Not legitimately when the targeting of civilians comes first.
Sadly, I must admit America has used that excuse in nearly every military action I know of….targeting civilians and using any retaliation as pretext.

Not being an expert as to the rules of war I wonder if civilians throwing firebombs gives an out for the attackers being called out for war crimes targeting civilians?

@newtboy,

A company cancelling a multi-billion dollar project means multi-billion dollars not spent on the work of the project, that many jobs out of the economy. Exactly the same as a car manufacturer shutting down for a week, by your logic nothing was lost, the company just stopped spending money for a couple days...

I only support the groups right to protest, and not to illegally block roads or borders. I stand by my wish is for their prompt arrest when illegal blocking roads, borders or places of business.

That said, I believe it also wrong of me to fail to point out that our federal government has continually refused to act as I would wish in promptly shutting down illegal blockades. This is the very first instance were they've shown any interest in a prompt police enforced end, and they've in fact jump much further to invoking a declaration of national emergency so they can also target protesters bank accounts directly and without court orders.

An analogy would be someone that supports arresting people for possession of marijuana. The government then proceeds to only selectively enforce that law, say only acting to make arrests when people are a particular creed or color. It's perfectly consistent to believe the government arrests are wrong and unfair, and to NOT support them, while at the same time still believing the idea of the rule applied fairly being a good idea.

One side is about what I think the line for protest should be:
-I believe the right to protest should be independent of creed or belief, and should only be restricted when actions taken are illegal.(Ideally illegal being defined as impeding on freedoms of others)

By that, the convoy blockade of border or streets should have led to immediate arrests.

In the eye of fairness though, the last two years have already seen at a minimum 3 major protests, that included illegal blockades of work sites and railways and those were ALL allowed to run for weeks and in 2 cases months. The government of the day even tripped over themselves to message their support for the overall causes of the protestors.

In that light, it's wrong to simply ignore the fact that the first protest that is likely to vote conservative is the ONLY one where the government immediately condemns everything about them and feels compelled to intervene urgently.

Churches were literally burning last summer, and our PM's public statements spent most of their time sympathizing with the anger before pleading that burning churches isn't helpful. Where'd all that compassion for folks that you disagree with go when it meant a small number of downtown Ottawa business shutdown and horns honking go. Now our PM invokes terrorizing of the populace.

Trudeau's actions have been distressingly similar to Trump's as the division in our country grows, he's using his words to reach out to the extreme end of his side of the aisle, while tossing gasoline and vitriol onto his opposition. It's making things worse in the worst possible way when we need leaders uniting instead of stoking further division.

I read it, nowhere did it give an estimate of what those protests cost, and it indicated there were multiple other routes for the oil to travel so didn’t even disrupt oil transportation completely, much less ALL commerce.
And it was about pipelines crossing their (or protected) land it seems, a far cry from the truckers. Yes, the validity and severity of your cause matters, just like the damage you do and to whom.

Billions worth of goods stuck temporarily…but no actual estimated cost for their delay, this cost billions in lost production and salaries that won’t be recovered.

That protest was targeted against the offending entity, not the populace. I have no issue with natives blockading their own land and preserves that feed those reservations against permanent destruction for some private profits. That’s a far cry from the truckers blockading the main border crossing for industry and tourism because they’re afraid to get a poke.

The numbers I saw were special. Hundreds of millions-billions lost (your billions in goods delayed doesn’t have a price tag). That was before the bridge was reopened. These protesters weren’t satisfied with that damage and continued to close your capitol with ever shifting demands. Since regular measures had failed, I support emergency measures, seizure, even forfeiture after trial, of any funds or tools used.

Perhaps they became only as localized (but certainly not as targeted, and localized in a city not the unpopulated country), but they had already done exponentially more damage and showed no sign of end or even demands.

Let’s ignore someone personally supporting a grass roots movement outside their country and control, please. I find it a red herring totally unconnected to how he governs.

Yes, some Floyd protests were more violent than the truckers, some weren’t, remember how they were all violently smashed, tear gassed, rubber bullets galore, run through with police trucks, unmarked vans pulling up and grabbing people crossing the streets, unmarked vans driving through towns full of police shooting tear gas at any moving body, etc? Don’t pretend the response is similar.
Also, the Floyd protests lasted a weekend in most cases (occupy Portland really wasn’t about Floyd) and went elsewhere the next march. They weren’t closing down one area for weeks intent on staying. Most lasted hours and were peaceful until police became violent, despite right wing media’s fear-mongering.

