Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[BlackArcher101]

That guy truly scares me, especially his financial way of thinking.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

It is when you only need to read the next sentence to realize there's no reason to read the rest because he's just regurgitating obvious lies.

Everyone with a 6th grade social studies education understands that there is a separation between the government and the police agencies. The agencies aren't suppose to ask for anything, the government isn't suppose to direct them. Otherwise you could just have Trudeau and Kenney direct the agencies to end their investigations on them, or go further down a slippery slope of ending democracy. The independence is a necessity.

Poilievre and his cronies understood that they would be able to get a "no" to the question "Did you ask the government to invoke the Emergencies Act?"

"No, we never would ask the Government to invoke the act as it's not our position to do so. We just worked with and advised the government for a week while discussing the tools necessary to end the blockade and those tools happened to be in the Emergencies Act and how not getting those tools would continue to prolong the blockade indefinitely. The Emergencies Act was necessary to provide the tools to end the blockade and we thank the government for consulting with us."

But of course the headline reads "Police agencies deny asking for Emergencies Act" and CaptainCrunch falls for it and refuses to acknowledges he's getting played. Everyone else is the liars.

This website is incapable of having respectful discussion anymore.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This website is incapable of having respectful discussion anymore.

There are some topics where people can barely have a discussion. Forget a respectful one.

A lot of “conversations” around here (specifically related to politics or hot button issues) are just the same people regurgitating the same positions they’ve held for the last 5+ years. People want their opinions to be taken seriously without ever doing the same for anyone else or considering they might be wrong or be missing some perspective.

Which is why treating it all as fun and games is the only way out! If you can’t change minds or learn anything, might as well have a good time.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This website is incapable of having respectful discussion anymore.

At what point do you start to consider knowingly spreading misinformation as disrespectful to those who would prefer not to see that sort of stuff posted?

CC is a good guy but he’s no more immune to having the wool pulled over his eyes by the media than anyone else. If you think of pointing it out as a form of tough love you may be less offended by it. This attitude that we can’t tell people when they are clearly (unintentionally I hope) wrong about something is a very dangerous way of thinking that can only empower those who would attempt to manipulate others.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

At what point do you start to consider knowingly spreading misinformation as disrespectful to those who would prefer not to see that sort of stuff posted?

CC is a good guy but he’s no more immune to having the wool pulled over his eyes by the media than anyone else. If you think of pointing it out as a form of tough love you may be less offended by it. This attitude that we can’t tell people when they are clearly (unintentionally I hope) wrong about something is a very dangerous way of thinking that can only empower those who would attempt to manipulate others.

Sure I agree but there's a difference between telling somebody they're wrong or why they're wrong as opposed to "anybody with a grade 6 education", don't you think?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

A lot of “conversations” around here (specifically related to politics or hot button issues) are just the same people regurgitating the same positions they’ve held for the last 5+ years. People want their opinions to be taken seriously without ever doing the same for anyone else or considering they might be wrong or be missing some perspective.

So you are enlightened and constantly change and learn and adjust your belief systems over time, but nobody else does?

Makes sense, sounds about right. I also find it weird how you think bullying people is "fun", given your position on a host of other positions that seems to colour you as extremely hypocritical.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

This website is incapable of having respectful discussion anymore.

Is this a shot at me? I took the time to provide a bunch of quotes from the actual transcripts of the committee to explain to CaptainCrunch and PostAndIn how they were being mislead by Pierre Poilievre and the newspaper articles with hard facts:

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...&postcount=186

The response I got back was that I was confused and:

Never mind CC, there actually ARE NO valid reasons to mistrust this government based on previous performance, the Globe and Mail IS a right wing rag and PP IS evil incarnate.

I asked CaptainCrunch for the quotes he has attributed to the minister multiple times, and he keeps saying I am confused and not providing them. If they are interested in having a respectful discussion, it needs to start with facts. If they keep failing to provide them, it's not an honest discussion and therefore they shouldn't expect respect but I don't think "failing to acknowledge they are getting played" is especially disrespectful.

------------------------------------------
Also yes, the separation between the justice, legislative and executive branches is something taught in grade 6 social studies, or near enough that grade. That was not meant to be an insult. At least not to anyone but Poilievre.

So Mr.Coffee, in the interest of having a respectful discussion next time, how many times can I ask for someone to provide evidence of the fact that they are relying on before I can call them out as being a liar (or being played by the liar)? Evidentially it's more than 3.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

So you are enlightened and constantly change and learn and adjust your belief systems over time, but nobody else does?

Makes sense, sounds about right. I also find it weird how you think bullying people is "fun", given your position on a host of other positions that seems to colour you as extremely hypocritical.

Pretty weird to complain about respectful discussion and then follow it up with putting words into my mouth and calling me a hypocrite.

