Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Freedom Convoy organizer Tamara Lich denied bail
Comments
-
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
-
Oscar Wilde?RaceBannon said:
Fuck off fascistHHusky said:
I didn't, but please add it to the list of my imagined sins.RaceBannon said:
You cared so much you stayed silent for the year of 2020HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
Fuck off -
I know you won't respond because you're a pathetic fucking Kunt but tell us why the MAGA Shaman was put into solitary, what were his other offenses besides trespassing and disrupting an official proceeding? Now go run and hide Kunt.MelloDawg said:
Ok.Sledog said:
Explain why people are in jail denied bail or hearings and in solitary confinement for trespassing. Please name another instance of this occurring in our nation besides Jan 6th. I'll wait.HHusky said:Public bail hearing is fascist too? You gals do get hysterical.
Shouldn't take a legal scholar long to do so. -
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details. -
Preferable to open warfare.SFGbob said:
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details. -
You gave zero fucks while the US burned under BLM and Antifa rioters.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
Fuck off.
-
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.
Someone is arguing none of this is a big deal? Take it easy on the strawman, blob.
-
Not only did he give zero fucks, he attacked and smeared the people who were trying to stop it.PurpleThrobber said:
You gave zero fucks while the US burned under BLM and Antifa rioters.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
Fuck off. -
@HHusky
So it wasn't just put into place....HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
The need to fuck that straw man in every reply is amazing
So its cool because 1988 and stuff and freeze but don't seize bank accounts. Mostly peaceful starving
Boot licker -
No anarchists are on my team. Too bad you can't say the same.PurpleThrobber said:
You gave zero fucks while the US burned under BLM and Antifa rioters.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
Fuck off. -
Quiet kids! Swaye and I are having an adult conversation.hardhat said:
Preferable to open warfare.SFGbob said:
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details. -
BLM and Antifa are your teamHHusky said:
No anarchists are on my team. Too bad you can't say the same.PurpleThrobber said:
You gave zero fucks while the US burned under BLM and Antifa rioters.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
Fuck off.
Why the need to lie so much?
The people you voted for cheered them on as well. So did Mini Castro in Canada
The internet is forever. Tough on liars like you -
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.HHusky said:
Someone is arguing none of this is a big deal? Take it easy on the strawman, blob.
oh the irony. You are King Strawman. -
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.HHusky said:
Someone is arguing none of this is a big deal? Take it easy on the strawman, blob.
You're arguing that what Trudeau is currently doing now in Canada is lawfully enacted and no big deal. Go fuck yourself Dazzler. Your entire response was an attempt to minimize what Trudeau is actually doing.
You can stick your strawman up your ass Dazzler. -
Someone is arguing none of this is a big deal? Take it easy on the strawman, blob.SFGbob said:
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.HHusky said:
You're arguing that what Trudeau is currently doing now in Canada is lawfully enacted and no big deal. Go fuck yourself Dazzler. Your entire response was an attempt to minimize what Trudeau is actually doing.
You can stick your strawman up your ass Dazzler.
It was passed in 1988!!!!! -
Fucking Antifa and BLM are arms of the Rat party Dazzler. Own your shit.HHusky said:
No anarchists are on my team. Too bad you can't say the same.PurpleThrobber said:
You gave zero fucks while the US burned under BLM and Antifa rioters.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
Fuck off. -
"The people you voted for . . . " typically signals the futility of trying to engage.RaceBannon said:
BLM and Antifa are your teamHHusky said:
No anarchists are on my team. Too bad you can't say the same.PurpleThrobber said:
You gave zero fucks while the US burned under BLM and Antifa rioters.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
Fuck off.
Why the need to lie so much?
The people you voted for cheered them on as well. So did Mini Castro in Canada
The internet is forever. Tough on liars like you -
You sit at the kids table. 1/2 of what you said sounds reasonable. Then you slide back into weasel words and refused to answer if you think it's an overreach what is being done to peaceful protestors.HHusky said:
Quiet kids! Swaye and I are having an adult conversation.hardhat said:
Preferable to open warfare.SFGbob said:
Hey, tossing Japanese Americans into camps was no big deal. It was lawfully enacted.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details. -
The futility comes from you being a moron and an easy markHHusky said:
"The people you voted for . . . " typically signals the futility of trying to engage.RaceBannon said:
BLM and Antifa are your teamHHusky said:
No anarchists are on my team. Too bad you can't say the same.PurpleThrobber said:
You gave zero fucks while the US burned under BLM and Antifa rioters.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
Fuck off.
Why the need to lie so much?
