Author Topic: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)  (Read 22682 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8950
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1530 on: February 20, 2023, 07:37:45 pm »
Your personalization of the debate is strangely shady-like, Junior. But since waldo already showed how the Charter was still supported, how come---Charter warrior that you now are---you said nothing about peepee's support this week for provinces being able to pre-emptively use the notwithstanding clause?

https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/robert-libman-so-much-for-poilievres-championing-of-freedom

I don't particularly like Peepee or support him.   I don't think he should have supported the convoy protestors who were engaging in illegal actions. I've never heard of this story before.  I'll have to read it when I have more time.

It doesn't matter what waldo or the government says.  The Emergencies Act took away people's charter rights.   What do you think the Act is for anyways?

They violated freedom of movement and freedom of association (blocked off public streets downtown, didn't allow children into the protest area) and froze people's bank accounts, which probably falls under search and seizure or whatnot.  Maybe there's other violations I'm missing
I queef, therefore I am.

Offline Bubbermiley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3437
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1531 on: February 20, 2023, 08:43:50 pm »
Waldo has already pointed out how the Charter accomodates necessary use of the Emergencies Act and it's use has already been deemed appropriate. That's why they didn't need to use the notwithstanding clause---because the Charter wasn't violated.
Meanwhile Ford has violated it just to engage in union busting...but nary a peep.

Offline bcsapper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1698
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1532 on: February 20, 2023, 08:45:53 pm »
I don't particularly like Peepee or support him.   I don't think he should have supported the convoy protestors who were engaging in illegal actions. I've never heard of this story before.  I'll have to read it when I have more time.

It doesn't matter what waldo or the government says.  The Emergencies Act took away people's charter rights.   What do you think the Act is for anyways?

They violated freedom of movement and freedom of association (blocked off public streets downtown, didn't allow children into the protest area) and froze people's bank accounts, which probably falls under search and seizure or whatnot.  Maybe there's other violations I'm missing

Didn't the truckers violate freedom of movement and freedom of association for everyone else?  And freedom of sleep.  They should all be in jail.
Time for bed said Zebedee...

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8950
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1533 on: February 21, 2023, 12:55:05 am »
Waldo has already pointed out how the Charter accomodates necessary use of the Emergencies Act and it's use has already been deemed appropriate. That's why they didn't need to use the notwithstanding clause---because the Charter wasn't violated.
Meanwhile Ford has violated it just to engage in union busting...but nary a peep.

What up with the whattaboutism?

So you're saying something like since the Charter says the
emergencies Act can crap all over our Charter rights legally that Charter rights weren't violated?

The Charter sure is flawed.  Wtf the purpose of it if politicians can take a dump on it whenever they like.  Pierre Trudeau is a moron for making this garbage.

Can Doug Ford just use the notwithstanding clause and start raping babies?  F*ck this retarded country.   I'd move to America if it wasn't strapped to the eyeballs.
I queef, therefore I am.

Offline Queefer Sutherland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8950
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1534 on: February 21, 2023, 12:56:12 am »
Didn't the truckers violate freedom of movement and freedom of association for everyone else?  And freedom of sleep.  They should all be in jail.

They should have been arrested.  The police were scared of bumpy castles.
I queef, therefore I am.
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline Bubbermiley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3437
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1535 on: February 21, 2023, 06:02:54 am »
Actually it was Sterling Lyon who came up with the notwithstanding clause, not Pierre. Pierre didn't want it at all.
And it isn't exactly whataboutism to point out that Trudeau's actions were consistent with the Charter but Ford's were not.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8451
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1536 on: February 21, 2023, 09:11:22 am »
They should have been arrested.  The police were scared of bumpy castles.

Having to shut down Rideau Centre resulted in 20 million a week in lost revenues and lots of lost jobs.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline bcsapper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1698
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1537 on: February 21, 2023, 10:16:03 am »
They should have been arrested.  The police were scared of bumpy castles.

What bumpy castles?  Were they blocking a bridge?  Were they disturbing the peace?   Were they storing weapons in the Coutts castle?

Those damn castles!
Time for bed said Zebedee...
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6987
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1538 on: February 21, 2023, 10:40:18 am »
own it Poilievre!


Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6987
Re: Trucker convoy (non-censor edition)
« Reply #1539 on: February 21, 2023, 11:37:49 am »
re: Report of the Public Inquiry into the 2022 Public Order Emergency

Quote from: Commissioner Paul Rouleau
I find the province of Ontario's reluctance to become fully engaged in such efforts directed at resolving the situation in Ottawa troubling. Premier Doug Ford and his cabinet were absent during a crisis in a city in their jurisdiction and skipped out on two "tripartite meetings" with federal and city representatives trying to collaborate on a plan. Given that the city and its police service were clearly overwhelmed, it was incumbent on the province to become visibly, publicly and wholeheartedly engaged from the outset.