What the point was: to take things less seriously and realise you might as well enjoy yourself since we’re not moving boulders of thought across borders here

What the point wasn’t: to have fun bullying people or that I am somehow above the fray.

Hell, I was agreeing with you and just adding my two cents. But uhhh, go off king? Thanks for being part of the solution

[PeteMoss]

Can't believe Trudeau would just give up our land to Denmark. What a beta.

MY HANS ISLAND!

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Did he have that pre-written a few days ago? Pretty odd timing on the day they are removing most of the restrictions.

If the chief public health officer is telling the government to relax restrictions as suggested in this article back in March expecting May it would be done, and the tyrant just chose to keep the restrictions for political reasons, how is that not relevant?

The tyrant and the liberal government kept saying it is about the science but clearly it was not.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Sure I agree but there's a difference between telling somebody they're wrong or why they're wrong as opposed to "anybody with a grade 6 education", don't you think?

I agree with you in principle, but frankly I’m pretty certain that at times you personally have directed harsher comments towards me on this board so I’m not exactly sure where you’re going with this. Regardless I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume those days are behind you now

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by ikaris

If the chief public health officer is telling the government to relax restrictions as suggested in this article back in March expecting May it would be done, and the tyrant just chose to keep the restrictions for political reasons, how is that not relevant?

The tyrant and the liberal government kept saying it is about the science but clearly it was not.

Clearly you’ve never lived through actual tyranny if you believe wearing masks and longer wait times to travel have anything to do with it. Why not just call him inept or unfit to lead if you disagree with his policies?

[edslunch]

Nm

[OptimalTates]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1535273241014677506

Now that Bergin is following the lead and calling for Mendicino to resign, those quotes in Poilievre appear to be the smoking gun quotes. Unfortunately the gun is a prop and they brought in a smoke machine.

https://parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44...ing-7/evidence

When they talk about RCMP Brenda Lucki not asking for the Emergencies Act to be invoked, while true (and which I bolded in her response below), here is a more accurate view of what she provided to the special joint committee (though if you care enough to be calling for Mendicino to resign I would argue just watch the whole thing):
All quotes from Brenda Lucki:

On February 14, the Government of Canada provided law enforcement with additional tools. The measures enacted under the Emergencies Act provided all police officers across the country—not just the RCMP—with the ability to deal with blockades and unlawful public assemblies. The emergency measure regulations supplemented existing authorities and provided new instruments for law enforcement to address these illegal blockades.
Let's look at some concrete examples.
First, police were able to maintain a secure perimeter throughout the national capital region, and refuse entry to individuals travelling to the illegal protest with the intent of participating. Second, supporting an illegal assembly was also prohibited, and police had the enforcement authority to arrest individuals who continued to supply fuel, food and other materials to an area of an unlawful assembly. Third, there were new powers to compel individuals to provide essential goods and/or services for the removal, towing and storage of vehicles and equipment. I delegated these powers to the OPP, which used them to secure needed equipment to clear the streets of Ottawa.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said, “when they did invoke the act”.
We spoke about it. I don't have the exact date in front of me, but I would say within the week before, when I was given the situational reports, there were discussions and various talks about the Emergencies Act—

You referred to how we resolved these situations. Within RCMP jurisdiction, we obviously had the benefit of hindsight after what happened in Ottawa, and there were times when we actually would have used it if it had been invoked earlier.

I can't speak specifically to any advice that was done in cabinet. What I can say is that each and every day during the convoy I provided a situational report of what happened from—

No. What I can say is that especially in the Ottawa context, what we did is that we tried to reduce the footprint of the number of people there via conversations through our liaison teams, police liaison teams. We tried to reduce the footprint and to get people to be motivated to leave. Of course, there were people who left after the weekends, but again, a lot of people would show up during the week. There was a group who never left the entire time. There were authorities within the Emergencies Act that served as motivators and as deterrents to people coming back in.

First, most of any of the discussions that we had were within the deputy minister community, so of course there were representatives from Customs, Transport, Public Safety—I'm trying to think who else—anybody who sort of had parts of the situation..... I think it was PCO and Justice. So we would discuss—

I have no idea what would trigger it. All I know is that I provided on-site advice from the situational awareness for the decision-makers on what was happening on the ground in all police jurisdictions from coast to coast to coast.

No, I did not, but what I can say is that the Emergencies Act did give us the tools that we needed—

We were not.... It wasn't really the police that were.... We're not in the position to provide influence on the government as to when and where they invoke a certain act. For us, it was about keeping Canadians safe in Ottawa, and when they did bring in the act, it definitely provided us some authorities that helped reduce the footprint so that we could do a safer enforcement.

Well, I can tell you from an RCMP perspective, for example, we were in the midst of trying to enforce at Coutts, for example, and we could not enforce because we couldn't access any tow trucks. We weren't able to do the enforcement that we needed on the days that we wanted to enforce because we had no authorities to force the tow truck drivers to assist, and all of them refused to provide the service.

