/justin-trudeau-60...
I think it is reasonable to consider the possibility that these handouts may have biased the media to the point where they may be reluctant to bite the hand that feeds them.
[0] https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/justin-trudeau-60...
I'm not arguing there's not some possible influence, I don't know if you can say that with any media in any country, I was just taking exception to the blatantly false "state owned and operated".
You’re partially correct. Don’t forget the goodie bag the media gets to “support journalism” which basically is a huge pot of money. Or Telford bragging she could get articles written published to smear to smear someone. It not too hard to make the connection between money and favours now is it?
Well they live in large part on state money according to VivaFrei.
> On the livestreams they had music blasting and children playing in the snow near the trucks. Doesn’t look like an “insurrection”,
Except for the existence of snow, it sounds like things I’ve seen around fighters in the Palestinian intifada. I think you have an unrealistic view of what an insurrection looks like.
Except for the existence of snow, it sounds like things I’ve seen around fighters in the Palestinian intifada. I think you have an unrealistic view of what an insurrection looks like.
> citizens living in these cities are in support in large numbers
Source? The US polls I've seen show 60% support for vaccine mandates, which is probably why the government feels so confident in shutting down the protests. The media I've seen isn't portraying the protestors as violent but as a nuisance.
Source? The US polls I've seen show 60% support for vaccine mandates, which is probably why the government feels so confident in shutting down the protests. The media I've seen isn't portraying the protestors as violent but as a nuisance.
Do the polls have how many support the protest? If 20% do, then that would be 200k residents in the city. I consider 200k, or 20% of the population to be a large number. Still a minority, but a large minority.
It does irritate me that the media are referring to it by their own name, "The Freedom Convoy", when it should be something more neutral and objective, like "the Harassment Convoy".
What do US polls have to do with Canadian protests? I mean aren't those just arm chair supporters in the USA?
I'd be interested to see canadian polls if you've got them.
Hours of footage https://youtube.com/c/Ottawalks
>> citizens living in these cities are in support in large numbers,
what are you possibly basing this on?
>> But these are only my personal observations and conclusions
Oh, opinion. So you complain that the media coverage is "vastly negative" because... you feel it is.
what are you possibly basing this on?
>> But these are only my personal observations and conclusions
Oh, opinion. So you complain that the media coverage is "vastly negative" because... you feel it is.
Please don't cross into the flamewar style here. Your comment is a noticeable step in that direction, which is against both the letter and the spirit of the site guidelines. You can make your substantive points without that.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Well they did say they were watching videos of it and it seemed peaceful. Basically that the videos they are seeing don't support the message they are hearing. I would be interest to see evidence either way.
https://youtube.com/c/Ottawalks Hours of footage
> The most insane was that all layers of government did nothing to stop the noise (truck horns), but it ended when a 21 year old who simply filed a court injunction and the protesters complied.
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/injunction-ottawa-granted-1...
This did not work though:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/protesters-violate-cou...
The court order is just a threat and the Ottawa Police Service appear to not care to enforce the order.
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/injunction-ottawa-granted-1...
This did not work though:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/protesters-violate-cou...
The court order is just a threat and the Ottawa Police Service appear to not care to enforce the order.
I think one point that the last two years has nailed home (around the world) is that how protestors are treated has little to do with what their tactics and behavior are, and more to do with simply whether their message ideologically aligns with the police.
If the police agree with some group of protestors, then they're treated with kid gloves, and can get away with anything. The police will throw their hands up and say "nope, can't possibly enforce the law anymore, so sorry!" and stand back. If the police do not agree with some other group of protestors, they're going to get beaten, pepper sprayed, and shot with rubber bullets, no matter how they behave. All of a sudden, enforcement is no problem.
If the police agree with some group of protestors, then they're treated with kid gloves, and can get away with anything. The police will throw their hands up and say "nope, can't possibly enforce the law anymore, so sorry!" and stand back. If the police do not agree with some other group of protestors, they're going to get beaten, pepper sprayed, and shot with rubber bullets, no matter how they behave. All of a sudden, enforcement is no problem.
Things I’ve seen this year.
People who Molotov cocktailed a police van with people inside. Let off with probation.
Police beat an unconscious person until they died. Internal investigation cleared them of wrongdoing.
It definitely matters what the protest is supporting/fighting.
People who Molotov cocktailed a police van with people inside. Let off with probation.
Police beat an unconscious person until they died. Internal investigation cleared them of wrongdoing.
It definitely matters what the protest is supporting/fighting.
Portland Police Department is just one particularly egregious example. Numerous leaked text messages between officers and the Proud Boys. Letting them know to take cover before tear gas is deployed and that they'll be told when it's "all clear" to come back out, letting them know that though some of their leaders have active warrants for arrest, that they are clear to come to the protest because there's no "other agencies" involved in enforcement, so there's no risk.
My example #1 was a BLM protestor, #2 was at the capital protest.
> "there is no violence, and no obvious danger."
This is false and I would expect better of HN posters.
A group of the protestors locked the doors to a downtown apartment building with handcuffs and then attempted to set that building on fire.
Although nobody has been injured yet, there have been plenty of weapons seizures as well as incidents of protestors ramming police vehicles and/or attempting to arrest police officers.
Residents of Ottawa are scared to leave their homes for simple tasks like buying groceries because the protestors have assaulted vulnerable individuals for wearing masks.
The entire thing is a tinderbox just waiting for one unhinged protestor to make a wrong move. And even if we escape this incident peacefully, there are the toxic diesel fumes from idling trucks which have been polluting downtown Ottawa's air for the last two weeks and are likely to become trapped in the urban environment.
This is false and I would expect better of HN posters.
A group of the protestors locked the doors to a downtown apartment building with handcuffs and then attempted to set that building on fire.
Although nobody has been injured yet, there have been plenty of weapons seizures as well as incidents of protestors ramming police vehicles and/or attempting to arrest police officers.
Residents of Ottawa are scared to leave their homes for simple tasks like buying groceries because the protestors have assaulted vulnerable individuals for wearing masks.
The entire thing is a tinderbox just waiting for one unhinged protestor to make a wrong move. And even if we escape this incident peacefully, there are the toxic diesel fumes from idling trucks which have been polluting downtown Ottawa's air for the last two weeks and are likely to become trapped in the urban environment.
> A group of the protestors locked the doors to a downtown apartment building with handcuffs and then attempted to set that building on fire.
What evidence is there that that was real? An allegation was made on Twitter, but only thing I've found that digs into the details looks like a complete debunking (see links at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30336974). It's from a biased source and I'm open to any factual refutation, but I've looked for contrary reporting that digs into the details, and haven't found any. Only a lot of repetition of the original allegation.
What evidence is there that that was real? An allegation was made on Twitter, but only thing I've found that digs into the details looks like a complete debunking (see links at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30336974). It's from a biased source and I'm open to any factual refutation, but I've looked for contrary reporting that digs into the details, and haven't found any. Only a lot of repetition of the original allegation.
News report (investigation ongoing so details not really clear): https://globalnews.ca/news/8600592/trucker-convoy-police-inv...
With a couple rouge agents being your definition of obvious danger, there can never be another protest. Apply that same logic to the protests a year before and see how it goes
I feel like that is an understatement. This is not a few good old boys throwing a snowball. It's acts of arson, attempted murder, probably fits the definition of terrorism. And that's just the apartment building incident.
And of course the protests a year before were in no part better.
And of course the protests a year before were in no part better.
Every large protest fits the definition of terrorism, especially I suspect from the perspective of the politicians that the protest is trying to pressure. This is why people have been arguing that the definition is misguided and far to broad pretty much since the inception of that definition.
I didn't mention severity or intention on purpose. Even the most just causes have a few self-righteous assholes willing to justify the means
The arson thing was pretty thoroughly debunked. "I would expect better of HN posters."
When was that debunked? The last I heard the police were investigating. I even saw video from it.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/police-arson-unit-probes-otta...
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/police-arson-unit-probes-otta...
A direct quote from the Ottawa police chief:
"We don’t have any direct linkage between the occupation—the demonstrators—and that act." [1]
[1]https://www.cpac.ca/episode?id=fa5721d6-af8b-48d9-9848-73dcf...
"We don’t have any direct linkage between the occupation—the demonstrators—and that act." [1]
[1]https://www.cpac.ca/episode?id=fa5721d6-af8b-48d9-9848-73dcf...
Oh, so the 'debunking' is not on whether or not an attempted mass murder/arson occurred, but that there is no "direct linkage" between the occupation and the crime.
What that likely means is that they don't know who the people in the video are. It seems pretty likely to me that it's related to the occupation, especially since there was a 'confrontation' earlier that day with residents of the building. It's not like buildings are burnt down in Ottawa every day.
What that likely means is that they don't know who the people in the video are. It seems pretty likely to me that it's related to the occupation, especially since there was a 'confrontation' earlier that day with residents of the building. It's not like buildings are burnt down in Ottawa every day.
That's great that it "seems pretty likely" to you, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Unless you have concrete information which the OPS doesn't have, I don't think speculation is very useful here.
>It's not like buildings are burnt down in Ottawa every day.
No building was burnt down.
No building was burnt down.
In the country I grew up in, trying and failing to commit crimes is still a crime. The act itself is the crime, not the success of it. Unfortunately these days it seems like the better determinant of whether something is a crime is someone's political affiliation.
Nitpick but parent said "no building were burnt down" and not "no crime was comitted"
ar_turnbull(1)
[deleted]
Compared to the violence, burning and looting in front of the American election this is absolutely nothing and have only lasted a few days
Those demonstrations were mostly peaceful according to those we are supposed to listen to, so obviously the current demonstrations are even more peaceful.
Edit: I'm triple vaccinated myself and recommend it for everyone else, but if we have freedom to choose that also must include freedom to do what I think is less smart.
In fact I think at this point the attempt to force people to vaccinate is scaring people away from it.
Those demonstrations were mostly peaceful according to those we are supposed to listen to, so obviously the current demonstrations are even more peaceful.
Edit: I'm triple vaccinated myself and recommend it for everyone else, but if we have freedom to choose that also must include freedom to do what I think is less smart.
In fact I think at this point the attempt to force people to vaccinate is scaring people away from it.
People still have their rights to do "dumb choices". I'm triple vaccinated, got omicron one month later of being vaccinated, still believe that the vaccine helped me to have it almost asymptomatically, but I'm ok with people saying that dont want to be vaccinated.
If it wasn't clear I think we agree very much.
To force a division among the population is the real evil. We should demand better investments in the health sector, better salary to all workers involved on that (Doctors, nurses, teachers, policeman, etc), a covid treatment protocol that works and that's peer reviewed and supported by the scientists and eventually not the best for the pharma industry. We need transparency from Politicians in every single decision that affects the population.
Add to that ER doctors needing police escorts to hospitals. Hospital staff told not to wear scrubs or anything that identifies them as hospital staff.
>A group of the protestors locked the doors to a downtown apartment building with handcuffs and then attempted to set that building on fire.
For some reason the media failed to show the images in their stories, but the two arsonists on camera (not a group) had purple hair. With all the talk of white supremacist instigators at BLM riots, I wouldn't be surprised if this were a case of the opposite, anti-trucker instigators trying to give the protestors a bad name, and purple hair is more likely associated with the left...which ironically has taken a pro government stance on this issue.
In any case afaik no actual tie to the protests has been reported.
In any case afaik no actual tie to the protests has been reported.
> Residents of Ottawa are scared to leave their homes for simple tasks
Kind of like almost everyone in the US and Canada for a period of almost a year thanks to governmental policies?
Another way to look at things is these protests will indirectly help flatten the curve, especially if they go on for two more weeks.
Kind of like almost everyone in the US and Canada for a period of almost a year thanks to governmental policies?
Another way to look at things is these protests will indirectly help flatten the curve, especially if they go on for two more weeks.
> there is no violence, and no obvious danger
A number of illegal weapons, high capacity magazines, and a large quantity of ammunition were seized in a blockade in Alberta. I would not be surprised if there are people with weapons in Ottawa as well, waiting for an opportunity to strike.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8618494/alberta-coutts-border-pro...
A number of illegal weapons, high capacity magazines, and a large quantity of ammunition were seized in a blockade in Alberta. I would not be surprised if there are people with weapons in Ottawa as well, waiting for an opportunity to strike.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8618494/alberta-coutts-border-pro...
> A number of illegal weapons...were seized in a blockade in Alberta.
> https://globalnews.ca/news/8618494/alberta-coutts-border-pro...
Your link doesn't describe anything as "illegal weapons." It just says "long guns" and "handguns" which are both pretty broad terms that undoubtedly encompass guns that are legal in Canada.
> https://globalnews.ca/news/8618494/alberta-coutts-border-pro...
Your link doesn't describe anything as "illegal weapons." It just says "long guns" and "handguns" which are both pretty broad terms that undoubtedly encompass guns that are legal in Canada.
Most hand guns are prohibited[0] weapons in Canada. You need explicit authorization to transport [2] prohibited weapons. There are pretty strict rules[3] for how they're to be transported, too. You're not just allowed to drive around with handguns rattling around in the car, this isn't the US. Large capacity magazines are illegal in almost all cases [1]. Even that machete might be illegal given the context [4].
[0] https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/classes-firearms
[1] https://www.grc-rcmp.gc.ca/en/firearms/maximum-permitted-mag...
[2] https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/authorization-transpo...
[3] https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/storing-transporting-...
[4] https://cubetoronto.com/canada/are-machetes-illegal-in-canad...
[0] https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/classes-firearms
[1] https://www.grc-rcmp.gc.ca/en/firearms/maximum-permitted-mag...
[2] https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/authorization-transpo...
[3] https://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/firearms/storing-transporting-...
[4] https://cubetoronto.com/canada/are-machetes-illegal-in-canad...
A machete may be considered a weapon in certain contexts, but that's not a unique law. The US also reclassifies things as weapons once they are used as weapons (in that instance.) Attack someone with a machete and it suddenly becomes a deadly weapon.
Canada bans a lot of weapons for looking "scary" -- nunchuks and butterfly knives for example (both of which are rather notoriously more dangerous to the person wielding them than anybody else). Americans who come to Canada are frequently surprised by the different laws up here. Yes, an attack with a machete renders it illegal in both countries. A concealed machete is illegal in Canada, regardless of intent or use. I'm not so sure about the US (especially with the variance among state laws)
A lot of states ban nunchucks (sometimes as "ninja weapons") and butterfly knives. It's highly variable throughout the US.
By definition a handgun not in storage or in transport to a shooting range is an illegal weapon in Canada.
Handguns require a license to transport (ATT). Even if they were acquired legally (and that's a very big if because of RPAL), their presence at the border is very illegal.
Surprisingly, despite "a willingness to use them against police", they didn't use them against police, so it's likelier than not that the story is made up or mischaracterized.
A lot of people will say they are willing to do something.
But when their life is on the line they suddenly capitulate.
But when their life is on the line they suddenly capitulate.
These are the people of the truck convoy who protest: https://twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/status/149273926633759539...
Does it look like they are all packing and waiting to strike?
Does it look like they are all packing and waiting to strike?
The tweet is deleted. Regardless, I am sure not "all" protesters are looking for violence, but the ones who brought weapons and ammo certainly did. And I am sure not all of them have been found and arrested.
What a convenient thing to happen on the very same day he is expected to announce the taking away of civil liberties of Canadians, and give themselves the right to seize property and equipment.
Painting with broad strokes is dangerous.
When asking if anyone in the protest had firearms, a journalist was ejected from a news conference. Would have been a good opportunity to disavow violence, but here we are. In this case, it's not so much painting with broad strokes as much as judging by the company they keep.
Source: https://twitter.com/alexboutilier/status/1493319507846176769...
Source: https://twitter.com/alexboutilier/status/1493319507846176769...
"How dare you use my words and actions against me!"
I didn't see (nonfringe) calls for martial law. I saw calls for the military to tow the trucks because the actual truck towing companies the police normally subcontracted to were unwillingness to piss off their customer base/risk of violence from truckers/agreement with the protests. And, of the various government agencies, only the military had access to the heavy vehicle movers that were needed.
> I think it is intentional (I assume some political end game)
Most media doesn't have a political endgame. They have a bias for sensationalism and clickbait.
> I think it is intentional (I assume some political end game)
Most media doesn't have a political endgame. They have a bias for sensationalism and clickbait.
> of the various government agencies, only the military had access to the heavy vehicle movers that were needed
I am 100% certain there are people who can easily pick whatever kind of ignition lock cylinders are used in these trucks. It would be far more efficient to "car jack" these trucks, drive them to an impound lot, and auction them off the next day, than trying to tow them with "military tow trucks" (whatever those are).
I am 100% certain there are people who can easily pick whatever kind of ignition lock cylinders are used in these trucks. It would be far more efficient to "car jack" these trucks, drive them to an impound lot, and auction them off the next day, than trying to tow them with "military tow trucks" (whatever those are).
Definition, martial law: Martial law is the temporary imposition of direct military control of normal civil functions or suspension of civil law by a government, especially in response to a temporary emergency where civil forces are overwhelmed, or in an occupied territory. [1]
The key phrases are "imposition of direct military control of normal civil functions" and "suspension of civil law by a government".
The Canadian Emergencies Act, which was invoked by the Liberal government today, specifically states the following: "For greater certainty, nothing in this Act derogates from the authority of the Government of Canada to deal with emergencies on any property, territory or area in respect of which the Parliament of Canada has jurisdiction" [2].
I'd do a deeper reading but I'm a bit lazy, but my understanding is that the EA does not allow, in any way, a shift in governance that could be described as "martial law" - where the military is in control of civil functions and can create or remove laws as military leadership desires. Even with the EA invoked, the federal government still controls the Canadian military (but can be assisted in enforcing civil law _by_ the military).
I'm no fan of Trudeau either, but we should seek to be precise when discussing hot situations like this. People can get very inflamed off of internet posts and the idea that we're under "martial law" is riling people up.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law
[2] https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/page-1.html
The key phrases are "imposition of direct military control of normal civil functions" and "suspension of civil law by a government".
The Canadian Emergencies Act, which was invoked by the Liberal government today, specifically states the following: "For greater certainty, nothing in this Act derogates from the authority of the Government of Canada to deal with emergencies on any property, territory or area in respect of which the Parliament of Canada has jurisdiction" [2].
I'd do a deeper reading but I'm a bit lazy, but my understanding is that the EA does not allow, in any way, a shift in governance that could be described as "martial law" - where the military is in control of civil functions and can create or remove laws as military leadership desires. Even with the EA invoked, the federal government still controls the Canadian military (but can be assisted in enforcing civil law _by_ the military).
I'm no fan of Trudeau either, but we should seek to be precise when discussing hot situations like this. People can get very inflamed off of internet posts and the idea that we're under "martial law" is riling people up.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law
[2] https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/page-1.html
> I'd do a deeper reading but I'm a bit lazy, but my understanding is that the EA does not allow, in any way, a shift in governance that could be described as "martial law" - where the military is in control of civil functions and can create or remove laws as military leadership desires. Even with the EA invoked, the federal government still controls the Canadian military (but can be assisted in enforcing civil law _by_ the military).
Is that martial law is? What you're describing sounds more like a coup to me ("where the military is in control of civil functions and can create or remove laws as military leadership desires").
My understanding of martial law (very colored by being an American) is basically direct enforcement of domestic government authority by the military with little or no recourse to normal civilian oversight (e.g. courts). However, the military isn't acting independently, but is still taking orders from some civilian leader in some part of the government.
Is that martial law is? What you're describing sounds more like a coup to me ("where the military is in control of civil functions and can create or remove laws as military leadership desires").
My understanding of martial law (very colored by being an American) is basically direct enforcement of domestic government authority by the military with little or no recourse to normal civilian oversight (e.g. courts). However, the military isn't acting independently, but is still taking orders from some civilian leader in some part of the government.
Both of the situations you described can be accurate simultaneously.
There are two levels of civil government. The military can override the civil functions of the lower level (the states) while still taking orders from the upper level (the federal government)
There are two levels of civil government. The military can override the civil functions of the lower level (the states) while still taking orders from the upper level (the federal government)
Please apply what you've just said directly to contemporary Canadian governance and polity.
In ordinary functioning of government and civil society there's an effective separation of the army and the police in law enforcement. In the US, this is governed by the posse comitatus act. Canada doesn't really have an analogue, the government can request the assistance of the army when lower levels of government are unable to perform their duties sufficiently to maintain order.
The use of the emergencies act makes it clear that this is one of those situations and allows the government to utilize the military to support lower levels of law enforcement.
This is not martial law. This is not a coup. This is not unprecedented - after all Pierre Trudeau used the War Measures Act (predecessor to the Emergencies Act) to restore order in the October Crisis.
This is more like a state calling in the national guard.
The answer to lower levels of government not being able to maintain order isn't to roll over. It's to bring in more help. That's what's being done here. And it's governed by the Charter. Much more stringently than the War Measures Act ever was.
[edit] We cannot allow a small, loud, group of individuals to overturn the democratic will of the people as decided in the last election. This is un-democratic, unfair, and must end immediately. We can talk about ending restrictions in the open, but not with a boot on our throats. This occupation must end before we decide on what to do next. I remind you of the interview Pierre Trudeau gave re: the October Crisis.
They can have their say in peaceful protest, in court or at the next election - and not before.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeTsQQ22Uwc
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHaoBD-eakk
The use of the emergencies act makes it clear that this is one of those situations and allows the government to utilize the military to support lower levels of law enforcement.
This is not martial law. This is not a coup. This is not unprecedented - after all Pierre Trudeau used the War Measures Act (predecessor to the Emergencies Act) to restore order in the October Crisis.
This is more like a state calling in the national guard.
The answer to lower levels of government not being able to maintain order isn't to roll over. It's to bring in more help. That's what's being done here. And it's governed by the Charter. Much more stringently than the War Measures Act ever was.
[edit] We cannot allow a small, loud, group of individuals to overturn the democratic will of the people as decided in the last election. This is un-democratic, unfair, and must end immediately. We can talk about ending restrictions in the open, but not with a boot on our throats. This occupation must end before we decide on what to do next. I remind you of the interview Pierre Trudeau gave re: the October Crisis.
Pierre Trudeau: Yeah, well there's a lot of bleeding hearts around who just don't like to see people with helmets and guns. All I can say is, go on and bleed, but it's more important to keep law and order in this society than to be worried about weak-kneed people who don't like the looks of a soldier's helmet. [1]
They can have their say in peaceful protest, in court or at the next election - and not before.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeTsQQ22Uwc
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHaoBD-eakk
“government because they don't like the lawful, legal, constitutional decisions.”
This is a massive mischaracterization of your political opposition.
If it's unlawful, illegal or unconstitutional then avenues exist within the courts to resolve their grievances do they not? I'm led to believe that rule of law continues to prevail within Canada.
[edit] Not just that, Trudeau operates a minority government, meaning two other parties could gang up and oust them at basically any time. And yet, he remains in office. I think this really speaks to how small the vocal minority is.
They've brought guns, ammo, knives [1], built encampments, stashed them full of diesel and propane [2], disrupted trade, jobs, lives, supply chains, threatened violence. Harassed and intimidated healthcare workers. And for what? This is not your average picket, and it's gone on more than long enough.
We're all frustrated, we're all tired of this. I'm open to revisiting the health measures, but not like this.
[1] https://news.sky.com/story/freedom-convoy-guns-seized-in-rai...
[2] https://www.newsweek.com/ottawa-police-seize-fuel-truckers-a...
[edit] Not just that, Trudeau operates a minority government, meaning two other parties could gang up and oust them at basically any time. And yet, he remains in office. I think this really speaks to how small the vocal minority is.
They've brought guns, ammo, knives [1], built encampments, stashed them full of diesel and propane [2], disrupted trade, jobs, lives, supply chains, threatened violence. Harassed and intimidated healthcare workers. And for what? This is not your average picket, and it's gone on more than long enough.
We're all frustrated, we're all tired of this. I'm open to revisiting the health measures, but not like this.
[1] https://news.sky.com/story/freedom-convoy-guns-seized-in-rai...
[2] https://www.newsweek.com/ottawa-police-seize-fuel-truckers-a...
[deleted]
My understanding is that international law requires nation have some form of martial law.
The idea is that if your nation is “hosting” a battle field, and the police start arresting belligerents and charging them with civilian crimes, the military can override them and say “you can’t charge invading soldiers with a crime for honorably doing their duty” - they must be treated as POWs, not criminals.
For example, if Russia is attacking Toronto, and a Toronto Police Officer comes across a wounded Russian soldier with an AK-47, she can’t charge the soldier for possessing an illegal weapon. The soldier would have to be treated as a POW.
This means the military must - must! - be able to say “this area is under martial law”.
I doubt this applies to the current situation.
But if Canada is as diligent as they claim to be about International law, they need to have the ability to declare martial law.
The idea is that if your nation is “hosting” a battle field, and the police start arresting belligerents and charging them with civilian crimes, the military can override them and say “you can’t charge invading soldiers with a crime for honorably doing their duty” - they must be treated as POWs, not criminals.
For example, if Russia is attacking Toronto, and a Toronto Police Officer comes across a wounded Russian soldier with an AK-47, she can’t charge the soldier for possessing an illegal weapon. The soldier would have to be treated as a POW.
This means the military must - must! - be able to say “this area is under martial law”.
I doubt this applies to the current situation.
But if Canada is as diligent as they claim to be about International law, they need to have the ability to declare martial law.
“Must”
That’s now how that works, at all.
A soldier doesn’t need to be on a declared battlefield to get battlefield treatment.
Being a member of a military in uniform is enough.
That’s now how that works, at all.
A soldier doesn’t need to be on a declared battlefield to get battlefield treatment.
Being a member of a military in uniform is enough.
> That said, I am thoroughly disappointed the Federal gov't and much of the media coverage. They have done nothing but make the situation worse. I think it is intentional (I assume some political end game), but their actions are fueling even more outlandish conspiracy theories.
Didn't the father do the exact same thing back in the 70's?
Of course there's political gains, as they say, never get a crisis go to waste.
Didn't the father do the exact same thing back in the 70's?
Of course there's political gains, as they say, never get a crisis go to waste.
Also the Ambassador Bridge blockade was ordered by the court to clear on Friday midnight. Police cleared it Sunday with some arrests, some resistance but not much else.
Pretty standard when it comes to Canadian protests.
Pretty standard when it comes to Canadian protests.
What sort of laws would you support against people that hack websites like this?
We have sufficient laws, it’s the uneven enforcement that I have a problem with.
If I'm hearing you right, your belief is that law enforcement is not enforcing the current hacking laws that exist evenly. I'd like to understand this belief of yours. Who are they discriminating against?
>there is no violence, and no obvious danger
While there is no outright violence, there is torture to local residents, there was attempted arson, there is continued intimidation and harassment of those wearing masks, there is intimidation of visible minorities, there are attacks on businesses....
Is that enough to convince you that the situation is out of hand and than stricter action is needed?
The protestors haven't complied with not honking.
Please, please be careful with how you frame this. There was severe inaction and dangerous incompetence displayed by Ottawa police but please don't spin this as the federal government overstepping.
Edit - within seconds of posting, this is downvoted. Truly a shameful display by the folks here.
While there is no outright violence, there is torture to local residents, there was attempted arson, there is continued intimidation and harassment of those wearing masks, there is intimidation of visible minorities, there are attacks on businesses....
Is that enough to convince you that the situation is out of hand and than stricter action is needed?
The protestors haven't complied with not honking.
Please, please be careful with how you frame this. There was severe inaction and dangerous incompetence displayed by Ottawa police but please don't spin this as the federal government overstepping.
Edit - within seconds of posting, this is downvoted. Truly a shameful display by the folks here.
I didn't downvote you, but you're using extreme language like "torture" (I know noise and sleep deprivation are associated with torture but this sort of verbal escalation is not objective) and the only in-depth reporting I've seen on the arson thing makes it seem completely debunked: https://twitter.com/jonkay/status/1490557119816425474 (or https://twitter.com/jonkay/status/1490525934948081666 - I'm not sure what the right link is). That's a biased source, but I can't find anything comparably factual that is taking the allegation seriously. At a minimum, it's not fair to repeat words like "arson" as if they are established facts when at best they are highly disputable.
Weeks on end of horns outside your window are absolutely torture. They are demonstrably linked to mental health issues. It's not a verbal escalation. We are talking about people who have literally attached train and ship horns to vehicles and are using them incessantly.
That passes beyond "nuisance". Extreme situations can utilize extreme language.
That passes beyond "nuisance". Extreme situations can utilize extreme language.
> this sort of verbal escalation is not objective
Objectively, the sonic onslaught of their constantly blaring truck horns is equal in effect to well-known psychological warfare tactics. It is fair and accurate to call it torture in this context.
Objectively, the sonic onslaught of their constantly blaring truck horns is equal in effect to well-known psychological warfare tactics. It is fair and accurate to call it torture in this context.
Even worse, it wasn't just truck horns. There were several trucks driving around with train horns installed. And plenty of the apartments in Centretown are right up against the street.
I don't think making 80+ decibels of noise 10 feet from people's windows is even an okay way to protest, no matter who you are or what your cause is.
I used to live in this neighbourhood, right by Somerset and Metcalfe. Protests happened all the time. Some of them were anti-government, even. And none of them launched this kind of sustained assault against innocent citizens. I get the sense a lot of them think they're sticking it to the liberal elite, or something like that. But really - Centretown is (or was when I lived there, at least) one of the more affordable parts of Ottawa.
I don't think making 80+ decibels of noise 10 feet from people's windows is even an okay way to protest, no matter who you are or what your cause is.
I used to live in this neighbourhood, right by Somerset and Metcalfe. Protests happened all the time. Some of them were anti-government, even. And none of them launched this kind of sustained assault against innocent citizens. I get the sense a lot of them think they're sticking it to the liberal elite, or something like that. But really - Centretown is (or was when I lived there, at least) one of the more affordable parts of Ottawa.
80? I had heard in some cases it'd been measured at up to 140dB.
I wouldn't doubt that for the train horns, especially outdoors. ~80db inside an apartment is what I heard personally from someone I trust who lives there still, so that's usually what I go with.
It's absolutely torture. I don't live in Ottawa, but I was eating at a restaurant near the trucker protest that sprung up in my city two weeks ago, and I nearly lost my mind just hearing the horns blaring for an hour straight. I can't even imagine what the poor people in Ottawa are going through.
i would challenge you to test your opinion by spending even seven days living in downtown Ottawa. You would then seriously reconsider my labelling of 18 hours of illegally loud truck horns as torture as being "extreme language".
They're honking for 16-18 hours per day. For people that live near the convoy, they've been able to sleep for over two weeks due to this. I have friends and family affected by this. I'm fairly sure this constitutes torture if you don't have the resources to up and leave your residence for days at a time in order to sleep.
