Truckers convoy

[photofly]

Do you think your posts on this subject have raised or lowered the temperature?

My multiple communications to my MP, have expressed a sincere exhortation to lower the temperature.

And I meant to 7ECA — “how about (Trudeau) not raising it in the first place”.

Yes but you didn’t answer my question. Do you think YOUR posts are raising or lowering the temperature?

Don't be silly. Lowering the temperature is for other people to do!

[rookiepilot]

My multiple communications to my MP, have expressed a sincere exhortation to lower the temperature.

And I meant to 7ECA — “how about (Trudeau) not raising it in the first place”.

Yes but you didn’t answer my question. Do you think YOUR posts are raising or lowering the temperature?

Don't be silly. Lowering the temperature is for other people to do!

If I have lied, show me, I’ll correct it.

This is a very big deal. Not a little noise, what is happening.

Hence I have written my MP 4 times about it.

[photofly]

Yes but you didn’t answer my question. Do you think YOUR posts are raising or lowering the temperature?

Don't be silly. Lowering the temperature is for other people to do!

If I have lied, show me, I’ll correct it.

One doesn't lower the temperature by being "right" or pointing out how "right" one was. One lowers the temperature by pointing out that the other side can be "right", too.

This is a very big deal. Not a little noise, what is happening.

No doubt it is a very big deal. Which is why lowering the temperature is important. Are you actively contributing to that? Or is that something for everyone else to achieve?

Hence I have written my MP 4 times about it.

One can only imagine the joy with which each missive is received

[rookiepilot]

Don't be silly. Lowering the temperature is for other people to do!

If I have lied, show me, I’ll correct it.

One doesn't lower the temperature by being "right" or pointing out how "right" one was. One lowers the temperature by pointing out that the other side can be "right", too.

This is a very big deal. Not a little noise, what is happening.

Hence I have written my MP 4 times about it.

No doubt it is a very big deal. Which is why lowering the temperature is important. Are you actively contributing to that? Or is that something for everyone else to achieve?

No. Here, I’m trying to light a fire under everyone’s ass to write their MP’s.

You asked.

[photofly]

No. Here, I’m trying to light a fire under everyone’s ass to write their MP’s.

You asked.

I can't be sure, but I don't think it's working.

[digits_]

Question for people who grew up in Canada...

Reading posts here and reports in the media and on facebook etc, I can't help but wonder, are Canadians not used to protests?

Allow me to explain. Where I grew up, there were protest on the news pretty much every week. And many more were happening in the capital, which didn't always get reported. If the only thing that happened during a protest was some torched police cars and some non-life threatening injuries, it was a 'good', calm protest.

I've seen protests and gatherings from refugees in public parks and churches, lasting weeks or months. Recurrent protests (weekly) by students skipping school, the yellow jacket protests almost destroying entire streets... When violence and damage to private property happens, that's when the police intervened. But you could tear down statues or spray paint whatever you wanted on public buildings, and the response would be very mild. Eventually the trouble makers would maybe get arrested and fined or convicted. And sometimes a non profit or other organisation would be investigated by the government, and after some months in court corporate accounts could get frozen or seized, but I've never ever heard of people getting their accounts frozen without a trial, and even then, the result was maybe a fine and/or prison, but rarely, if ever, freezing of personal accounts.

Which brings me to my second question: why this reaction of freezing accounts and refusing to talk to the protesters?
It's nice to let the mind wander and come up with all kinds of conspiracy theories, but what would make this acceptable from a Canadian culture point of view? I don't often agree with politicians, but most of the time I can understand why they are doing something they are doing. But for this particular event, I truly am flabbergasted as to why this seems to bug the government so much.

If this event were to happen where I grew up -and similar things did, eg farmers protesting against milk quote in tractor convoys-, the government would actually provide basic infrastructure such as portable toilets to minimize the inconvenience for other citizens.

Anyway, wondering if someone could attempt to answer this somewhat objectively....

Quite simple....we don't want our country being like France. Repeated strikes, violent protests, taxpayers actually paying for people who are out to inconvenience others.

I can understand that sentiment, but it doesn't really explain why the PM wouldn't address the protesters and started calling them names from day one. At that point, nobody expected it to last for 3 weeks.