Well, in Coutts, we couldn't use tow trucks. They wouldn't come to our.... We asked them to come to assist us, but they would not. We looked to the military as well and, in the end, what ended up happening was that the Government of Alberta purchased some tow trucks, which was just at the onset of the invocation of the Emergencies Act.
We were trying to enforce far before then, but in order to enforce we had to remove both the people and the equipment, but we didn't have tow trucks to move the equipment.

No. We actually reached out to various police agencies when there was talk about some of the authorities that they were proposing, and of course we were consulted. We were the ones who would be using those authorities, so we were consulted to see if these would be of any use to police in the context of the “freedom convoy”.

That's a great question. It's all about reducing the footprint so that we can enforce safely.
We could maintain and reinforce the perimeter. It provided us and other policing partners an ability to restrict travel; prevent children from being brought into the situation; secure necessary equipment, such as tow trucks; and ensure that we could cut off financial support and other assistance, such as gas, for this unlawful blockade.

Under the Criminal Code, you can charge somebody. There were tow truck companies that were receiving funds through the protest not to assist us. Some of the individuals in the companies were very worried about their safety and their livelihood, and they were experiencing a lot of harassment. Even under a charge, it would go to court. Under the Emergencies Act, it compelled them to provide the service immediately. That was the sort of cover that they could use. They were no longer making the decision themselves. They were being forced under the authority of the Emergencies Act, and even then—

Absolutely. The provisions granted the RCMP and policing partners new authorities that would reduce that footprint because there is no way we could enforce with the maximum amount of people there.
There was a large group that refused to leave. No matter what things were tried by the police, there was a group that just would not leave. We needed ways to first of all stop additional people from coming in. Therein lay the perimeter that was put around the city. We would stop convoys that were heading from across the country. They would be stopped on roadsides or on roads coming towards Ottawa.
We also motivated people to leave by providing the information to the banks. We had one example where one individual said he must leave because he got a call from his spouse and was told that their bank account was frozen. He needed to leave or else they wouldn't be able to access

I updated PMO specifically. I updated the government, which included the Prime Minister, on the situation across the country.

No. When they had decided on some of the authorities, they consulted with the RCMP as well as other police agencies to see if any of those authorities they were contemplating would assist us and if they would be useful.

While selective quotes, you can get a pretty good picture of what was actually happening from the RCMP's point of view and how they believe they could not find a quick solution to the blockade without the Emergencies Act. Lucki was clear she had engaged with conversations prior to the Emergencies Act being invoked, how she kept the government informed of the situation, how she would have used the tools in the act earlier if it had been invoked earlier, and how they were required to successfully end the blockade.

Of course the police agencies are going to say they needed it to end the blockades (or else they would be admitting to a police faliure), but it's pretty obvious that the government did indeed receive advice from the RCMP. Shocking.

[Derek Sutton]

I hate this nitpicking shirt in parliament as much as I hate Trudeau. The PC's are just arguing semantics here, what a waste. Anyone with a 6th grade education could see the government had to do something, the country cannot function with borders blockaded and truckers occupying downtown Ottawa. I'm glad the emergencies act was invoked, a drastic measure that needed to be taken. I really do wish more arrests were made resulting in criminal records for many of the "protestors".

All levels of government across the entire spectrum need to get back to solving actual problems, working together and moving forward instead of beating dead horses day in and day out.

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1536830962243452930

[timun]

Originally Posted by Derek Sutton

I hate this nitpicking shirt in parliament as much as I hate Trudeau. The PC's are just arguing semantics here, what a waste. Anyone with a 6th grade education could see the government had to do something, the country cannot function with borders blockaded and truckers occupying downtown Ottawa. I'm glad the emergencies act was invoked, a drastic measure that needed to be taken. I really do wish more arrests were made resulting in criminal records for many of the "protestors".

All levels of government across the entire spectrum need to get back to solving actual problems, working together and moving forward instead of beating dead horses day in and day out.

No, you've just become nUmB tO lIbErAl LiEs.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Yoho

https://twitter.com/user/status/1536830962243452930

The Justin Trudeau brand is in trouble.

The 2015 fresh prince of politics with the celebrity hair—

My god are conservatives STILL talking about his stupid ####ing hair? It didn't work in 2015 and it won't work now. Let it go...

He’s too woke—

Boom! There's the conservative shibboleth du jour.

What a vapid and inane editorial. Don Martin should retire, what a hack.

[TheIronMaiden]

The protest on parliament hill was going to result in suppression no matter what. One of the primary functions of any government is to legitimize itself. This is done through discourse and violence. I am glad that I am governed in such a way that the primary focus is on suppression through discursive force. I would find an emphasis on physical violence much less palatable.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Yoho

https://twitter.com/user/status/1536830962243452930

Hasn't Martin been predicting this for like the past 3 years? I guess he's bound to be right eventually.