> They're honking for 16-18 hours per day. For people that live near the convoy, they've been able to sleep for over two weeks due to this. I have friends and family affected by this. I'm fairly sure this constitutes torture if you don't have the resources to up and leave your residence for days at a time in order to sleep.
Are earplugs not a thing in Canada?
Calling honking torture is ridiculous hyperbole. That word should be reserved for the extremely serious kinds of acts it's normally used to describe, lest it become effectively meaningless.
Words themselves don't have any power, and if you try to harness the power of a concept by misusing a word that refers to it, you just cause the word's definition to shift and to weaken its association to the concept (potentially making that concept much harder to access and refer to).
Are earplugs not a thing in Canada?
Calling honking torture is ridiculous hyperbole. That word should be reserved for the extremely serious kinds of acts it's normally used to describe, lest it become effectively meaningless.
Words themselves don't have any power, and if you try to harness the power of a concept by misusing a word that refers to it, you just cause the word's definition to shift and to weaken its association to the concept (potentially making that concept much harder to access and refer to).
I challenge you to find earplugs that can be worn 24h a day without any physical discomfort, provide 60dB of attenuation across a wide range of frequencies (these horns probably span low 100's of Hz to mid kHz), and are reasonably inexpensive.
Even if you could find such beasts (which I don't think you can), then you have the problem that you effectively can't use your hearing. You thought that social interactions were hard with a mask? Imagine not being able to use your hearing at all.
(yes, 60 dB is necessary because that's how much you'll need in order to sleep - the human ear has an incredibly large dynamic range and even 30 dB_SPL conversations are enough to keep some people awake for hours)
As it stands, many of the residents near these protests are being subjected to low-level sleep deprivation, which is literally torture (as in, used as such by organizations who actually want to extract information or confessions from people).
To clarify - it's not honking that's torture, it's sustained honking at a duration and intensity that will cause sleep deprivation and other psychological damage.
Completely independently of the reason that these people are protesting - this particular means is not humane.
Even if you could find such beasts (which I don't think you can), then you have the problem that you effectively can't use your hearing. You thought that social interactions were hard with a mask? Imagine not being able to use your hearing at all.
(yes, 60 dB is necessary because that's how much you'll need in order to sleep - the human ear has an incredibly large dynamic range and even 30 dB_SPL conversations are enough to keep some people awake for hours)
As it stands, many of the residents near these protests are being subjected to low-level sleep deprivation, which is literally torture (as in, used as such by organizations who actually want to extract information or confessions from people).
To clarify - it's not honking that's torture, it's sustained honking at a duration and intensity that will cause sleep deprivation and other psychological damage.
Completely independently of the reason that these people are protesting - this particular means is not humane.
> I challenge you to find earplugs that can be worn 24h a day without any physical discomfort, provide 60dB of attenuation across a wide range of frequencies (these horns probably span low 100's of Hz to mid kHz), and are reasonably inexpensive.
> Even if you could find such beasts (which I don't think you can), then you have the problem that you effectively can't use your hearing. You thought that social interactions were hard with a mask? Imagine not being able to use your hearing at all.
> (yes, 60 dB is necessary because that's how much you'll need in order to sleep - the human ear has an incredibly large dynamic range and even 30 dB_SPL conversations are enough to keep some people awake for hours)
Per this (https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/NoiseChart_P...), 30 dB is rated as a "whisper." This (https://mynewmicrophone.com/what-are-decibels-the-ultimate-g...) calls 30 dB SPL a "Quiet bedroom at night."
It sounds like you're challenging me with overkill requirements meant to totally mute the horns almost like they're not there, when the realistic problem is to reduce the noise to the point where someone could sleep.
I kind of find it hard to believe that's not possible with and indoor location + silicone ear plugs (and maybe white noise if you're very sensitive).
> As it stands, many of the residents near these protests are being subjected to low-level sleep deprivation, which is literally torture (as in, used as such by organizations who actually want to extract information or confessions from people).
Again, calling it "literally torture" is ridiculous hyperbole, or at the very least invokes misleading associations. A noisy neighbor is being annoying to his neighbors, not torturing them.
> Even if you could find such beasts (which I don't think you can), then you have the problem that you effectively can't use your hearing. You thought that social interactions were hard with a mask? Imagine not being able to use your hearing at all.
> (yes, 60 dB is necessary because that's how much you'll need in order to sleep - the human ear has an incredibly large dynamic range and even 30 dB_SPL conversations are enough to keep some people awake for hours)
Per this (https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/NoiseChart_P...), 30 dB is rated as a "whisper." This (https://mynewmicrophone.com/what-are-decibels-the-ultimate-g...) calls 30 dB SPL a "Quiet bedroom at night."
It sounds like you're challenging me with overkill requirements meant to totally mute the horns almost like they're not there, when the realistic problem is to reduce the noise to the point where someone could sleep.
I kind of find it hard to believe that's not possible with and indoor location + silicone ear plugs (and maybe white noise if you're very sensitive).
> As it stands, many of the residents near these protests are being subjected to low-level sleep deprivation, which is literally torture (as in, used as such by organizations who actually want to extract information or confessions from people).
Again, calling it "literally torture" is ridiculous hyperbole, or at the very least invokes misleading associations. A noisy neighbor is being annoying to his neighbors, not torturing them.
What about young children? You have a handwavy method to get a toddler to wear silicone earplugs for 8 hours a night?
Judging by your post history, you seem to be more interested in stirring up shit than actually contributing to the discussion. This bizarre defence of noisemaking jackasses fits with that.
Judging by your post history, you seem to be more interested in stirring up shit than actually contributing to the discussion. This bizarre defence of noisemaking jackasses fits with that.
> Judging by your post history, you seem to be more interested in stirring up shit than actually contributing to the discussion.
I'm not, and I'm pretty sure your accusation violates site guidelines.
> This bizarre defence of noisemaking jackasses fits with that.
You should note I'm not defending them or their actions. I just think it's ridiculous hyperbole to call what they're doing "literally torture." If the ancestor comment had simply said they were being annoying and disruptive, I wouldn't have responded at all.
I'm not, and I'm pretty sure your accusation violates site guidelines.
> This bizarre defence of noisemaking jackasses fits with that.
You should note I'm not defending them or their actions. I just think it's ridiculous hyperbole to call what they're doing "literally torture." If the ancestor comment had simply said they were being annoying and disruptive, I wouldn't have responded at all.
But it is literally a form of torture.
Exactly - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_deprivation#Interrogatio... there we go, right there.
> Exactly - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_deprivation#Interrogatio... there we go, right there.
So are you going to set up crimes-against-humanity tribunals to prosecute all the noisy neighbors of the world for being torturers?
And were those truckers performing interrogations that I haven't heard about? Your comparison is as ridiculous as comparing compulsory school to prison. Yeah, you can find some similarities, but you're missing important differences that undermine the comparison.
So are you going to set up crimes-against-humanity tribunals to prosecute all the noisy neighbors of the world for being torturers?
And were those truckers performing interrogations that I haven't heard about? Your comparison is as ridiculous as comparing compulsory school to prison. Yeah, you can find some similarities, but you're missing important differences that undermine the comparison.
Yes, 30 dB ambient noise keeps me awake at night - I know this as someone who had a sibling that played video games and very quietly talked into his mic from another room - which wasn't even noticeable during the day, but during the night, I could hear him clearly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_pressure#Examples_of_sou... gives 30 dB as a "very calm room", which is what it was.
Comments elsewhere in the thread cite 120+ dB horns outside and about 80 dB indoors.
80-60=20. Let's say the earplugs only have to be 50 dB (and that the average person can sleep with 30 dB of noise in their ears at night) - I still bet you can't find any that fit the requirements above.
There's no "overkill requirements" - I'm handing you concrete, realistic numbers that are reflective of real life and you're trying to handwave them away.
> A noisy neighbor is being annoying to his neighbors, not torturing them.
You literally didn't read one of the last sentences of my comment - "To clarify - it's not honking that's torture, it's sustained honking at a duration and intensity that will cause sleep deprivation and other psychological damage."
Please read before responding.
Comments elsewhere in the thread cite 120+ dB horns outside and about 80 dB indoors.
80-60=20. Let's say the earplugs only have to be 50 dB (and that the average person can sleep with 30 dB of noise in their ears at night) - I still bet you can't find any that fit the requirements above.
There's no "overkill requirements" - I'm handing you concrete, realistic numbers that are reflective of real life and you're trying to handwave them away.
> A noisy neighbor is being annoying to his neighbors, not torturing them.
You literally didn't read one of the last sentences of my comment - "To clarify - it's not honking that's torture, it's sustained honking at a duration and intensity that will cause sleep deprivation and other psychological damage."
Please read before responding.
Earplugs just deaden sound, they don't eliminate it.
My work earplugs aren't rated for super high decibels, but they're a step up from the disposable ones most folks I work with use. They're definitely a solid step up from what most folks are going to buy from the hardware store. I've got coworkers who can converse loudly enough that I can make out the entire conversation over the normal shop noise the earplugs are supposed to be for while 200 feet away and within an enclosed (but not particularly thick-walled) office.
Earplugs will dull the noise, but if I can't take a nap over two guys having a conversation at that distance, I really doubt most folks' ability to get a good night's sleep over truck horns. The earplugs will probably mitigate the physical damage done by the noise, but I highly doubt they do much for the psychological stress. People lose their ability to focus and sometimes their sanity due to injuries that cause a constant ringing in their ears. Even if you can reduce the volume, the constant noise is a type of torture.
Edit: Found the Noise Reduction Rating for a number of different types of hearing pro that I've used in the past. The best one was rated at 33, meaning it roughly reduces the noise by something like 33 decibels. That pair, of course, being the ubiquitous neon yellow 3M product with flames on the sides for enhanced performance. I don't wear them myself because while they're fashionable, they're incredibly uncomfortable for me. This also appears to be among the best non-powered hearing pro that's available on the market. They will take an uncomfortably loud worksite at 105 dB down to effectively under 80 dB and more-or-less within a safe range for hearing. Not a pleasant level for sleeping though, by any means, although I can pull it off myself if I'm tired enough. When you start talking about a truck horn which those earplugs might or might not be able to quiet down close to the level of that 105 dB you'd experience with no hearing pro on a worksite, you're past potential hearing damage and well into a range where there is no reasonable escape from the barrage of sound.
Edit 2: Most of these earplugs in the 25-33 NRR range are definitely available at the hardware store if anyone needs to know that. They're more expensive per pair and seem to come in higher count containers, but they're there and much cheaper than the doctor's visits and hearing aids will be in the future. If you find yourself in a situation where the background noise is uncomfortable at all, please, please, get yourself some if at all feasible. Half the old dudes I've worked with in my life did not think it was worth the hassle and I'm tired of having to scream in people's ears to communicate. Also all the near misses because you have to either throw something at them or close the distance if you see a dangerous situation they don't and need to warn them.
Earplugs will dull the noise, but if I can't take a nap over two guys having a conversation at that distance, I really doubt most folks' ability to get a good night's sleep over truck horns. The earplugs will probably mitigate the physical damage done by the noise, but I highly doubt they do much for the psychological stress. People lose their ability to focus and sometimes their sanity due to injuries that cause a constant ringing in their ears. Even if you can reduce the volume, the constant noise is a type of torture.
Edit: Found the Noise Reduction Rating for a number of different types of hearing pro that I've used in the past. The best one was rated at 33, meaning it roughly reduces the noise by something like 33 decibels. That pair, of course, being the ubiquitous neon yellow 3M product with flames on the sides for enhanced performance. I don't wear them myself because while they're fashionable, they're incredibly uncomfortable for me. This also appears to be among the best non-powered hearing pro that's available on the market. They will take an uncomfortably loud worksite at 105 dB down to effectively under 80 dB and more-or-less within a safe range for hearing. Not a pleasant level for sleeping though, by any means, although I can pull it off myself if I'm tired enough. When you start talking about a truck horn which those earplugs might or might not be able to quiet down close to the level of that 105 dB you'd experience with no hearing pro on a worksite, you're past potential hearing damage and well into a range where there is no reasonable escape from the barrage of sound.
Edit 2: Most of these earplugs in the 25-33 NRR range are definitely available at the hardware store if anyone needs to know that. They're more expensive per pair and seem to come in higher count containers, but they're there and much cheaper than the doctor's visits and hearing aids will be in the future. If you find yourself in a situation where the background noise is uncomfortable at all, please, please, get yourself some if at all feasible. Half the old dudes I've worked with in my life did not think it was worth the hassle and I'm tired of having to scream in people's ears to communicate. Also all the near misses because you have to either throw something at them or close the distance if you see a dangerous situation they don't and need to warn them.
How are the protestors sleeping?
You do know that they're in vehicles that they're moving in and out of the city, correct? It's not like they're all just parked in one spot and staying there the entire time.
Unlike people with fixed addresses, they can just up and move to a quiet part of the city to sleep, and then drive back after.
Unlike people with fixed addresses, they can just up and move to a quiet part of the city to sleep, and then drive back after.
moralestapia(3)
>"...I know noise and sleep deprivation are associated with torture..."
You could stop right there. It is torture. Especially when you consider old frail people.
You could stop right there. It is torture. Especially when you consider old frail people.
Looking at the live streams, I see visible minorities going to the protests and supporting the truckers and the atmosphere seems festive and celebratory more than anything else.
I've said this before. There's a strong libertarian bent to HN and I'm not surprised if there's a large contingent of this site that actively supports the convoy. There's people here that are strong supports of Peter Thiel, if that's any indication of where their sympathies lie.
But, most of them are not residents of Ottawa, and the lived experiences of people in that city, particurlarly those who have had run ins with the protesters, or struggled through the 16-18 hours / day of honking, had to walk around or be harrassed by them, see the awful imagery of Trump, Confederate etc. flags being waved around, the yellow star morons etc. cannot simply be dismissed as bad or inaccurate media.
A city is being held hostage by an extreme minority and, even in OPs post they mention that the Toronto police handled it properly, but question the admonition levied against the Ottawa police.
The Ottawa police are complicit in this now as well as city council. They sat on their hands while allowing this to spiral out of control, and now want to play the victim or blame others (e.g. blaming counter protesters today).
It doesn't matter if you side with the protest or not. The sheer fact that they've been allowed to have large impact on the city and it's residents, for this long, is proof that the so-called lack of freedom that they're fighting for is simply not the bogeyman they've made it out to be. Especially if you're white.
But, most of them are not residents of Ottawa, and the lived experiences of people in that city, particurlarly those who have had run ins with the protesters, or struggled through the 16-18 hours / day of honking, had to walk around or be harrassed by them, see the awful imagery of Trump, Confederate etc. flags being waved around, the yellow star morons etc. cannot simply be dismissed as bad or inaccurate media.
A city is being held hostage by an extreme minority and, even in OPs post they mention that the Toronto police handled it properly, but question the admonition levied against the Ottawa police.
The Ottawa police are complicit in this now as well as city council. They sat on their hands while allowing this to spiral out of control, and now want to play the victim or blame others (e.g. blaming counter protesters today).
It doesn't matter if you side with the protest or not. The sheer fact that they've been allowed to have large impact on the city and it's residents, for this long, is proof that the so-called lack of freedom that they're fighting for is simply not the bogeyman they've made it out to be. Especially if you're white.
>A city is being held hostage by an extreme minority and, even in OPs post they mention that the Toronto police handled it properly, but question the admonition levied against the Ottawa police.
>The Ottawa police are complicit in this now as well as city council. They sat on their hands while allowing this to spiral out of control, and now want to play the victim or blame others (e.g. blaming counter protesters today).
>It doesn't matter if you side with the protest or not. The sheer fact that they've been allowed to have large impact on the city and it's residents, for this long, is proof that the so-called lack of freedom that they're fighting for is simply not the bogeyman they've made it out to be. Especially if you're white.
This is really not much different than how Portland handled the BLM protests in 2020. 100 straight nights of extreme protests with violence against police and federal buildings. Only difference is this is during the night and many neighborhoods were terrorized as it moved from downtown. Not much media coverage of this other than conservative journalist Andy Ngo who has himself been violently targeted for simply recording and publishing video of what is happening.
>The Ottawa police are complicit in this now as well as city council. They sat on their hands while allowing this to spiral out of control, and now want to play the victim or blame others (e.g. blaming counter protesters today).
>It doesn't matter if you side with the protest or not. The sheer fact that they've been allowed to have large impact on the city and it's residents, for this long, is proof that the so-called lack of freedom that they're fighting for is simply not the bogeyman they've made it out to be. Especially if you're white.
This is really not much different than how Portland handled the BLM protests in 2020. 100 straight nights of extreme protests with violence against police and federal buildings. Only difference is this is during the night and many neighborhoods were terrorized as it moved from downtown. Not much media coverage of this other than conservative journalist Andy Ngo who has himself been violently targeted for simply recording and publishing video of what is happening.
A major difference is that the police would issue dispersal orders, then attack the BLM protesters indiscriminately, or call curfews which basically declared open season on any kind of protester, journalist, civilian, doing anything outdoors after X o'clock. The police were shooting rubber bullets at people sitting on their own porches.
This is not how Ottawa is being handled, this is not how January 6th was handled, and if BLM protesters decided they were going to shut down an international bridge that provided 1/3 of trade with the US, that wouldn't have made it a hour before an extreme response was taken.
If the trucker protest were treated like the BLM protests, you'd see people blinded and dead, and it would be completely torn apart every night to have to be reassembled the next day. At least compare it to Occupy, although they were in a park instead of blocking roads.
This is not how Ottawa is being handled, this is not how January 6th was handled, and if BLM protesters decided they were going to shut down an international bridge that provided 1/3 of trade with the US, that wouldn't have made it a hour before an extreme response was taken.
If the trucker protest were treated like the BLM protests, you'd see people blinded and dead, and it would be completely torn apart every night to have to be reassembled the next day. At least compare it to Occupy, although they were in a park instead of blocking roads.
The police protected buildings from being set on fire and their officers being attacked with lasers and fireworks. Dispersal orders were only given AFTER the protests turned violent.
Comparing 100+ nights of protests and riots with Jan 6th is ridiculous...one was night after night of the same thing and having a plan in place to defend and the other is a single day where the police lost control and they actually shot someone with real bullets.
Comparing 100+ nights of protests and riots with Jan 6th is ridiculous...one was night after night of the same thing and having a plan in place to defend and the other is a single day where the police lost control and they actually shot someone with real bullets.
> A major difference is that the police would issue dispersal orders, then attack the BLM protesters indiscriminately, or call curfews which basically declared open season on any kind of protester, journalist, civilian, doing anything outdoors after X o'clock. The police were shooting rubber bullets at people sitting on their own porches.
Whilst also advising Proud Boys and Three Per Centers of their "enforcement plans", texting them to "take cover" and that they'd be given an "all clear" when they come back out.
Or being advised that although their leaders had active arrest warrants, that they would not be arrested at any protests that were "supervised" by Portland Police Department, so they should "feel free" to come to protests.
Whilst also advising Proud Boys and Three Per Centers of their "enforcement plans", texting them to "take cover" and that they'd be given an "all clear" when they come back out.
Or being advised that although their leaders had active arrest warrants, that they would not be arrested at any protests that were "supervised" by Portland Police Department, so they should "feel free" to come to protests.
They were in contact with both sides of the conflicts...only one side made their plans clear and also applied for permits. I'm not saying it was the right call, but one side was violent toward police and the other was not...not a huge surprise that the police would choose to work with them.
The Proud Boys applied for a small fraction of permits.
And if you are ordering a protest to disperse, you don't tell one side to go home. If you have a curfew (leaving aside opinions there), it's not a curfew for one side.
If you're telling people who have warrants for their arrest that you will actively not only NOT arrest them but protect them, that's not working with them, that's working for them. Which is unsurprising in PDX, given how many LEOs are members of those same organizations.
Nothing in what you said was a good justification. You're right though, it's not a huge surprise that police would choose to work with militant right wing organizations.
And if you are ordering a protest to disperse, you don't tell one side to go home. If you have a curfew (leaving aside opinions there), it's not a curfew for one side.
If you're telling people who have warrants for their arrest that you will actively not only NOT arrest them but protect them, that's not working with them, that's working for them. Which is unsurprising in PDX, given how many LEOs are members of those same organizations.
Nothing in what you said was a good justification. You're right though, it's not a huge surprise that police would choose to work with militant right wing organizations.
>this is not how January 6th was handled
January 6th police had real bullets and shot and killed a person. You could argue Jan 6th was handled more strictly than BLM.
January 6th police had real bullets and shot and killed a person. You could argue Jan 6th was handled more strictly than BLM.
Of the 3 fatalities during that riot 2 were self inflicted and the only remaining one was when a rioter breached the last line of defence between the people screaming "Hang Mike Pence!" and 60 to 80 members of congress. There's been speculation that the tunnel entrance down the hallway from where the shooting occurred was where Mike Pence was evacuated through. I was amazed at the level of restraint displayed by the capitol police in contrast to clearing of lafayette square in the summer with pepper balls, tear gas, flash bangs, etc. At that time the park police didn't even bother to order the crowd to disperse until after they had already started attacking the crowd.
They did all that for a photo op vs. Capitol police falling back as far as they could without risking the lives of members of Congress. Even in the aftermath once the building was evacuated and they were clearing the grounds they handled that with kid gloves compared to many of the BLM protests.
They did all that for a photo op vs. Capitol police falling back as far as they could without risking the lives of members of Congress. Even in the aftermath once the building was evacuated and they were clearing the grounds they handled that with kid gloves compared to many of the BLM protests.
Not much media coverage? I saw coverage of it all the time. It was covered as if it was the end of civilization and it continues to push the narrative today that BLM protests were burning cities to the ground across the country.
I'm not sure where you're getting this whole idea that there wasn't much media coverage on it. A quick google search shows literally thousands of news stories about it.
I'm not sure where you're getting this whole idea that there wasn't much media coverage on it. A quick google search shows literally thousands of news stories about it.
Main stream media...I live near Portland and the local news covered very little about it. 30 second clip of the peaceful start...and little about the destruction and chaos that was seen night after night.
Eventually even the local news started showing what was going on when their crew were attacked covering the story. However this happened many times before and they simply left and didn't cover what was happening.
https://katu.com/news/local/police-declare-riot-near-justice...
Eventually even the local news started showing what was going on when their crew were attacked covering the story. However this happened many times before and they simply left and didn't cover what was happening.
https://katu.com/news/local/police-declare-riot-near-justice...
> Not much media coverage..
oh this is absurd.
BLM was the lead story in just about every newspaper, news channel, magazine and aggregator sites for weeks.
I noticed on a sibling comment you claim to live near Portland and implied that local media did minimal coverage which is also absurd. Again, it was covered obsessively by just about every single local news outlets from their local networks, papers, and podcasts.
No media outlet was trying to hide BLM from you.
oh this is absurd.
BLM was the lead story in just about every newspaper, news channel, magazine and aggregator sites for weeks.
I noticed on a sibling comment you claim to live near Portland and implied that local media did minimal coverage which is also absurd. Again, it was covered obsessively by just about every single local news outlets from their local networks, papers, and podcasts.
No media outlet was trying to hide BLM from you.
BLM was...Antifa riots every night were not. The media seemed to just ignore them...maybe with the theory that they would stop if not getting covered. Millions in damage, many police officers hurt and hundreds of businesses impacted nightly. Go look for stories on all the businesses that left downtown Portland because of the riots and the lack of city leadership to address them. On top of homeless, crime and drugs...it's an absolute shit show.
Again, a quick google search shows thousands of articles that specifically tie antifa to the riots in Portland.
The media did not ignore it at all. If anything, I'd believe that tie-in with "antifa" is greatly exagerrated by the media, since it seems like the situation in Portland is better explained via the horrible police escalation that happened there and the fact that there's a variety of groups that jumped into the vacuum.
The media did not ignore it at all. If anything, I'd believe that tie-in with "antifa" is greatly exagerrated by the media, since it seems like the situation in Portland is better explained via the horrible police escalation that happened there and the fact that there's a variety of groups that jumped into the vacuum.
Andy Ngo isn't exactly a reliable source.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo#Credibility
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo#Credibility
He posts video...how is raw video not a reliable source? He certainly has an agenda, but also posts things that many will not. He was not afraid to post video when the actual news teams were threatened and attacked during the riots (by specific groups that you can't really talk about since they don't exist...it's just an idea).
[deleted]
But I'm sure his Wikipedia page is
The nice thing about Wikipedia is that claims are sourced. I had no idea who this guy was, but I looked over the statements critical of his credibility and at first glance many of them are sourced at heavily biased media outlets which isn't encouraging. I'm not digging into it enough to say those articles are wrong, but I'd say the clams that he isn't credibile on his wikipedia page aren't looking very convincing so far, or at the very least that view on the guy doesn't seem widely accepted by mainstream sources.
Since even a sourced and cited claim can be utterly bogus, it is actually worse. Because it looks authoritative at a glance when there are many citations next to a claim.
But some citations are nature.com, and some are People Magazine, and they all get the same superscript number.
But some citations are nature.com, and some are People Magazine, and they all get the same superscript number.
Then if those claims are bogus, it becomes a matter of your sources vs. their sources, and it ends up all being a matter of faith and perhaps gut feeling.
It's not just their sources vs your sources, it's about the data those sources have, where/how they got it, and how much of it you can verify.
You have to evaluate the evidence and the sources to decide which is more credible. Some things you have to take on faith, but that doesn't make it a dice roll. When it matters you can apply some critical thinking skills, and at least be able to justify the position you've settled on.
In this case I don't care enough about this Andy guy to dig into it, but I was able to determine that I couldn't justify forming an opinion about his credibility using what Wikipedia was presenting to me. If I wanted to get into the woods, I'm sure I could end up with an informed opinion based on more than a gut feeling.
You have to evaluate the evidence and the sources to decide which is more credible. Some things you have to take on faith, but that doesn't make it a dice roll. When it matters you can apply some critical thinking skills, and at least be able to justify the position you've settled on.
In this case I don't care enough about this Andy guy to dig into it, but I was able to determine that I couldn't justify forming an opinion about his credibility using what Wikipedia was presenting to me. If I wanted to get into the woods, I'm sure I could end up with an informed opinion based on more than a gut feeling.
> I've said this before. There's a strong libertarian bent to HN and I'm not surprised if there's a large contingent of this site that actively supports the convoy. There's people here that are strong supports of Peter Thiel, if that's any indication of where their sympathies lie.
To me the political bent of HN isn't relevant when reading a comment. I'd rather take each comment on its own merits, without guessing or assuming what the ideology of the commenter would have to be.
I recently lived in a country in which wearing the wrong color socks is grounds for instant prison, so I prefer when my government's monopoly on violence errs on the side of restraint, as in the case of these protestors.
Should individual protestors get shut down when they harass mask-wearing doctors or honk horns in the middle of the night? Obviously.
But there is some fuzzy line in which we let protestors do otherwise illegal or fineable things that we don't let individuals do.
I could be convinced that skin color is a factor as you mentioned, but at the moment I have no idea.
To me the political bent of HN isn't relevant when reading a comment. I'd rather take each comment on its own merits, without guessing or assuming what the ideology of the commenter would have to be.
I recently lived in a country in which wearing the wrong color socks is grounds for instant prison, so I prefer when my government's monopoly on violence errs on the side of restraint, as in the case of these protestors.
Should individual protestors get shut down when they harass mask-wearing doctors or honk horns in the middle of the night? Obviously.
But there is some fuzzy line in which we let protestors do otherwise illegal or fineable things that we don't let individuals do.
I could be convinced that skin color is a factor as you mentioned, but at the moment I have no idea.
I don't know what the answer is with these protests, but criminalizing them isn't the answer. I'm an active leftist and do a lot of mutual aid and protesting. I've been beaten by cops and had them deploy munitions against me. Giving cops more latitude to deal with this protest movement will mean that they deploy even more force against me the next time I'm politely asking that they stop murdering people.
The original comment was mentioning the downvotes, not comments. I agree on engaging comments (hence this conversation) but there's definitely brigading happening with votes if you post anything that the libertarians disagree with.
I'm a total moderate, I try very hard not to view these things through a partisan lens. As a free thinking human I feel no need to have my opinions dictated by any group of people. I think your comment is one that has some merit WRT the police's actions and what they might be able to do better, but it is framed in such a hostile, inflammatory, extremely partisan way. You criticize this website for being bent on some partisan streak that you don't like and needlessly bring race into the conversation when this entire thing has nothing to do with race whatsoever.
> is proof that the so-called lack of freedom that they're fighting for is simply not the bogeyman they've made it out to be
It's disingenuous to equate the lack of freedom that they are talking about with the lack of freedom to protest. They are not the same thing, the protesters are talking about vaccine mandates specifically.
> is proof that the so-called lack of freedom that they're fighting for is simply not the bogeyman they've made it out to be
It's disingenuous to equate the lack of freedom that they are talking about with the lack of freedom to protest. They are not the same thing, the protesters are talking about vaccine mandates specifically.
what is wrong with listening to "minorities". Doesnt BLM represent a minority, especially in Canada? Also, a couple of confederate and nazi flags do not define these protests.
Hahaha.. this is a hilarious comment.
These people are not the minority. They're self-professed victimes of so-called tyranny that doesn't exist. The sheer fact that they're able to protest for this long, in this way, at the nations capital is ample evidence that this so-called tyranny they're fighting is a delusion.
Equivocating that with the lived experience of millions of people who are fighting for true equality is truly a laughable position.
Honk, I guess.
These people are not the minority. They're self-professed victimes of so-called tyranny that doesn't exist. The sheer fact that they're able to protest for this long, in this way, at the nations capital is ample evidence that this so-called tyranny they're fighting is a delusion.
Equivocating that with the lived experience of millions of people who are fighting for true equality is truly a laughable position.
Honk, I guess.
minority does not need to be defined by race sex or religion. What about people who had covid and reluctant about vaccines? All that word soup is irrelevant. Getting fired after having worked through the heights of epidemic is a serious "lived experience" and also "an ample evidence" of bureaucratic overreach. Anyway, bunch of provinces including Ontario already cancelled vaccine mandates and vaccine passports, only real holdouts are BC and Quebec. Trackers already won. The government can easily deescalate but choosing not to due fear and spite
Getting fired for not getting vaccines was a line that I didn't agree with.
However, the vast majority of organizations that did this were private though, and it was the organization that implemented these policies. I'd hardly equate that with government overreach, and especially not the federal government if you're a nurse/healthcare worker, or worked in a local municipal government.
My point is that these protests don't have anything to do with vaccines, mandates or some perceived minority status that not following them bestows (which, again, is a choice..). If that was the case, they would not be in Ottawa. There might be some people paying lip service to these ideas, but the majority of the people protesting are self-labelling as minorities due to some perception of tyranny from the federal government that does not exist.