[Aviatard]

If I have lied, show me, I’ll correct it.

One doesn't lower the temperature by being "right" or pointing out how "right" one was. One lowers the temperature by pointing out that the other side can be "right", too.

This is a very big deal. Not a little noise, what is happening.

Hence I have written my MP 4 times about it.

No doubt it is a very big deal. Which is why lowering the temperature is important. Are you actively contributing to that? Or is that something for everyone else to achieve?

No. Here, I’m trying to light a fire under everyone’s ass to write their MP’s.

You asked.

No to which? No you’re not actively contributing to “lowering the temperature?” Or No it’s not something for everyone else to achieve?

Maybe you should be a politician considering how difficult it it to get you to answer a simple yes or no question.

[tsgarp]

If January 6th wasn't seditious, or an attempted insurrection, what fits either definition in your opinion?

Dude, the Jan 6th protesters contained a huge proportion of firearm owners and military veterans. Had they attempted an insurrection, there would have been an insurrection. Your side's continued tactic of deliberately mis-applying labels is doing nothing to build unity, and is in fact isolating you even further from mainstream thought and support.

How does one "lower the temperature", when the intent is the removal of government as one of the core values of the group - above and beyond the stated removal of vaccination mandates for cross border truckers? Of course, we later saw the messaging morph into a hodgepodge of demands...

Sedition is telling people to pick up weapons and go remove a government. Telling people to disobey a government, calling on a government or portions thereof to resign or calling on one section of a government is protesting. Disobeying the police and breaking the law in support of a moral principle is civil disobedience, (Go read up on Gandhi), not insurrection nor sedition. Please see my previous comments about unity and mainstream thought.

[tsgarp]

snip

[pelmet]

Any surprise to see this......Arrest them and freeze their bank accounts to pay for the costs they incur, as should be done here.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/science/ ... d=msedgntp

[WellThatAgedWell]

No. Here, I’m trying to light a fire under everyone’s ass to write their MP’s.

You asked.

I can't be sure, but I don't think it's working.

I have written my MP and MPP today to voice my concerns about the state of Canada.

I guess lots of Canadians don’t like freedoms and prefer government control. Must be the case the way Justin and Jagmeet are leading. Very strange times! I like to think this is not true, so we will have to see how much longer Trudeau will last as the liberal leader. I’m optimistic he will be gone shortly as this plan hopefully backfires.

[tsgarp]

No. Here, I’m trying to light a fire under everyone’s ass to write their MP’s.

You asked.

I can't be sure, but I don't think it's working.

I have written my MP and MPP today to voice my concerns about the state of Canada.

I guess lots of Canadians don’t like freedoms and prefer government control. Must be the case the way Justin and Jagmeet are leading. Very strange times! I like to think this is not true, so we will have to see how much longer Trudeau will last as the liberal leader. I’m optimistic he will be gone shortly as this plan hopefully backfires.

He's a tyrant. He has literally said that he admires a 'Basic Dictatorship' as a form of government. He has literal said that this country belongs to Quebec.

[tsgarp]

Taking a step back from individual cases, do you think it's appropriate for people to give money to ad-hoc protest movements?
Or, to put it another way, do you think it's appropriate for ad-hoc protest movements to be supplied with millions of dollars of funds?

Yes.

[tsgarp]

Any surprise to see this......Arrest them and freeze their bank accounts to pay for the costs they incur, as should be done here.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/science/ ... d=msedgntp

The left had better pray that they never face another Conservative majority. If the precedent set by the current Liberal government is applied to the left wing protest groups, they, and all their members will be starving on the street.

[rookiepilot]

+1000.

WSJ Editorial.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/justin-tru ... 1645223027

In case missed, the Civil Liberties association is suing:

https://ccla.org/press-release/ccla-wil ... n-court-2/

https://ccla.org/press-release/ccla-cal ... emergency/

[photofly]

Taking a step back from individual cases, do you think it's appropriate for people to give money to ad-hoc protest movements?
Or, to put it another way, do you think it's appropriate for ad-hoc protest movements to be supplied with millions of dollars of funds?

