Canada Freedom Convoy 2022

[whYME]

He enacted it, it worked, was no longer needed and he repealed it.

There was a spider on the wall and it was really annoying me, so I pulled out an RPG launcher, and well let's just say there's no more spider.

I used the RPG, it worked, and was no longer needed so I put it away.

It seems reasonable

[CountValentine]

There was a spider on the wall and it was really annoying me, so I pulled out an RPG launcher, and well let's just say there's no more spider.

I used the RPG, it worked, and was no longer needed so I put it away.

It seems reasonable

Good for you but wrong thread. Try this one: https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=53089.0

[whYME]

Good for you but wrong thread. Try this one: https://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=53089.0

So you can't actually defend it. Got it.

[CountValentine]

So you can't actually defend it. Got it.

Your strawman is just too funny.
I answer your question and you just go off on tangents.

[whYME]

Your strawman is just too funny.
I answer your question and you just go off on tangents.

Ok, I'll assume we've been misunderstanding each other. Let's start over.

How were the extreme measures he took reasonable?

[CountValentine]

How were the extreme measures he took reasonable?

The measures he took were to end an illegal protest. It had a major effect on the economy of two countries.
Now you can argue if it was warranted.
I believe it was, it worked and then repealed as it is no longer needed. That IMHO is reasonable.

I guess another option would have been to teargas them. 

[whYME]

an illegal protest.

What does that even mean?

It had a major effect on the economy of two countries.

I assume you're talking about the Windsor blockade. Are you not aware that it was already cleared before the emergency act was declared?

Now you can argue if it was warranted.

Um, yeah. That's exactly what I'm doing.

I believe it was

Why?

I guess another option would have been to teargas them. 

Right, like how they needed tear gas in Windsor...

[CountValentine]

We are to this point now:

[whYME]

We are to this point now:

Ok, fine.

Back in the summer of 2020, when there were actual violent riots, cities were burning, police stations were overrun, Federal courthouses under nightly attack for months on end, had DJT declared an emergency and said that any participant can have their bank accounts seized without any due process you obviously would've considered that reasonable. (provided that he rescinded the order once he was worried he'd lose the vote over it in congress.)

[CountValentine]

Back in the summer of 2020, when there were actual violent riots, cities were burning, police stations were overrun, Federal courthouses under nightly attack for months on end, had DJT declared an emergency and said that any participant can have their bank accounts seized without any due process you obviously would've considered that reasonable. (provided that he rescinded the order once he was worried he'd lose the vote over it in congress.)

By executive order, H*LL NO!
Now if he had something legal to use like the Defense Production Act then I would say yes. Not for just one and done protest but for something like occupy Seattle.

[whYME]

By executive order, H*LL NO!
Now if he had something legal to use...

That kinda brings us back here

One question now is since it was never ratified by the parliament was it ever actually legal?

I would say yes.

Interesting.

Not for just one and done protest but for something like occupy Seattle.

Where do you draw the line?

Under your standards being applied to Ottawa presumably anyone who participated in or supported the BLM "fiery but mostly peaceful" protests should be fair game.

[CountValentine]

That kinda brings us back here

...and for Canada to sort out.

Where do you draw the line?

You want to protest, go right ahead.
You don't get to block major arteries weeks at a time.

[whYME]

You want to protest, go right ahead.
You don't get to block major arteries weeks at a time.

Fair enough. Although,

1. That still doesn't answer why the extreme measure of suspending rights was needed.

2. What's the line where it's no longer just a protest?

3. "block[ing] major arteries weeks at a time" is disputable at best.

[CountValentine]

Fair enough. Although,

1. That still doesn't answer why the extreme measure of suspending rights was needed.

2. What's the line where it's no longer just a protest?

3. "block[ing] major arteries weeks at a time" is disputable at best.

Everything is disputable, like calling the measure "extreme". 

[whYME]

Everything is disputable, like calling the measure "extreme". 

So it's disputable whether declaring an emergency (without even bothering to have it ratified by parliament)  and seizing the assets of your political opposition without any due process is considered extreme?

Interesting.

(And then you complain that some here aren't being tough enough on Putin)

[CountValentine]

(And then you complain that some here aren't being tough enough on Putin)

This is the whole problem. Talking about the two things together.
Just as insane as talking about the last president and "H" together.

[whYME]

This is the whole problem. Talking about the two things together.
Just as insane as talking about the last president and "H" together.

ok, so setting that aside, back to the main point:

Everything is disputable, like calling the measure "extreme". 

So it's disputable whether declaring an emergency (without even bothering to have it ratified by parliament)  and seizing the assets of your political opposition without any due process is considered extreme?

[CountValentine]

So it's disputable whether declaring an emergency (without even bothering to have it ratified by parliament)  and seizing the assets of your political opposition without any due process is considered extreme?

The Act was used to stop the illegal protest that was crippling the country. If he went after political opponents, then that is for Canada to sort out.

Why is the right sticking their nose in this? The protest was broke up peacefully. We can learn from then.

[Onefishtwofish]

The Act was used to stop the illegal protest that was crippling the country. If he went after political opponents, then that is for Canada to sort out.

What! You have no idea what you're talking about. Canadians are not like American. They don't think or act like them.
This was no terrorist act and to compare it to the last time it was enacted is pure lunacy. It may have been illegal but that should have been dealt with the police.
The entire concept of Parliament is that the MPs represent Canadians. When MPs refuse to talk to their constituents - that is already going against the entire idea of democracy. When "respected" leaders call out names like babies and refer to people as terrorists and go in hiding just show their true colors.

There is a a reason that the way the government is acting resonates to all immigrants from former ussr. No one is saying that what they did was correct but the opposite they demonstrated what a peaceful protest actually is and perhaps Americans should learn one thing or two.


CV I may disagree with your points in other threads but I'm calling you out here.
/End

[CountValentine]

CV I may disagree with your points in other threads but I'm calling you out here.
/End

So we shouldn't let Canada sort it out? You want the US to sort it out?

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2022/02/canadas-emergencies-act.html
"Regulating and prohibiting public assemblies, including blockades, other than lawful advocacy, protest or dissent,"