5 ms·

Blockades are not fundamental rights. Honking is not a fundamental right. Situating massive private objects on public property is not a fundamental right. Also

Blockades are not fundamental rights. Honking is not a fundamental right. Situating massive private objects on public property is not a fundamental right. Also, the government declared a state of emergency, the whole point of which is to create a temporary environment where certain rights may be ignored. I don’t see the government of Quebec declaring an emergency because of an epidemic of people flipping the bird before proceeding with legal proceedings against this guy. There’s literally no comparison between the 2 situations. You may disagree with declaration of emergency, and there are ways for the people to protest that. Doesn’t seem like the vast majority of Canadians were interested. There may have been issues with the response to the trucker blockade. But an illegal suppression of fundamental rights wasn’t one of them.

refurb 4y ago
How about donating to a cause? So-called “Freedom Convoy” protesters were ultimately responsible if banks froze their accounts under the Emergencies Act last winter, but the government was not trying to “punish” those who took part, senior bureaucrats said Thursday. The government set a precedent that donating to causes deemed "threatening" is worthy of an emergency freeze on your bank account. Well done. Canada.
- labster 4y ago
  I know, what about our Charter rights to fund terrorists? Seriously, there is a line between civil disobedience and uncivil disobedience, and they crossed it.
  - IncRnd 4y ago
    If people don't educate themselves on why the government acts against others, then when the government acts against them, who will listen to their cries?
  - refurb 4y ago
    This comment is exactly why we need Charter Rights the government can't easily suspend. The utter lack of understanding of why these protections are needed is astounding. I wonder what they are teaching the kids in school. The government (and voters) won't hesitate to call the opposition "terrorists" and claim donating $5 to a cause is "supporting terrorism" and freeze your bank account so you can't pay rent or buy food. It's really scary. This time it's the other side, next time it's you.
    - bawolff 4y ago
      From what i understand, a significant portion of those people would have had their bank accounts frozen from civil lawsuits anyways. So even without the emergencies act it was likely to happen anyways. > This time it's the other side, next time it's you. First they came for the violent criminals, and i did not speak up because i wasn't a violent criminal... oh wait i'm actually totally ok with that.
      - refurb 4y ago
        A donation to a cause is now a "violent crime"?
        bawolff 4y ago
        It doesn't seem like anybody who donated had anything happen to them. However, generally speaking people who give money to someone in order to further a criminal act are comitting a criminal act. This is hardly a new concept.
      - unmole 4y ago
        Blowing horns is a violent crime? No, wait. Donating to people blowing horns is a violent crime?
        bawolff 4y ago
        If the horns are loud enough to cause permenent hearing loss, than yes (these weren't just car horns). Allegedly they were significantly above that threshold, even from inside buildings. There's also mental torture aspect of doing it 24/7 (literally a tactic used in war to break troops). Additionally people living in the area reported experiencing significant harrasment from protestors.
  - unmole 4y ago
    > terrorists Right, honking horns and blocking roads is pretty much the same as setting off bombs and murdering people for political ends.
    - HappySweeney 4y ago
      They were torturing civilians in order to extract political concessions from the government. It's not called murderism.
- Nursie 4y ago
  That doesn’t say donor accounts were frozen. There appears to be little evidence that donors had their accounts frozen. Accounts receiving those donations were.
  - refurb 4y ago
    “Just to be clear, a financial contribution either through a crowdsourced platform or directly, could result in their bank account being frozen?” Conservative MP Philip Lawrence asked Department of Finance Assistant Deputy Minister Isabelle Jacques. “Yes,” she replied. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-to-freedom-convoy-after-feb-15-enough-to-have-donors-bank-accounts-frozen-finance-committee-told https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-t...
    - defrost 4y ago
      Followed by: Such action, she said, would only be taken on donations made after Feb. 15’s emergency declaration and isn’t retroactive — adding such a case would be “very unlikely,” but definitely possible. The main solid takeaway from that article is that 206 accounts were definitely frozen .. accounts that very probably donations were flowing into. The rest of the article is weasel phrased, there are allegations of donors having their accounts frozen but no corroboration and then later details on how some of those stories don't add up. A solid reference would be the actual public records that were requested to be kept: The committee gave unanimous consent to a motion tabled by Chambers compelling government departments and agencies to report weekly to the committee on how many accounts they’d recommended frozen, who owned them and the reasons thereof.
      - refurb 4y ago
        Who cares if it was "only after the emergency declaration"? Who cares if it wasn't "retroactive"? Who care if the government is sending updates on who they freeze? Those sound like a lot of attempts to say "oh, seizing people's assets without trial for the crime of a small donation only happened to a few people, so no big deal". Some blue collar guy trying to make ends meets hears about the protest after the emergency and says "yeah, I think the government is overstepping, I'm going to send $10 in support". Never stepped foot in Ottawa, never blocked any bridges, never honked any horns. Now his bank account is frozen and he can't pay the rent. How in any way is that acceptable in a country that claims to respect person freedoms? These are the tactics you'd expect from authoritarian systems. I used to laugh at the irony when Vietnam would charge some protestor for "abusing democratic freedoms", but hey, that's kinda what Canada did. People should be really pissed off that it happens at all. But you know what, I'm ok if people aren't that pissed off. What's more maddening are people who saying "yeah, that should have happened. In fact, I'm glad it happened". Jesus Christ Canada. I don't know what it is with Commonwealth countries but you see places like New Zealand and Australia doing the same. "The right of the state supersede the rights of the individual".

