7 ms·

Are you sure this is abuse? My guess is a judge ordered the accounts to be frozen.

by lottin 5y ago

unmole 5y ago
You guessed wrong.
wolpoli 5y ago
The canadian government declared an emergency under the emergencies act. The act enables the government to make any orders or regulations, so there is no need to go through the court.
- lottin 5y ago
  So it's not abuse then? If it was done according to law.
  - esyir 5y ago
    In same way that the patriot act is legal, yes.
  - wolpoli 5y ago
    Yes, it's perfectly legal and done according to law. There are some oversights. Under the Emergencies Act, the Parliament and the Senate get to confirm the use of the act. What surprised people were the fact that the action of voting down the use of the act will trigger an election, and parties didn't want an election. [1] [1]: https://windsorstar.com/news/canada/mps-to-vote-tonight-on-whether-emergencies-act-for-blockades-still-needed/wcm/559bf3e4-f53c-4e30-a895-92202da578c9 https://windsorstar.com/news/canada/mps-to-vote-tonight-on-w...
  - Wildgoose 5y ago
    Vienna’s jews were rounded up into camps perfectly legally according to the Law. I don’t think this is a route you really want to go down.
    - lottin 5y ago
      If you're claiming that a government is abusing its power because it froze some funds, and it turns out it was done according to law, then the accusation is unsubstantiated. Maybe it was abusing its power, but we haven't been shown any evidence. And the burden of proof is on you to show that it was an abuse of power.
      - xdennis 5y ago
        The government used emergency powers designed to be used in case of war for dealing with peaceful protesters. The previous act was only used during WW1, WW2, and during the October Crisis by Trudeau's alleged father, which is also the reason the powers were watered down. Canada's democracy slip up was criticized in the EU: https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-news/justin-trudeau-blasted-by-eu-parliament-for-handling-of-freedom-convoy-protests-in-canada-articleshow.html https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-n... > the burden of proof is on you Which is impossible because the government explicitly said they won't be transparent and that all the charges are secret: > Freeland said she would not give "specifics of whose accounts are being frozen." -- https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-linked-trucker-protest-1680649 https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-...
        incomingpain 5y ago
        > Freeland said she would not give "specifics of whose accounts are being frozen." Freeland did say that they would be freezing the donators as well in the original videos. The more egregious comment was by David Lamenti. He's a lawyer and law professor. He knows the law. His comments are not a gaffe and not out of context or anything. This is not him pulling the wrong insult out of his bag. He spoke clearly and he meant every little bit of the comment. https://torontosun.com/news/national/trudeau-minister-threatens-to-seize-accounts-of-pro-trump-convoy-donors https://torontosun.com/news/national/trudeau-minister-threat... The CTV guy is even like wtf. Days later the RCMP disavowed being involved and urgently worked to unfreeze those bank accounts. https://blockade.rcmp.ca/news-nouvelles/ncr-rcn211130-s-d-en.html https://blockade.rcmp.ca/news-nouvelles/ncr-rcn211130-s-d-en...
  - soundnote 5y ago
    So we cannot deem past slavery abusive, then? According to law, after all.
incomingpain 5y ago
>Are you sure this is abuse? My guess is a judge ordered the accounts to be frozen. That's kind of the problem. No judge was ever involved. The emergency act was deployed by Trudeau, they seized bank accounts and arrested legitimate peaceful protesters. Tyrannically crushing a legitimate protest just because ~70 semi trucks were illegally parked in ottawa.
- generj 5y ago
  Shutting down a protest because it completely shut down a major city center and harassed locals for weeks seems like a totally legitimate use of government power to me. They also blocked a major bridge border crossing and attempted to block other border crossings. That makes them less of a protest and more a rebellion. I can’t think of a single country in the world which would allow an absolutely tiny minority to shut down border crossings for extended periods of time. Preventing trade to that extent is arguably a form of violence; using horns in residential areas late at night is definitely violent. Also “crushing” a protest usually involves lots more violence then was employed. Tiananmen Square was crushed (literally), US civil rights protests were crushed with firehouses and dogs, etc. The actions of the Canadian government seem anodyne to any government I’ve heard described as “crushing” a protest.
  - incomingpain 5y ago
    >Shutting down a protest because it completely shut down a major city center It did not do this at all. When I zoom in on Ottawa and ignore gatineau. I would assert the city center is say UofOttwa to the east side, if not all the way to the rideau. Maybe kowloon market, china town, little italy, centretown west is the west side. With a southern spot of maybe the 417 highway? What did the protest block? You'll have to zoom it significant more. It blocked what wellington and queen for 2 blocks? It did absolutely nothing to 90% of the city centre. To suggest a protest at parliament hill is 'completely shutting down the major city center' is absurd. > harassed locals for weeks seems like a totally legitimate use of government power to me. Ok, fine, so we set the precedent that you agree with. You're fine with future governments crushing legitimate protests under the same misrepresentations as well? Afterall, how much conservative protests are there? Pretty rare. We're going to be crushing left-wing protest for the most part. >They also blocked a major bridge border crossing and attempted to block other border crossings. Did they? Which bridge in Ottawa did they block? Or do you mean ambassador bridge which is a related but unconnected protest. This blockade ended before the emergency act was ever implemented. We are talking about Trudeau crushing a legitimate protest in ottawa. The emergency act was used for ONLY ottawa, took them days to even do anything. >That makes them less of a protest and more a rebellion. A rebellion! Oh wow. A peaceful protest in front of parliament with bouncy castles and hottub is a rebellion. I guess they just never quite got around to the rebelling part... I honestly didnt even see the canadian media label them a rebellion. Sure even doug ford called them a military occupation. But rebellion! >I can’t think of a single country in the world which would allow an absolutely tiny minority to shut down border crossings for extended periods of time. People linked Trudeau being in favour of the extremely violent hong kong riots and the only marginally violent farmer protests in india. Yet he refused to even talk to them once. Couldnt even send a staffer to go talk to the protest once. I would hope ANY government would be forced to talk to a protest at least once before declaring national emergency and crushing them with force. >Preventing trade to that extent is arguably a form of violence; using horns in residential areas late at night is definitely violent. Oh wow, we are even redefining what violence is. Why are you doing this? There's a clear reason. The protesters have the right to 'peaceful protest'. You are required to redefine 'violence' in order to invalidate their charter rights. I see what you are doing. You are even redefining what a residential area is. For the record... you have to go about 4 blocks or more away from the protest to get to the first residential building. Where they were parked is not residential at all. Census data is public. The protest was never 'harassing residents'. At most they were 'harassing counter protesters' which is what it is. >Also “crushing” a protest usually involves lots more violence then was employed. Now you're redefining crushing? >The actions of the Canadian government seem anodyne to any government I’ve heard described as “crushing” a protest. Crushing means 'to subdue completely' or 'oppress grievously'. Well the day before they gave the emergency act back. There was not a single protester in ottawa and parliament hill. They subdued the protest completely. AKA they crushed a peaceful protest. There's a reason why Bill Maher called Trudeau Hitler right before he crushed a peaceful protest. After he tyrannically crushed the protest and made protesting illegal for conservatives. Bill Maher seems to be saying that Trudeau = Hitler.