The people you voted for cheered them on as well. So did Mini Castro in Canada
The internet is forever. Tough on liars like you
These are your people. You stood by while America burned and blamed Trump
The blood is on your hypocritical hands
Engage this bitch -
I appreciate you answering clearly. Only question you didn't answer, and this gets to the root of it for me, is *should* bank freezes be used in *this* instance. I disagree with you that Emergency Powers should exist, but I can see how reasonable people can disagree on this.HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
My issue is in it's application. Even Canadas version of the ACLU (not a conservative organization) has said this is an overreach. I think most rational actors see these emergency powers being used for some 9-11 type situation, not some trucks blocking a road (incidentally that is why I believe we SHOULD not have these type of powers - they are ripe for abuse). So, fair enough that you think these powers should reside with the federal government. But do you, in this instance, think the truckers are actual terrorists? Trudy said they are, and the financial instruments being used were cited as being available to stop "terrorist networks." Are a bunch of working class truckers parked on a bridge *really* an existential threat to democracy in Canada?
I believe casting thousands of hard working people who are pissed off about Covid policies as terrorists bent on the overthrow of the government is a sad state of affairs. And clear tyrannical overreach.
edit: I am ASSUMING Canadas ACLU that came out against these action are liberal - I should be fair and say that was an assumption. I don't really know what their political bent is. Poont of clarification.
edit 2: It appears the Canadian Civil Liberties Association is a liberal group (no deep research here), and I just realized they have sued Trudy to have the Emergency Powers stopped. Interesting. I did not know that. -
Biden thinks parents of school kids are terrorists. He routinely calls his opponents racist and his underlings call us terrorists and nazis and confederates
As does H. I know he agrees with the fascist. He is one
But no mean tweets
H also thinks the unvaxxed should be denied medical care
-
HHusky: "It's not tyranny if it's allowed under law."HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details. -
The POS that murdered the Uber driver with 4 kids was out on bail. She begged for her life and he shot her in the back of the head. Cause too many black guys in prison or something, something.RaceBannon said:The guy who shot that mayor got bail
Many fine criminals get out on no bail and offend again and again
And people just take it because to point it out isn't classy
-
Shitty human being says what?HHusky said:Public bail hearing is fascist too? You gals do get hysterical.
-
Shitty human being says what?HHusky said: -
Shitty human being says what?HHusky said:
Mostly peaceful blockade.RaceBannon said:
Peaceful protest and no bail period -
Shitty human being says what?HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here. -
He gives bootlickers a bad name, they disown him because they have more character.RaceBannon said:
Fuck off boot lickerHHusky said:
Mostly peaceful blockade.RaceBannon said:
Peaceful protest and no bail period -
Shitty human being says what?HHusky said:
I didn't, but please add it to the list of my imagined sins.RaceBannon said:
You cared so much you stayed silent for the year of 2020HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
Fuck off -
Shitty human being says what?HHusky said:
Whether you think Canada's Emergency Powers Act is a good law or not, it is a lawfully enacted statute, and we are well removed from its 1988 passage, so it isn't some hastily erected device designed to give Justin Trudeau supreme and perpetual power. Those powers have to be renewed by Parliament, as I understand it. These things alone make the situation very much unlike Vlad Putin signing a bill he asked for that makes Vlad Putin President for Life. What we have in Canada is not tyranny and it may even be wise to have such a law on the books. Whether there were better options than invoking the law in any particular case is a fair question, of course.Swaye said:
I will not go into the summer of love and your position on that, but instead will pivot and say that I actually agree with you on one vital point - the truckers should not have been allowed to shut down city and bridge movement indefinitely. I think they should have made their point for a week, made a lot of discomfort, then gone and parked the trucks legally somewhere and continued their peaceful protest complete with bouncy castles on the streets, but sans illegally parked trucks. I actually believe just not delivering supplies to the cities for about a month would have made their point way better than the bridge fiasco to be completely honest.HHusky said:
I don't think "protests" should be permitted to shut a city down indefinitely. I don't really care what the cause is or whether I agree with it or not.hardhat said:Who was hysterical about 'fascism' and 'daddy' the past five years? And who is cheering on fascism and authoritarian actions now?
Ann Davison voter here.
See I can't be a "law and order" guy and say anything else. Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest. This is how I would have done things.
So, since we are all being honest now, will you concede that labelling them all as terrorists and freezing their bank accounts is an enormous overreach and tyrannical act? Couldn't some tow truck providers have been compelled to tow the trucks without stealing the bank accounts? And what about the people who sent them 100 bucks? Should they be labelled terrorists and have their bank accounts stolen as well? I mean that is what is happening. Or is Trudy acting like a fascist and a liar? I am wondering what your honest opinion is about BOTH sides.
@HHusky
"Make your point with civil disobedience, then follow the law and continue your protest." I strongly agree.
I was as weary with the "Summer of Love" as anyone. Cops kill too many people unnecessarily in this country. We get it; I've said it myself. But I still don't want my town to be a war zone, and I voted against any candidate who thought we could solve society's ills by cutting some arbitrary percentage of funding from the police. If anything, we need to make becoming a police officer a more competitive process, attracting better candidates. That would imply more funding, not less.
Freezing accounts? I prefer it to open warfare, and it is one of the emergency powers the Canadian statute provides, not something the current government invented on the spot. Freezing accounts is much different than seizing them. The former is potentially a useful, temporary emergency power; the latter should require due process. As with most harsh measures, the devil is in the details.