Unless you're a federal employee that was fired due to your position on vaccines (over 95% of federal employees are vaccinated) then protesting in Ottawa doesn't make any sense.
However, the vast majority of organizations that did this were private though, and it was the organization that implemented these policies. I'd hardly equate that with government overreach, and especially not the federal government if you're a nurse/healthcare worker, or worked in a local municipal government.
My point is that these protests don't have anything to do with vaccines, mandates or some perceived minority status that not following them bestows (which, again, is a choice..). If that was the case, they would not be in Ottawa. There might be some people paying lip service to these ideas, but the majority of the people protesting are self-labelling as minorities due to some perception of tyranny from the federal government that does not exist.
Unless you're a federal employee that was fired due to your position on vaccines (over 95% of federal employees are vaccinated) then protesting in Ottawa doesn't make any sense.
It seems pretty clear to me that the protests have everything to do with the vaccine mandates.
Why should only people who are fired be allowed to protest? Most of the truckers are vaccinated, but they are protesting for the right of those who aren't to be allowed to do their job.
Why should only people who are fired be allowed to protest? Most of the truckers are vaccinated, but they are protesting for the right of those who aren't to be allowed to do their job.
If they actually have anything to do with the mandates, then protesting in Ottawa doesn't make any sense.
All of the health and COVID mandate policy is set at the provincial level in Canada, not federally. They should be protesting in Toronto, or other provincial capitals.
However, a good percentage of provincial capitals are currently Conservative governments. So, by deliberatly choosing Ottawa, they're protesting legitimately elected government to force them to step down (despite being democratically elected 6 months ago) and install a new leadership panel made up of the convoy leadership.
https://twitter.com/Justin_Ling/status/1490811201089159170
All of the health and COVID mandate policy is set at the provincial level in Canada, not federally. They should be protesting in Toronto, or other provincial capitals.
However, a good percentage of provincial capitals are currently Conservative governments. So, by deliberatly choosing Ottawa, they're protesting legitimately elected government to force them to step down (despite being democratically elected 6 months ago) and install a new leadership panel made up of the convoy leadership.
https://twitter.com/Justin_Ling/status/1490811201089159170
The truckers started protesting due to federal mandates preventing them from crossing the borders, so protesting in Ottawa makes lots of sense.
They are asking the prime minister to drop the mandates or step down.
I agree that it isn't reasonable to expect the federal government to tell the provinces what to do, but they have been protests in all the major cities as well (so far as I can tell).
They are asking the prime minister to drop the mandates or step down.
I agree that it isn't reasonable to expect the federal government to tell the provinces what to do, but they have been protests in all the major cities as well (so far as I can tell).
Majority of the BLM weren’t killed by a cop standing on their necks. Your point was understood and invalidated
> ... and it was the organization that implemented these policies ...
That may not be true. It is common for governments to implement the really unpleasant policies by using businesses as an enforcement arm (eg, surveillance via banks and telecom companies). It bears asking why companies have all, in coordination, picked up a set of policies that are both ineffective and divisive - it is entirely on the table that it is because of government pressure in the form of OH&S guidelines.
Firing unvaccinated people barely does anything w.r.t. changing the odds that people get COVID eventually. We've seen ample evidence that being vaccinated doesn't change the transmissible situation. So why are companies doing this? Their employees are still going to turn up and transmit COVID. By this point, the anti-vaccine types have probably caught COVID and gained natural immunity anyway so these policies would represent companies shooting themselves in the foot. It is possible they'd do that of their own initiative but it is nevertheless a bit weird.
> My point is that these protests don't have anything to do with vaccines, mandates or some perceived minority status...
Why do you think these protests have just mushroomed up? Have trucker protests been an ongoing thing in Canada for many decades?
That may not be true. It is common for governments to implement the really unpleasant policies by using businesses as an enforcement arm (eg, surveillance via banks and telecom companies). It bears asking why companies have all, in coordination, picked up a set of policies that are both ineffective and divisive - it is entirely on the table that it is because of government pressure in the form of OH&S guidelines.
Firing unvaccinated people barely does anything w.r.t. changing the odds that people get COVID eventually. We've seen ample evidence that being vaccinated doesn't change the transmissible situation. So why are companies doing this? Their employees are still going to turn up and transmit COVID. By this point, the anti-vaccine types have probably caught COVID and gained natural immunity anyway so these policies would represent companies shooting themselves in the foot. It is possible they'd do that of their own initiative but it is nevertheless a bit weird.
> My point is that these protests don't have anything to do with vaccines, mandates or some perceived minority status...
Why do you think these protests have just mushroomed up? Have trucker protests been an ongoing thing in Canada for many decades?
Canada is confusing. The below two comments come from the same person, likely Canadian, referring to other Canadians who are an extreme minority who are not the minority.
> > A city is being held hostage by an extreme minority
> These people are not the minority.
> > A city is being held hostage by an extreme minority
> These people are not the minority.
My mistake. In my first comment, I should have referred to the truck convoy protesters as perceiving themselves as having minority status. I made this comment before people starting to compare these protests to BLM, which is for a an actual minority group.
thats a lot of mental gymnastics you're doing there to avoid that cognitive dissonance
You literally called them a minority:
> A city is being held hostage by an extreme minority
> A city is being held hostage by an extreme minority
False equivalence? The behaviour of these recent protestors is the crux of the issue.
> I've said this before. There's a strong libertarian bent to HN and I'm not surprised if there's a large contingent of this site that actively supports the convoy. There's people here that are strong supports of Peter Thiel, if that's any indication of where their sympathies lie.
Wait and you've extrapolated this from claims of a downvote made in the first hour after posting a reply on a politically controversial topic? HN is a huge site, are you really expecting unanimous political views? This is par for the course on these threads.
Wait and you've extrapolated this from claims of a downvote made in the first hour after posting a reply on a politically controversial topic? HN is a huge site, are you really expecting unanimous political views? This is par for the course on these threads.
They had farmer protests in the Netherlands with tractors. I think we may have invented it?
https://www.politico.eu/article/angry-dutch-farmers-swarm-th...
Anyway society loved it at first until they caused too many traffic jams. Public opinion turned and it was over quickly. If you are a work at home software dev these kind of protests don't affect you until Amazon stops delivering.
https://www.politico.eu/article/angry-dutch-farmers-swarm-th...
Anyway society loved it at first until they caused too many traffic jams. Public opinion turned and it was over quickly. If you are a work at home software dev these kind of protests don't affect you until Amazon stops delivering.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Making one city a bit uncomfortable temporarily is well worth creating justice for an entire country permanently. Sucks for Ottowans, but the truckers are doing the right thing morally.
> Edit - within seconds of posting, this is downvoted. Truly a shameful display by the folks here.
Please don't comment on downvotes like this; it's not useful.
Please don't comment on downvotes like this; it's not useful.
Complaining about downvoting is straight-up against the HN guidelines https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html :
> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.
And in this case, it's more than a little manipulative. "Truly a shameful display by the folks here."
> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.
And in this case, it's more than a little manipulative. "Truly a shameful display by the folks here."
Do you have a source on any of that?
If you have family or friends in Ottawa, you know.
Here's an interview with a MD in downtown Ottawa, speaking of her and her staff at a medical clinic getting harassed in the street for wearing a mask. https://www.npr.org/2022/02/12/1080354245/health-care-worker...
Here's an interview with a MD in downtown Ottawa, speaking of her and her staff at a medical clinic getting harassed in the street for wearing a mask. https://www.npr.org/2022/02/12/1080354245/health-care-worker...
I read the story. The MD does not claim she or her staff has been harassed. Her one claim is "And a lot of people have been harassed, have been told to take their masks off." The MD also claims "I would say that a huge 18-wheeler is not a peaceful thing to have in the middle of your city" which is weird since large trucks are a primary and pervasive mode of transporting goods nearly everywhere. The story also does not disclose that the interviewee is an Ontario public employee, essentially a spokesperson for the government position, which is in opposition to the protestors.
> The MD also claims "I would say that a huge 18-wheeler is not a peaceful thing to have in the middle of your city" which is weird since large trucks are a primary and pervasive mode of transporting goods nearly everywhere.
I must have missed where large trucks sit for days on end, engine running, horns blaring endlessly as part of their "useful public utility".
> The story also does not disclose that the interviewee is an Ontario public employee, essentially a spokesperson for the government position, which is in opposition to the protestors.
This is blatant bias on your part. Doctors employed by the state to provide healthcare are not government spokespeople, however you're trying to spin it here.
I must have missed where large trucks sit for days on end, engine running, horns blaring endlessly as part of their "useful public utility".
> The story also does not disclose that the interviewee is an Ontario public employee, essentially a spokesperson for the government position, which is in opposition to the protestors.
This is blatant bias on your part. Doctors employed by the state to provide healthcare are not government spokespeople, however you're trying to spin it here.
The interviewee does not assert that "large trucks sit for days on end, engine running, horns blaring endlessly," just that "a huge 18-wheeler is not a peaceful thing."
I deny that pointing out the obvious and undeclared conflict of interest is bias, blatant or not. The physician is articulating the same position as her employer who is in opposition to the protestors. Would it be fair for a Facebook employee to comment on an issue regarding their employer and not disclose it, especially if they worked in a portion of the company directly involved in the issue at hand?
EDIT:
Also, the parent comment to mine claimed of the NPR interview: "Here's an interview with a MD in downtown Ottawa, speaking of her and her staff at a medical clinic getting harassed in the street for wearing a mask."
This description is not true of the interview text available at the link when I read it.
I deny that pointing out the obvious and undeclared conflict of interest is bias, blatant or not. The physician is articulating the same position as her employer who is in opposition to the protestors. Would it be fair for a Facebook employee to comment on an issue regarding their employer and not disclose it, especially if they worked in a portion of the company directly involved in the issue at hand?
EDIT:
Also, the parent comment to mine claimed of the NPR interview: "Here's an interview with a MD in downtown Ottawa, speaking of her and her staff at a medical clinic getting harassed in the street for wearing a mask."
This description is not true of the interview text available at the link when I read it.
I assume of course that you’re equally vehement that any protestor who is employed by the government or military also makes sure to point out that they’re a government employee and that they’re speaking against their government’s policies as an individual, just so we don’t confuse them for spokespeople too, yes?
We would not want confusion and ambiguity there either, after all.
We would not want confusion and ambiguity there either, after all.
My observations are hardly "vehement." In NPR's home country more physicians are non-government employed so it would make sense to establish that the person is commenting in alignment their employer's position even if they were not specifically authorized to speak. It is also typically disclosed if a protestor is protesting their own employer as it bolsters the case for their integrity.
Since both governments and nongovernmental actors use news media to advance their cases it is important to evaluate and understand the context of an interview especially if it doesn't make the assertions that the linking person claims it makes.
Also, I did not claim that the interviewee is a spokesperson, but that they articulate a position in such close alignment with their employer that they are essentially a spokesperson. It isn't that there is confusion about a person's role. It is that either NPR didn't disclose or the physician didn't disclose a conflict of interest and allow the reader to evaluate the interview with that in mind.
Since both governments and nongovernmental actors use news media to advance their cases it is important to evaluate and understand the context of an interview especially if it doesn't make the assertions that the linking person claims it makes.
Also, I did not claim that the interviewee is a spokesperson, but that they articulate a position in such close alignment with their employer that they are essentially a spokesperson. It isn't that there is confusion about a person's role. It is that either NPR didn't disclose or the physician didn't disclose a conflict of interest and allow the reader to evaluate the interview with that in mind.
> While there is no outright violence, there is torture to local residents
Why did you use the word torture here? Torture is a well-defined word with an accepted meaning. Do you feel that it is appropriate? Or are you looking for an emotionally-loaded reaction? Can I also claim that my loud college neighbors are torturing me when they stay up too late on the weekend? Of course I can, but it sure is disingenuous to anyone who has actually been tortured.
Why did you use the word torture here? Torture is a well-defined word with an accepted meaning. Do you feel that it is appropriate? Or are you looking for an emotionally-loaded reaction? Can I also claim that my loud college neighbors are torturing me when they stay up too late on the weekend? Of course I can, but it sure is disingenuous to anyone who has actually been tortured.
> Can I also claim that my loud college neighbors are torturing me when they stay up too late on the weekend? Of course I can, but it sure is disingenuous to anyone who has actually been tortured.
If they did it for a week straight after you'd lodged several noise complaints and had the police go nowhere, yeah, I think that would qualify. It's certainly not the most severe type of torture but intentionally depriving a person of sleep and attempting to damage their eardrums qualifies.
If your loud college neighbours were setting off a train horn outside your building, repeatedly, I think you'd expect them to be handled by the police (if not arrested) pretty immediately.
If your loud college neighbours were assaulting people in the streets, shouting death and rape threats at you, you'd probably consider them violent.[1] Another post of mine has many more links if you're interested.
I'm not sure how much actual violence is required for a protest to become violent. Is it just that nobody's been killed yet? That seems to be what everyone is waiting for and I sincerely hope we don't get there (thankfully it looks like things may be defusing today).
[1]: https://globalnews.ca/news/8594809/covid-freedom-convoy-otta...
If they did it for a week straight after you'd lodged several noise complaints and had the police go nowhere, yeah, I think that would qualify. It's certainly not the most severe type of torture but intentionally depriving a person of sleep and attempting to damage their eardrums qualifies.
If your loud college neighbours were setting off a train horn outside your building, repeatedly, I think you'd expect them to be handled by the police (if not arrested) pretty immediately.
If your loud college neighbours were assaulting people in the streets, shouting death and rape threats at you, you'd probably consider them violent.[1] Another post of mine has many more links if you're interested.
I'm not sure how much actual violence is required for a protest to become violent. Is it just that nobody's been killed yet? That seems to be what everyone is waiting for and I sincerely hope we don't get there (thankfully it looks like things may be defusing today).
[1]: https://globalnews.ca/news/8594809/covid-freedom-convoy-otta...
[deleted]
If a person or group knowingly deploys sonic psychological warfare techniques upon innocent people, they are torturers. In this context, the constant blaring of truck horns is deliberate and not meant in kindness or frivolity. The negative psychological effects upon the local residents are now well known and well documented.
Okay but the thing about torture is, in order to be torture you must be prevented from leaving the situation. Are they literally trapping people in their homes? No. You just really really don't like them and so are trying to delegitimize their protest with use of loaded language. Torture means things like having your skin pealed off or your fingernails removed. Torture means things like being imprisoned and repeatedly being made to feel as though you are drowning. Constant honking must certainly be annoying! But as far as I'm aware, protests are supposed to be uncomfortable and annoying. This is not torture. It's like terrorist. The word terrorist now means somebody did a thing that the government doesn't like. Are we going to do this same thing with torture? Because I'm not here for it.
Oh, it's fine, because everyone can afford to go to a hotel for a few weeks, then, right?
Me pointing out that this is not torture, that torture means specific things and that this doesn't meet the commonly-accepted definition of torture, followed by you glibly inserting the phrase "its fine" is a perfect microcosm of why online discussion is doomed.
Torture means you are in pain and you cannot stop it. Not by getting on the bus and riding across town, not by wearing earmuffs, it means that you, the person being tortured, cannot stop the torture.
This is clearly not the case when there is noise outside your house that you dislike. Words have meanings, let's please stick to using them.
You want to be absolutely pedantic about torture "meaning specific things", and where "commonly-accepted definitions" happen, conveniently, to mean what's more convenient to you.
Dictionaries, on the other hand, define torture as "inflicting pain and suffering on".
The UN Conventions on Torture in no way specify that imprisonment, formal or otherwise, is a required component for something to be defined as torture.
So my opinion is that your vision of torture in this instance is far more narrow, because it fits your worldview more.
Dictionaries, on the other hand, define torture as "inflicting pain and suffering on".
The UN Conventions on Torture in no way specify that imprisonment, formal or otherwise, is a required component for something to be defined as torture.
So my opinion is that your vision of torture in this instance is far more narrow, because it fits your worldview more.
I mean maybe, “that last paranormal activity movie was absolute torture.”
I assume (charitably) they mean it in a hyperbolic sense
I assume (charitably) they mean it in a hyperbolic sense
RIMR(2)
hamaluik(2)
> It appears this was the result of terrible security at GiveSendGo.
Don't victim blame, and call a spade a spade. It was the result of targeted black hat hacking and identity theft, probably made easier by poor security at GiveSendGo.
Don't victim blame, and call a spade a spade. It was the result of targeted black hat hacking and identity theft, probably made easier by poor security at GiveSendGo.
WHAT!
People standing up for their rights!
Cue the media attack dog and smear campaign. We need some corporate approved misinformation to get ahead of this.
It's such an obvious formula at this point. Does anyone still not see through it?
People standing up for their rights!
Cue the media attack dog and smear campaign. We need some corporate approved misinformation to get ahead of this.
It's such an obvious formula at this point. Does anyone still not see through it?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/coutts-protest-blocka...
Mounties said in a release Monday that they became aware of a small organized group within the larger protest at Coutts.
They say they had information that the group had access to a cache of firearms and ammunition. Officers seized long guns, handguns, multiple sets of body armour, a machete, a large quantity of ammunition and high-capacity firearm magazines.
Mounties said in a release Monday that they became aware of a small organized group within the larger protest at Coutts.
They say they had information that the group had access to a cache of firearms and ammunition. Officers seized long guns, handguns, multiple sets of body armour, a machete, a large quantity of ammunition and high-capacity firearm magazines.
This type of revelation will likely be commonplace in the days/weeks ahead as militant extremists are exposed.
There will always be some opportunistic groups looking to cause more mayhem in chaotic situations like this. These protests have been literally “mostly peaceful” no?
>> This type of revelation will likely be commonplace in the days/weeks ahead as militant extremists are exposed.
> There will always be some opportunistic groups looking to cause more mayhem in chaotic situations like this. These protests have been literally “mostly peaceful” no?
Exactly. Didn't "Bugaloo Bois" try to hijack the Black Lives Matter protests?
I think it's important to be careful, and not try to paint an entire protest movement with a small unreasonable minority that may be within or adjacent to it.
> There will always be some opportunistic groups looking to cause more mayhem in chaotic situations like this. These protests have been literally “mostly peaceful” no?
Exactly. Didn't "Bugaloo Bois" try to hijack the Black Lives Matter protests?
I think it's important to be careful, and not try to paint an entire protest movement with a small unreasonable minority that may be within or adjacent to it.
Several of the most prominent acts of violence during the BLM protests were indeed Boogaloo Boys (murders of multiple police officers in Oakland, arson at a police precinct in Minneapolis, shooting up a different precinct with an AK-47 while shouting "Justice for Floyd!")
Are we in the same reality?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-pleads-guilty-minne...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-pleads-guilty-minne...
Yep.. that was the 4th person arrested..
Here’s one of the others;
> According to the complaint, Hunter would later post multiple messages on Facebook bragging of his actions in Minneapolis on the night of 28 May and morning of 29 May, writing, “I set fire to that precinct with the Black community,” and, “My mom would call the FBI if she knew.” “I’ve burned police stations with Black Panthers in Minneapolis,” he claimed in one message, and in another, “The BLM protesters in Minneapolis loved me.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/...
Here’s one of the others;
> According to the complaint, Hunter would later post multiple messages on Facebook bragging of his actions in Minneapolis on the night of 28 May and morning of 29 May, writing, “I set fire to that precinct with the Black community,” and, “My mom would call the FBI if she knew.” “I’ve burned police stations with Black Panthers in Minneapolis,” he claimed in one message, and in another, “The BLM protesters in Minneapolis loved me.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/...
Yup and uh.. how do you connect that with the Boogaloo boys?
Did you read the article? The quotes from the person bragging about burning down the police station was a BB from Texas who drove 1,200 miles to Minneapolis to foment unrest.
> According to the criminal complaint against Hunter, on 26 May, as intense protests broke out in Minneapolis over the killing of George Floyd by a city police officer, a “Boogaloo Boi” based in Minnesota posted a public Facebook message: “I need a headcount.”
> Hunter, a resident of Boerne, Texas, which is roughly 1,200 miles away, responded: “72 hours out. Another “Boogaloo Boi”, based in North Carolina, posted a public message the same day: “Lock and load boys,” he wrote, adding, “the national network is going off.”
> Prosecutors say that Hunter would later describe himself to Austin police officers as “the leader of the Boogaloo Bois in south Texas”.
> By 28 May, during a night of the most intense unrest and destruction in the city, Hunter was in Minneapolis, just as the 3rd precinct police station, known locally as a “playground for renegade cops”, was being set on fire.
> According to the criminal complaint against Hunter, on 26 May, as intense protests broke out in Minneapolis over the killing of George Floyd by a city police officer, a “Boogaloo Boi” based in Minnesota posted a public Facebook message: “I need a headcount.”
> Hunter, a resident of Boerne, Texas, which is roughly 1,200 miles away, responded: “72 hours out. Another “Boogaloo Boi”, based in North Carolina, posted a public message the same day: “Lock and load boys,” he wrote, adding, “the national network is going off.”
> Prosecutors say that Hunter would later describe himself to Austin police officers as “the leader of the Boogaloo Bois in south Texas”.
> By 28 May, during a night of the most intense unrest and destruction in the city, Hunter was in Minneapolis, just as the 3rd precinct police station, known locally as a “playground for renegade cops”, was being set on fire.
1. He did not burn down the building, per your own source. He was nearby and "assisted". His charge is, from ABC:
> Federal investigators said they reviewed video of Hunter firing rounds with his AK-47 style assault rifle into the Third Precinct building while looters were still inside and that he also *helped assist* them in setting the building on fire.
(emphasis added)
2. The people who did burn down the building are not Boogaloo associated. See my original link.
[1] - https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/boogaloo-bois-member-charged...
> Federal investigators said they reviewed video of Hunter firing rounds with his AK-47 style assault rifle into the Third Precinct building while looters were still inside and that he also *helped assist* them in setting the building on fire.
(emphasis added)
2. The people who did burn down the building are not Boogaloo associated. See my original link.
[1] - https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/boogaloo-bois-member-charged...
He wasn't charged with burning down the building -- others were -- that is correct. In any case, a Boogaloo dipshit drove from Texas to Minnesota and was at the site of the police precinct that was burned down and then bragged to his friends that he burned it down.. all the while communicating with the boog dipshit who murdered the police officers in Oakland.
> For example, On May 30, HUNTER sent a message to another individual stating, "I set fire to that precinct with the black community," followed by "Minneapolis third precinct." On May 31, HUNTER sent the following message to another individual: "My mom would call the fbi if she knew what I do and at the level I'm at w[ith] it."
> HUNTER posted other messages on Facebook about his activities in Minneapolis. On June 10, HUNTER posted "I've burned police stations with black panthers in Minneapolis" and "I helped the community bum down that police station in Minneapolis." HUNTER also posted, "I didn't' protest peacefully Dude ... Want something to change? Start risking felonies for what is good."
So by his own words, he helped burn it down. DOJ couldn't find enough to charge him with that -- and by no means were the BBs the only ones causing violence & destruction in MN during the riots -- but the immediate presence of a 'fire team' of far-right agitators sure seems important.
> For example, On May 30, HUNTER sent a message to another individual stating, "I set fire to that precinct with the black community," followed by "Minneapolis third precinct." On May 31, HUNTER sent the following message to another individual: "My mom would call the fbi if she knew what I do and at the level I'm at w[ith] it."
> HUNTER posted other messages on Facebook about his activities in Minneapolis. On June 10, HUNTER posted "I've burned police stations with black panthers in Minneapolis" and "I helped the community bum down that police station in Minneapolis." HUNTER also posted, "I didn't' protest peacefully Dude ... Want something to change? Start risking felonies for what is good."
So by his own words, he helped burn it down. DOJ couldn't find enough to charge him with that -- and by no means were the BBs the only ones causing violence & destruction in MN during the riots -- but the immediate presence of a 'fire team' of far-right agitators sure seems important.
You are right, Mr Hunter is obviously a far right fire team, a real leader of the Boogaloo, a firebrand arsonist.
> "My mom would call the fbi if she knew what I do and at the level I'm at w[ith] it."
> "My mom would call the fbi if she knew what I do and at the level I'm at w[ith] it."
> These protests have been literally “mostly peaceful” no?
That's fair, yes. Economically disruptive, but largely peaceful.
I'd wager the left isn't going to pass "it's legal to run over protesters" in response to these, though. https://www.vox.com/2021/4/25/22367019/gop-laws-oklahoma-iow...
That's fair, yes. Economically disruptive, but largely peaceful.
I'd wager the left isn't going to pass "it's legal to run over protesters" in response to these, though. https://www.vox.com/2021/4/25/22367019/gop-laws-oklahoma-iow...
From your own overtly biased link:
> Under the new law, an Oklahoma driver will no longer be liable for striking — or even killing — a person if the driver is “fleeing from a riot ... under a reasonable belief that fleeing was necessary to protect the motor vehicle operator from serious injury or death.”
Super disingenuous to characterize that as "it's legal to run over protesters".
> Under the new law, an Oklahoma driver will no longer be liable for striking — or even killing — a person if the driver is “fleeing from a riot ... under a reasonable belief that fleeing was necessary to protect the motor vehicle operator from serious injury or death.”
Super disingenuous to characterize that as "it's legal to run over protesters".
The person you drove over doesn't get to give an alternative story to this necessity, nor do they have to be somebody that you're fleeing from.
I don't think it's reasonable to defend yourself from somebody by going up to a passer by and shooting them
I don't think it's reasonable to defend yourself from somebody by going up to a passer by and shooting them
> The person you drove over doesn't get to give an alternative story to this necessity, nor do they have to be somebody that you're fleeing from.
Agreed. This is one of many reasons why rioting is awful—it creates these dangerous scenarios where ordinary people have to make split second life-or-death decisions. Frankly, I wish rioting was prosecuted more aggressively rather than blaming people who are stuck in situations where they have to defend themselves (“but they don’t need to be there!” <- people have the right to assemble in public, but rioters don’t have the right to create dangerous situations).
> I don't think it's reasonable to defend yourself from somebody by going up to a passer by and shooting them
This is an embarrassingly obvious straw man. No one is arguing for the right to kill a third party to defend oneself against another, the argument is that people should be given a pass if they accidentally hit someone while fleeing for their life. It’s one thing to disagree with that, but it’s an entirely different thing to lie about the law or the argument.
Agreed. This is one of many reasons why rioting is awful—it creates these dangerous scenarios where ordinary people have to make split second life-or-death decisions. Frankly, I wish rioting was prosecuted more aggressively rather than blaming people who are stuck in situations where they have to defend themselves (“but they don’t need to be there!” <- people have the right to assemble in public, but rioters don’t have the right to create dangerous situations).
> I don't think it's reasonable to defend yourself from somebody by going up to a passer by and shooting them
This is an embarrassingly obvious straw man. No one is arguing for the right to kill a third party to defend oneself against another, the argument is that people should be given a pass if they accidentally hit someone while fleeing for their life. It’s one thing to disagree with that, but it’s an entirely different thing to lie about the law or the argument.
Never seen a cop get off with "I feared for my life", eh?
Occasionally self-defense laws protect guilty people, but that doesn't imply that the law isn't a self-defense law. I'm sure there's lots of good criticism of this law, but characterizing it as the OP did is patent dishonesty. Even Vox wasn't willing to go that far ffs.
Self defense was already a thing. Why the need for new legislation?
For the purpose of your claim that the law legalized killing protesters, it doesn’t matter.
That said, per my previous comment, there may be lots to criticize about this law, including that it may have been superfluous. I’m not a lawyer, but my best guess is that existing self-defense law didn’t clearly absolve the victim of injury or death to bystanders as she pursued her own safety. But again, none of that has anything to do with what’s going on in Canada.
That said, per my previous comment, there may be lots to criticize about this law, including that it may have been superfluous. I’m not a lawyer, but my best guess is that existing self-defense law didn’t clearly absolve the victim of injury or death to bystanders as she pursued her own safety. But again, none of that has anything to do with what’s going on in Canada.
[deleted]
Sleep deprivation and continuous noise is considered torture under Geneva Convention and by the U.N.[1] and Canadian law[2]. U.S. and others have been condemned heavily for using such techniques and U.S. has since stopped (at least officially) even in black ops places like Gitmo.
Protests and blockade are one thing, continuous noise in areas where people live and work is not peaceful .
[1] https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CAT/Shared%20Documents...
[2] https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/yes-sleep-deprivation-is-tor...
Protests and blockade are one thing, continuous noise in areas where people live and work is not peaceful .
[1] https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CAT/Shared%20Documents...
[2] https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/yes-sleep-deprivation-is-tor...
It seems super disingenuous to imply that noisy protests are "violent" by citing laws and regulations which pertain to the treatment of detainees.
Our media entertained a serious debate about whether looting or burning a neighborhood to the ground was "violence" or not, and the many preferred to refer to these events as "fiery but mostly peaceful protests". How did we go from that to tenuous analogies of torture?
Our media entertained a serious debate about whether looting or burning a neighborhood to the ground was "violence" or not, and the many preferred to refer to these events as "fiery but mostly peaceful protests". How did we go from that to tenuous analogies of torture?
I got voted down for saying what you did but in a more terse, direct fashion. Too much heat in here with one-day HNers, yourself excepted.
one-day HN'ers can't downvote (400 Karma threshold)
Depends on how you define peaceful; if you consider it peaceful to make enough noise in a neighbourhood such that thousands cannot sleep there for weeks, then yes.
Yes. I've seen no evidence of stores being looted, businesses burned, or anybody throwing rocks at police -- all of which were common in 2020 BLM protests.
Well, now you have.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-police-arson-in...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/coutts-protest-blocka...
As for the police - helps that a lot of them were tacitly helping the rioters. As usual, giving them fuel and supplies, and ignoring clear-cut violations of the law. Why throw rocks at an ally?
Toronto and other cities may have shut them down, but the Ottawa cops were pretty much assisting. Not really a surprise, cops are pretty right-wing aligned in general.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-police-arson-in...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/coutts-protest-blocka...
As for the police - helps that a lot of them were tacitly helping the rioters. As usual, giving them fuel and supplies, and ignoring clear-cut violations of the law. Why throw rocks at an ally?
Toronto and other cities may have shut them down, but the Ottawa cops were pretty much assisting. Not really a surprise, cops are pretty right-wing aligned in general.
From your own link:
> Police have not confirmed any link between their investigation into this incident and the ongoing convoy protest.
Anyway, there's a pretty considerable difference between whatever this was and the images of burned down neighborhoods in the US.
https://www.google.com/search?q=kenosha+aftermath&client=saf...
> Police have not confirmed any link between their investigation into this incident and the ongoing convoy protest.
Anyway, there's a pretty considerable difference between whatever this was and the images of burned down neighborhoods in the US.
https://www.google.com/search?q=kenosha+aftermath&client=saf...
On the footage, he described seeing two individuals lighting a fire in the lobby shortly after 5 a.m. Sunday. After the suspects leave, another individual is seen coming into view and quickly extinguishing the fire near the elevators, Munoz said.