Yes.

You really can’t see any problems with that, at all?

[Antique Pilot]

Any surprise to see this......Arrest them and freeze their bank accounts to pay for the costs they incur, as should be done here.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/science/ ... d=msedgntp

The left had better pray that they never face another Conservative majority. If the precedent set by the current Liberal government is applied to the left wing protest groups, they, and all their members will be starving on the street.

One of the many provisions of the Emergencies Act is the ability to seize bank accounts. The Emergencies Act was passed by the government of that left leaning radical Brian Mulroney in 1988.

AP

[digits_]

Taking a step back from individual cases, do you think it's appropriate for people to give money to ad-hoc protest movements?
Or, to put it another way, do you think it's appropriate for ad-hoc protest movements to be supplied with millions of dollars of funds?

Yes.

You really can’t see any problems with that, at all?

Why would that be a problem? If this would not be allowed, protesting would only be available to the richer part of society.
Funding protests means transportation can be organised to get more people to the protest location (especially in a country as vast as Canada). Or allow people to take unpaid time off work.

Anyone protesting is donating their time. It's nice that here is an option for people who want to support the protest but are unable or unwilling to donate their time.

Political campaigns are often won or lost due to a lack of funds. It would only be weird that protesters are not allowed to use the same tools to get their point across. Even if it is just to make banners or flyers.

[photofly]

Yes.

You really can’t see any problems with that, at all?

Why would that be a problem? If this would not be allowed, protesting would only be available to the richer part of society.
Funding protests means transportation can be organised to get more people to the protest location (especially in a country as vast as Canada). Or allow people to take unpaid time off work.

Anyone protesting is donating their time. It's nice that here is an option for people who want to support the protest but are unable or unwilling to donate their time.

Political campaigns are often won or lost due to a lack of funds. It would only be weird that protesters are not allowed to use the same tools to get their point across. Even if it is just to make banners or flyers.

Why do you think fundraising by political parties is controlled and limited?

Why are charities, which are entitled to campaign for and accept unlimited donations, not permitted to engage in political campaigning?

Are you aware of the financial reporting obligations on charities?

What are money laundering regulations for?

Given that it is is illegal for the Conservative Party to accept millions of anonymous dollars from abroad to “bring down” the liberal government, why is it ok for Tamara Lich to do it?

[digits_]

You really can’t see any problems with that, at all?

Why would that be a problem? If this would not be allowed, protesting would only be available to the richer part of society.
Funding protests means transportation can be organised to get more people to the protest location (especially in a country as vast as Canada). Or allow people to take unpaid time off work.

Anyone protesting is donating their time. It's nice that here is an option for people who want to support the protest but are unable or unwilling to donate their time.

Political campaigns are often won or lost due to a lack of funds. It would only be weird that protesters are not allowed to use the same tools to get their point across. Even if it is just to make banners or flyers.

Why do you think fundraising by political parties is controlled and limited?

Why are charities, which are entitled to campaign for and accept unlimited donations, not permitted to engage in political campaigning?

Are you aware of the financial reporting obligations on charities?

What are money laundering regulations for?

You're answering questions by asking more questions. Your intial question was about what the problems would be with funding a protest.
Your follow up questions are about the current situation. I don't know the details about the current legal situation regarding charities and political donations, but that doesn't matter to answer your initial question. I stand by my answer there.


Now why do you think it *is* a problem?

[digits_]

Given that it is is illegal for the Conservative Party to accept millions of anonymous dollars from abroad to “bring down” the liberal government, why is it ok for Tamara Lich to do it?

Then limit the donations to the same amount as political parties may receive. I doubt the total donated amount to the freedom convoy was anywhere close to what established political parties achieve.

And if super shady things are happening (purchasing of weapons, bribing officials, hiring mercenaries, etc), you can freeze the organisation's account and investigate. But not indiviual protester's accounts.

[Aviatard]

+1000.

WSJ Editorial.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/justin-tru ... 1645223027

In case missed, the Civil Liberties association is suing:

https://ccla.org/press-release/ccla-wil ... n-court-2/

https://ccla.org/press-release/ccla-cal ... emergency/

Continuing the chill, togetherness, tone down the rhetoric vibe I see.