Are you sure this is abuse? My guess is a judge ordered the accounts to be frozen.

by lottin 5y ago

Are you sure this is abuse? My guess is a judge ordered the accounts to be frozen.

unmole 5y ago

You guessed wrong.

wolpoli 5y ago

The canadian government declared an emergency under the emergencies act. The act enables the government to make any orders or regulations, so there is no need to go through the court.

lottin 5y ago
So it's not abuse then? If it was done according to law.
- esyir 5y ago
  In same way that the patriot act is legal, yes.
- wolpoli 5y ago
  Yes, it's perfectly legal and done according to law. There are some oversights. Under the Emergencies Act, the Parliament and the Senate get to confirm the use of the act. What surprised people were the fact that the action of voting down the use of the act will trigger an election, and parties didn't want an election. [1] [1]: https://windsorstar.com/news/canada/mps-to-vote-tonight-on-whether-emergencies-act-for-blockades-still-needed/wcm/559bf3e4-f53c-4e30-a895-92202da578c9 https://windsorstar.com/news/canada/mps-to-vote-tonight-on-w...
- Wildgoose 5y ago
  Vienna’s jews were rounded up into camps perfectly legally according to the Law. I don’t think this is a route you really want to go down.
  - lottin 5y ago
    If you're claiming that a government is abusing its power because it froze some funds, and it turns out it was done according to law, then the accusation is unsubstantiated. Maybe it was abusing its power, but we haven't been shown any evidence. And the burden of proof is on you to show that it was an abuse of power.
    - xdennis 5y ago
      The government used emergency powers designed to be used in case of war for dealing with peaceful protesters. The previous act was only used during WW1, WW2, and during the October Crisis by Trudeau's alleged father, which is also the reason the powers were watered down. Canada's democracy slip up was criticized in the EU: https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-news/justin-trudeau-blasted-by-eu-parliament-for-handling-of-freedom-convoy-protests-in-canada-articleshow.html https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-n... > the burden of proof is on you Which is impossible because the government explicitly said they won't be transparent and that all the charges are secret: > Freeland said she would not give "specifics of whose accounts are being frozen." -- https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-linked-trucker-protest-1680649 https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-...
      - incomingpain 5y ago
        > Freeland said she would not give "specifics of whose accounts are being frozen." Freeland did say that they would be freezing the donators as well in the original videos. The more egregious comment was by David Lamenti. He's a lawyer and law professor. He knows the law. His comments are not a gaffe and not out of context or anything. This is not him pulling the wrong insult out of his bag. He spoke clearly and he meant every little bit of the comment. https://torontosun.com/news/national/trudeau-minister-threatens-to-seize-accounts-of-pro-trump-convoy-donors https://torontosun.com/news/national/trudeau-minister-threat... The CTV guy is even like wtf. Days later the RCMP disavowed being involved and urgently worked to unfreeze those bank accounts. https://blockade.rcmp.ca/news-nouvelles/ncr-rcn211130-s-d-en.html https://blockade.rcmp.ca/news-nouvelles/ncr-rcn211130-s-d-en...
- soundnote 5y ago
  So we cannot deem past slavery abusive, then? According to law, after all.