I think you’re stretching, putting on blinders, and doing insane mental gymnastics to pretend you believe that. From the actual damage caused, the idiotic reasoning behind it (quickly abandoned), the extremely uncanadianness of the self centered far right rally masquerading as protest, the international damage, the foreign involvement from planning to funding, these are unique “protests” in numerous ways.

Their idiotic beliefs are only one of many distinctions I’ve pointed out, and as I mentioned only color public opinion and the amount of patience they’re given by the public, not how the government treats them. It’s not at all honest for you to pretend that’s the entirety of my position…it’s very Bob of you, and has lost some of my respect.

Pipelines crossing sovereign territory or preserves = bad so blockading those areas to force pipeline movement = good….oil companies didn’t truck the oil out, they increased shipments from other areas by rail. Read the article you linked.

Native cultures and governments are different. Pretending an elected board for a reservation works for the people is naive in the extreme. Read about politics on reservations, who funds the people that get elected in most cases, what happens to opposing candidates…saying the board signed off while so many showed up to fight against it seems a bit at odds, no? Like maybe the board members were bribed, had ties with the oil industry, or other conflicts….just maybe?

And again, those protests didn’t cost a fraction what the truckers did from my research. Delaying delivery of a billion in goods isn’t the same as costing a billion in losses. Neither is delaying or cancelling a billion dollar project. Be adult please….don’t make such specious arguments ….please. They don’t slip by, and they make me think you are being disingenuous.

Economic disruption of the blockades was similar to the Mohawk blockade of railways about 2 years ago:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ottawa-rejects-police-intervention-to-put-an-end-to-blockades/

Similarly, mass lay offs and multi-billions of dollars of goods stuck sitting around waiting to get to the industries needing them.

Since at least 2012 the attempted expansion of an existing pipeline(Trans Mountain) was targeted continuously by blockades. Opposition and resulting delays leading to cost overruns so large that company ultimately halted the multi-billion dollar project.

In terms of dollars being lost, the convoy protest wasn't special. More over, the blockade of the border in Ontario that was causing the real economic damage was dismantled and removed before the 'emergency measures' were enacted. Which is to state, the emergency measures were primarily intended to clear out downtown Ottawa. In downtown Ottawa though, the damages were at minimum as localized as any of the lumber or pipeline blockades mentioned.


Prime Minister Trudeau couldn't be more unequivocal when he was expressing his support for the farmer protests in India and the Floyd protests in the US. Clip if you'd like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9EaSF6Y0eE

The protests in India absolutely did immensely more harm to India's economy than the convoy here did in Canada. The protests in support of Floyd were again unequivocally more violent than the convoy in Canada.

There really is no basis by which to point to the convoy's actions and find them in any way unique or distinct from multiple other protests within Canada, or ones abroad that have been either given more latitude, or outright embraced and supported.

The distinction as even you can't resist going after, is that their beliefs they are protesting for are stupid and wrong, so no right to protest for them. That isn't how the right to protest within a democracy should be allowed to work.

I also have to point out the 'ethical' argument isn't as cut and dry as you want to make it out either.
-Pipelines bad so blockading is good ignores the fact the same oil gets pumped regardless, it just gets loaded into trucks that burn even more oil to haul it and have a fair greater risk of accidents and spills.
-Defending the rights and lands of Aboriginal peoples(like at Coastal Gas Link site violently attacked with millions in damages while the convoy was being vilified for 'incitement') is anything but obvious. The Wet'suwet'en hereditary leaders made claim to parts of the pipeline route and demanded it be shut down. However, the same Wet'suwet'en people's multiple elected Band Councils signed on with their wishes to proceed with the project. In fact, ALL elected representatives of ALL the Bands with land along the route had ALL signed onto the project and wanting it to proceed. It is in no way obvious that ignoring the will of those other bands to favour the conflicting claims of the hereditary leaders is clearly the most respectful of the people's wishes.

The protests you mentioned didn’t halt commerce for huge swaths of your, and our country, did they? Severity and ubiquity of impacts matter.

Lemme ask you, did this protest ask for dialog, or outright refuse it?

None of the other protests intentionally caused as much collateral damage as possible. It’s not their cause, it’s their methodology and severity of the results.

It’s not about their cause du jure, it’s about their methods, causing economic damage as deep and widespread as possible. I’ll ask, did the other protests you mentioned try to shut the country down for their cause, or were they targeted against the industries/entities they were protesting?

I’m pretty certain that, had they not blocked freeways, border crossings, cities, and industries their protests wouldn’t be being broken up and protesters wouldn’t be arrested. Again, it’s not the why, it’s the how that’s an issue. Their methods aren’t the same as other tolerated protests in severity nor focus.