...
Police have not confirmed any link between their investigation into this incident and the ongoing convoy protest.
...
Police have not confirmed any link between their investigation into this incident and the ongoing convoy protest.
There is also potential for it being false flag operations in order to justify more militaristic responses.
You're eating up the propaganda.
These are regular folks.
These are regular folks.
Did they accidently query their own payroll?
Trudeau's father had the Mounties plant bombs at civilians (Canadian citizens on Canadian soil) back in the 70's and tried to blame it on some political group to justify armed intervention [0].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...
Trudeau's father had the Mounties plant bombs at civilians (Canadian citizens on Canadian soil) back in the 70's and tried to blame it on some political group to justify armed intervention [0].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...
[deleted]
Oka crisis in the 90s had gun battles between FN and the police/military
0xy(1)
I went through the leaks last night and they're wrong about the IP addresses. All of the IP addresses listed are internal to the service itself- they recorded the IP addresses of their own nodes (or possibly cloudflare edge nodes), and they're all from one of a few ranges or localhost.
The email addresses, names, country and zip codes all seem legit though.
The email addresses, names, country and zip codes all seem legit though.
The IP addresses in the leak appear to show all of them (or at least most) as being Class B private addresses (172.16..)
Irrelevant to my actual opinion of the whole protest, I find this fact hilarious.
And somewhat sad…true tech literacy will never be reached I guess.
And somewhat sad…true tech literacy will never be reached I guess.
I mean, I wouldn't expect the general public to have "true tech literacy" to the point of knowing the difference between IP classes. That seems above and beyond "literacy" to me. Hell, I wouldn't even expect the general public to know what an IP address is; their exposure to them is both so minimal and so shallow that it doesn't make sense to learn the intricacies of.
For instance, I consider myself to be fairly techy. I run multiple VLANs on the class A space on my home network, so I have decent exposure to IP addresses. And I routinely struggle with CIDR notation to the point where I basically have to use a converter each time because I can't remember which bits correspond to which ranges.
If I have this much trouble, I wouldn't expect the general public to even know what any of what I said is.
For instance, I consider myself to be fairly techy. I run multiple VLANs on the class A space on my home network, so I have decent exposure to IP addresses. And I routinely struggle with CIDR notation to the point where I basically have to use a converter each time because I can't remember which bits correspond to which ranges.
If I have this much trouble, I wouldn't expect the general public to even know what any of what I said is.
I don't think it is literacy really, just sloppy engineering process.
Typically this happens when someone develops a service which is front facing without any proxy/ LB before it, goes to production and gets validated IP and other logs are great everyone moves on . Few months/years down to scale their service or improve security a LB or CF type proxy is put in front and no bothers to check the IP logs are still valid because no one actually uses IP for anything in their tooling( like filters/blocks or geomapping etc) so won't notice the break at all.
Typically this happens when someone develops a service which is front facing without any proxy/ LB before it, goes to production and gets validated IP and other logs are great everyone moves on . Few months/years down to scale their service or improve security a LB or CF type proxy is put in front and no bothers to check the IP logs are still valid because no one actually uses IP for anything in their tooling( like filters/blocks or geomapping etc) so won't notice the break at all.
Where does one find the leaked list?
I'd like to know as well. The Distributed Denial of Secrets [1] page states that "Due to PII in the dataset, the dataset is only being offered to journalists and researchers."
Edit: Here [2], captured by the Internet Archive
[1] - https://ddosecrets.com/wiki/GiveSendGo_Freedom_Convoy_donor_...
[2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20220214031301/https://givesendg...
Edit: Here [2], captured by the Internet Archive
[1] - https://ddosecrets.com/wiki/GiveSendGo_Freedom_Convoy_donor_...
[2] - https://web.archive.org/web/20220214031301/https://givesendg...
I didn't join in on the BLM protests because I'm neither American nor arrogant enough to tell Americans how they want to run their society.
Ban foreign money entering your political system. Nothing good will ever come from it.
Ban foreign money entering your political system. Nothing good will ever come from it.
Well I'm sure these truckers think and say it's a human rights issue not political, if you ban that you would ban the mechanism liberal democracy values get spread around the world financially speaking, usually under the name of human rights.
[deleted]
pinephoneguy(1)
How about Canadians living in America who are de facto barred from entering their country to visit relatives?
As has been pointed out, you can visit relatives in Canada. What you can't do is zip back and forth across the border willy nilly during this pandemic, while refusing to take the preventative measures 4/5ths of your (eligible) countrymen have taken, namely vaccination.
I'm an American living in Canada. Like you I chose to live across an international border from my family. Guess what? Living abroad inconvenient from time to time! During a pandemic when one country (USA) chooses to behave idiotically, the result being a 3x per capita death rate compared to Canada, it's even more inconvenient. Ironically, people like you (who can't be bothered to do anything to prevent virus spread) are the reason we have to have all these damned restrictions.
Despite the inconvenience to me (didn't see family for over a year) I support the border closures and restrictions fully. I am very proud of Canada's success in keeping death and hospitalization rates down compared to USA, and proud of Canadians' civic spirit and collective solidarity. That civic spirit is a big part of why I prefer living here.
If you never want to be inconvenienced in your travels to and within Canada: move back home. You are opting into a certain amount of inconvenience by living abroad, that is your choice.
I'm an American living in Canada. Like you I chose to live across an international border from my family. Guess what? Living abroad inconvenient from time to time! During a pandemic when one country (USA) chooses to behave idiotically, the result being a 3x per capita death rate compared to Canada, it's even more inconvenient. Ironically, people like you (who can't be bothered to do anything to prevent virus spread) are the reason we have to have all these damned restrictions.
Despite the inconvenience to me (didn't see family for over a year) I support the border closures and restrictions fully. I am very proud of Canada's success in keeping death and hospitalization rates down compared to USA, and proud of Canadians' civic spirit and collective solidarity. That civic spirit is a big part of why I prefer living here.
If you never want to be inconvenienced in your travels to and within Canada: move back home. You are opting into a certain amount of inconvenience by living abroad, that is your choice.
The adversity of your words is against hacker news rules. This isn't reddit.
>>Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
>>Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
I appreciate the feedback. What in particular did you find objectionable about my comment? Feel free also to "flag" my comment for moderator review if you think it isn't suitable for hackernews.
Who is barred? I’ve travelled to Canada to visit family a number of times last year and once so far this year. I have another trip planned for late spring.
Canadian citizens enter by right.
Canadian citizens enter by right.
There was a time that entering as a Canadian citizen by air would get you escorted to a gov't approved place of quarantine for a few days, regardless of your living situation / ability to self-isolate. Granted, that's not the situation currently.
Unvaccinated Canadians older than five who have to quarantine for fourteen days.
A 14 day quarantine for an endemic virus just as present in Canada as anywhere else is a de facto prohibition.
A 14 day quarantine for an endemic virus just as present in Canada as anywhere else is a de facto prohibition.
Quarantine != "barred". Perhaps inconvenient to the point of rethinking the trip, yes, but that's different than a citizen being denied the right of return by their government.
And even that inconvenience can be removed with a free, safe shot that takes 30 seconds to get for those that aren't prevented by some other health condition.
And even that inconvenience can be removed with a free, safe shot that takes 30 seconds to get for those that aren't prevented by some other health condition.
Former Newfoundland Premier Brian Peckford, one of the men who helped draft our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is suing the government, claiming that these travel restrictions on Canadian citizens are unconstitutional.
It's a pretty remarkable situation to have someone who wrote our constitution pointing out that the government is in error.
It's a pretty remarkable situation to have someone who wrote our constitution pointing out that the government is in error.
The case was doomed before it was filed because the pretense and premise is a bit absurd. Air Travel is not a right on its own and the federal government is freely able to place limits on who is allowed onto an airplane already, for a lot of arbitrary reasons (Canadians or otherwise). Setting that aside, provinces also have a say in how that works and could easily also force isolation on returning travelers and invoke the notwithstanding clause to enforce it. Either way, by the time it is argued we will hopefully be past COVID restrictions.
It will also be interesting to see the moment of Peckford's lawyers arguing the intent of the constitution and the crown having to argue against it, given Peckford was there at its drafting. However, it would be foolish to believe the man to be automatically correct and infallible on this point in the court's eyes.
However, I do believe the discussion is worth having because if nothing else it will force the Canadian government to rethink its policies that were clearly developed on the fly without due consideration. Right now, with the benefit of hindsight, 14-day enforced quarantines and 3-5-day enforced stays at government designated hotels don't seem to have done much of anything other than throw the hospitality industry a bone. Personally, I would have preferred to see more aggressive testing done at points of entry, with quarantine notices essentially handed out to individuals who need it. Unfortunately successive governments undermined Canadian biotech industries and left the country without the needed capacity.
There need to be better policies and plans in place for the next time this happens and it is important to have the discussion of just how much you're able to dictate to a given individual.
It will also be interesting to see the moment of Peckford's lawyers arguing the intent of the constitution and the crown having to argue against it, given Peckford was there at its drafting. However, it would be foolish to believe the man to be automatically correct and infallible on this point in the court's eyes.
However, I do believe the discussion is worth having because if nothing else it will force the Canadian government to rethink its policies that were clearly developed on the fly without due consideration. Right now, with the benefit of hindsight, 14-day enforced quarantines and 3-5-day enforced stays at government designated hotels don't seem to have done much of anything other than throw the hospitality industry a bone. Personally, I would have preferred to see more aggressive testing done at points of entry, with quarantine notices essentially handed out to individuals who need it. Unfortunately successive governments undermined Canadian biotech industries and left the country without the needed capacity.
There need to be better policies and plans in place for the next time this happens and it is important to have the discussion of just how much you're able to dictate to a given individual.
Next time this happens, public health agencies will be dealing with large swaths of their populations who have zero (actually, negative) trust in them and refuse to comply with any and all measures from day one.
They're having to deal with that this time. Some people can't be told, it seems to have little to do with any earned mistrust.
>"notwithstanding clause"
This thing makes a mockery of Canadian Bill of Rights
This thing makes a mockery of Canadian Bill of Rights
Peckford didn't really contribute to drafting the charter in its relevant portions here, though he had peripheral involvement in its contours as a premier of a province during the period it was negotiated and as part of the basis for the Kitchen Accord that led to s.33. His major position on the constitutional negotiations as a whole was mostly a losing position. So it's a little like arguing the anti-federalists had unique constitutional insight in the U.S. Especially given that the constitution was shortly relitigated vis-a-vis Meech Lake and Charlottetown and the heirs to Peckford's position... lost again!
After losing election in Newfoundland (thanks partially to betting the province's economic future on hydroponic cucumbers -- a little surprising that didn't work!) he left the province, and he's had no real involvement in politics since except to endorse the far-right political party in the last election and become a professional anti-vaxxer, as you note.
I think the appeal to authority here is odd. Whether Peckford has a legal point on the travel restrictions or not, it's not because he was ostensibly in the room when the finer points of the constitution were hammered out. The whole point of the Court Challenges Program and other measures was because everyone -- the legal profession, the provinces, the federal government, and interest groups -- believed that the charter required extensive jurisprudence to understand.
I doubt Peckford wins as the case works its way through; the dominant policy view on the Charter and the court is basically dialogue theory, that the court exists primarily to work affirmatively with the government and that even when the court strikes government policies it typically does so in a cooperative way. The court is largely deferent to state interests. This deference is built right into s.1, which is why charter rights are subject to s.1.
But even beyond that, the court has already circumscribed s.6(1) rights e.g. in Divito v. Canada (which held that, for example, citizens are not entitled to prison transfers to serve international sentences domestically; both because the state has an s.1 interest in limiting such rights and because s.6(1) isn't that expansive to begin with). The court has never held, e.g., that s.6(1) grants an affirmative right to fly, or an affirmative right to fly without ID, or even an affirmative right to get a passport without following instructions. The alternative argument is some kind of nonsense s.7 argument which would clearly crumble when applying s.1.
I suspect they would decline to rule in Peckford's favour here, they aren't in the business of whole cloth concocting these kinds of affirmative rights. The most likely vote would be 8-1 or 9-0, with maybe Brown dissenting?
Of course Peckford being legally incorrect doesn't mean he has no point from a moral or policy standpoint. Totally reasonable to say "I think Peckford's point is well taken." Just think the bizarre invocation of him as a legal authority doesn't hold up at all.
After losing election in Newfoundland (thanks partially to betting the province's economic future on hydroponic cucumbers -- a little surprising that didn't work!) he left the province, and he's had no real involvement in politics since except to endorse the far-right political party in the last election and become a professional anti-vaxxer, as you note.
I think the appeal to authority here is odd. Whether Peckford has a legal point on the travel restrictions or not, it's not because he was ostensibly in the room when the finer points of the constitution were hammered out. The whole point of the Court Challenges Program and other measures was because everyone -- the legal profession, the provinces, the federal government, and interest groups -- believed that the charter required extensive jurisprudence to understand.
I doubt Peckford wins as the case works its way through; the dominant policy view on the Charter and the court is basically dialogue theory, that the court exists primarily to work affirmatively with the government and that even when the court strikes government policies it typically does so in a cooperative way. The court is largely deferent to state interests. This deference is built right into s.1, which is why charter rights are subject to s.1.
But even beyond that, the court has already circumscribed s.6(1) rights e.g. in Divito v. Canada (which held that, for example, citizens are not entitled to prison transfers to serve international sentences domestically; both because the state has an s.1 interest in limiting such rights and because s.6(1) isn't that expansive to begin with). The court has never held, e.g., that s.6(1) grants an affirmative right to fly, or an affirmative right to fly without ID, or even an affirmative right to get a passport without following instructions. The alternative argument is some kind of nonsense s.7 argument which would clearly crumble when applying s.1.
I suspect they would decline to rule in Peckford's favour here, they aren't in the business of whole cloth concocting these kinds of affirmative rights. The most likely vote would be 8-1 or 9-0, with maybe Brown dissenting?
Of course Peckford being legally incorrect doesn't mean he has no point from a moral or policy standpoint. Totally reasonable to say "I think Peckford's point is well taken." Just think the bizarre invocation of him as a legal authority doesn't hold up at all.
The last man alive who sat with PET and the other premiers to discuss how Trudeau’s unacceptable constitution (to the premiers who had to be on board) was going to pass muster.
Note to readers: Peckford is nowhere near the last man alive who sat with PET and the premiers.
I literally said “de facto”. A 14 day quarantine when one has 10 days vacation a year is de facto a bar.
Nor did I argue, or am interested in arguing, the merits of banning the unvaccinated. I just stated that they are effectively banned from entry.
Nor did I argue, or am interested in arguing, the merits of banning the unvaccinated. I just stated that they are effectively banned from entry.
Being barred to enter a country because of a lack of vaccination is nothing new from the pre-Covid-19 era.
Like Brazil requires a Yellow Fever vaccination for people from some African countries.
There are probably about 100 other reasons they can be banned from entry if they don't comply. Saying they are "banned" if they don't get a vaccination (even though of course it's not a ban, it's a "de facto" ban) is no more interesting than if they're "banned" if they won't submit to a search, or if they've filled their car with fruit.
That is the entire point. International travel is not for the plebs.
> Quarantine != "barred". Perhaps inconvenient to the point of rethinking the trip, yes,
The original quote was "de facto barred". If something is "inconvenient to the point that it makes the trip infeasible" it's pretty much as good as barring entry.
> And even that inconvenience can be removed with a free, safe shot that takes 30 seconds to get for those that aren't prevented by some other health condition.
I'm vaxxed and boosted, but at this point it doesn't seem like vaccines inhibit transmission and thus it's purely a matter of bodily autonomy. "yield your right to bodily autonomy and you may enter" is some authoritarian nonsense.
The original quote was "de facto barred". If something is "inconvenient to the point that it makes the trip infeasible" it's pretty much as good as barring entry.
> And even that inconvenience can be removed with a free, safe shot that takes 30 seconds to get for those that aren't prevented by some other health condition.
I'm vaxxed and boosted, but at this point it doesn't seem like vaccines inhibit transmission and thus it's purely a matter of bodily autonomy. "yield your right to bodily autonomy and you may enter" is some authoritarian nonsense.
First, vaccines do inhibit transmission. They're not perfect, and the protection begins to wane after a few months, but to say that they don't inhibit transmission is false.
Further, the vaccines have consistently significantly reduced hospitalization, and most Canadian hospitals continue to be stretched with a long backlog. The continued strain from COVID hospitalizations continues to impact others. Freedom has always been limited when it interferes with the rights of others, (in this case timely access to healthcare) and borders have always had stricter rules than normal life within a country.
We're in a gray area here, granted. Ideally ones' own health choices would not impact others, and hospitals would be back to normal, but the restrictions are not nonsense.
Further, the vaccines have consistently significantly reduced hospitalization, and most Canadian hospitals continue to be stretched with a long backlog. The continued strain from COVID hospitalizations continues to impact others. Freedom has always been limited when it interferes with the rights of others, (in this case timely access to healthcare) and borders have always had stricter rules than normal life within a country.
We're in a gray area here, granted. Ideally ones' own health choices would not impact others, and hospitals would be back to normal, but the restrictions are not nonsense.
> First, vaccines do inhibit transmission. They're not perfect, and the protection begins to wane after a few months, but to say that they don't inhibit transmission is false.
I was a little imprecise--I don't think the transmission inhibiting effect is literally zero, but I suspect it's marginal (based on US health officials remarks about 'everyone is going to get omicron' https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday...).
> Freedom has always been limited when it interferes with the rights of others, (in this case timely access to healthcare) and borders have always had stricter rules than normal life within a country.
I can't take this argument seriously while Canada tolerates so many other things that increase one's risk of consuming hospital resources (drinking, smoking, driving, etc) and fails to mandate other things which would similarly reduce load on hospitals (diet, exercise, etc). In these other cases, it's regarded as the responsibility of the government to provide enough healthcare to meet demand--not to infringe on the rights of citizens.
> We're in a gray area here, granted. Ideally ones' own health choices would not impact others, and hospitals would be back to normal, but the restrictions are not nonsense.
I think we left the gray area when it became clear that COVID would be endemic and vaccines don't do much to reduce transmission.
I was a little imprecise--I don't think the transmission inhibiting effect is literally zero, but I suspect it's marginal (based on US health officials remarks about 'everyone is going to get omicron' https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday...).
> Freedom has always been limited when it interferes with the rights of others, (in this case timely access to healthcare) and borders have always had stricter rules than normal life within a country.
I can't take this argument seriously while Canada tolerates so many other things that increase one's risk of consuming hospital resources (drinking, smoking, driving, etc) and fails to mandate other things which would similarly reduce load on hospitals (diet, exercise, etc). In these other cases, it's regarded as the responsibility of the government to provide enough healthcare to meet demand--not to infringe on the rights of citizens.
> We're in a gray area here, granted. Ideally ones' own health choices would not impact others, and hospitals would be back to normal, but the restrictions are not nonsense.
I think we left the gray area when it became clear that COVID would be endemic and vaccines don't do much to reduce transmission.
fock(1)
Quarantine procedures were in place during Zika and Ebola outbreaks as well. And those procedures were substantially more harsh. Major metro hospitals had quarantine facilities brought in for Ebola. Patients were shoved into a mobile field hospital for 14 days. Not a single protest happened for that.
The takeaway here is that none of this is new. People are mostly just pissed off that the quarantine procedures now apply to them. It was a-okay when other people were shoved into isolation tanks because, "that's what happens when you go to Africa."
The takeaway here is that none of this is new. People are mostly just pissed off that the quarantine procedures now apply to them. It was a-okay when other people were shoved into isolation tanks because, "that's what happens when you go to Africa."
Right, but the virus was contained. A quarantine when you have as much COVID as anyone is petty.
Effectiveness is not metric that changes legality. A lot of government policy is ineffective does not make it illegal or unconstitutional .
When the rights are infringed upon just for the fuck of it without solid proof that it is to prevent endangering large amount of lives - maybe it is technically legal but I think it is crime.
You can make it illegal and actually a crime. The democratic way to make it one is either make that point democratically elected leaders in a civilized manner or vote against them next election and organize into parties/block to influence policy.
Terrorizing and hold regular people hostage with noise pollution, blockade and disrupt their lives is what revolutionary/terrorist organization would do.
If protestors behave like terrorists and insurgents then sooner or later they will be treated like one.
Terrorizing and hold regular people hostage with noise pollution, blockade and disrupt their lives is what revolutionary/terrorist organization would do.
If protestors behave like terrorists and insurgents then sooner or later they will be treated like one.
Yes, so they don't contribute to the clogging of hospitals (90% of COVID related hospitalizations are unvaccinated people).
Stop being so selfish and get vaccinated.
Stop being so selfish and get vaccinated.
Im not arguing for or against vaccination. Im just pointing out that some Canadians are de facto barred from entry.
The law also doesn't recognize natural immunity which is not that ineffective, is it?
The law also doesn't recognize natural immunity which is not that ineffective, is it?
No Canadians are barred from entry, nor have they been. You'll still be getting into the country, just with testing and quarantine requirements. Working cross border isn't a right
Not all unvaccinated people end up in a hospital though. So aren't we discriminating against them?
It's equivalent to saying that lets bar all male Canadian citizens from entering Canada, since over 90% of rapes are committed by men!
It's equivalent to saying that lets bar all male Canadian citizens from entering Canada, since over 90% of rapes are committed by men!
> Not all unvaccinated people end up in a hospital though. So aren't we discriminating against them?
We absolutely are, and I applaud the effort.
If they were fighting against rabies or measles or tetanus vaccinations, I'd say "Good on you! Do your part to clean out the shallow end of the gene pool."
But once their stupidity endangers others, we as civilized people step in and stop them.
When unvaccinated COVID patients flood the hospitals, it means that other people with serious or life threatening medical situations can't get the quality treatment they need. At this point, the antivax stupidity crosses over into danger-to-society.
So yeah, block them until they no longer pose a threat.
We absolutely are, and I applaud the effort.
If they were fighting against rabies or measles or tetanus vaccinations, I'd say "Good on you! Do your part to clean out the shallow end of the gene pool."
But once their stupidity endangers others, we as civilized people step in and stop them.
When unvaccinated COVID patients flood the hospitals, it means that other people with serious or life threatening medical situations can't get the quality treatment they need. At this point, the antivax stupidity crosses over into danger-to-society.
So yeah, block them until they no longer pose a threat.
> When unvaccinated COVID patients flood the hospitals [..]
In our part of the world, despite eye-watering infection rates over the last few weeks, hospitals are absolutely nowhere near capacity (and that's putting it mildly).
Were younger and fitter people really flooding hospitals if they got Covid? Thought the data on age and comorbidities is pretty clear and has been for a while now.[0][1]
[0] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7... [1] https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/75/11/222...
In our part of the world, despite eye-watering infection rates over the last few weeks, hospitals are absolutely nowhere near capacity (and that's putting it mildly).
Were younger and fitter people really flooding hospitals if they got Covid? Thought the data on age and comorbidities is pretty clear and has been for a while now.[0][1]
[0] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7... [1] https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/75/11/222...
Thank God nobody old or frail ever caught the disease from a young fit person.
kstenerud(1)
So you'll be ok with barring all male Canadian citizens from entering Canada as well?
Upstream in this thread we have "it's not torture because no-one is making those residents who live in the area stay" - because of course, they all can afford the time and effort to go stay in a hotel out of the area for a few weeks...
Here we have "oh, well, it might as well be a ban, if you're going to inconvenience someone for a few weeks".
Here we have "oh, well, it might as well be a ban, if you're going to inconvenience someone for a few weeks".
they can go get the safe, effective vaccine for free so they don't have to quarantine
Well, maybe they should get vaccinated then.
[deleted]
Point stands they’re barred entry.
Look, I get it. They’re icky and Canada has a long history of denying or trying to deny entry to “icky” ppl. Mediterraneans, Asians, Eminem (though I forgot about that one eh?).
Canada has just a long list of things its apologized for. Like barring entry to Mediterraneans, Asians and Eminem.
Look, I get it. They’re icky and Canada has a long history of denying or trying to deny entry to “icky” ppl. Mediterraneans, Asians, Eminem (though I forgot about that one eh?).
Canada has just a long list of things its apologized for. Like barring entry to Mediterraneans, Asians and Eminem.
Comparing racial exclusion and barring felons to how unvaccinated people are being treated is some seriously disingenous nonsense.
> Look, I get it
No, you don't.
> Look, I get it
No, you don't.
Gosh, that's a really tough position to be in. If only there was something they could do to be exempt from the 14 day quarantine. Anything at all.
Just get vaccinated. It takes, like, 5 minutes.
Just comply and the regime will not threaten you is not really how a free person thinks.
No. It is immoral for a healthy, COVID recovered man to get a vaccine best used in the third world.
To travel, and get around my moral qualms, I signed up for a vaccine trial. I was refused or got the placebo.
To travel, and get around my moral qualms, I signed up for a vaccine trial. I was refused or got the placebo.
I've heard this spin multiple times.
Fun fact - people who live or have lived in disease-plagued areas of the world are far more likely to willingly adhere to guidelines on masks, isolation, and the like, because they've seen, firsthand, the devastating effect of pandemics and epidemics.
Let's not pretend for one moment that your average antivaxxer in the US or Canada is in any way on some sort of moral crusade for the third world.
It's just a "better" reason than "because I'm selfish".
Fun fact - people who live or have lived in disease-plagued areas of the world are far more likely to willingly adhere to guidelines on masks, isolation, and the like, because they've seen, firsthand, the devastating effect of pandemics and epidemics.
Let's not pretend for one moment that your average antivaxxer in the US or Canada is in any way on some sort of moral crusade for the third world.
It's just a "better" reason than "because I'm selfish".
The vaccine reserved for you did not go to the third world instead.
I’ll help your argument out and make it stronger (because “reserved” vaccines have indeed been shipped overseas):
Once a vial is opened the vaccines contained therein can’t be shipped overseas and will expire in a few hours. I could therefore wait outside a Walgreens before closing and get the shot.
Except Im not a utilitarian. I cannot take what is rightfully another’s just because they cant enjoy it. I believe that all young people should have refused the shot, therefore liberating millions of doses. Mine is but the first (literal) drop in what should be an ocean; and Im actively encouraging my friends to do the moral thing and refuse to get boosted.
Once a vial is opened the vaccines contained therein can’t be shipped overseas and will expire in a few hours. I could therefore wait outside a Walgreens before closing and get the shot.
Except Im not a utilitarian. I cannot take what is rightfully another’s just because they cant enjoy it. I believe that all young people should have refused the shot, therefore liberating millions of doses. Mine is but the first (literal) drop in what should be an ocean; and Im actively encouraging my friends to do the moral thing and refuse to get boosted.
It is rightfully yours. your government put in the work to develop and produce these vaccines on your behalf. You can always put in more work to make more vaccines to get to others if you think they should also have vaccines
Do you only do this for vaccines? other medical treatment? food? water?
I don't know where to draw the line myself, so I wonder what kind of rules you set for yourself. This sounds like one of the most extreme examples I've heard.
I don't know where to draw the line myself, so I wonder what kind of rules you set for yourself. This sounds like one of the most extreme examples I've heard.
Nice sentiment but this is analogous to the concept of not throwing out food because there are starving people out there. The vaccine you're not taking isn't going to magically get reappropriated for use in the third world. Most likely, it will just go to waste.
Yes it is. My parents were vaccinated with vaccines not used by first world countries.
EDIT:
Also, consider that perhaps the West should be consuming (far) less resources including food? Eat what’s on your plate, even if you’re full, and skip the next meal. Your discomfort and hunger will help remind you next time to have an appropriate serving.
EDIT:
Also, consider that perhaps the West should be consuming (far) less resources including food? Eat what’s on your plate, even if you’re full, and skip the next meal. Your discomfort and hunger will help remind you next time to have an appropriate serving.
Nope it is not, this is an abuse of the term "prohibition".
Canadian citizens are always free to re-enter Canada.
I've had relatives come into the country from different countries many times, with no issues. They had to quarantine, one of them with us, but they were never denied entry, and even that is getting dropped progressively.
I am a Canadian living in America, and my non-Canadian co-workers have been driving up for ski vacations all through the omicron surge.
Nobody's barred from going anywhere. Go get your shots.
Nobody's barred from going anywhere. Go get your shots.
Jesus Christ, you can't just leave your S3 bucket open, guys. There are lots of warnings from Amazon before you end up doing that, and it's so easy to not do (pre-signed URLs if you really need a URL).
I guess it's rather interesting to see the reactions from the media and HN comments. Sort of reflects the relative politics:
- Patreon leak. Media didn't go download everyone's data and threaten to get info. HN blamed Patreon.
- GiveSendGo (a terrible name imho). Media downloads the data and threatens to get info. HN blames the hacker.
I think I'm going to choose consistency here. I hate these data breach guys, but it's sort of like I hate mosquitos. If I could cleanse the Earth of them I would, but I can't. So I accept they are just a natural constraint. But if your hotel has mosquitos I'm going to blame your hotel.
This 'hack' is dealing with amateurish security. If you're in a controversial place you've got to do better. GiveSendGo has a lot of work to do (unless this was something weird this specific campaign did). And their security position on this was terrible: https://techcrunch.com/2022/02/08/ottawa-trucker-freedom-con...
> TechCrunch contacted GiveSendGo co-founder Jacob Wells with details of the exposed bucket on Tuesday. The bucket was secured a short time later, but Wells did not respond to our questions, including if GiveSendGo planned on informing about the security lapse those whose information was exposed.
I guess it's rather interesting to see the reactions from the media and HN comments. Sort of reflects the relative politics:
- Patreon leak. Media didn't go download everyone's data and threaten to get info. HN blamed Patreon.
- GiveSendGo (a terrible name imho). Media downloads the data and threatens to get info. HN blames the hacker.
I think I'm going to choose consistency here. I hate these data breach guys, but it's sort of like I hate mosquitos. If I could cleanse the Earth of them I would, but I can't. So I accept they are just a natural constraint. But if your hotel has mosquitos I'm going to blame your hotel.
This 'hack' is dealing with amateurish security. If you're in a controversial place you've got to do better. GiveSendGo has a lot of work to do (unless this was something weird this specific campaign did). And their security position on this was terrible: https://techcrunch.com/2022/02/08/ottawa-trucker-freedom-con...
> TechCrunch contacted GiveSendGo co-founder Jacob Wells with details of the exposed bucket on Tuesday. The bucket was secured a short time later, but Wells did not respond to our questions, including if GiveSendGo planned on informing about the security lapse those whose information was exposed.
Patreon is a bay area startup with loads of VC funding. Their engineering team is well paid and people hold them to a higher standard.
GiveSendGo has amateurish security because it's an amateurish company.