incomingpain 5y ago

>Are you sure this is abuse? My guess is a judge ordered the accounts to be frozen. That's kind of the problem. No judge was ever involved. The emergency act was deployed by Trudeau, they seized bank accounts and arrested legitimate peaceful protesters. Tyrannically crushing a legitimate protest just because ~70 semi trucks were illegally parked in ottawa.

generj 5y ago
Shutting down a protest because it completely shut down a major city center and harassed locals for weeks seems like a totally legitimate use of government power to me. They also blocked a major bridge border crossing and attempted to block other border crossings. That makes them less of a protest and more a rebellion. I can’t think of a single country in the world which would allow an absolutely tiny minority to shut down border crossings for extended periods of time. Preventing trade to that extent is arguably a form of violence; using horns in residential areas late at night is definitely violent. Also “crushing” a protest usually involves lots more violence then was employed. Tiananmen Square was crushed (literally), US civil rights protests were crushed with firehouses and dogs, etc. The actions of the Canadian government seem anodyne to any government I’ve heard described as “crushing” a protest.
- incomingpain 5y ago
  >Shutting down a protest because it completely shut down a major city center It did not do this at all. When I zoom in on Ottawa and ignore gatineau. I would assert the city center is say UofOttwa to the east side, if not all the way to the rideau. Maybe kowloon market, china town, little italy, centretown west is the west side. With a southern spot of maybe the 417 highway? What did the protest block? You'll have to zoom it significant more. It blocked what wellington and queen for 2 blocks? It did absolutely nothing to 90% of the city centre. To suggest a protest at parliament hill is 'completely shutting down the major city center' is absurd. > harassed locals for weeks seems like a totally legitimate use of government power to me. Ok, fine, so we set the precedent that you agree with. You're fine with future governments crushing legitimate protests under the same misrepresentations as well? Afterall, how much conservative protests are there? Pretty rare. We're going to be crushing left-wing protest for the most part. >They also blocked a major bridge border crossing and attempted to block other border crossings. Did they? Which bridge in Ottawa did they block? Or do you mean ambassador bridge which is a related but unconnected protest. This blockade ended before the emergency act was ever implemented. We are talking about Trudeau crushing a legitimate protest in ottawa. The emergency act was used for ONLY ottawa, took them days to even do anything. >That makes them less of a protest and more a rebellion. A rebellion! Oh wow. A peaceful protest in front of parliament with bouncy castles and hottub is a rebellion. I guess they just never quite got around to the rebelling part... I honestly didnt even see the canadian media label them a rebellion. Sure even doug ford called them a military occupation. But rebellion! >I can’t think of a single country in the world which would allow an absolutely tiny minority to shut down border crossings for extended periods of time. People linked Trudeau being in favour of the extremely violent hong kong riots and the only marginally violent farmer protests in india. Yet he refused to even talk to them once. Couldnt even send a staffer to go talk to the protest once. I would hope ANY government would be forced to talk to a protest at least once before declaring national emergency and crushing them with force. >Preventing trade to that extent is arguably a form of violence; using horns in residential areas late at night is definitely violent. Oh wow, we are even redefining what violence is. Why are you doing this? There's a clear reason. The protesters have the right to 'peaceful protest'. You are required to redefine 'violence' in order to invalidate their charter rights. I see what you are doing. You are even redefining what a residential area is. For the record... you have to go about 4 blocks or more away from the protest to get to the first residential building. Where they were parked is not residential at all. Census data is public. The protest was never 'harassing residents'. At most they were 'harassing counter protesters' which is what it is. >Also “crushing” a protest usually involves lots more violence then was employed. Now you're redefining crushing? >The actions of the Canadian government seem anodyne to any government I’ve heard described as “crushing” a protest. Crushing means 'to subdue completely' or 'oppress grievously'. Well the day before they gave the emergency act back. There was not a single protester in ottawa and parliament hill. They subdued the protest completely. AKA they crushed a peaceful protest. There's a reason why Bill Maher called Trudeau Hitler right before he crushed a peaceful protest. After he tyrannically crushed the protest and made protesting illegal for conservatives. Bill Maher seems to be saying that Trudeau = Hitler.