BUT…there is a significant difference, morally, ethically, and logically between protesting being murdered by police or protesting your last tiny bit of sovereign land or water sources being taken and permanently destroyed by oil companies, and protesting not getting a shot to have the privilege of traveling to another country. I’m far more prepared to be patient for life and death causes than ignorant inconvenience causes.

Edit: P.S. also, “fuck your feelings” goes both ways. These are the same people that took that stance for 4 years here (some still do). When you tell people “fuck your feelings” in response to any subject, any complaints, it’s pretty ridiculous to expect those same people to respect your feelings, especially while you honk a truck horn in their back yard all night for weeks. In my neighborhood, there would have been burning trucks night one, and peace night 2….but I’m a native Texan, kind of the opposite of a Canadian.

90%? You underestimate by 9.99% IMO.

I’ve seen assaults. I’ve seen disturbing the peace in residential neighborhoods 24/7 for weeks on end. I’ve seen what amounts to kidnapping (trapping people in their cars on the street and blockading them in).
BTW, we aren’t India, more money was lost at this one crossing than if you blockaded all of India for the same timeframe. In America, we don’t just let other people block our borders….that’s our thing!

No, the bridge was not part of a recent past long term blockade, no farmer blockade shut down auto manufacturing on both sides of the borders or weeks. You are incorrect.

Protests are acceptable, even if they cause inconvenience. Protests without an issue that last for weeks-months with the only intent being causing economic damage aren’t protests, they’re tantrums. These protesters didn’t know why they were there besides getting the liberal out of power through any means.

These “protesters” deserved nothing but ridicule, their anti vax position is ridiculous, they know it, and it’s moot because the mandates change with the severity of the outbreak, and are from both sides of the border….Trudeau can’t force America to drop our mandates, and border crossers must be vaccinated….period. Notice when the mandates being lifted soon was announced they didn’t leave but just changed their demands. It’s not a protest, it’s an economic blackmail attempt.

The problem there is most of the violence was not part of the BLM protests (despite the lies right wing media produced all 2020), they were often nearby, taking advantage of the lowered police presence outside the protests, and often was violence directed at BLM, not coming from them. The people terrorizing and inciting violence, shooting crowds, planting bombs, lighting fires, shooting police, etc were Proud boys and Boogaloo boys…far right anti protesters. The idiots carried their manifestos explaining the false flag operation when they committed their crimes, and were caught repeatedly.

They should have simply used tow trucks, confiscating every truck involved to be sold at auction to pay for some of the exorbitant costs, far more than all summer of BLM and anti BLM protests, btw.

This was a threat to your sovereignty, and wasn’t being addressed by other laws or means (sounded like the police chief was a fan).

Seizure is perfection, but should include oversight (I bet it really does, you aren’t America where we’ve made it legal for police to commit armed robbery with no oversight). Note- seizure is different from forfeiture. They’re likely freezing accounts, not seizing the funds, right? Details matter.

It’s not just what they’re protesting, they don’t even know that themselves, it’s how and where. That said, the total lack of support among the population counts. I would expect any protest protesting against it being illegal to eat live babies to get shut down fast, no matter how civil they were on the streets.

Lemme guess, a pipeline crossing sovereign native lands under protest? Going over aquifers? Through preserves? Pumping tar sands no one really wants?
Millions in damages are an hour of the truck protests. They’re designed to cost tens of millions per day…costing everyone not just the target of their protest.

No known connection to protesters, but you want there to be one and are upset they didn’t just fabricate one? It sounds incredibly likely they’re involved, but without evidence one shouldn’t assign culpability.

They have the right to say anything, they don’t have the right to silence all other discussion and action while they ramble and party for weeks-months because they have nothing to say, but are loving the disruption they’re causing. A strong democracy doesn’t support one tiny group negating the entire continent’s voice for months. That’s what this is, they said their peace by day 2, now it’s not a protest, it’s an economic attack trying to blackmail a country (nearly a continent) into abandoning public health for a TINY minority of morons who want special privileges.