Think of it this way. Patreon's security failure made bay area techies look bad because it turned out that you couldn't just hire a bunch of them and expect things to go well. GiveSendGo's security failure makes bay area techies look bad because it turns out cloud security isn't as easy as they'd like to think.
Also taking down small sites that provide services to the out group of the bay area is unacceptable in a democracy. It invites legislative reprisal.
GiveSendGo has amateurish security because it's an amateurish company.
Think of it this way. Patreon's security failure made bay area techies look bad because it turned out that you couldn't just hire a bunch of them and expect things to go well. GiveSendGo's security failure makes bay area techies look bad because it turns out cloud security isn't as easy as they'd like to think.
Also taking down small sites that provide services to the out group of the bay area is unacceptable in a democracy. It invites legislative reprisal.
[deleted]
Thank you for writing a comment that is actually about opsec and technology, unlike so many others in this thread.
[deleted]
The question I have is, did GiveSendGo concede that they left the bucket open, and if not, how was it opened.
The lack of effective policing is what's most disappointing to me. The Ottawa police have completely failed to enforce any boundaries. This further erodes public trust in the police and public safety in general. In that sense the protestors are winning.
What is effective policing meant to look like in circumstances like this?
This is an unarguably large amount of people practicing civil disobedience. How many police does Ottawa have on hand to deal with it?
All the tactics I can think of to truly control a crowd this size are rather…harsh (lines of riot police and water cannons etc). So if you don’t take that option you’re left with tactical deployment of officers.
Seems like a hard problem to get right. Just because they’re not perfect doesn’t mean they’re not effective.
The fact that they’re seizing weapons caches before any particularly heinous outbreaks of violence makes me think they’re prioritising their resources somewhat effectively?
This is an unarguably large amount of people practicing civil disobedience. How many police does Ottawa have on hand to deal with it?
All the tactics I can think of to truly control a crowd this size are rather…harsh (lines of riot police and water cannons etc). So if you don’t take that option you’re left with tactical deployment of officers.
Seems like a hard problem to get right. Just because they’re not perfect doesn’t mean they’re not effective.
The fact that they’re seizing weapons caches before any particularly heinous outbreaks of violence makes me think they’re prioritising their resources somewhat effectively?
There are less people engaging in highly disruptive actions such as in the blockade of the border pass or in honking at night than police officers.
The tactics are pretty simple. You order dispersal for disruptive people. If they refuse, you calmly walk towards and past them as a group in riot gear. If they engage in violence, you act in minimal self defence, and if they refuse to move, you continue, slowly pushing them forwards.
If people stay stuck in their trucks or cars, you give them a warning their car is being impounded. If they don't leave by then, you tow it to the side and give a hefty fine, with or without them inside.
It's not a hard problem at all. I've been on the receiving end multiple times. It's only when you start throwing tear gas for no reason or beating up people for fun - which police often does to other groups - that you have unprovoked issues.
As it stands municipal police has done exactly nothing. They haven't even given fines.
The ones seizing weapon caches are the RCMP, under federal jurisdiction. They've recently been allowed to take over the duties of municipal officers because so many of them refuse to do anything.
The tactics are pretty simple. You order dispersal for disruptive people. If they refuse, you calmly walk towards and past them as a group in riot gear. If they engage in violence, you act in minimal self defence, and if they refuse to move, you continue, slowly pushing them forwards.
If people stay stuck in their trucks or cars, you give them a warning their car is being impounded. If they don't leave by then, you tow it to the side and give a hefty fine, with or without them inside.
It's not a hard problem at all. I've been on the receiving end multiple times. It's only when you start throwing tear gas for no reason or beating up people for fun - which police often does to other groups - that you have unprovoked issues.
As it stands municipal police has done exactly nothing. They haven't even given fines.
The ones seizing weapon caches are the RCMP, under federal jurisdiction. They've recently been allowed to take over the duties of municipal officers because so many of them refuse to do anything.
The response from Toronto police seemed highly effective. The response from Ottawa police was selfies and gaslighting, which ultimately resulted in the police chief resigning.
Police will not attack their own citizens. Sometimes it happens...shocker. Usually when the government is out of line with the sentiment of the people.
So now they will try to send in the RCMP to the dirty work.
This is a tactic often used by dictators.
Send in out of town people to suppress the locals.
I'm confused, is only the truckers convoy data available or was all of GiveSendGo's database compromised? GiveSendGo hosts fundraising campaigns for the full constellation of alt-right, Proud Boy, J6, etc groups that don't get hosted by GoFundMe.
As a fully vaccinated person who thinks that people who disagree with me should have rights, and who values freedom more than wealth, I'm proud that my name is on that list.
As a fully vaccinated person who understands that the point of every law in a democratic society is for the benefit of everybody (including myself) at the expense of my own liberty, I am proud that my name is not on that list.
When you increase community immunity, you can reduce a pandemic to an endemic (a disease that causes only a few hospitalizations each year and doesn't threaten rationing care). This means businesses can open up, people can remove masks, and everything can go back to normal. People's livelihoods will no longer be at stake. My freedom to choose whether to vaccinate might be restricted, but I benefit overall.
When you implement laws against burning fields and barbecuing on days with poor air circulation, you let everybody breathe easier without masks and without suffering breathing problems. My freedom to barbecue might be restricted, but I benefit overall.
When you increase community immunity, you can reduce a pandemic to an endemic (a disease that causes only a few hospitalizations each year and doesn't threaten rationing care). This means businesses can open up, people can remove masks, and everything can go back to normal. People's livelihoods will no longer be at stake. My freedom to choose whether to vaccinate might be restricted, but I benefit overall.
When you implement laws against burning fields and barbecuing on days with poor air circulation, you let everybody breathe easier without masks and without suffering breathing problems. My freedom to barbecue might be restricted, but I benefit overall.
> the point of every law in a democratic society is for the benefit of everybody
provably false.
So are you saying that my parents and grandparents, who went on strike and participated in worker unions, were wrong, and that they should have accepted labour laws as they were back then, since those laws were conceived in a democratic society hence they were fair by definition?
> When you increase community immunity
we already have that, in many advanced economies, including Australia where I live, we are now at 80-90% vaccination rates, which is what the WHO identified as a goal; we will never reach 100% even if we were living in a techno-dictatorship, because some people can't be vaccinated for medical reasons. As a vaccinated person, you have to be aware that when you go to a public place not everyone around you is vaccinated, this can't be changed regardless of what happens to the truckers.
> barbecuing on days with poor air circulation,
preventing someone from having a barbie on a certain day vs. firing someone from their job - not exactly two comparable situations
provably false.
So are you saying that my parents and grandparents, who went on strike and participated in worker unions, were wrong, and that they should have accepted labour laws as they were back then, since those laws were conceived in a democratic society hence they were fair by definition?
> When you increase community immunity
we already have that, in many advanced economies, including Australia where I live, we are now at 80-90% vaccination rates, which is what the WHO identified as a goal; we will never reach 100% even if we were living in a techno-dictatorship, because some people can't be vaccinated for medical reasons. As a vaccinated person, you have to be aware that when you go to a public place not everyone around you is vaccinated, this can't be changed regardless of what happens to the truckers.
> barbecuing on days with poor air circulation,
preventing someone from having a barbie on a certain day vs. firing someone from their job - not exactly two comparable situations
> So are you saying that my parents and grandparents, who went on strike and participated in worker unions, were wrong, and that they should have accepted labour laws as they were back then, since those laws were conceived in a democratic society hence they were fair by definition?
No, I'm saying that democracies choose the laws to benefit the people who live in them, as opposed to dictatorships. Sometimes, the people in the democracies aren't smart enough to choose laws that benefit them (like the US states that made laws against vaccine mandates and had predictable healthcare rationing as a result), but that doesn't change the purpose of the democracy or its laws.
> we already have that, in many advanced economies
And those advanced economies are free to open up. Denmark already has. Canada, whether by having too low a vaccination rate or too little healthcare, is not among them. Hence, the need for mandates to get there.
> preventing someone from having a barbie on a certain day vs. firing someone from their job - not exactly two comparable situations
You're comparing a law with a punishment for breaking a law, which is a nonsensical comparison, as you apparently agree, but why make it? The key comparison is whether both laws are beneficial, and they are.
No, I'm saying that democracies choose the laws to benefit the people who live in them, as opposed to dictatorships. Sometimes, the people in the democracies aren't smart enough to choose laws that benefit them (like the US states that made laws against vaccine mandates and had predictable healthcare rationing as a result), but that doesn't change the purpose of the democracy or its laws.
> we already have that, in many advanced economies
And those advanced economies are free to open up. Denmark already has. Canada, whether by having too low a vaccination rate or too little healthcare, is not among them. Hence, the need for mandates to get there.
> preventing someone from having a barbie on a certain day vs. firing someone from their job - not exactly two comparable situations
You're comparing a law with a punishment for breaking a law, which is a nonsensical comparison, as you apparently agree, but why make it? The key comparison is whether both laws are beneficial, and they are.
> You're comparing a law with a punishment
I'm not, "loosing your job" is not a punishment, it's an effect of the mandate. The punishment would be being fined or going to jail for still driving a truck despite the mandate.
I'm not, "loosing your job" is not a punishment, it's an effect of the mandate. The punishment would be being fined or going to jail for still driving a truck despite the mandate.
> The key comparison is whether both laws are beneficial, and they are
Something something "Dei Delitti e Delle Pene"
Something something "Dei Delitti e Delle Pene"
"Public advocacy is for everyone, not only those able and willing to weather abuse. And donors have good reason to fear abuse." — Jeremy D. Tedesco
I'd be very interest in the distribution of donations? E.g. are there big donors or is the money mostly from small donors.
The median is $50 and the 95th percentile is $200 so it's mostly small donations with a few (22) donations over 5K. Plus the one 215K whale.
What's the total number of donors / amount of donation? Apologies for not doing the research myself, I'm at work.
8.4M in donations plus another 0.57M going to GSG (not a bad racket eh?) over 92k rows. I'm using the word rows intentionally here because I can't make any claim about the number of actual individuals.
Thank you for all this great data! So the "big" donors (>=5k) are something like 4%. Truely does seem fairly grassroots-ish, assuming no shenanigans with the records people thing.
If you believe the donation display names in the file, you'd think this was all an inside job by Mayor Jim Watson, police chief Peter Sloly, Hunter Biden, Kamala Harris, etc. etc. ;)
The comments are.. special. Lots of Christian religious stuff which makes sense given the site's background. As someone who is very much not religious, this makes me just as uncomfortable.
The comments are.. special. Lots of Christian religious stuff which makes sense given the site's background. As someone who is very much not religious, this makes me just as uncomfortable.
[deleted]
I know a few people who made repeated donations, so you can't necessarily assume each donation is an individual.
From another comment it looks like the IP addresses are not accurate. Otherwise, it would have been interesting to see if many small donations were coming from the same IP.
Reading this thread demonstrate to me why we (as a society, no matter where you're living) can't live together as we've been doing anymore. The ideas are colliding in too many areas and all of them look like a rat trap.
Something hostile in human behavior we are unable to remove is deeply rotten and who knows how we can fix it. This are sad (but non desperate) times to live.
I don't think much has changed, what has changed is we now have the Internet and technology, enabling the ideas and information to be heard.
>> Reading this thread demonstrate to me why we (as a society, no matter where you're living) can't live together as we've been doing anymore. The ideas are colliding in too many areas and all of them look like a rat trap. Something hostile in human behavior we are unable to remove is deeply rotten and who knows how we can fix it. This are sad (but non desperate) times to live.
> I don't think much has changed, what has changed is we now have the Internet and technology, enabling the ideas and information to be heard.
It's not just that. The internet and technology also allow an unprecedented levels of disconnection, dehumanization, and "filter bubble"-ing.
IRL interaction put breaks on a lot things that online interaction has now removed.
> I don't think much has changed, what has changed is we now have the Internet and technology, enabling the ideas and information to be heard.
It's not just that. The internet and technology also allow an unprecedented levels of disconnection, dehumanization, and "filter bubble"-ing.
IRL interaction put breaks on a lot things that online interaction has now removed.
I’m somewhat hopeful. For me getting out of the media bubble was actually super easy once you just do it and now I feel like I have a more accurate view of the world and a lot less stress. If people stop overdosing on CNN and Fox and Facebook then after the withdrawals I think everyone will feel just better and clearer. Now how do we make everyone stop doing that? No idea.
Wikipedia current events is my “news” source now and I couldn’t be happier
Wikipedia current events is my “news” source now and I couldn’t be happier
It is all pushed by digital ad revenue. Conflict is extremely profitable. As long as socials and infotainment (it's not news) companies make more selling conflict and outrage, that is all we'll get. They will amplify anything for more dollars. When is the last time you saw a headline that wasn't click-bait? Everyone is so busy hating their neighbor they miss the oligarchy printing money.
Governmental centralization control has grown steadily since the start of the 20th century. Control and micromanagement of human behavior and thought, especially in big cities, has grown beyond what humans are capable of tolerating
That's a nice way of spelling doxxing.Remember "it's bad only when the other side does it".
Publishing the already publicly available data isn't doxxing yet.
This is necessary information the public needs to see to start estimating how much of that money is coming from foreign donors so we can question why and deal with it accordingly.
This is necessary information the public needs to see to start estimating how much of that money is coming from foreign donors so we can question why and deal with it accordingly.
Didn't seem necessary when it was the Hunter laptop, or the Ashley diary, or the DNC emails.
Those things were ignored in the MSM as "illegally obtained" and "disinformation" and banned from discussion on social sites "due to hacking".
But this civilian donor list is "necessary information" and the media is licking their chops wanting to broadcast it for their brown shirt goons. Disgusting.
Those things were ignored in the MSM as "illegally obtained" and "disinformation" and banned from discussion on social sites "due to hacking".
But this civilian donor list is "necessary information" and the media is licking their chops wanting to broadcast it for their brown shirt goons. Disgusting.
I'm eager to see passwords leaks as well as all the other personal info leaks for the last decade be exposed then. Remember the Desjardins leak a few years ago? Is that OK?
I fail to see why a leak is considered "public information" to you or why specifically it's ok for this case but not equifax, desjardins and all the others.
I fail to see why a leak is considered "public information" to you or why specifically it's ok for this case but not equifax, desjardins and all the others.
Understanding american meddling in canadian affairs is handy for canadian sovereignty.
Does that justify the doxxing? What about the informations of Canadians? Collateral damage?
Law enforcement has enough tools to investigate stuff like this. The public doesn't need access to everyone's information just in case it's "helpful."
Law enforcement has enough tools to investigate stuff like this. The public doesn't need access to everyone's information just in case it's "helpful."
I didn't donate but I should have. My name would be in great company on that list.
Comments I've read say the file has over 100k names, postal codes, and email addresses of people who have donated. Now, they've likely been radicalized by being doxed, and they can find each other both online, and by postal code.
By releasing this data, these hackers have provided probably the most valuable organizing, fundraising, and sales pipeline list for conservative causes and businesses ever created in the country, and it is that quality of forethought that I think makes this a Canadian state backed operation. The wisdom behind this was truly exemplary.
By releasing this data, these hackers have provided probably the most valuable organizing, fundraising, and sales pipeline list for conservative causes and businesses ever created in the country, and it is that quality of forethought that I think makes this a Canadian state backed operation. The wisdom behind this was truly exemplary.
[deleted]
For those of you still on the fence or just learning about this, here's a rundown of the fine people in charge of this travesty of a "protest":
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/who-is-who-a-guide-to-the-majo...
PAT KING: Pat King is a far-right protester who has said in videos posted to social media that there may be future plans to target politicians' homes and that "the only way that this is going to be solved is with bullets." He has called for the arrest of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Ottawa Police Chief Peter Sloly.
King has gained attention online for a video posted to Twitter in which he decries the "depopulation" of white people, as well as another video posted in 2019 in which he makes racist remarks about Jewish, Muslim, and Chinese people.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/who-is-who-a-guide-to-the-majo...
PAT KING: Pat King is a far-right protester who has said in videos posted to social media that there may be future plans to target politicians' homes and that "the only way that this is going to be solved is with bullets." He has called for the arrest of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Ottawa Police Chief Peter Sloly.
King has gained attention online for a video posted to Twitter in which he decries the "depopulation" of white people, as well as another video posted in 2019 in which he makes racist remarks about Jewish, Muslim, and Chinese people.
I genuinely wonder how many of the people protesting actually know who this person is or what he believes (if the parent comment even accurately represents him--I really have no idea). Reminds me of how people would criticize BLM protests on the basis that some people in the BLM org had ties to communism--a very weak criticism considering how many better criticisms existed and how few of the protesters had related views. The parent comment seems like a similarly weak indictment of the protesters.
King is literally a founding convoy organizer who calls the shots and has a massive following and influence on the convoy members. His videos get 100's of thousands of views and he influenced the convoy 'manifesto' that they created to try to overthrow the government. Your comment shows you have done zero research into the matter. He's a vocal white supremacist who believes Islam has taken over the government to kill white bloodlines. You can find many videos of him saying this to be broadcast to his following.
I get the sense you aren't familiar with BLM Canada. They aren't dissimilar.
I don't doubt he's crazy, I do doubt his crazier views represent those of protesters more broadly. But in whichever case, the administration could take the wind out of his sails by yielding--no need to organize under King if the goal is accomplished. If the government didn't take an authoritarian stance in the first place, King would be marginal.
You think pointing out that there’s far-right extremists managing this whole show is a “weak indictment” when one of the stated goals of said protest is to overturn a democratically elected government?
It's a strong indictment to the extent that this person actually "runs the show" and his views about race represent the majority of protesters' views. Which is to say "yes, it's a weak indictment".
Idk. At best you are defending the idea that the majority of protestors are pawns in someone else’s game, no? Just because someone doesn’t know they’re being used doesn’t mean they aren’t being used …
If that's the case then you're screwed either way because Trudeau's racism is thoroughly documented. :) But thankfully (much to the chagrin of the media and others) these protests have centered narrowly around the bodily autonomy issue rather than unsavory race views, and the likelihood of the protests transforming into racial protests is small. Further still, the establishment could completely take the wind out of the alleged protest leaders' sails by acquiescing (no need to organize under these guys if the need to organize goes away altogether).
If you think Trudeau wearing blackface (also bad, obvs) is comparable to the occupation of the capital of Canada, I wish you well — we really have nothing to discuss here.
I don't think they're comparable. Peaceful protests are a good thing and blackface (by an authoritarian no less) is a bad thing.
Yeah, seems super peaceful:
https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/mobile/ottawa-police-report-a-nigh...
Please, spare me, and spare the rest of us, your poorly informed takes.
https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/mobile/ottawa-police-report-a-nigh...
Please, spare me, and spare the rest of us, your poorly informed takes.
From your own link:
> Residents complained about another night of illegal fireworks, loud music and horn honking Saturday night and Sunday morning.
Loud music? Say it isn't so!
> Residents complained about another night of illegal fireworks, loud music and horn honking Saturday night and Sunday morning.
Loud music? Say it isn't so!
Also from my link:
"Overnight, demonstrators exhibited extremely disruptive and unlawful behaviour, which presented risks to public safety and unacceptable distress for Ottawa residents," said police.
Go ahead, keep digging. I can do this all day.
"Overnight, demonstrators exhibited extremely disruptive and unlawful behaviour, which presented risks to public safety and unacceptable distress for Ottawa residents," said police.
Go ahead, keep digging. I can do this all day.
Oof. That's how the police characterized "illegal fireworks, loud music and horn honking". In fairness to you, your quote from the police was at the tippy top of your article and mine was multiple paragraphs later.
i dont see canadian citizens as pawns. Support isn't going to go past the aligned interests
i have a 4 year old daughter in ontario who has never seen her friends faces or her teacher's face. she eats outside even when it's -20. as of today, no end in sight for these rules. why? it's shameful. im surprised the civil unrest in canada isnt worse.
My children in Ontario public schools eat inside -- always have. Strangely, when they eat, they even take off their masks and see the faces of their classmates. Even more strange, they see their classmates faces even with masks on, just a smaller portion of their faces.
Today is quite cold, so they're not having outdoor recess at all. They're staying inside. Eating inside. Maybe your school district has different policies?
Today is quite cold, so they're not having outdoor recess at all. They're staying inside. Eating inside. Maybe your school district has different policies?
May I highlight this is your _very_ first comment on this website. Why did you suddenly decide to make an account and post your first comment here? Do you work in technology?
Because some people don't feel safe in the software industry to make comments under a username tied to their public identity when it comes to Covid (or other polarizing stuff).
I've been on this website for about a decade, but this account I use now is only 10 months old.
I've been on this website for about a decade, but this account I use now is only 10 months old.
The only article I could find about "kids eating outside in the cold" is this one, which clarifies that "no, we won't be sending kids outside in the cold"[1]. If you can find one, let me know. I am a parent in Ontario and I've not heard a single anecdote about this from anyone.
Regarding "as of today, there is no end in sight for these rules": there has been a plan in place for months outlining the key dates when mandates will be relaxed. Just hours before OPs comment, the Ontario government announced they will be accelerating that schedule by 4 days, and the vaccine passport will be retired in just 2 weeks.[2]
Your comments re: new accounts are fair, but given the above I don't believe there is any truth to OPs comment, so I personally believe the account is intentionally created to spread FUD about the pandemic response in Canada and to create sympathy towards the convoy and its arguments.
[1] https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/furey-school-board-ni...
[2] https://globalnews.ca/news/8617879/ontario-covid-restriction...
Regarding "as of today, there is no end in sight for these rules": there has been a plan in place for months outlining the key dates when mandates will be relaxed. Just hours before OPs comment, the Ontario government announced they will be accelerating that schedule by 4 days, and the vaccine passport will be retired in just 2 weeks.[2]
Your comments re: new accounts are fair, but given the above I don't believe there is any truth to OPs comment, so I personally believe the account is intentionally created to spread FUD about the pandemic response in Canada and to create sympathy towards the convoy and its arguments.
[1] https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/furey-school-board-ni...
[2] https://globalnews.ca/news/8617879/ontario-covid-restriction...
My comment or question was more rhetorical. There is a nigh-zero chance that the comment-OP responds to any of my questions or posts any more comments. I leave it to the reader to extrapolate why that is the case.
> Why did you suddenly decide to make an account and post your first comment here? Do you work in technology?
I wasn't aware that only people who work in the tech industry were allowed to post on Hacker News.
If you think someone is trolling, then email dang.
I wasn't aware that only people who work in the tech industry were allowed to post on Hacker News.
If you think someone is trolling, then email dang.
Thank you, I will email dang. Is the address dang at ycombinator dot com ?
hn at ycombinator dot com
Nobody eat outside, especially at -20C you're just lying.
My 4 years old at the kindergarden doesn't wear a mask and neither does her classmates. She eats indoor every day.
My 7 years old in first grade wears a mask indoor but not outdoor. She eats inside with all of her classmates, unmasked.
My 4 years old at the kindergarden doesn't wear a mask and neither does her classmates. She eats indoor every day.
My 7 years old in first grade wears a mask indoor but not outdoor. She eats inside with all of her classmates, unmasked.
I used to on occasion back in elementary school. It's -30 where everyone was required to be inside
In 1830 in Sebastopol it similarly took 2 years of pointless quarantine for people to rebel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sevastopol_plague_uprising
The powers-to-be, civil and military, had great "business" going because of the quarantine by pillaging most of the funds the government provided for the city supplies (as the normal trade and supply was broken by the quarantine) while population was starving. The military doctors responsible for the quarantine received pay several folds higher than their usual pay. To maintain the supposed epidemic, ie. to generate sufficient number of deaths which were all chalked to plague even though in reality there weren't any plague cases, they for example forced people to sit in the sea in winter supposedly for public hygiene purposes, and naturally the malnourished population was getting ill and died in numbers. Anybody who showed any signs of any illness would be put into total quarantine into a hospital building with especially bad conditions which all but guaranteed the death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sevastopol_plague_uprising
The powers-to-be, civil and military, had great "business" going because of the quarantine by pillaging most of the funds the government provided for the city supplies (as the normal trade and supply was broken by the quarantine) while population was starving. The military doctors responsible for the quarantine received pay several folds higher than their usual pay. To maintain the supposed epidemic, ie. to generate sufficient number of deaths which were all chalked to plague even though in reality there weren't any plague cases, they for example forced people to sit in the sea in winter supposedly for public hygiene purposes, and naturally the malnourished population was getting ill and died in numbers. Anybody who showed any signs of any illness would be put into total quarantine into a hospital building with especially bad conditions which all but guaranteed the death.
My buddy lives near Hamilton. The stuff his kids are going through is insane.
Yeah, I have 5 nieces and nephews and friends with kids that live and around Hamilton. Tell me what they're going through that's insane.
Don't just drop comments like this without backing up your assertions, because it's false. Is it ideal for the kids right now? Fuck no. None of us want this. But to sell the narrative that there's a whole class of parents/teachers/administrators who are not trying their goddamned hardest to make this as easy on kids as possible, while stradling the line of what's responsible during a pandemic, is just belittling all of the effort being done for no discernable purpose at all.
Don't just drop comments like this without backing up your assertions, because it's false. Is it ideal for the kids right now? Fuck no. None of us want this. But to sell the narrative that there's a whole class of parents/teachers/administrators who are not trying their goddamned hardest to make this as easy on kids as possible, while stradling the line of what's responsible during a pandemic, is just belittling all of the effort being done for no discernable purpose at all.
My oldest kid been going to in-class school since September 2020 [1]. Maskless since October 2021. She missed, in a year and a half, a total of two or three weeks of school. This is a blessing that my kid has received.
I cant speak of your nieces.
EDIT:
[1] The year is correct, 2020.
I cant speak of your nieces.
EDIT:
[1] The year is correct, 2020.
NB for people outside Ontario: this is very likely a made-up untrue story. If parent commenter provides some details substantiating this unusual circumstance, I apologize in advance.
What school district? This is nothing like what I've seen in the Toronto schools which tend to be more cautious due to population density here.
I'm willing to believe this isn't a made up story, but am interested in details as this is very different from what I've heard or seen in Ontario.
Also why can't your child see their friend's faces outside of school? This is all quite confusing.
What school district? This is nothing like what I've seen in the Toronto schools which tend to be more cautious due to population density here.
I'm willing to believe this isn't a made up story, but am interested in details as this is very different from what I've heard or seen in Ontario.
Also why can't your child see their friend's faces outside of school? This is all quite confusing.
What? Covid is over. Everyone was unmasked yesterday at the Superbowl.
I assume the premier's kids are going through the exact same restrictions. Socialized healthcare means you are all in this together right?
I assume the premier's kids are going through the exact same restrictions. Socialized healthcare means you are all in this together right?
The premier's daughter is definitely unmasked, and an adult as calculated by age:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krista_Haynes https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-anti-vac...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krista_Haynes https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-anti-vac...
[deleted]
Unless there's some crazy school board out there, there's no way they have kids eating outside when it's -20. Most school boards won't even have outdoor recess on days like that.
I have 11 nieces and nephews in 5 different school boards in Ontario, and not one of them has these restrictions. They eat indoors, they can take their masks off at lunch, and during gym class. Their teachers regularly post videos for students to watch, with their masks off, so that they can have that level of interaction with their students.
We still do play dates with kids too. And birthday parties, where we can opt to go maskless if everyone is tested and comfortable with it.
I have 11 nieces and nephews in 5 different school boards in Ontario, and not one of them has these restrictions. They eat indoors, they can take their masks off at lunch, and during gym class. Their teachers regularly post videos for students to watch, with their masks off, so that they can have that level of interaction with their students.
We still do play dates with kids too. And birthday parties, where we can opt to go maskless if everyone is tested and comfortable with it.
Comments like this will get you banned here, no matter how right you are or feel you are, or how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. If you'd please review the site guidelines and stick to the rules when posting to HN, we'd appreciate it. Your comment would be completely fine—and considerably more persuasive—without those beginning and end bits.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Thank you. Schoolboard don't risk lawsuit from freezing children. Parent post is pure misinformation from brand new account with, quite honestly, the most eyerolling 'Canadian' name someone thought of.
I don't live in Ontario and don't have kids, so I don't have any personal experience. This section of Joël Lightbound speech stood out to me though. It is regarding the apparent quarantine measures in Quebec. I can't substantiate it, so maybe it is completely sensationalized.
>In Quebec in January 22, we've locked up kids aged 6 to 10 years old for up to ten days in windowless rooms. Kids who tested negative, who had no symptoms, who came in contact though, with someone who had the virus.
Starts at 3:48
https://youtu.be/xuASydTUatI?t=228
>In Quebec in January 22, we've locked up kids aged 6 to 10 years old for up to ten days in windowless rooms. Kids who tested negative, who had no symptoms, who came in contact though, with someone who had the virus.
Starts at 3:48
https://youtu.be/xuASydTUatI?t=228
It's a one of, a seriously screwed up one, but it's not the normal quarantine procedure. I have a lot of respect for Lightbound but his speech was a lot of measure dropping with no context and no alternative proposed. I do respect that we need to be united more though.
https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/in-jail-teenagers-spent-10-days-...
https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/in-jail-teenagers-spent-10-days-...
No, this isn't the normal procedure. Kids aged under 12 only have to quarantine for 5 days unless they test positive and have no symptoms, this is to happen at home, not at school, and only if it was a very close contact.
It may have been an emergency where parents for some reason refuse to stay home with their kids and no alternative had been set up yet; but it absolutely is not the protocol.
It may have been an emergency where parents for some reason refuse to stay home with their kids and no alternative had been set up yet; but it absolutely is not the protocol.
I don't live in Quebec or have any knowledge of what is happening in that province, but this either sounds like there are mitigating situations that we're not aware of for this reaction, or an overreach by some board/school.
In Ontario, we were asked to isolate at home if there was any close contact with COVID at school and use remote learning if it was available for your class.
In Ontario, we were asked to isolate at home if there was any close contact with COVID at school and use remote learning if it was available for your class.
[deleted]
I'd be curious to see foreign donors.
Interesting side thought, this whole debacle has made me see the real value of Bitcoin and other crypto currencies..
You mean where your support for a controversial political movement would be irrevocably public? If this list had leaked Bitcoin addresses, the next thing you'd see would be a report of everything else those addresses had been used for.
True, but its much harder to dox this number of people if all you have is a big list of Bitcoin addresses. It requires significantly more work, plus it's also harder to stop the disbursement of funds like what happened with the Canadian government freezing bank accounts and transactions with this campaign.
> True, but its much harder to dox this number of people if all you have is a big list of Bitcoin addresses.
This is also true of any other mechanism: if this was just a list of credit card transaction IDs, it'd be hard to do much with it as well. The problem is when you combine those with other metadata and it seems highly unlikely that anyone would spontaneously stop collecting that information.
This is also true of any other mechanism: if this was just a list of credit card transaction IDs, it'd be hard to do much with it as well. The problem is when you combine those with other metadata and it seems highly unlikely that anyone would spontaneously stop collecting that information.