refurb 4y ago

How about donating to a cause? So-called “Freedom Convoy” protesters were ultimately responsible if banks froze their accounts under the Emergencies Act last winter, but the government was not trying to “punish” those who took part, senior bureaucrats said Thursday. The government set a precedent that donating to causes deemed "threatening" is worthy of an emergency freeze on your bank account. Well done. Canada.

labster 4y ago
I know, what about our Charter rights to fund terrorists? Seriously, there is a line between civil disobedience and uncivil disobedience, and they crossed it.
- IncRnd 4y ago
  If people don't educate themselves on why the government acts against others, then when the government acts against them, who will listen to their cries?
- refurb 4y ago
  This comment is exactly why we need Charter Rights the government can't easily suspend. The utter lack of understanding of why these protections are needed is astounding. I wonder what they are teaching the kids in school. The government (and voters) won't hesitate to call the opposition "terrorists" and claim donating $5 to a cause is "supporting terrorism" and freeze your bank account so you can't pay rent or buy food. It's really scary. This time it's the other side, next time it's you.
  - bawolff 4y ago
    From what i understand, a significant portion of those people would have had their bank accounts frozen from civil lawsuits anyways. So even without the emergencies act it was likely to happen anyways. > This time it's the other side, next time it's you. First they came for the violent criminals, and i did not speak up because i wasn't a violent criminal... oh wait i'm actually totally ok with that.
    - refurb 4y ago
      A donation to a cause is now a "violent crime"?
      - bawolff 4y ago
        It doesn't seem like anybody who donated had anything happen to them. However, generally speaking people who give money to someone in order to further a criminal act are comitting a criminal act. This is hardly a new concept.
    - unmole 4y ago
      Blowing horns is a violent crime? No, wait. Donating to people blowing horns is a violent crime?
      - bawolff 4y ago
        If the horns are loud enough to cause permenent hearing loss, than yes (these weren't just car horns). Allegedly they were significantly above that threshold, even from inside buildings. There's also mental torture aspect of doing it 24/7 (literally a tactic used in war to break troops). Additionally people living in the area reported experiencing significant harrasment from protestors.
- unmole 4y ago
  > terrorists Right, honking horns and blocking roads is pretty much the same as setting off bombs and murdering people for political ends.
  - HappySweeney 4y ago
    They were torturing civilians in order to extract political concessions from the government. It's not called murderism.
Nursie 4y ago
That doesn’t say donor accounts were frozen. There appears to be little evidence that donors had their accounts frozen. Accounts receiving those donations were.
- refurb 4y ago
  “Just to be clear, a financial contribution either through a crowdsourced platform or directly, could result in their bank account being frozen?” Conservative MP Philip Lawrence asked Department of Finance Assistant Deputy Minister Isabelle Jacques. “Yes,” she replied. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-to-freedom-convoy-after-feb-15-enough-to-have-donors-bank-accounts-frozen-finance-committee-told https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-t...
  - defrost 4y ago
    Followed by: Such action, she said, would only be taken on donations made after Feb. 15’s emergency declaration and isn’t retroactive — adding such a case would be “very unlikely,” but definitely possible. The main solid takeaway from that article is that 206 accounts were definitely frozen .. accounts that very probably donations were flowing into. The rest of the article is weasel phrased, there are allegations of donors having their accounts frozen but no corroboration and then later details on how some of those stories don't add up. A solid reference would be the actual public records that were requested to be kept: The committee gave unanimous consent to a motion tabled by Chambers compelling government departments and agencies to report weekly to the committee on how many accounts they’d recommended frozen, who owned them and the reasons thereof.
    - refurb 4y ago
      Who cares if it was "only after the emergency declaration"? Who cares if it wasn't "retroactive"? Who care if the government is sending updates on who they freeze? Those sound like a lot of attempts to say "oh, seizing people's assets without trial for the crime of a small donation only happened to a few people, so no big deal". Some blue collar guy trying to make ends meets hears about the protest after the emergency and says "yeah, I think the government is overstepping, I'm going to send $10 in support". Never stepped foot in Ottawa, never blocked any bridges, never honked any horns. Now his bank account is frozen and he can't pay the rent. How in any way is that acceptable in a country that claims to respect person freedoms? These are the tactics you'd expect from authoritarian systems. I used to laugh at the irony when Vietnam would charge some protestor for "abusing democratic freedoms", but hey, that's kinda what Canada did. People should be really pissed off that it happens at all. But you know what, I'm ok if people aren't that pissed off. What's more maddening are people who saying "yeah, that should have happened. In fact, I'm glad it happened". Jesus Christ Canada. I don't know what it is with Commonwealth countries but you see places like New Zealand and Australia doing the same. "The right of the state supersede the rights of the individual".