Dumb shit snowflakes have been whining for the last 2 years, ignoring orders to make minor changes for both public health and to be able to reopen quickly, but like spoiled two year olds on time out, you guys kept defying orders, making the pandemic and the shutdowns exponentially worse, and restarting the “time out” clock.
You also complained non stop about shutting down the economy, hurting small businesses and commerce, but when a tiny (100+-) group of mostly white, swastika/confederate flag waiving truckers decide to shut down international commerce, costing hundreds of millions of dollars weekly (more than all rioting damage done in 2020, because they are targeting businesses and commerce) just to throw a tantrum, not achieve a thing, you are not just accepting of it, you support it.
Clearly your complaints about shutting down and hurting the economy to fight Covid and save hundreds of thousands of lives were not genuine since you are happy to do the same and worse to save the feelings of 100 truckers.…fuck your feelings, remember?…...big surprise, bob is a hypocrite willing to say anything to support his position today, including the exact opposite of his position yesterday.

All Trudeau needs to do is confiscate the trucks at gunpoint. Any trucker joining loses his truck. If it’s not their truck, they’ll have a huge bill from the owner.
Also, maybe remove their licenses for 2 years (or until restitution is paid in full). (Edit: nice, seems they actually thought of all that and have made it the law, and added up to a year in prison for those blocking commerce.)

Dumb shit, the restrictions
1)were also USA restrictions, like everyone else, Canadian truckers can’t cross the border without vaccinations. How does Trudeau stop that?…serious question I know you will ignore.
2) were being lifted in short order once the current variant slows its roll or border crossers get vaccinated
3) you really think a few hundred truckers (and a few hundred more rabble rousing morons with them) should have veto power over an entire federal government, and a federal government in another country, don’t you? But only when they look like you and waive confederate and nazi flags.
No, that’s not right? It has nothing to do with race? Why didn’t you support Trump defunding the police and/or removing immunity then?

So incredibly short sighted, myopic, hypocritical, self centered, likely racist, and just plain dumb Bob. You never disappoint.

Lemme guess, you support My Crackhead’s plan to illegally fly a helicopter over the protest and dump thousands of his pillows with bible verses covering them on Canada in a massive foreign littering/proselytizing scheme against a country that’s already banned him from entry. Right?

Not smart for some/ most, agreed. Most people let some one else manage their $. Most people don't watch day to day.

I've been buying stocks for last 20 years. Took a lot of lumps. My main goal was to not to loose my shirt. A lot of lessons learned, mainly what not to do.

Main lesson learned was to find a Amazon.Target, Starbucks or Apple just as they become trendy. If you had bought and hold any of these for the last 10 years, you would be doing just fine. Tesla fits this model. Its 20 years old and finally over last 2 really planted its stake permanently as a auto maker. They are the EV leader.

That being said Tesla is easy to follow and see. There is enough active YouTube channels people reporting daily from around the world on Tesla. A person can fully understand this business and what is going on.

Other companies are more secretive and also no one really cares.


My final thought is this. IMO Tesla is at the same point as when Steve jobs introduced the iPhone in 2006.

Dont you wish you loaded up on apple back in 2006 @ $7 bucks a share? Apple close Friday was $168.

Its about the long game.

So easy to make baseless, fact free opinion only statements, isn’t it?

You might try adult conversation wherein you are expected to back up opinion with facts. Try something new.

It’s true, the withdrawal plan is on Biden, because Trump did not have one at all.


The withdrawal, and the issues with the Taliban taking the billions in weapons we had given the Afghans are 100% on Trump, however. He negotiated the withdrawal with the Taliban after releasing them from prison. They instantly started attacking Afghan targets and Trump gave the Afghans, our allies, zero assistance….then blamed Biden for his mess and losses.
Can you explain why Trump apparently gave up and surrendered unconditionally to the Taliban in 2020? Can you explain not involving the Afghans or our military in his negotiations? Can you even explain setting the enemy free from prison, no strings attached?

The last 4 + months of his presidency, Trump forgot about policies because every waking moment was spent fomenting and perpetrating the big lie, knowing he would lose the election and a coup was his only shot at retaining the power to hide his crimes and debts.

Biden won. Trump isn’t president. No one expected him to be able to put out every dumpster fire Trump left him, he only had to get Trump out. Success. Winner.

Such a sad little man, bob. Defending a failed anti American wannabe dictator for a plan he never had for the withdrawal he negotiated. Why? Dictator Don failed….over and over and over and over and over…….thank goodness. Failure. Loser.

Yeah, the crutch of it for me is the UBI moniker.

What you describe at the end of your post, minimum income, is really just a rewording of the existing social security and welfare systems across the western world. I know they look different in each, but here in Canada what you describe is more or less our already existing system's design goal. Welfare money exists for those that straight up can not work, and an employment insurance system exists to protect those inbetween jobs, meanwhile other multiple programs are aimed at distributing financial assistance to the lower income groups.