Sort of true, but also credit card numbers are useless without the PII metadata. If you're storing credit card info like this then you pretty much have to store the sensitive stuff that can be used to dox people alongside it. The metadata isn't a requirement in the Bitcoin case. In fact, the way that bitcoin works, you wouldn't even end up with a centralized list like this of all the donors to get leaked in the first place. Some interested journalist or activist would have to go and manually compile it by looking at all the transactions themselves.
Do you think they would not otherwise store names if they weren't accepting credit card donations? If they were using Bitcoin, I'd bet that the only difference might be the lack of a billing address — it seems exceedingly unlikely that the crowdsourcing site or people running the campaign weren't planning to be able to contact their supporters and in many cases they need that for accounting or tax purposes, too.
The equivalent of a list of bitcoin addresses would be a list of credit card numbers, which this is not. This is closer to a list of names on an exchange like coinbase than a list of wallet addresses.
if I want to make an anonymous donation I can send BTC to any big player that consolidates outgoing transfers from their hot wallets and you won't have a chance in hell of knowing who sent it.
of course you can't move millions or illegal monoey like that (you can't use it like a tumbler) because it would be traceable if coinbase or whoever get subpoenaed
but you on this case you would be safe from persecution from supporting some political activism that gets ppl frothing in the mouth and want to make other ppl lose their jobs.
of course you can't move millions or illegal monoey like that (you can't use it like a tumbler) because it would be traceable if coinbase or whoever get subpoenaed
but you on this case you would be safe from persecution from supporting some political activism that gets ppl frothing in the mouth and want to make other ppl lose their jobs.
That's like saying you could give cash to someone else and then there won't be a link. We know that most people, even fairly committed users, do not have perfect opsec and cut corners for convenience. If you're proposing something for general use, you need to make your plans about what's safe for the median user rather than the 99th percentile.
Bitcoin or other crypto would just be the payment mechanism, alongside any other option like CC, paypal, bank transfer, etc. The donation platform could still collect any other data as part of the user profile.
Sure, they could choose not to collect or retain that data for crypto, but they could do the same with other payment mechanisms as well. Crypto wouldn't confer much more in the way of anonymity benefits above and beyond what a donation platform could provide right now if they wanted to.
Sure, they could choose not to collect or retain that data for crypto, but they could do the same with other payment mechanisms as well. Crypto wouldn't confer much more in the way of anonymity benefits above and beyond what a donation platform could provide right now if they wanted to.
Who needs a donation platform?
It's a service that provides a convenient form of aggregation. It's not impossible to do things without one, but doing ad hoc peer-to-peer donations from a large number of donors to a large number of recipients in a very short amount of time is pretty difficult without some type of infrastructure to facilitate it. It doesn't have to be a general purpose donation platform, but whatever it is will have the same privacy factors I referenced already: independently of whether it accepts crypto, it will have to decide if/what user data to retain.
I'm not at-all familiar with Canadian law, but receiving money from foreign donors for political activity is often illegal. These funding platforms would probably need you to disclose who you are even if you gave bitcoin.
The movement has to brand it as human rights issue (which they possibly have) and the political activity problem flies out of the window.
As a Canadian I humbly request Americans stay out of our politics, particularly when it comes to influencing them via monetary donations. Get your own house in order, don't encourage wannabe insurrectionists who had a manifesto to take over the government in blatantly undemocratic ways.
That is ironic coming from a Canadian. Just recently, a lot of money poured in from Canada to support the farmer protest in India. Here is one example: https://www.gofundme.com/f/donatetofarmers
PS: Not that I support the current Canadian protests.
Edit: Some other examples: 1. https://globalnews.ca/news/7680005/farmers-india-protest-bil... 2. https://thewire.in/rights/justin-trudeau-farmers-protest-ind... 3. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/farmers-prot...
PS: Not that I support the current Canadian protests.
Edit: Some other examples: 1. https://globalnews.ca/news/7680005/farmers-india-protest-bil... 2. https://thewire.in/rights/justin-trudeau-farmers-protest-ind... 3. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/farmers-prot...
As an Indian, this double standard was the most amusing thing for me in all these. When farmers in India protested, Canadian PM himself supported them (probably because he wanted the Sikh community votes?).
Indian government only used police officers with batons and were sometimes chased away by the protesters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1qFKUtfvMc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7so5TwIMyM
Then yesterday I saw videos of heavily armed RCMP officers deployed to remove some of the blockades!
Indian government only used police officers with batons and were sometimes chased away by the protesters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1qFKUtfvMc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7so5TwIMyM
Then yesterday I saw videos of heavily armed RCMP officers deployed to remove some of the blockades!
As a matter of principle I agree with you, however there is also a large Indian diaspora in Canada and it's quite possible most of that money was donated by Indians; it doesn't make a lot of sense for a Canadian living in the US to donate the money from a US account though.
I agree on the Indians in Canada donating part. But Canadian PM should have stayed away from making comments supporting the protest.
https://thewire.in/rights/justin-trudeau-farmers-protest-ind...
Especially since some of these protestors are rumored to have backing of Khalistani separatists who have blown up an Air India flight in the past killing 329 people.
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/khalistan-terror-group...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182
https://thewire.in/rights/justin-trudeau-farmers-protest-ind...
Especially since some of these protestors are rumored to have backing of Khalistani separatists who have blown up an Air India flight in the past killing 329 people.
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/khalistan-terror-group...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182
Similar applies for Canada and the US
While I have not donated anything to this cause, as an American I fundamentally reject your humble request.
The reality is that while in this moment you are against it, the second a protest is in your favor, I'm willing to bet you will turn a blind eye. Nearly all international charities are a form of foreign influence whether you agree with them or not, and your politicians are the ones happy to allow these charities to operate within your nation.
If I support a cause within Canada and truly wish it the best, then I will donate to it, just like everyone else in the world already is. I do not support hypocrisy.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-trump-clinton-u-s-el...
The reality is that while in this moment you are against it, the second a protest is in your favor, I'm willing to bet you will turn a blind eye. Nearly all international charities are a form of foreign influence whether you agree with them or not, and your politicians are the ones happy to allow these charities to operate within your nation.
If I support a cause within Canada and truly wish it the best, then I will donate to it, just like everyone else in the world already is. I do not support hypocrisy.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-trump-clinton-u-s-el...
Looking through your recent comments, there are multiple examples of you commenting on American politics and monetary policy...
Sure. Did they give money to US politicians?
The U.S.A., and previously Great Britain, has always had an enormous political and economic influence on Canada, for better or for worse. Today we are being noticed in the U.S.A. because we're struggling. Having worked and traveled internationally for many years it is my opinion that at most times we, as a sovereign nation, rarely even occur to American minds. Such is life, and I'm okay with it.
> particularly when it comes to influencing them via monetary donations
Were any of the GiveSendGo funds marked towards supporting political candidates?
Were any of the GiveSendGo funds marked towards supporting political candidates?
The majority of the donors were Canadian, so presumably you're in favor of the multiple millions of dollars flowing to the group from Canadians?
You can look at the data - there were around twice as many foreign donations than Canadian ones.
I did look at the data. $4,311,287 listed their country as Canada, and $4,110,520 were from other countries. [1]
You're just wrong. Number of individual donors is irrelevant, the majority of cash is from Canada.
[1] https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiODI3Y2UzMWQtMjE4MS00N...
You're just wrong. Number of individual donors is irrelevant, the majority of cash is from Canada.
[1] https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiODI3Y2UzMWQtMjE4MS00N...
Neither of us are wrong. I looked at the number of donations, but yes you are correct the majority of the cash is from Canada.
As an American I'd love if we all stayed out of each other's politics, but that's not how the world works, sorry.
That being said, a lot of Americans want freedom everywhere, especially for their neighbors in the north, what's so hard to understand about that?
Btw, your insurrection claim is played out and laughable, there is no violence, use words properly.
I look forward to seeing your comments about our 2022 midterm elections or our 2024 presidential election.
That being said, a lot of Americans want freedom everywhere, especially for their neighbors in the north, what's so hard to understand about that?
Btw, your insurrection claim is played out and laughable, there is no violence, use words properly.
I look forward to seeing your comments about our 2022 midterm elections or our 2024 presidential election.
Reuters is behind a paywall (if you are over their article limit due to being a news addict); could we get a non-paywalled link for this please?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30334289 was originally a reply to this but I detached it and pinned it to the top of the thread, which we sometimes do for archive links.
It's not actually being a paywall - it's behind a login wall - but they don't ask for money (or a credit card) and seem to actually mean unlimited access.
I don’t even feel like a bad person saying I hope they all die of Covid.
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the HN guidelines.
Please don't create accounts to do that with.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Please don't create accounts to do that with.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The forces that promote Divide-and-Conquer tactics are absolutely dependent on otherwise normal people, suddenly feeling justified with wishing death upon their neighbors.
The overwhelming majority of the truckers are fully vaccinated. In fact, as a group, they are more vaccinated than the general population of Canada.
negzero7(16)
talentedcoin(2)
olivermarks(4)
zrglkjlkrh(2)
ars(3)
I guess that's what counts as hacktivism these days. Doxxing working class people and their supporters.
It's nice to see the left and right's true colors here and how easily they pulled back the veil of opposition to reveal their true contempt for the lower classes and the real class war underpinning everything.
These last two years, I have seen so much scary authoritarianism from well-meaning people using their own moral righteousness as all the justification they need for oppression. I fear things will get worse before they get better.
It's nice to see the left and right's true colors here and how easily they pulled back the veil of opposition to reveal their true contempt for the lower classes and the real class war underpinning everything.
These last two years, I have seen so much scary authoritarianism from well-meaning people using their own moral righteousness as all the justification they need for oppression. I fear things will get worse before they get better.
Please don't take HN threads in the direction of generic ideological flamewar. It makes the discussion much more predictable and repetitive, and usually much nastier. We're trying to avoid all that here, and you can make your substantive points without it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
This is anything but generic ideological flamewar here, dang. I'm clearly slamming both "tribes" for their tribalism here.
More importantly, I'm someone deeply involved with the kinds of people that would have been able to perform this kind of hack and would do so for political reasons. I am directly calling their behavior awful.
I'm explicitly condemning the doxxing of ordinary people for their political activity and frankly am shocked that you would even suggest that to be against the rules or even controversial.
More importantly, I'm someone deeply involved with the kinds of people that would have been able to perform this kind of hack and would do so for political reasons. I am directly calling their behavior awful.
I'm explicitly condemning the doxxing of ordinary people for their political activity and frankly am shocked that you would even suggest that to be against the rules or even controversial.
Ok, fair enough. On closer reading, I think I pattern-matched your comment the wrong way!
(That said, it's still rhetorically in the flamewar style and that's the wrong style for HN. We want curious conversation here.)
(That said, it's still rhetorically in the flamewar style and that's the wrong style for HN. We want curious conversation here.)
> (That said, it's still rhetorically in the flamewar style and that's the wrong style for HN. We want curious conversation here.)
Fair. It can be an unfortunate component of my writing style. Too many decades in front of computers and all.
Fair. It can be an unfortunate component of my writing style. Too many decades in front of computers and all.
> Ok, fair enough. On closer reading, I think I pattern-matched your comment the wrong way!
Just want to say I respect and appreciate the humility here. It's easy for a moderator to just shut down disagreement.
Just want to say I respect and appreciate the humility here. It's easy for a moderator to just shut down disagreement.
To pick out this comment when people upthread are calling what amounts to a party in downtown Ottawa an insurrection and an attempt to overthrow a democratically elected government is pretty gross.
I'm not picking out or singling out anybody's comments or any dogs in any of these fights. I'm trying to neutrally apply the site guidelines in a bog-standard way. Alas, that involves making mistakes—quite a few of them, because the quantity of material posted here doesn't allow for a close reading of everything, or even a quick reading of everything (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...).
Nevertheless we need to try to prevent this place from being engulfed in flames, since that's (a) the default internet outcome and (b) everything HN is not supposed to be for.
One of many ways everyone can contribute to this effort is by resisting the reflex to assume that the moderators are secretly privileging the side you don't like. That's a common illusion (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) but it makes things worse.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Nevertheless we need to try to prevent this place from being engulfed in flames, since that's (a) the default internet outcome and (b) everything HN is not supposed to be for.
One of many ways everyone can contribute to this effort is by resisting the reflex to assume that the moderators are secretly privileging the side you don't like. That's a common illusion (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...) but it makes things worse.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
It's because I called this all out for what it is and the moderation here has the thinnest veneer of fairness. A few very high profile posters get away with absolute murder on this board (especially in the form of personal attacks) because they pass the SV ideological purity test, but the rest of us have to keep our opinions to ourselves.
I'd like to see links to the personal attacks you claim we're tacitly ok with. I can only think of one user who I carve out occasional exceptions for (for reasons other than you'd expect, and not someone very-high-profile). Other than that, I'm pretty confident in saying: no, we don't do that.
All this has zero to do with "SV ideological purity tests". If you follow the moderation here, you should know that we have no such "tests" and couldn't care less about "purity". Unfortunately, one consequence of that is that everyone with strong ideological passions ends up accusing us of being enforcers for the side they don't like. It's clearly a cognitive bias and probably hard-wired in all of us: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que....
All this has zero to do with "SV ideological purity tests". If you follow the moderation here, you should know that we have no such "tests" and couldn't care less about "purity". Unfortunately, one consequence of that is that everyone with strong ideological passions ends up accusing us of being enforcers for the side they don't like. It's clearly a cognitive bias and probably hard-wired in all of us: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que....
Honestly fair. I had to cool off for a while and I will walk it back. First of all I don't know you and second of all I know that you do try hard from previous conversations that we've had.
While I do think a certain one or two users have gotten a pass before, honestly it was a couple of years ago at this point and probably not worth considering today.
I wouldn't say that I have a particular side here, but I do see one unfortunate (to me) point of view dominating all conversations and that's not even something that's localized to HN. People bring their tendencies to bully online and drown out and attack their peers (i mean, just look at this thread) and in professional life this is also very real and the consequences are nasty. You can't moderate everything at the end of the day though, so no fault to you.
What does worry me is that there seems to be a growing sentiment on this board (as in life) that doxxing of ordinary people is okay even though this is a crowd that not only should know better but needs to be held to a higher standard because of our access to and skill with such data. It's simply not challenged enough, but that's also not your job either.
While I do think a certain one or two users have gotten a pass before, honestly it was a couple of years ago at this point and probably not worth considering today.
I wouldn't say that I have a particular side here, but I do see one unfortunate (to me) point of view dominating all conversations and that's not even something that's localized to HN. People bring their tendencies to bully online and drown out and attack their peers (i mean, just look at this thread) and in professional life this is also very real and the consequences are nasty. You can't moderate everything at the end of the day though, so no fault to you.
What does worry me is that there seems to be a growing sentiment on this board (as in life) that doxxing of ordinary people is okay even though this is a crowd that not only should know better but needs to be held to a higher standard because of our access to and skill with such data. It's simply not challenged enough, but that's also not your job either.
Thomas Ptacek and Don Hopkins are two examples of very high-profile users who routinely post guidelines-breaking comments without being downvoted, flagged, or chastised by mods.
Even if you were to concede that, you'd probably counter that you can't read all the comments. And, of course, that is so. But that is beside the point that I have made many times before: the community's bias allows such users (and those who espouse certain views) to break the guidelines without penalty, while heavily penalizing others and those with contrary views.
Every time I see you tell someone that moderator bias is an illusion, I can't help but think that you are talking past each other, because the elephant in the room (which I have rarely seen you even acknowledge) is the extreme bias in the community's downvoting and flagging behavior, which naturally results in the official moderation actions being biased toward what is flagged, which amounts to a de facto official moderation bias. (If a community only calls the police when certain groups of people break the law, the police's actions will naturally be biased toward enforcing against those groups of people, because they aren't omniscient.)
Even if you were to concede that, you'd probably counter that you can't read all the comments. And, of course, that is so. But that is beside the point that I have made many times before: the community's bias allows such users (and those who espouse certain views) to break the guidelines without penalty, while heavily penalizing others and those with contrary views.
Every time I see you tell someone that moderator bias is an illusion, I can't help but think that you are talking past each other, because the elephant in the room (which I have rarely seen you even acknowledge) is the extreme bias in the community's downvoting and flagging behavior, which naturally results in the official moderation actions being biased toward what is flagged, which amounts to a de facto official moderation bias. (If a community only calls the police when certain groups of people break the law, the police's actions will naturally be biased toward enforcing against those groups of people, because they aren't omniscient.)
Thomas Ptacek is exactly whom I had in mind.
This is way off base. dang is an excellent and fair moderator.
Usually. Nobody is perfect.
There are certain topics and certain people that do not get moderated fairly and HN itself has certain biases that are encouraged or have opposition to them discouraged. If you know what they are, you know what they are.
Bringing up HN's (often subtle but often not-so) bias against average poor people gets heavily moderated here.
I give dang credit versus other moderators elsewhere who are explicitly biased and don't give a fuck how you feel about it.
There are certain topics and certain people that do not get moderated fairly and HN itself has certain biases that are encouraged or have opposition to them discouraged. If you know what they are, you know what they are.
Bringing up HN's (often subtle but often not-so) bias against average poor people gets heavily moderated here.
I give dang credit versus other moderators elsewhere who are explicitly biased and don't give a fuck how you feel about it.
> If you know what they are, you know what they are.
I don't know what they are! Perhaps you could clue me in at [email protected]?
I don't know what they are! Perhaps you could clue me in at [email protected]?
Here's what should be an obvious one: any time I see communism criticized, the comment gets downvoted, and often flagged. Even comments written by people who lived in communist states, offering first-hand accounts, without breaking any HN guidelines, get downvoted and flagged.
In the same threads, "conservatives" and "conservatism" and Republicans and "liberty" are freely condemned, mocked, and accused of all sorts of evil behaviors and intent, without even being downvoted, much less flagged.
This happens regularly, any time these topics come up in a popular thread. So it's hard for me to understand how you could be unaware of this de facto community bias.
In the same threads, "conservatives" and "conservatism" and Republicans and "liberty" are freely condemned, mocked, and accused of all sorts of evil behaviors and intent, without even being downvoted, much less flagged.
This happens regularly, any time these topics come up in a popular thread. So it's hard for me to understand how you could be unaware of this de facto community bias.
> Here's what should be an obvious one: any time I see communism criticized
The active ingredient here is the phrase "I see". What you're seeing feels obvious to you because you feel strongly on the topic. People who feel differently have very different "obvious" perceptions. (Edit: like here, which was just posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30351063.) These perceptions are entirely predictable from the passions of the perceiver, and I do mean entirely—it is probably the single most consistent phenomenon I've observed on HN.
Because these perceptions are predictable from the passions of the perceiver, it follows that they don't tell us anything about the community. They only tell us something about you—namely, which position you personally favor or disfavor, and how strongly. That's why other users perceive the opposite bias to what you perceive. Their passions are producing their perception the same way that yours are—they just happen to have opposite passions. Consider these gems:
zero left wing chatter. instant ban by this fash site https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30302617
a community full of some pretty extreme opinions, generally right-wing and regressive https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29439442
most of people on HN are ancap or fascists https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28958681
There are reams of this stuff, coming from all ideological tribes. Same community, incompatible perceptions—why? Because they're not actually incompatible. They only appear so if you take them as objective claims about the community. As expressions of the preferences of the perceiver, they're not only compatible, they're isomorphic. Whatever mechanism is producing these nearly-identical comments, it can't be "political skew on Hacker News", because the claims are coming from all factions.
Usually at this point someone objects, "so you're just claiming that HN is perfectly neutral in every way? the community has no biases of any kind?" No, that doesn't follow. I'm only saying that comments like yours and the 3 I just linked to don't contain any signal about this, because the feeling of bias tells us nothing about the actual statistical and demographic situation. (Well, it tells us that HN produces enough data points for everybody to run across some that rub them the wrong way. But that's not enough information to conclude anything about HN as a whole.)
It's incredible how deeply these feelings go and how convincing they are, so the mechanism is probably hard-wired into all of us. My hypothesis, which I call the notice-dislike bias (a terrible name), goes like this: because painful experiences make a deeper impression than pleasurable ones, we're all more likely to notice the data points that bring up dislike/disagree reactions in us (i.e. give us pain) than we are to notice the kind that we like/agree with (i.e. give us pleasure). Not only that but we weight the painful ones much more heavily. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que....
This leads to false feelings of generality (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...), in which people are convinced that the community (and usually the moderators too) are overwhelmingly stacked against their particular views (for example, your view that communism is bad). It's easy to see that these generalities are false, because the opposite side has exactly the same feeling—they just perceive the bias the other way around, like the other 3 I linked to.
Usually at this point someone objects, "You haven't proven anything—just because somebody else has a wrong perception, it doesn't follow that mine is". Yes, a perception of this type may happen to correspond to the real situation, but only by accident—like a wrong solution to a math exercise that ends up at the right answer, but is still incorrect. What matters is how the answer is derived. The perceptions we're talking about are derived from the perceiver's internal pleasure/pain experience, and that mechanism is not capable of assessing reality accurately. Essentially, we are all projecting the inverse of our own preferences onto the outside world, and then feeling surrounded by hostility.
Normally I don't offer a verdict on particular claims about this, but I feel pretty confident in saying that there is no pro-communist bias on HN. The comments that you see getting downvoted are, in many cases, downvoted because they're breaking the HN guidelines. Any comment that makes grandiose, repetitive ideological claims is already breaking the site guidelines, and when people go after each other about communism (or any other $classic-ideological-flavor) they're nearly always doing that. I have to ask commenters to stop doing this all the time on HN—not because I'm a secret communist or secret-anything-else, but because these discussions are not interesting in HN's sense of the word. We want curious conversation here, and people bashing their $other-side with well-worn talking points (be it "communism killed x-hundred-million people!" or anything else of that nature), they're not having curious conversation.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The active ingredient here is the phrase "I see". What you're seeing feels obvious to you because you feel strongly on the topic. People who feel differently have very different "obvious" perceptions. (Edit: like here, which was just posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30351063.) These perceptions are entirely predictable from the passions of the perceiver, and I do mean entirely—it is probably the single most consistent phenomenon I've observed on HN.
Because these perceptions are predictable from the passions of the perceiver, it follows that they don't tell us anything about the community. They only tell us something about you—namely, which position you personally favor or disfavor, and how strongly. That's why other users perceive the opposite bias to what you perceive. Their passions are producing their perception the same way that yours are—they just happen to have opposite passions. Consider these gems:
zero left wing chatter. instant ban by this fash site https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30302617
a community full of some pretty extreme opinions, generally right-wing and regressive https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29439442
most of people on HN are ancap or fascists https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28958681
There are reams of this stuff, coming from all ideological tribes. Same community, incompatible perceptions—why? Because they're not actually incompatible. They only appear so if you take them as objective claims about the community. As expressions of the preferences of the perceiver, they're not only compatible, they're isomorphic. Whatever mechanism is producing these nearly-identical comments, it can't be "political skew on Hacker News", because the claims are coming from all factions.
Usually at this point someone objects, "so you're just claiming that HN is perfectly neutral in every way? the community has no biases of any kind?" No, that doesn't follow. I'm only saying that comments like yours and the 3 I just linked to don't contain any signal about this, because the feeling of bias tells us nothing about the actual statistical and demographic situation. (Well, it tells us that HN produces enough data points for everybody to run across some that rub them the wrong way. But that's not enough information to conclude anything about HN as a whole.)
It's incredible how deeply these feelings go and how convincing they are, so the mechanism is probably hard-wired into all of us. My hypothesis, which I call the notice-dislike bias (a terrible name), goes like this: because painful experiences make a deeper impression than pleasurable ones, we're all more likely to notice the data points that bring up dislike/disagree reactions in us (i.e. give us pain) than we are to notice the kind that we like/agree with (i.e. give us pleasure). Not only that but we weight the painful ones much more heavily. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que....
This leads to false feelings of generality (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...), in which people are convinced that the community (and usually the moderators too) are overwhelmingly stacked against their particular views (for example, your view that communism is bad). It's easy to see that these generalities are false, because the opposite side has exactly the same feeling—they just perceive the bias the other way around, like the other 3 I linked to.
Usually at this point someone objects, "You haven't proven anything—just because somebody else has a wrong perception, it doesn't follow that mine is". Yes, a perception of this type may happen to correspond to the real situation, but only by accident—like a wrong solution to a math exercise that ends up at the right answer, but is still incorrect. What matters is how the answer is derived. The perceptions we're talking about are derived from the perceiver's internal pleasure/pain experience, and that mechanism is not capable of assessing reality accurately. Essentially, we are all projecting the inverse of our own preferences onto the outside world, and then feeling surrounded by hostility.
Normally I don't offer a verdict on particular claims about this, but I feel pretty confident in saying that there is no pro-communist bias on HN. The comments that you see getting downvoted are, in many cases, downvoted because they're breaking the HN guidelines. Any comment that makes grandiose, repetitive ideological claims is already breaking the site guidelines, and when people go after each other about communism (or any other $classic-ideological-flavor) they're nearly always doing that. I have to ask commenters to stop doing this all the time on HN—not because I'm a secret communist or secret-anything-else, but because these discussions are not interesting in HN's sense of the word. We want curious conversation here, and people bashing their $other-side with well-worn talking points (be it "communism killed x-hundred-million people!" or anything else of that nature), they're not having curious conversation.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Hey Nathan, I see you don’t live in Canada! You simply don’t have a clue what’s going on here if you think it’s just a party.
Multiple organizers have openly made those exact statements. You are misinformed.
Multiple organizers have openly made those exact statements. You are misinformed.
Do you have any proof, or is it isolated incidents of conveniently fully masked agitators waving Nazi flags?
I am talking about written and video statements made by organizers, not individual protesters.
> conveniently fully masked agitators
I shouldn't even bother responding to this kind of disingenuous bait. Of course it's all a massive psyop false flag conspiracy to smear the good names of working class Canadians in it for the good fight, right.
> conveniently fully masked agitators
I shouldn't even bother responding to this kind of disingenuous bait. Of course it's all a massive psyop false flag conspiracy to smear the good names of working class Canadians in it for the good fight, right.
I don't mean to pile on, having just responded to you in another thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30337439), but your comments on this topic are standing out as breaking the HN guidelines, and we need you to stop. Not only does this sort of flamewar contribute to destroying this place, it's not in anyone's real interest—including your own. I understand why emotions are super high on this topic, and legitimately so—but commenters here need to follow the site guidelines no matter how high their emotions are. Indeed, that's pretty much the only condition under which most of these guidelines are even needed in the first place: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Per dang's nice request, let's open this up a bit and talk about why this is happening. It's now acceptable (and even lauded in the comments of this post) to doxx people with the wrong opinion. What changed to make otherwise reasonable people approve of this course of action? I want to know what societal switch flipped.
I've seen it posited that it's due to the pseudo-anonymity of the internet, but that doesn't seem to fully explain it. Something has fundamentally changed to allow this level of dehumanization towards the "others".
I've seen it posited that it's due to the pseudo-anonymity of the internet, but that doesn't seem to fully explain it. Something has fundamentally changed to allow this level of dehumanization towards the "others".
> Something has fundamentally changed to allow this level of dehumanization towards the "others".
Nothing has changed in the level of dehumanization. It's clearly a very human failing that has played out in history time and again. The only reason it feels more prevalent, is because we've turned it inward toward what used to be a more cohesive group. So we can ask why we're breaking apart, but there's no mystery about why we dehumanize the "others" -- we always have.
Nothing has changed in the level of dehumanization. It's clearly a very human failing that has played out in history time and again. The only reason it feels more prevalent, is because we've turned it inward toward what used to be a more cohesive group. So we can ask why we're breaking apart, but there's no mystery about why we dehumanize the "others" -- we always have.
Of course, you're right.
At the same time, we may ask why American society seems to be more ideologically polarized now than at various times in recent decades. If the root cause is natural human failing, what is the second-level cause? Could it be that American society has been under a form of ideological siege and sabotage for many years, that is now coming to fruition?
For example, it's documented that, as far back as the early 20th century, the USSR funded programs to demoralize American society through means as seemingly innocuous as making public art and architecture uglier. As well, Marcuse's "long march through the institutions" has now had 50 years to take effect, and polls have shown that American academia is much less ideologically diverse than in past decades, now being nearly entirely formed of those who vote for one party.
There are elements of history that seem like weather, coming and going in cycles, but there are also parties taking active roles to effect certain ends, and we would be wise to be aware of their influence.
At the same time, we may ask why American society seems to be more ideologically polarized now than at various times in recent decades. If the root cause is natural human failing, what is the second-level cause? Could it be that American society has been under a form of ideological siege and sabotage for many years, that is now coming to fruition?
For example, it's documented that, as far back as the early 20th century, the USSR funded programs to demoralize American society through means as seemingly innocuous as making public art and architecture uglier. As well, Marcuse's "long march through the institutions" has now had 50 years to take effect, and polls have shown that American academia is much less ideologically diverse than in past decades, now being nearly entirely formed of those who vote for one party.
There are elements of history that seem like weather, coming and going in cycles, but there are also parties taking active roles to effect certain ends, and we would be wise to be aware of their influence.
we slaughtered religion, so people need some fountain of self-righteousness to drink from. The nebulous "Consensus" we're supposed to hold holy now is thin and unsatisfying gruel so more fevered flavor is needed to mask the essential blandness.
we used to be able to say "you're wrong about $X, but we can still work together on $Y in agreement." That's unfashionable now. We demand inhuman purity from our idols, de-idolizing them or de-historizing their imperfections as necessary to the dictates of the moment. We expect ideological harmony from our peers, or at the very least meek acceptance of our views without any backtalk. You can think differently, as long as you're quiet about it. and don't let anyone see evidence of your deviance.
we used to be able to say "you're wrong about $X, but we can still work together on $Y in agreement." That's unfashionable now. We demand inhuman purity from our idols, de-idolizing them or de-historizing their imperfections as necessary to the dictates of the moment. We expect ideological harmony from our peers, or at the very least meek acceptance of our views without any backtalk. You can think differently, as long as you're quiet about it. and don't let anyone see evidence of your deviance.
Not everyone can work from home on their MacBook while wearing PJs. Let's be honest, the people who are part of this protest do not represent the socio-economic interests of those who make up HN. It really boils down to elitism.
HN is mad that the working class is advocating for themselves and not busy delivering our Amazon packages and making us lattes.
HN is mad that the working class is advocating for themselves and not busy delivering our Amazon packages and making us lattes.
Thank you.
This read [1] is pretty interesting in regards to the increase in support for authoritarianism that you are seeing. It could just be yet another evolutionary quirk that doesn't work in the modern age.
Perhaps all the development into algorithms that make people click on things, when people click on things they are outraged about is a contributing factor to this if there is a link between perceived moral division and support for authoritarianism.