[photofly]

Why would that be a problem? If this would not be allowed, protesting would only be available to the richer part of society.
Funding protests means transportation can be organised to get more people to the protest location (especially in a country as vast as Canada). Or allow people to take unpaid time off work.

Anyone protesting is donating their time. It's nice that here is an option for people who want to support the protest but are unable or unwilling to donate their time.

Political campaigns are often won or lost due to a lack of funds. It would only be weird that protesters are not allowed to use the same tools to get their point across. Even if it is just to make banners or flyers.

Why do you think fundraising by political parties is controlled and limited?

Why are charities, which are entitled to campaign for and accept unlimited donations, not permitted to engage in political campaigning?

Are you aware of the financial reporting obligations on charities?

What are money laundering regulations for?

You're answering questions by asking more questions. Your intial question was about what the problems would be with funding a protest.
Your follow up questions are about the current situation. I don't know the details about the current legal situation regarding charities and political donations, but that doesn't matter to answer your initial question. I stand by my answer there.


Now why do you think it *is* a problem?

I’m saying that, for better or worse (I personally think much for the better) there’s a tight lid on money that can be used in politics. There’s no way that people are going to be permitted to use multi-million dollar slush funds for seditious campaigns. For as long as goFundMe were being “responsible” about disbursing funds the status quo could be left to lie. As soon as a foreign organization outside the jurisdiction of the Canadian government did an end run around that, the government had no choice but to step in. Most of the emergency powers will be removed, but permanent money control legislation will be introduced. You can thank Tamara Lich and GiveSendGo for it.

Then limit the donations to the same amount as political parties may receive. I doubt the total donated amount to the freedom convoy was anywhere close to what established political parties achieve.

Alas, it’s too late for that, as your American friends pointed out that they are outside the jurisdiction of Canada to limit donations or disbursements. On Twitter. Proudly.

In terms of amounts, this protest allegedly raised in two weeks double what the Liberals raised by donations for the entire 2009 election campaign.

[rookiepilot]

+1000.

WSJ Editorial.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/justin-tru ... 1645223027

In case missed, the Civil Liberties association is suing:

https://ccla.org/press-release/ccla-wil ... n-court-2/

https://ccla.org/press-release/ccla-cal ... emergency/

Continuing the chill, togetherness, tone down the rhetoric vibe I see.

Oh yeah. The Wall Street Journal is a hard right, inflammatory, fringe publication.

Thanks for reminding me.

And the Civil Liberties association is a Conservative Party mouthpiece— isn’t it?

Don’t you and others find it revealing that all sides of the spectrum are heavily criticizing the government’s actions here?

[digits_]

Most of the emergency powers will be removed,

That is extremely scary if that turns out to be true.

but permanent money control legislation will be introduced. You can thank Tamara Lich and GiveSendGo for it.

No, I will hold the politicians responsible who will come up with the new legislation. There is a big spectrum of legislation available between "you can't donate to any protesters or we will confiscate your personal accounts" vs "donation to protesters are limited to the same as political donations"

Then limit the donations to the same amount as political parties may receive. I doubt the total donated amount to the freedom convoy was anywhere close to what established political parties achieve.

Alas, it’s too late for that, as your American friends pointed out that they are outside the jurisdiction of Canada to limit donations or disbursements. On Twitter. Proudly.

In terms of amounts, this protest allegedly raised in two weeks double what the Liberals raised by donations for the entire 2009 election campaign.

Still, that's what, 10 million dollars vs a federal government? Does that warrant emergency powers to deal with it? Pretty sure every city has multiple companies controlling more than 10 million dollars. Money in itself doesn't do anything -except give a signal-, it's how it is being spent that could be controlled.


There would be lots of similarities with saying "protesters could damage stuff, so from now on, protesting is prohibited".

Part of why protests are scary -or should be scary- is that they can grow. While politicians have no duty to help them grow, they shouldn't be given too many tools to slash them down either.

If 51% of the population votes that the other 49% have to pay all taxes and do all the work -which is perfectly democratic-, the 49% should have the tools and the financing to protest.