Despite all of that already existing, UBI is still being heralded up here in trials as well as a replacement. The problem being that for the needy the UBI pitches are generally a step backwards.

Eg. $500/month is the UBI pitch, and they say it'll be great because everyone gets it no matter what so it's simple and fair and nobody is left behind. The trouble though is that the reality is the truly in need people were already benefitting more than the $500/month under the existing systems, and the cost was much less because it was targeted.

I here UBI and get very worried about folks just selling snake oil 'solutions' that in the end are just a demand to adopt their own particular flavor of wealth redistribution.

Comment downvote for blatant lies

1) it specifically does not outlaw them, it explicitly allows them….it regulates and enforces them, so yes, in states with ID laws, it has mandatory ID to vote (but expands what ID is allowed beyond a drivers license.). Fail

2) It does not allow unattended drop boxes. where? Quote it. It requires more drop boxes than one for 3.5 million people, it does not (that I can find anywhere) allow unattended drop boxes any more than current laws which require them to be under surveillance and attended. It does not allow “vote gathering” liar, prove me wrong with quotes from the bill (you can’t)….side note, in California, the Republican Party itself set up multiple unauthorized drop boxes, unattended and without surveillance cameras even after being charged for breaking state laws, gathered those votes (discarding any that they didn’t want to submit, like any from people named Enrique and DeShawn, and possibly filling out any left unsealed…..Republicans are also the ones caught with campaigns directly harvesting ballots from nursing homes and admitting they filled out any race not filled out, voting for the Republican candidates even on Democrat’s ballots, so you know, those are Republican MOs, not Democratic, you can’t point to one actual example of Democrats doing that, maybe you can find some false OAN reports claiming that, but absolutely no evidence. Double Fail

3) dumb ass, it requires investigation by the state “ Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including by requiring states to conduct post-election audits for federal elections”. It also requires states to purchase voting machines with a paper receipt and record, so no more attempts like cyber ninjas to reprogram the machines to give the results they want with no physical record to prove their fraud. Super fail

4) where does it limit a states ability to challenge and audit itself? Quotes from the bill or admit you’re lying. It limits the states ability to gerrymander, to deny polling places for targeted populations, and to create biased and blatantly racist policies designed to obstruct certain populations from voting. It limits states ability to limit early voting. It actually REQUIRES states to audit every federal election you delusional fucking moron. Double dipsolitious fail

5) the scariest part for you (that you didn’t mention intentionally) is making Election Day a national holiday, because if poor working people get a paid day off to vote, guaranteed more will vote, and that’s disastrous for the right that freely admits it can only win elections if they get to choose the voters, the method of voting, and the outcome (I’m looking at Trump), and will never win any election ever again if all legal voters vote.

Such a sad, deluded little liar you’ve become, bob. You must really dislike yourself to do that to yourself. You’re worth an honest argument and position, bob. You let Trump twist you into this dishonest, “say anything”, hyper partisan angry little man…..you deserve better, and we all deserve better from you.

Always against the side of freedom, inclusion, equal opportunity, truth, honesty, fairness, civil rights, and civility.

LMFAHS!!!
So delusional and backwards, Bobby. The sky, sea, and land are all orange through your eyes, aren’t they?
4500% increase in voter registration refusals, but no increase in fraudulent applications found. All Republican driven. A vote wrongly denied is the same as a vote wrongly cast, and Republicans are undeniably guilty of both but can’t point to any verifiable examples from the left of in proper vote denial or intentional voter fraud, only cases they make up (like the poster boy for vote fraud claims that finally admitted he voted as his wife for Trump).

It’s all Republican fuckery. Name the Democratic fuckery you mean, be specific with verifiable examples. I know you can’t, snowflake.
Every instance found, all Republican vote fraud. There were many, but not at levels that mattered (for the direct vote fraud, other Republican frauds like the violent coup attempt and fraudulent Republican electors, those mattered).

Every hurdle to vote, Republican written, all directly targeting minorities….it’s only Republicans creating racist targeted roadblocks for certain voters they wouldn’t accept as roadblocks to their own firearm ownership, because it’s not about safeguarding rights it’s only about underhanded power grabs by the political minority in this country, the party who only won one presidential election in the last 8 by getting more votes….they’re Republicans. Democracy isn’t a friend of Republicans.
They’re the party that’s openly anti democratic. They’re the party that admits that if every eligible voter voted they would NEVER win another election. You vote Republican because you’re an infantile sucker that likes to trigger the libtards (no matter the cost to America) and who can’t ever admit he’s w-w-w-w-wrong.

You’re Eric Cartman. Dim, dishonest, and despised.

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]