[1] - https://www.psypost.org/2022/02/study-provides-first-evidenc...
Perhaps all the development into algorithms that make people click on things, when people click on things they are outraged about is a contributing factor to this if there is a link between perceived moral division and support for authoritarianism.
[1] - https://www.psypost.org/2022/02/study-provides-first-evidenc...
Yes, it's very idealistic to think 'hacktivists' would take the upper ground here in what is already a very dirty fight.
I mean you have 61% of donors not even being Canadians. They're funding a movement that shut down a major commerce corridor into the US, directly affecting the US economy.
To say this is about the 'working class' is naive. I mean you think Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, was tweeting support of it because he loves the working class?
I mean you have 61% of donors not even being Canadians. They're funding a movement that shut down a major commerce corridor into the US, directly affecting the US economy.
To say this is about the 'working class' is naive. I mean you think Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, was tweeting support of it because he loves the working class?
A large number of donors for BLM weren't from the US. Do you also support doxing them?
I don't support doxing anybody. I just don't believe the narrative that the truckers and their supporters represent the oppressed working class.
To be fair, the US has roughly 10x the population of Canada. So any support from the US is going to appear outsized unless interpreted on a per-capita basis.
Being objective here:
- 90 percent of Canada's truckers are vaccinated, so why are you using working class as a substitute for protestor, then using that to call this class warfare?
- Don't you think working class people will care most about this list? The people with the most time to scour lists and make angry tweets probably most likely aren't UHNW individuals...
- Don't you see the irony is claiming authoritarianism has landed under the guise of morality, then assigning morality based on party orientation? Somehow painting the right as working class victims, and the left as upper class aggressors?
- 90 percent of Canada's truckers are vaccinated, so why are you using working class as a substitute for protestor, then using that to call this class warfare?
- Don't you think working class people will care most about this list? The people with the most time to scour lists and make angry tweets probably most likely aren't UHNW individuals...
- Don't you see the irony is claiming authoritarianism has landed under the guise of morality, then assigning morality based on party orientation? Somehow painting the right as working class victims, and the left as upper class aggressors?
> then assigning morality based on party orientation? Somehow painting the right as working class victims, and the left as upper class aggressors?
Actually you read that into that based on your own biases. I was deliberate _not_ to do this specifically. The establishment media and government mouthpieces, both left and right, have demonized the shit out of this protest and painted them as nazis, terrorists or any other fear word they can get away with.
Truly independent journalists have been painting a very different picture by doing the things that traditional media won't do: long form interviews with protestors and ordinary Ottawans.
Actually you read that into that based on your own biases. I was deliberate _not_ to do this specifically. The establishment media and government mouthpieces, both left and right, have demonized the shit out of this protest and painted them as nazis, terrorists or any other fear word they can get away with.
Truly independent journalists have been painting a very different picture by doing the things that traditional media won't do: long form interviews with protestors and ordinary Ottawans.
I don't get this...
You're saying it's my bias that the protestors are right leaning, and therefore the attackers are left?
Isn't that just an open fact? You omitting it doesn't make it not true...
You're saying it's my bias that the protestors are right leaning, and therefore the attackers are left?
Isn't that just an open fact? You omitting it doesn't make it not true...
> Isn't that just an open fact?
No, it isn't. Not in their own words. If you've only been watching CBC/CNN, well, that's a big part of the problem then.
No, it isn't. Not in their own words. If you've only been watching CBC/CNN, well, that's a big part of the problem then.
This doesn't feel like a reply in good faith.
I mean it's easy enough to see the political aspect here isn't tied to the political leanings of news source:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/freedom-convoy-trucker-canadas...
I got the impression you were browbeating me for not intentionally ignoring very plain context as you did, and you seem to be confirming that.
I mean it's easy enough to see the political aspect here isn't tied to the political leanings of news source:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/freedom-convoy-trucker-canadas...
I got the impression you were browbeating me for not intentionally ignoring very plain context as you did, and you seem to be confirming that.
Not a reply in good faith?
I stated from the beginning that this is a class issue and not a left/right one. You in your very first reply said "being objective here" and then went on some screed about how this is obviously left wing vs right wing politics.
Then I stated that if you look at the only actual interviews being done with these people and hear them in their own words they say that this is not a left wing vs right wing thing here and you say that I'm commenting in bad faith.
Not anywhere did I tell you to refer to Fox News as a source for content. You picked that source entirely on your own to suit your argument. As myself and others have mentioned in the thread, the only long form interviews being done with these people are being done by independent journalists on youtube.
I stated from the beginning that this is a class issue and not a left/right one. You in your very first reply said "being objective here" and then went on some screed about how this is obviously left wing vs right wing politics.
Then I stated that if you look at the only actual interviews being done with these people and hear them in their own words they say that this is not a left wing vs right wing thing here and you say that I'm commenting in bad faith.
Not anywhere did I tell you to refer to Fox News as a source for content. You picked that source entirely on your own to suit your argument. As myself and others have mentioned in the thread, the only long form interviews being done with these people are being done by independent journalists on youtube.
> I stated from the beginning that this is a class issue and not a left/right one.
And you are blatantly wrong. You omitted mentioning left/right when talking about a conservative protest, that does not change the fact it's a conservative protest.
You're certainly free to keep floundering about this but it won't change the simple reality:
Freedom Convoy is a largely conservative protest, as it is largely speaking to conservative talking points.
-
That doesn't mean every person there is a conservative, it does not mean being against vaccine mandates makes you a conservative, it simply means the people most represented by the tenants of the convoy are conservatives.
You are commenting in bad faith because either you don't know enough about this subject to realize it's a right-oriented movement... or you're aware of this but intentionally trying to bury that fact to force a pretty unrelated diatribe.
> Not anywhere did I tell you to refer to Fox News as a source for content
You tried to blame my source of news for a take not at all tied to news articles, which was ridiculous.
To humor you I chose one that was opposite of the ones you mentioned, the source of news does not change the reality that this is a conservative movement.
And you are blatantly wrong. You omitted mentioning left/right when talking about a conservative protest, that does not change the fact it's a conservative protest.
You're certainly free to keep floundering about this but it won't change the simple reality:
Freedom Convoy is a largely conservative protest, as it is largely speaking to conservative talking points.
-
That doesn't mean every person there is a conservative, it does not mean being against vaccine mandates makes you a conservative, it simply means the people most represented by the tenants of the convoy are conservatives.
You are commenting in bad faith because either you don't know enough about this subject to realize it's a right-oriented movement... or you're aware of this but intentionally trying to bury that fact to force a pretty unrelated diatribe.
> Not anywhere did I tell you to refer to Fox News as a source for content
You tried to blame my source of news for a take not at all tied to news articles, which was ridiculous.
To humor you I chose one that was opposite of the ones you mentioned, the source of news does not change the reality that this is a conservative movement.
I'm pretty sure OP is explicitly NOT assigning/painting left and right, but rather saying with the "pulled back the veil of opposition" comment that left vs right is an illusion/artifice, and the struggle is actually upper vs lower class.
I'm confused, aren't the protestors and their entire cause very openly right leaning?
Or am I getting browbeaten for making the connection the specific working class are in fact right leaning...
OP didn't write their comment in a vacuum. Can we not pretend that we're unable to apply context, like a massive conservative movement sparked by conservative anti vaxx sentiment.
Or am I getting browbeaten for making the connection the specific working class are in fact right leaning...
OP didn't write their comment in a vacuum. Can we not pretend that we're unable to apply context, like a massive conservative movement sparked by conservative anti vaxx sentiment.
> by conservative anti vaxx sentiment.
This same group of truckers who repeatedly say that they are not anti vaxx but anti mandate and are more than 95% vaccinated anyway.
Okay, buddy.
This same group of truckers who repeatedly say that they are not anti vaxx but anti mandate and are more than 95% vaccinated anyway.
Okay, buddy.
Patronizing sign offs like "Okay, buddy" are surely a sign of a strong argument.
As are showing off facts that are completely baseless.
For example, sounds like you confused the numbers for vaccination from the CTA about all truckers? Since the certainly no rigorous numbers specific to the protestors...
The CTA is the largest organization of truckers and yet...
“CTA believes such actions — especially those that interfere with public safety — are not how disagreements with government policies should be expressed.”
-
Kudos though, you totally pulled a fast one on dang acting like this was "about both sides"
Unfortunately you've slowly started to leak out the vitriol very closely associated with one side of these protests...
As are showing off facts that are completely baseless.
For example, sounds like you confused the numbers for vaccination from the CTA about all truckers? Since the certainly no rigorous numbers specific to the protestors...
The CTA is the largest organization of truckers and yet...
“CTA believes such actions — especially those that interfere with public safety — are not how disagreements with government policies should be expressed.”
-
Kudos though, you totally pulled a fast one on dang acting like this was "about both sides"
Unfortunately you've slowly started to leak out the vitriol very closely associated with one side of these protests...
You can be vaccinated and be against the mandate.
> 90 percent of Canada's truckers are vaccinated
is this actually true, or is this just an extrapolation of "90% of Canadians are vaccinated"?
regardless, it's not as though only 10% of truckers are involved in this protest...
is this actually true, or is this just an extrapolation of "90% of Canadians are vaccinated"?
regardless, it's not as though only 10% of truckers are involved in this protest...
According to the Canadian Trucking Alliance, 90% of truckers are.
Also your wording is very confusing
"only 10% of truckers".
You realize it's not anywhere near 10% of truckers actively involved right? That it's a much lower number, with estimates putting them at most hundreds to a few thousand out of hundreds of thousands of truckers total
Also your wording is very confusing
"only 10% of truckers".
You realize it's not anywhere near 10% of truckers actively involved right? That it's a much lower number, with estimates putting them at most hundreds to a few thousand out of hundreds of thousands of truckers total
Or that any less than 100% of truckers are working class.
Isn’t this freedom? The right to donate and the right to know who did? Aren’t these donations considered speech (US centric)?
Or it only distasteful when your speech and opinion is public? I support very robust free speech perspectives and freedom of speech rights, but there are also consequences for our speech (and the protections, in the US at least, are from your government only).
Or it only distasteful when your speech and opinion is public? I support very robust free speech perspectives and freedom of speech rights, but there are also consequences for our speech (and the protections, in the US at least, are from your government only).
Last I heard, "hacking" and DDoS attacks were illegal and against the law?
I don’t endorse illegal activities, ever, full stop. I speak only of the results.
Don’t speak or support what you’d be embarrassed to see successfully attributed to you on the front page of a newspaper. Everyone’s opsec streak runs out eventually, and anonymity should have bounds once you’re influencing the public sphere (politics, in this case).
(all of my political donations are public in FEC filings, even those I’m not required to disclose)
Don’t speak or support what you’d be embarrassed to see successfully attributed to you on the front page of a newspaper. Everyone’s opsec streak runs out eventually, and anonymity should have bounds once you’re influencing the public sphere (politics, in this case).
(all of my political donations are public in FEC filings, even those I’m not required to disclose)
Do you also support exposing homosexuals who don't want to come out?
People have a right to privacy. Stealing private information is the opposite of freedom.
People have a right to privacy. Stealing private information is the opposite of freedom.
Only in the case where the subject in question is pushing public policy to hurt homosexuals while secretly being one themselves. Public figures are held to a higher standard of accountability, and a loss of some privacy is expected depending on how far your life dips into public policy and influence. The purpose in this case would be to expose the malicious hypocrisy.
You’re Average Joe or Jane? Of course not, not under any circumstances. Their bedroom is their business only. I can’t stress this enough.
> People have a right to privacy. Stealing private information is the opposite of freedom.
Higher level, to demand anonymity when pushing resourced ($$$) speech in a democracy is attempting to subvert the political system while avoiding recourse for bad faith intent and/or actions (my observations from a systems analyst perspective).
Nuance and absolutism are incompatible.
You’re Average Joe or Jane? Of course not, not under any circumstances. Their bedroom is their business only. I can’t stress this enough.
> People have a right to privacy. Stealing private information is the opposite of freedom.
Higher level, to demand anonymity when pushing resourced ($$$) speech in a democracy is attempting to subvert the political system while avoiding recourse for bad faith intent and/or actions (my observations from a systems analyst perspective).
Nuance and absolutism are incompatible.
It sounds like you're saying the "ends justify the means".
Perhaps its not embarrassment that makes people want privacy, but fear of retribution. Consider someone living during the McCarthy era in the US. Speaking up could be career ending, and in the long run, if things had progressed to a more authoritarian regime, life threatening.
As one of the earlier posters said, I think many people see a slide into authoritarianism on both sides of the political spectrum. And it strikes me, that not being able to have secrets or privacy supports authoritarianism more than furthering democracy.
Perhaps its not embarrassment that makes people want privacy, but fear of retribution. Consider someone living during the McCarthy era in the US. Speaking up could be career ending, and in the long run, if things had progressed to a more authoritarian regime, life threatening.
As one of the earlier posters said, I think many people see a slide into authoritarianism on both sides of the political spectrum. And it strikes me, that not being able to have secrets or privacy supports authoritarianism more than furthering democracy.
So are much of the protest activity (not in general, but many of the specific activities of this protest are)
One of the four pillars of ethical journalism is minimizing harm. Knowing if there are big and powerful donors may be important to surface, but outing your neighbors has no journalistic upside. It's all about tribe vs tribe at that point. If you publish this and target the mob at ordinary people, you deserve to be forced out of the profession, in my opinion.
Where are the "ethical journalists" trying to publish the donors of...
"GoFundMe allowed support for CHAZ/CHOP zone in Seattle even after murders"
Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles https://www.gofundme.com/f/h2tqv-black-lives-matter-los-ange...
ANTIFA Takes Donations (for NAACP) https://www.gofundme.com/f/antifa-takes-donations
"GoFundMe allowed support for CHAZ/CHOP zone in Seattle even after murders"
Black Lives Matter - Los Angeles https://www.gofundme.com/f/h2tqv-black-lives-matter-los-ange...
ANTIFA Takes Donations (for NAACP) https://www.gofundme.com/f/antifa-takes-donations
For all you know, this was $state_actor_invested_in_western_chaos, so don't be ridiculous. How you derive the "true colors" of "the left and right" from the fact that someone decided this is an exploit worth investing in, seems to be beyond my understanding?
edit: fascinating, this comment received positive votes and then went straight to -3 within seconds.
edit: fascinating, this comment received positive votes and then went straight to -3 within seconds.
You cannot trust the news.
Only verified facts.
There is a information war and the propaganda is being amplified on full blast.
Only verified facts.
There is a information war and the propaganda is being amplified on full blast.
Less than hour before the equivalent of Marshall Law is declared here in Canada and my civil rights are taken away. What should I do in my last hour of freedom?
No, it's not the equivalent to martial law. Every civil law still applies, parliament and the courts are still operating normally with their full powers. It's closer to sending the national guard.
They can put you in prison, and take your car and seize your life savings and property for protesting them, or for giving money for protestors that lost the means to support themselves. Not sure what you're talking about...they decide what is an illegal protest. They will even force tow truck companies to force them to tow protestors vehicles.
And Trudeau just admitted he used American companies to tow Canadian vehicles. Literally used aid from a foreign nation to break up protests in his own country. Presumably with the help of the Michigan governor.
And Trudeau just admitted he used American companies to tow Canadian vehicles. Literally used aid from a foreign nation to break up protests in his own country. Presumably with the help of the Michigan governor.
No, they can't do that for protesting or giving people money. They can freeze accounts temporarily, that's true, they can't take your money.
They can take your car if you block the road and refuse to remove it, yes. That's called getting impounded, and it happens everyday.
They can fine you or imprison you for a blockade, yes. That's always been the law.
And yes, they can force companies to provide services during an emergency, this is also Canadian law.
I don't see how hiring a foreign company to provide a service in exchange for money is "foreign aid". I'm pretty sure he didn't ask any governor for permission, because he doesn't need to, it's perfectly normal for the federal government to hire companies from across the border.
Is this harsh? Sure. Is it martial law? No, not at all. In fact, the military isn't even getting deployed, it's all the RCMP.
They can take your car if you block the road and refuse to remove it, yes. That's called getting impounded, and it happens everyday.
They can fine you or imprison you for a blockade, yes. That's always been the law.
And yes, they can force companies to provide services during an emergency, this is also Canadian law.
I don't see how hiring a foreign company to provide a service in exchange for money is "foreign aid". I'm pretty sure he didn't ask any governor for permission, because he doesn't need to, it's perfectly normal for the federal government to hire companies from across the border.
Is this harsh? Sure. Is it martial law? No, not at all. In fact, the military isn't even getting deployed, it's all the RCMP.
You keep giving them the benefit of the doubt, without any logical reason to. They have taken more and more rights away and used divisive strategies to do it at every step.
We are going onto the third year of emergency measures. The government's response to people protesting their emergency measures is to double down with even more emergency measures. The Truck drivers that are currently protesting did so because their ability to feed their family was taken away from them. These are middle aged men with families, with no easily transferable skills. Yesterday was the truck drivers, next day might be you. Don't wake up one day when the boot is crushing your balls. At least be honest with yourself, and make a line beyond which you will not retreat.
We are going onto the third year of emergency measures. The government's response to people protesting their emergency measures is to double down with even more emergency measures. The Truck drivers that are currently protesting did so because their ability to feed their family was taken away from them. These are middle aged men with families, with no easily transferable skills. Yesterday was the truck drivers, next day might be you. Don't wake up one day when the boot is crushing your balls. At least be honest with yourself, and make a line beyond which you will not retreat.
For now, I will give them the benefit of the doubt, because they didn't use the law to even a fraction of its extent - they really could have done so much worse.
The truck drivers still have their ability to make ends meet. They can either take in-Canada jobs which will pay a bit less but still provide a living above and beyond the average salary, or they can take a jab and work internationally. When I had to get vaccinated to cross borders, no one went and blockaded anything, because that's a completely reasonable and normal thing to expect. I don't understand why I should care that they have to do the same.
And as we're entering the third year of emergency measures, all provinces are already scaling them back. I agree that some measures were excessive and useless; I also think that earlier on many emergency measures were lifted too early.
I don't have any sympathy for them or their goals of ending all health measures and, for some, deposing the governments. I don't think that asking for vaccinations to engage in cross-border activities is even remotely unreasonable - and I've had to comply by such rules many times. I know because of working with people in the industry for years that there's plenty of work to go around inside this country for them if they really don't want to take the vaccine, albeit with a pay cut that still allows them to provide for their families.
All in all, it's perfectly fine. They aren't victims of any real opression. If they were, I'd support them, I might even put up with some of their methods. As it stands, I don't think they're justified in blocking critical infrastructure or blaring train horns in residential neighborhood.
They haven't taken any rights away they hadn't already. I'm sorry, but I already have to live with the risk of tear gas, agents provocateurs, rubber bullets, broken bones, and getting closed-in by police for hours if I ever want to protest tuition hikes or imperialism. I don't see how their treatment by Trudeau whose being infinitely gentler for much more disruptive behaviour infringes anymore rights that are already being infringed on by police for any other protest.
I have made my line long ago and I'm perfectly honest with myself.
The truck drivers still have their ability to make ends meet. They can either take in-Canada jobs which will pay a bit less but still provide a living above and beyond the average salary, or they can take a jab and work internationally. When I had to get vaccinated to cross borders, no one went and blockaded anything, because that's a completely reasonable and normal thing to expect. I don't understand why I should care that they have to do the same.
And as we're entering the third year of emergency measures, all provinces are already scaling them back. I agree that some measures were excessive and useless; I also think that earlier on many emergency measures were lifted too early.
I don't have any sympathy for them or their goals of ending all health measures and, for some, deposing the governments. I don't think that asking for vaccinations to engage in cross-border activities is even remotely unreasonable - and I've had to comply by such rules many times. I know because of working with people in the industry for years that there's plenty of work to go around inside this country for them if they really don't want to take the vaccine, albeit with a pay cut that still allows them to provide for their families.
All in all, it's perfectly fine. They aren't victims of any real opression. If they were, I'd support them, I might even put up with some of their methods. As it stands, I don't think they're justified in blocking critical infrastructure or blaring train horns in residential neighborhood.
They haven't taken any rights away they hadn't already. I'm sorry, but I already have to live with the risk of tear gas, agents provocateurs, rubber bullets, broken bones, and getting closed-in by police for hours if I ever want to protest tuition hikes or imperialism. I don't see how their treatment by Trudeau whose being infinitely gentler for much more disruptive behaviour infringes anymore rights that are already being infringed on by police for any other protest.
I have made my line long ago and I'm perfectly honest with myself.
There was an excellent article about who these truckers are here: https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-the-truckers-want?r=6p... They're not exactly the group of people one might expect.
I miss the days when progressives were on the side of the working man and woman, and long-haul truckers were considered folk heroes.
I miss the days when progressives were on the side of the working man and woman, and long-haul truckers were considered folk heroes.
The unions of long haul truckers came out against the protest. 99% of them are there, on the road, doing their job. 90% of them are vaccinated, just like the rest of us.
The truckers that have their own truck to bring there and block infrastructure are the privileged few who manage to be owners-operators. They represent the working man and woman about as well as the average IT contractor - and they're almost certainly even wealthier on average.
The truckers that have their own truck to bring there and block infrastructure are the privileged few who manage to be owners-operators. They represent the working man and woman about as well as the average IT contractor - and they're almost certainly even wealthier on average.
As one of the donors included in this hack, I am not entirely sure what they're out to accomplish.
Despite eye-rolling media mischaracterizations of these truckers as you-know-whats, it's a run of the mill workers strike. It has also been extremely peaceful and frankly comical at times. (We can contrast this with the "fiery yet mostly peaceful protests" of 2020 that negatively affected working class neighborhoods and how that was endorsed as an exercise in contrast. CHAZ, CHOP, etc.)
These workers and people who have to work in meatspace have had their lives impeded for two years now, 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.
I'm proud to endorse this honkery, and I do not mind if it inconveniences some bureaucrats, as my neighborhood in Austin had police helicopters circling overhead for a week, cars set on fire, many buildings along 6th entirely destroyed, all while employees at my company enjoyed and supported the carnage financially.
Despite eye-rolling media mischaracterizations of these truckers as you-know-whats, it's a run of the mill workers strike. It has also been extremely peaceful and frankly comical at times. (We can contrast this with the "fiery yet mostly peaceful protests" of 2020 that negatively affected working class neighborhoods and how that was endorsed as an exercise in contrast. CHAZ, CHOP, etc.)
These workers and people who have to work in meatspace have had their lives impeded for two years now, 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.
I'm proud to endorse this honkery, and I do not mind if it inconveniences some bureaucrats, as my neighborhood in Austin had police helicopters circling overhead for a week, cars set on fire, many buildings along 6th entirely destroyed, all while employees at my company enjoyed and supported the carnage financially.
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.
> 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.
Without that regulatory backing, it would be dead under a year.
The CBC is not 'the majority of media'.
Some subset of Canadian media is required to publish some % of Canadian-produced content, but that does not make it funded by the government.
I don't know where this misinformation comes from, but I have some suspicions.
Some subset of Canadian media is required to publish some % of Canadian-produced content, but that does not make it funded by the government.
I don't know where this misinformation comes from, but I have some suspicions.
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.
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"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurrection
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"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurrection
1. merriam-webster isn't a good source because they have a history of redefining words for activism purposes, eg. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52993306
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?
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?
Truncated for posting:
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.
https://www.websters1913.com/words/Insurrection
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.
https://www.websters1913.com/words/Insurrection
The "usually" violent was added to that dictionary in 2013.
>an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government
Which protest does not meet that criteria?
Which protest does not meet that criteria?
Most? You can protest against a government while still acknowledging its legitimacy.
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.
I don't think the truckers are trying to say that the government is illegitimate though? They are saying the mandate laws are illegitimate.
> 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.
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.
Why is it a far left position to call out what protest leaders stated in their memorandum of understanding?
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.
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.
I agree that is unlikely for them to succeed. But just because a demand is futile doesn't mean it wasn't made.
Here's how the MoU actually reads:
"Give us our shit back, Randy."
"No."
"Fuck right off, Randy."
"Give us our shit back, Randy."
"No."
"Fuck right off, Randy."
"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.
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.
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.
> I am simply in awe that so many of the same people that were viciously against BLM protests are supporters of this protest
Where do you think that hypocrisy comes from? I'm across the pond so very far from the action, but I'm very curious how people reason about this.
Where do you think that hypocrisy comes from? I'm across the pond so very far from the action, but I'm very curious how people reason about this.
> Where do you think that hypocrisy comes from?
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.
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'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.
Without values it's just loads of angry spittle.
This happens all over the political spectrum. It happens in technology discussions. It happens in, as another post said, sports commentary.
Without values it's just loads of angry spittle.
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.
I haven't followed very closely so perhaps I missed it, but is there a source on that?
Only thing I can find is the reporting on Jagmeet Singh comments who is opposed to the truckers.
Only thing I can find is the reporting on Jagmeet Singh comments who is opposed to the truckers.
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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Convoy_2022#Protest_go...
> 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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Convoy_2022#Protest_go...
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.
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.
"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.
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):
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]
It is currently very unpopular.[4]
[1]: https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/who-is-who-a-guide-to-the-majo...
[2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20220113155334/https://canada-un...
[3]: https://web.archive.org/web/20220213145435/https://canada-un...
[4]: https://angusreid.org/trudeau-convoy-trucker-protest-vaccine...
Edit: tried to clean up formatting & missing end of sentence.
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 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 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 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.
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]
It is currently very unpopular.[4]
[1]: https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/who-is-who-a-guide-to-the-majo...
[2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20220113155334/https://canada-un...
[3]: https://web.archive.org/web/20220213145435/https://canada-un...
[4]: https://angusreid.org/trudeau-convoy-trucker-protest-vaccine...
Edit: tried to clean up formatting & missing end of sentence.
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"
"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.
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.
Play that out. How will it happen?
Not OP, not taking sides, but the "how" of it playing out is irrelevant if the stated intent is to overthrow a government.
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.
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'?
https://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2022/02/12/Detroit-...
>"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.
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'?
https://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2022/02/12/Detroit-...
>"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]
1. https://www.iheartradio.ca/newstalk-1010/audio/podcasts/the-... 2. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/protest-organizer-no-...
1. https://www.iheartradio.ca/newstalk-1010/audio/podcasts/the-... 2. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/protest-organizer-no-...
>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.
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.
>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'?
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.
"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.
https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/035/101/CNN...
I think "loud but mostly peaceful protests" is an apt description.
https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/035/101/CNN...
> to overthrow the elected government of Canada
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?
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?
As commented elsewhere
> 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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Convoy_2022#Protest_go...
> 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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Convoy_2022#Protest_go...
So they tried to "overthrow the government" by filing a petition to call for early elections? That's quite a stretch...
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.
They were only petitioning for early elections - in case Covid restrictions were not immediately removed. Not unconditionally.
Petitioning for early elections (even if impossible legally) is a far, far cry from "overthrowing the government"*.
Would you be willing to edit your original post to provide some context here?
Petitioning for early elections (even if impossible legally) is a far, far cry from "overthrowing the government"*.
Would you be willing to edit your original post to provide some context here?
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.
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.
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 ...
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-kill...
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 ...
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-kill...
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 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.
larryflint(1)
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.
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.
We want curious conversation here.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
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.
We want curious conversation here.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
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.
BLM protestors were routinely arrested, beaten and teargassed on live TV for everyone to watch.
Donating directly to a mob causing havoc thousands of miles away from you because you're annoyed that your coworkers did the same is why this country and frankly the western world is so entirely broken. This is a wonderful example of the politics of spite in action. Making the world a better place has gone out the window, it's simply about making the world a worse place for people you don't like
Harassing people wearing masks and minding their own business and stealing from foodbanks because restaurants refuse to serve protestors isn't exactly peaceful.
Where does this end? Is it ok for me to pay homeless people to stand outside your house with a rifle and scream at your house all night?
Donating directly to a mob causing havoc thousands of miles away from you because you're annoyed that your coworkers did the same is why this country and frankly the western world is so entirely broken. This is a wonderful example of the politics of spite in action. Making the world a better place has gone out the window, it's simply about making the world a worse place for people you don't like
Harassing people wearing masks and minding their own business and stealing from foodbanks because restaurants refuse to serve protestors isn't exactly peaceful.
Where does this end? Is it ok for me to pay homeless people to stand outside your house with a rifle and scream at your house all night?
No they weren’t!
People protesting BLM didnt get scratched as America got together to condemn police brutality.
Antifa, who highjacked the protests and torched cities, got arrested. But most were released by sympathetic DAs.
In fairness the BLM organizers are getting arrested. For fraud.
People protesting BLM didnt get scratched as America got together to condemn police brutality.
Antifa, who highjacked the protests and torched cities, got arrested. But most were released by sympathetic DAs.
In fairness the BLM organizers are getting arrested. For fraud.
I don't want to get political here, that's not my intention but this even was 100% peaceful protestors who just happened to be somewhere the President wanted to go were gassed for no reason.
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/01/867532070/trumps-unannounced-...
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/01/867532070/trumps-unannounced-...
No worries, your cool. But it didnt happen (i mean they did get gassed, but not because of trump)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/06/09/park-police...
Note the source (WaPo is anti trump) and year (after the 2020 dust settled)
This based on an investigation done by the Biden admin.
One of the casualties of our 24 hr media cycle is that in the orgy of current news we don't pay attention to the follow up.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/06/09/park-police...
Note the source (WaPo is anti trump) and year (after the 2020 dust settled)
This based on an investigation done by the Biden admin.
One of the casualties of our 24 hr media cycle is that in the orgy of current news we don't pay attention to the follow up.
You live in Austin and donated to support protests in Canada?
I’m curious about that - why are you actively getting involved in another country?
I’m curious about that - why are you actively getting involved in another country?
Because I'm sympathetic to their plight.
I'm a class traitor frankly. My whole family works in jobs like this that have been impacted. One of my old co-founders was a 24 big-rig truck mechanic and his dad is being put out of business by the California CARB restrictions.
But aside from the specifics, I find it odd that people are decrying cross-national donations of money to causes. Were similar complaints made about CA->US donations in 2020? How about national disasters? I don't need a reason to give charitably to causes I care about in the world, and a supposedly cosmopolitan populace wondering about transnational giving seems contradictory to me.
I'm a class traitor frankly. My whole family works in jobs like this that have been impacted. One of my old co-founders was a 24 big-rig truck mechanic and his dad is being put out of business by the California CARB restrictions.
But aside from the specifics, I find it odd that people are decrying cross-national donations of money to causes. Were similar complaints made about CA->US donations in 2020? How about national disasters? I don't need a reason to give charitably to causes I care about in the world, and a supposedly cosmopolitan populace wondering about transnational giving seems contradictory to me.
These protests are a disruption specific to the internal affairs of Canada. The U.S. has long had a dominant power relationship with the rest of the continent. The way that Americans have imposed their views on both sides of this internal conflict is both patronizing and deleterious to the self-determination of the Canadian people. It would be as suspect if one was to donate to the Shining Path, the Contras, the Medellín Cartel, or any other faction.
Agreed. The xinjiang intern- uhh... vocational education and training centers are an issue that that's specific to the internal affairs of China. The U.S. has long had a dominant power relationship with the rest of the world. The way that Americans have imposed their views on both sides of this internal conflict is both patronizing and deleterious to the self-determination of the Chinese people. It would be as suspect if one was to donate to the Shining Path, the Contras, the Medellín Cartel, or any other faction.
China is not located in the Americas, while Canada is. American geography education is indeed in a dire state.
1. I'm not sure how you got the impression that I implied china was located in the americans. My comment was specifically worded to not imply that.
2. Does america's influence on the world not exist? Why does your original claim of "Americans have imposed their views on both sides of this internal conflict is both patronizing and deleterious to the self-determination of the Canadian people" only apply if it's on the same continent? Is it better to impose your views on people half way across the world?
2. Does america's influence on the world not exist? Why does your original claim of "Americans have imposed their views on both sides of this internal conflict is both patronizing and deleterious to the self-determination of the Canadian people" only apply if it's on the same continent? Is it better to impose your views on people half way across the world?
America has long had a unique influence over the rest of the Americas while it did not on the rest of the world until very relatively in the postwar period. It also has not had a hegemonic influence on nations such as China, unlike it has had over Canada and most of the American continent. Historically, the United States had a relatively weak presence in China, while the European powers and Japan have had a far stronger hand there. Therefore the analogy to China is false, unless you were to claim that it was part of the Americas, which given the flagrant inaccuracy of your statement seemed to imply that it was made in earnest.
>America has long had a unique influence over the rest of the Americas while it did not on the rest of the world until very relatively in the postwar period.
So influencing canada is bad because they were doing it since 1776, but influencing china is fine because they only did it starting in 1945?
>Historically, the United States had a relatively weak presence in China, while the European powers and Japan have had a far stronger hand there.
Do you also think "european powers" should stay out of genocides in africa, because of their outsized influence in the past?
>Therefore the analogy to China is false, unless you were to claim that it was part of the Americas, which given the flagrant inaccuracy of your statement seemed to imply that it was made in earnest.
You failed to state the justification, so I was forced to guess.
So influencing canada is bad because they were doing it since 1776, but influencing china is fine because they only did it starting in 1945?
>Historically, the United States had a relatively weak presence in China, while the European powers and Japan have had a far stronger hand there.
Do you also think "european powers" should stay out of genocides in africa, because of their outsized influence in the past?
>Therefore the analogy to China is false, unless you were to claim that it was part of the Americas, which given the flagrant inaccuracy of your statement seemed to imply that it was made in earnest.
You failed to state the justification, so I was forced to guess.
> So influencing canada is bad because they were doing it since 1776, but influencing china is fine because they only did it starting in 1945?
The U.S. didn't even influence China until the normalization of relations under Nixon, in 1972. Furthermore, the relation was always less unequal between the two, than it was and is between the U.S. and other countries in the Americas.
> Do you also think "european powers" should stay out of genocides in africa, because of their outsized influence in the past?
European powers have historically been very bad at handling African genocides. Even as recently as the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, France initially supported the government of the Génocidaires, and did not aid the victimized Tutsis. Given Europe's awful track record in this area, it is impossible to say how constructive intervention could be.
> You failed to state the justification, so I was forced to guess.
I apologize for underrating your grasp of geography.
The U.S. didn't even influence China until the normalization of relations under Nixon, in 1972. Furthermore, the relation was always less unequal between the two, than it was and is between the U.S. and other countries in the Americas.
> Do you also think "european powers" should stay out of genocides in africa, because of their outsized influence in the past?
European powers have historically been very bad at handling African genocides. Even as recently as the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, France initially supported the government of the Génocidaires, and did not aid the victimized Tutsis. Given Europe's awful track record in this area, it is impossible to say how constructive intervention could be.
> You failed to state the justification, so I was forced to guess.
I apologize for underrating your grasp of geography.
>specific to the internal affairs of Canada.
It's a Canada policy, but is specific to crossing the border from the US.
"Specific to internal affairs" is a stretch at best.
>Shining Path, the Contras, the Medellín Cartel, or any other faction.
You forgot BLM.
It's a Canada policy, but is specific to crossing the border from the US.
"Specific to internal affairs" is a stretch at best.
>Shining Path, the Contras, the Medellín Cartel, or any other faction.
You forgot BLM.
BLM is based in the United States, so that reference would not make sense unless you are talking about funding crossing state lines.
> It's a Canada policy, but is specific to crossing the border from the US.
Up until the blockade of the border, it was an internal matter entirely, but you are correct here. If the border situation escalates, then the OAS needs to get involved to mediate a ceasefire and ensure that free and fair elections can take place.
> It's a Canada policy, but is specific to crossing the border from the US.
Up until the blockade of the border, it was an internal matter entirely, but you are correct here. If the border situation escalates, then the OAS needs to get involved to mediate a ceasefire and ensure that free and fair elections can take place.
Canada and international donations to blm is.
Are you alleging that the Logan Act has been violated? That is a serious accusation.
It's a matter of sovereignty who you let in and under what conditions. There are some treaty specifics, but as far as Americans are involved, it's those treaties, and you're free to renegotiate them
if we're gonna start playing by the "if it has nothing to do with your country then keep out of it" rule then it's a great idea to establish this now before the 2024 US elections, ideally before the upcoming midterms as well.
I'm fine with this development as long as we all agree to play by the same rules and remain consistent.
I'm fine with this development as long as we all agree to play by the same rules and remain consistent.
If these protests become an issue for American national security and strategic geopolitical interest then yes NATO should make preparations as in other flashpoints but for now the situation has not yet escalated to such a degree. The U.S. did not intervene during the coup attempt against Erdogan in Turkey in 2016 either.
my post had nothing to do with official government actions or interventions but with the rights of citizens of different countries to sympathize with and donate money to causes outside of their own country. we allowed our cities to burn and lives to be lost to violent summer protests that were funded in part by citizens of other countries. if the general sentiment is that we should not allow this any more, that would be fine with me, but only if such actions are applied equally and unilaterally.
as far as I am aware, no lives have been lost nor businesses destroyed during the current events in Canada.
as far as I am aware, no lives have been lost nor businesses destroyed during the current events in Canada.
Your comment evoked the current Ukraine crisis. What do the midterm or general elections in the United States have to do with American citizens sympathizing with and donating money to causes in other countries? That is not an issue that is on the ballot. At least foreign policy is something that is germane to those elections. This is a complete non sequitur.
> Your comment evoked the current Ukraine crisis.
this was wholly unintentional, I'm not sure how you read that out of either of my prior comments! we were talking about citizen crowdfunding
this was wholly unintentional, I'm not sure how you read that out of either of my prior comments! we were talking about citizen crowdfunding
> At least foreign policy is something that is germane to those elections.
> What do the midterm or general elections in the United States have to do with American citizens sympathizing with and donating money to causes in other countries? That is not an issue that is on the ballot.
> This is a complete non sequitur.
> What do the midterm or general elections in the United States have to do with American citizens sympathizing with and donating money to causes in other countries? That is not an issue that is on the ballot.
> This is a complete non sequitur.
why are you quoting yourself to explain how "[my] comment evoked the current Ukraine crisis"? I think we're talking past each other, you really want to connect things to Ukraine and I don't, so I apologize for taking your time.
No apologies necessary, thank you. My point is that you bringing up upcoming elections in the U.S. in the context of discussing the appropriateness of American citizens funding campaigns abroad is a total non sequitur, as it is not a campaign issue. Something such as the Ukraine crisis, in contrast, might actually be a campaign issue, in keeping with your '"if it has nothing to do with your country then keep out of it" rule' reference.
I don't think national disasters are in quite the same category of charitable giving.
"Ninety percent of Canadians live within 100 miles of the US" I think in many ways, geographically and culturally, they're closer to Americans than they are to each other. Not that Canadians see it that way.
I might suggest that Americans within 100 miles of the Northern border more closely resemble Canadians than they do their other compatriots.
Not OP (and this shouldn't be considered an endorsement of their donation/views), but it's similar to how someone in Nantucket might've donated to groups protesting police in Minneapolis in summer 2020. It's a cause you believe in and you want those fighting for it to keep going, and you may also want that fight to influence others local to you to get more vocal.
Nantucket and Minneapolis both belong to the same political union. Canada is not yet a constituent member of the United States.
Absolutely correct, but that doesn't really change the validity of either of the points that I made.
So you think it's acceptable for citizens in one country to fund political movements in other countries? Would you feel the same way about oligarchs in Russia or China funding political organizations in the US?
>So you think it's acceptable for citizens in one country to fund political movements in other countries? Would you feel the same way about oligarchs in Russia or China funding political organizations in the US?
Please don't be so quick to put words into other's mouths and then go after them for something they never said.
Someone asked why another user might want to donate to political causes in another country. I responded, clarified I wasn't OP, then - and this is key - further clarified that my post "shouldn't be considered an endorsement of their donation/views", and then simply posited why someone might want to. See how I said that you shouldn't see my comment as an endorsement of their donation?
Discussing why someone might want to do something is different from arguing whether or not it is right to do so. At no point have I engaged in the latter. They can be lumped into the same conversation, but I haven't done that in this comment chain.
Please don't be so quick to put words into other's mouths and then go after them for something they never said.
Someone asked why another user might want to donate to political causes in another country. I responded, clarified I wasn't OP, then - and this is key - further clarified that my post "shouldn't be considered an endorsement of their donation/views", and then simply posited why someone might want to. See how I said that you shouldn't see my comment as an endorsement of their donation?
Discussing why someone might want to do something is different from arguing whether or not it is right to do so. At no point have I engaged in the latter. They can be lumped into the same conversation, but I haven't done that in this comment chain.
I didn't say you endorsed OPs views. You said that this was the same as someone in one part of the US funding political action in another part of the US. Apocryphon noted that Canada is a sovereign country and not part of the US. You replied that this didn't change the point of your original post. This implied that you don't see a distinction between funding political activity within your own country and funding political activity in another country and is independent of the OPs political stance.
>I didn't say you endorsed OPs views.
OP is a citizen in one country who donated to a political movement in another country. In discussing the "why" of that, you asked me:
>So you think it's acceptable for citizens in one country to fund political movements in other countries?
That's exactly what OP did. The manner in which you phrase your question, along with your follow up question that assumed my answer to the former would be, "Yes", strongly implies I have endorsed OP's views.
>You said that this was the same as someone in one part of the US funding political action in another part of the US. Apocryphon noted that Canada is a sovereign country and not part of the US. You replied that this didn't change the point of your original post. This implied that you don't see a distinction between funding political activity within your own country and funding political activity in another country and is independent of the OPs political stance.
One part of the US funding political action in another US state; someone in Brazil funding political action in India; someone on the moon funding political action on Venus. The point is that $PERSON1 from $REGION1 may feel that $POLITICALMOVEMENT in $REGION2 holds a lot of views that $PERSON1 strongly believes in, and as such they want to donate to them. This is backed up by OP's response confirming shared views. That's what was asked - why donate to another country? - and all I did was given a reason why, named locales be damned.
Now, I can grant that state-to-state and country-to-country are different things. That said, for the sake of a quick example pulled out of my ass, it worked; you're just unable to see the forest for the trees.
OP is a citizen in one country who donated to a political movement in another country. In discussing the "why" of that, you asked me:
>So you think it's acceptable for citizens in one country to fund political movements in other countries?
That's exactly what OP did. The manner in which you phrase your question, along with your follow up question that assumed my answer to the former would be, "Yes", strongly implies I have endorsed OP's views.
>You said that this was the same as someone in one part of the US funding political action in another part of the US. Apocryphon noted that Canada is a sovereign country and not part of the US. You replied that this didn't change the point of your original post. This implied that you don't see a distinction between funding political activity within your own country and funding political activity in another country and is independent of the OPs political stance.
One part of the US funding political action in another US state; someone in Brazil funding political action in India; someone on the moon funding political action on Venus. The point is that $PERSON1 from $REGION1 may feel that $POLITICALMOVEMENT in $REGION2 holds a lot of views that $PERSON1 strongly believes in, and as such they want to donate to them. This is backed up by OP's response confirming shared views. That's what was asked - why donate to another country? - and all I did was given a reason why, named locales be damned.
Now, I can grant that state-to-state and country-to-country are different things. That said, for the sake of a quick example pulled out of my ass, it worked; you're just unable to see the forest for the trees.
It's quite amazing to see Americans complain about political interference now.
Eastern European right wing politicians have always complied about westerners forming NGOs to promote their ideology like same-sex marriage.
Eastern European right wing politicians have always complied about westerners forming NGOs to promote their ideology like same-sex marriage.
For matters of state jurisdiction, like police power, it's interstate and extraunion.
As opposed to -lets say- issues related to international trade and crossing an international border between two signatories to NAFTA/USMCA.
As opposed to -lets say- issues related to international trade and crossing an international border between two signatories to NAFTA/USMCA.
A blockade of the border is a matter of international concern, the occupation of Ottawa is not unless the stability of the regime is in question, which would be of interest to the State Department.
This is normal. The Greek and Spanish civil wars received support from other nations and individuals, up to and including volunteers to fight. Orwell, a Brit, fought in the Spanish Civil War. Homage to Catalonia, good book.
Why not? Canadian PM expressed support for a protest going on in a foreign country last year which was purely an internal matter of that country.
Because they were not one of those inconvenienced by the protests.
Come on. None other than Justin Trudeau vocally supported the middlemen blocking highways in India against the farming reforms that Indian government passed in parliament. Some self introspection please.
Maybe he’s Canadian?
> As one of the donors included in this hack, I am not entirely sure what they're out to accomplish.
Find targets to cancel. ie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich#Appointment_to_CE...
Find targets to cancel. ie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich#Appointment_to_CE...
Yeah I found it to be tone deaf when my supposedly progressive software eng colleagues would share videos of lockdown protestors on IG saying F you idiots, as they work their cushy job. A lot of these people were protesting because they want to work, and not be dependent on government handouts.
The truckers were given TWO YEARS to get the jab and they refused to. They only need the jab if they are going into the United States and returning. They can do trucking within Canada without a jab. Also, the United States has imposed a similar mandate on truckers entering the US but I don't see the convoy protest that. 90% of truckers are vaccinated BTW.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/unvaccinated-canad...
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/unvaccinated-canad...
> As one of the donors included in this hack, I am not entirely sure what they're out to accomplish.
> as my neighborhood in Austin had police helicopters
Well, they certainly accomplished one goal: Out foreign donations.
> as my neighborhood in Austin had police helicopters
Well, they certainly accomplished one goal: Out foreign donations.
What to fear? Some lunatic calling an employer and citing Trudeau to say the donor supports homophobe racists. Its happened with other leaked lists.
Another problem is that, if the Canadian government tightens the screws, the donation might be deemed material support for crime. BS, but I wouldn't trust the Canadian judiciary.
Another problem is that, if the Canadian government tightens the screws, the donation might be deemed material support for crime. BS, but I wouldn't trust the Canadian judiciary.
It's not just a run of the mill worker's strike, though, it's tactically ingenious- they were able to put huge pressure on people very quickly without ever needing to get violent or aggressive. Good for them.
They're simply seizing the means of transportation, and reminding the government that the economy is dependent on them.
Yeah they failed massively at that. There were a few hundred trucks out of around 300,000, and they got denounced by their own unions. Basically the only thing they will do is inconvenience the government who doesn't want to look bad by removing them forcefully.
[deleted]
I thought these protests were negatively affecting working class neighborhoods as well by honking horns during the night? I’m not holding a strong opinion on the subject but it’s kind of silly bias to compare this to blm with your phrasing.
Blacks have been through much much worse for hundreds of years, so the truckers going through troubling times for 2 years doesn’t really justify the comparison.
Blacks have been through much much worse for hundreds of years, so the truckers going through troubling times for 2 years doesn’t really justify the comparison.
No person protesting during the BLM riots had "gone through much worse for hundreds of years." The truckers had personally experienced the thing they are protesting against (or would be affected by it going forward).
I can’t tell if this comment is implying African Americans have not experienced racism or negative systemic impacts in their own lifetime.
Or is this just pedantry that an individual can’t live for hundreds of years, and ignoring the actual point of if your parents are uneducated dirt poor then you will likely be uneducated dirt poor. Which is what I’m talking about.
Or is this just pedantry that an individual can’t live for hundreds of years, and ignoring the actual point of if your parents are uneducated dirt poor then you will likely be uneducated dirt poor. Which is what I’m talking about.
To clarify, the truckers have not been affected by the vaccine mandate until now. They were given two years to get an innocuous jab.
Pedantically, are you suggesting that the people protesting were part of the clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccines? If not, then they were given—at most—a year and, more likely, 9–10 months. I also covered that they "would be affected by it going forward."
(I'm not even going to broach the subject of "innocuous jab" at this date. A year ago, that may have been uncontroversial.)
(I'm not even going to broach the subject of "innocuous jab" at this date. A year ago, that may have been uncontroversial.)
> I thought these protests were negatively affecting working class neighborhoods as well by honking horns during the night?
Truckers aren't burning down neighborhoods or looting small business right now. Yet a good chunk of Americans had no problem with all that US 2 years ago, in the middle of a freaking pandemic. But honking is now where people draw the line?
> Blacks have been through much much worse for hundreds of years, so the truckers going through troubling times for 2 years doesn’t really justify the comparison.
How is truckers struggles any less valid than any other? cause the people demonstrating are white or something?
Truckers aren't burning down neighborhoods or looting small business right now. Yet a good chunk of Americans had no problem with all that US 2 years ago, in the middle of a freaking pandemic. But honking is now where people draw the line?
> Blacks have been through much much worse for hundreds of years, so the truckers going through troubling times for 2 years doesn’t really justify the comparison.
How is truckers struggles any less valid than any other? cause the people demonstrating are white or something?
> How is truckers struggles any less valid than any other?
Far be it from me to downplay the plight of others but it's a vaccine. Literally takes 10 minutes. Every baby in Canada receives a bunch of vaccines on a regular schedule. Many (all?) provinces have laws that state children must be vaccinated before attending school. This is nothing new. Transportation employees that cannot be vaccinated for COVID due to medical contraindication can have a medical exemption.
Any struggle here is completely self-inflicted.
Far be it from me to downplay the plight of others but it's a vaccine. Literally takes 10 minutes. Every baby in Canada receives a bunch of vaccines on a regular schedule. Many (all?) provinces have laws that state children must be vaccinated before attending school. This is nothing new. Transportation employees that cannot be vaccinated for COVID due to medical contraindication can have a medical exemption.
Any struggle here is completely self-inflicted.
Uhhh it’s definitely less valid? Truckers are complaining about vaccine passports, blm was complaining about being killed by police officers.
>Uhhh it’s definitely less valid?
The truckers see vaccine passports as an oppressive government action, and people getting killed by police officers as no big deal. The BLM protesters see police killings as an oppressive government action, and vaccine passports as no big deal. See the issue here? We as a society need standards for behavior that don't just boil down to "if you think it's justified then you can do whatever you want".
The truckers see vaccine passports as an oppressive government action, and people getting killed by police officers as no big deal. The BLM protesters see police killings as an oppressive government action, and vaccine passports as no big deal. See the issue here? We as a society need standards for behavior that don't just boil down to "if you think it's justified then you can do whatever you want".
Er, you don't know truckers think people getting killed by police officers is "no big deal". That appears to be something you just made up right now, as there's no obvious way you could possibly know that for sure. Or do you have some specific evidence, like a poll of the truckers on what they thought of BLM last year?
>Er, you don't know truckers think people getting killed by police officers is "no big deal".
I agree that "no big deal" was an overstep, but the argument works fine with "is justified"/"is not justified".
>Or do you have some specific evidence, like a poll of the truckers on what they thought of BLM last year?
Unfortunately not, but based on this poll[1] and demographic factors of truckers (ie. less likely to be college educated, more likely to be republican), it seems pretty reasonable to conclude that most truckers oppose BLM.
[1] https://civiqs.com/results/black_lives_matter?annotations=tr...
I agree that "no big deal" was an overstep, but the argument works fine with "is justified"/"is not justified".
>Or do you have some specific evidence, like a poll of the truckers on what they thought of BLM last year?
Unfortunately not, but based on this poll[1] and demographic factors of truckers (ie. less likely to be college educated, more likely to be republican), it seems pretty reasonable to conclude that most truckers oppose BLM.
[1] https://civiqs.com/results/black_lives_matter?annotations=tr...
Do you think the truckers would consider replacing vaccine mandates with police killings as a step down in oppression?
Your right to peacefully protest isn't supposed to depend on anyone else's opinion of how legitimate the cause you're protesting for is.
If you wanna bring up race, the US and CA black populations have lower rates of vaccination. The truckers want mandates withdrawn. Regardless of their intentions, they're doing a public good which will lend itself to the black population.
> Blacks have been through much much worse for hundreds of years, so the truckers going through troubling times for 2 years doesn’t really justify the comparison.
There’s no way you can objectively back this up. Not to mention you’re saying because some dead people had worse conditions it’s ok to make conditions for the living bad. That type of logic only applies to groups you dislike.
There’s no way you can objectively back this up. Not to mention you’re saying because some dead people had worse conditions it’s ok to make conditions for the living bad. That type of logic only applies to groups you dislike.
Umm objectively there was slavery and segregation from before the us existed until <70 years ago, which is hundreds of years
I couldn’t follow the logic on the second point, but current generation African Americans were negatively impacted by their great grandparents being slaves - it’s like generational wealth but the opposite.
I couldn’t follow the logic on the second point, but current generation African Americans were negatively impacted by their great grandparents being slaves - it’s like generational wealth but the opposite.
And where is that lost millions in donations that was supposed to go towards their causes, exactly?
I'm mean first we have those defending hundreds of millions of damage to businesses including black-owned ones and now we have ones defending fraudsters unable to file their financial reports and instead go off with millions worth of donations unaccounted for.
Sounds like a very successful scam executed by the founders to fool lots of people driven by emotion and outrage.
I'm mean first we have those defending hundreds of millions of damage to businesses including black-owned ones and now we have ones defending fraudsters unable to file their financial reports and instead go off with millions worth of donations unaccounted for.
Sounds like a very successful scam executed by the founders to fool lots of people driven by emotion and outrage.
Considering that you live in Austin how do you know the exact nature of the protests? Have you visited? Or is this what you read/saw in media?
It's also interesting how you contrast this to the BLM protests. I'm not sure how long a BLM protest would have been allowed to block a major traffic artery worth the 100s of million $ per day?
It's also interesting how you contrast this to the BLM protests. I'm not sure how long a BLM protest would have been allowed to block a major traffic artery worth the 100s of million $ per day?
>arson, vandalism, and looting between May 26 and June 8 were tabulated to have caused $1–2 billion in insured damages nationally—the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history, surpassing the record set during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
"$1-2 billion" from the George Floyd protests is between $70 million and $140 million a day, for 14 days. So that data might help you triangulate an answer to your question of "how long."
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests#:~:tex....
"$1-2 billion" from the George Floyd protests is between $70 million and $140 million a day, for 14 days. So that data might help you triangulate an answer to your question of "how long."
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests#:~:tex....
I don't mind if it inconvenience the government, but they have severely impacted residential neighbourhoods as well. Others in the movement have blocked commercial traffic across the border, putting people jobs at risk.
Ironically, I think these higher pressure activities will back fire. They could probably find a lot of support for easing restrictions, but destroying people's homes and jobs is not going to make or keep friends.
Ironically, I think these higher pressure activities will back fire. They could probably find a lot of support for easing restrictions, but destroying people's homes and jobs is not going to make or keep friends.
They are leaving or have already left the residential areas:
https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/ottawa-mayor-says-truckers-have-ag...
You believe the same thing about BLM right? They took over residential areas and blocked commercial traffic from coming. Look at Chop/Chaz.
As you are from Austin, you clearly have no idea that this is just more than bureaucrats but actual people live there. Many and have had to move out of their house as they couldn't sleep. This is honking all nights but also intimidating business owners, people walking by with a mask, verbal harassment, etc. This is all documented.
The people in those protests are also anti-vaxers, while 90% of the population is vaccinated, so they don't represent the working class. The Qanon "Queen of Canada" and all their crazies are there, harassing health care workers. This is very much the 1% of crazies, the working class is extremely irritated by having their health care workers being harassed.
The people in those protests are also anti-vaxers, while 90% of the population is vaccinated, so they don't represent the working class. The Qanon "Queen of Canada" and all their crazies are there, harassing health care workers. This is very much the 1% of crazies, the working class is extremely irritated by having their health care workers being harassed.
Yeah, well the establishment journalists are doing everything they can to cover for Trudeau. Meanwhile if you really want to be informed you can find tons of livestreams on Youtube from every angle of the protest in Ottawa, 1988 Watchman is good. I've been watching for over a week now and I've seen people helping and feeding each other. Filling the food banks, food banks are declining food donations now. Cleaning the streets. People dancing and singing, kids playing hockey in the streets. It's a big festival and a lot of people are showing up to celebrate and come together. It's inspiring in a time when people are so divided to see joyful people having fun.
By spending much of your comment denigrating other protests (presumably on issues that you care less about), you are doing exactly what you claim to be condemning. Try advocating for the specific laudable goals of your own cause rather than putting others down.
Considering that donations to the truckers were being turned down because the truckers were forming an "occupation", while individuals in the previous occupations (including the aforementioned CHOP and CHAZ) had received funds off the same platform... The composition seems relevant. Especially with all the name calling (that the truckers are forming an insurrection) being done by the same people who either stayed silent on, or actively supported Antifa as they shot explosives into occupied government buildings.
The truckers are on strike. Not really any different than any other worker strike, which socialists would normally fall over themselves supporting. The thing is, it seems, they cannot abide people going on strike against what they view as unjust government action.
The truckers are on strike. Not really any different than any other worker strike, which socialists would normally fall over themselves supporting. The thing is, it seems, they cannot abide people going on strike against what they view as unjust government action.
Please, stick to messing up your own country, and leave Canada alone.
You don't know what you're talking about in terms of negative impact these illegal blockades of the borders have on the economy.
Mischaracterizing CHOP while critiquing a mischaracterization of CHOP. The head truly spins
GiveSendGo appears to be a Christian crowdfunding platform. Maybe it's nuanced but I am unable to see a Christian connection to the mask mandates or whatever the truckers are protesting.
Might be a good idea to learn what they are protesting, before trying to draw connections between what they are protesting and other things like religion.
I hoped someone would enlighten me. From the headlines I've read it appeared to be about mask mandates.
It's more about vaccine mandates, but yeah mask mandate (all mandates) in general.
Including specifically for the truckers recent laws that effectively boil down to: either you get vaccinated, and show proof of it, or you lose your job.
Is this about vaccines or worker's rights?
- Health care workers in Ottawa had to be advised not too wear work wear in the streets to avoid harassment and assault.
- The Canadian Trucking Alliance have stated that between 85 and 90 per cent of truckers are already vaccinated.
- 65% of Canadians think the Freedom Convoy represents a small minority of selfish Canadians. (Leger poll)
- Hate groups spotted among the protesters include the Soldiers of Odin, Three Percenters and followers of the Soltrean hypothesis. I'm sure there are some very fine people among them as well.
- Prominent among the organizers are advocates of the "white genocide" theory.
- The Canadian Trucking Alliance have stated that between 85 and 90 per cent of truckers are already vaccinated.
- 65% of Canadians think the Freedom Convoy represents a small minority of selfish Canadians. (Leger poll)
- Hate groups spotted among the protesters include the Soldiers of Odin, Three Percenters and followers of the Soltrean hypothesis. I'm sure there are some very fine people among them as well.
- Prominent among the organizers are advocates of the "white genocide" theory.
Its about the fringe right being angry.
Maybe, but angry about vaccines or worker's rights? :-)
Angry about sience!
https://preview.redd.it/pj9zbnm03gh81.jpg?width=640&crop=sma...
"Crazy people make trouble for no good reason" is almost too hard to believe, are you sure there's nothing they want in particular?
What do they want? Do we know? Is there a document we can point to, that we know expresses the grievances of the protesters? Of a majority of protesters? Of their supporters?
>As one of the donors included in this hack, I am not entirely sure what they're out to accomplish.
No different than any other cancel culture etc.
>Despite eye-rolling media mischaracterizations of these truckers as you-know-whats, it's a run of the mill workers strike.
This is very important I learnt this weekend. Not to be glossed over.
Trudeau himself attacked the convoy as fringe minority, racists, sexists, and white supremacists. The 'government accredited' media was very fast to show the nazi flag and confederate flags. Conveniently very expensive professional camera gear right there to take pictures.
Yet the real media went around showing that the group is pretty diverse. https://notthebee.com/article/come-and-laugh-with-me-at-the-...
So what gives? Well what happened? Antivaxxers are unemployed? But who are the antivaxxers? ~50% of black canadians are unwilling to get vaccinated. ~25% of arabic and indian canadians are unwilling. When the average is ~85%. It means whites are above 85%. I didn't know this.
It means Trudeau and the 'government accredited' media who rushed out this narrative that they are white supremacists in fact knew they were disproportionally harming not-whites. That to label this convoy as white supremacist might discourage not-whites from joining. This 1 nazi flag has to be a journalist because the convoy is certainly not white supremacist.
At what point does the 'government accredited' media who pushed this white supremacist narrative get labelled government propaganda?
No different than any other cancel culture etc.
>Despite eye-rolling media mischaracterizations of these truckers as you-know-whats, it's a run of the mill workers strike.
This is very important I learnt this weekend. Not to be glossed over.
Trudeau himself attacked the convoy as fringe minority, racists, sexists, and white supremacists. The 'government accredited' media was very fast to show the nazi flag and confederate flags. Conveniently very expensive professional camera gear right there to take pictures.
Yet the real media went around showing that the group is pretty diverse. https://notthebee.com/article/come-and-laugh-with-me-at-the-...
So what gives? Well what happened? Antivaxxers are unemployed? But who are the antivaxxers? ~50% of black canadians are unwilling to get vaccinated. ~25% of arabic and indian canadians are unwilling. When the average is ~85%. It means whites are above 85%. I didn't know this.
It means Trudeau and the 'government accredited' media who rushed out this narrative that they are white supremacists in fact knew they were disproportionally harming not-whites. That to label this convoy as white supremacist might discourage not-whites from joining. This 1 nazi flag has to be a journalist because the convoy is certainly not white supremacist.
At what point does the 'government accredited' media who pushed this white supremacist narrative get labelled government propaganda?