2022 Freedumb Convoy(s) Thread

[GGG]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

54 percent of the population is much larger than just truckers. Should you not engage with those that disagree with your position?

Health authorities are reducing restrictions right now? So much of the 54% you are taking about is being listened to.

Remember No one like restrictions, most people would like hospital surgeons not to be cancelled. Given these priors aren’t the heath authorities who should be listened to. Or if you you disagree that the majority of the Canadian population doesn’t accept these priorities please provide evidence of that.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

54 percent of the population is much larger than just truckers. Should you not engage with those that disagree with your position?

No more qualified than a trucker though. What would engagement look like? "we hear you but we will not lift restrictions until our medical experts deem it safe to do so. Thanks for your time"

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

It makes sense for a gov't to have dialogue with people who disagree with them. They could have done this WAY before the word convoy even became part of our nation lexicon.

Who exactly should Trudeau have met/had dialogue with?

Do you think that if he met with them (whoever it is) and didn't give into their demands (he wouldn't) would that have stopped the convoy, is having dialogue good enough to please these occupiers?

Do you think Trudeau should have to meet with any groups of people that demand something from him? If so, what would be the minimum number of people that require him to sit down with any group about any topic? 5? 50? 1000? 10,000? Where is that line drawn?

Do you think that if Trudeau had to sit down and have dialogue with any group on any topic (as crazy as those groups/topics may be) it would actually give legitimacy and attention to groups that don't deserve it?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Who exactly should Trudeau have met/had dialogue with?

Do you think that if he met with them (whoever it is) and didn't give into their demands (he wouldn't) would that have stopped the convoy, is having dialogue good enough to please these occupiers?

Do you think Trudeau should have to meet with any groups of people that demand something from him? If so, what would be the minimum number of people that require him to sit down with any group about any topic? 5? 50? 1000? 10,000? Where is that line drawn?

Do you think that if Trudeau had to sit down and have dialogue with any group on any topic (as crazy as those groups/topics may be) it would actually give legitimacy and attention to groups that don't deserve it?

Raul Castro.

He'd know what to do.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

54 percent of the population is much larger than just truckers. Should you not engage with those that disagree with your position?

On what grounds? That they're being inconvenienced?
We ALL are.

I'd like them lifted too. So I'd be part of the 54%. That doesn't mean I disagree with the decision to keep them in place.

I'll ask you a last time. It's a simple yes or no.
Has any local health service came out and said it's not necessary to have the restrictions any more.

And why aren't you prepared to follow their lead?

[FlamesAddiction]

Where is the 54% number coming from? Just yesterday there was a poll saying 46% sympathize with the convoy, but a much smaller number supported their tactics.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Where is the 54% number coming from? Just yesterday there was a poll saying 46% sympathize with the convoy, but a much smaller number supported their tactics.

He's taking a poll about restrictions and applying to support of the protests. We have polls like you said about the support of the protests - which is much much lower.

[troutman]

30% of people believe in astrology.

[Yamer]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1492979771172659206

Cool. Cool.

Cool.

[Bagor]

Personification of the thread.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1492995012547780610

[Envitro]

WTF is an "assaulter". I've never heard that term before, and I've been adjacent to this community for a while now.

Wouldn't "team member" be a bit more appropriate? Is this purposefully using aggressive sounding terminology?

Let's say the two JTF2 members were injured during an operation in foreign lands... would they still be calling them "assaulters".

I'm keenly aware of each member having a particular job, like "scout" or "sniper" or "breacher", but have never heard assaulter in this context.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Envitro

WTF is an "assaulter". I've never heard that term before, and I've been adjacent to this community for a while now.

Wouldn't "team member" be a bit more appropriate? Is this purposefully using aggressive sounding terminology?

Let's say the two JTF2 members were injured during an operation in foreign lands... would they still be calling them "assaulters".

I'm keenly aware of each member having a particular job, like "scout" or "sniper" or "breacher", but have never heard assaulter in this context.

Looks like an official rank(or job? duty?):


https://www.canada.ca/en/special-ope...k-force-2.html

[Envitro]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Looks like an official rank(or job? duty?):


https://www.canada.ca/en/special-ope...k-force-2.html

Thank you... I stand corrected. Apparently a "Coxswain" is still a job description term they use somehow as well

I don't think it's a rank, but rather a position, but I could be wrong.

I think my overall point probably still stands though. Other media outlets such as the CBC have used the term "members" as opposed to assaulters, so to me it just feels a little bit strange.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

The whole 'this is divisive' meme is weak sauce. These people may have extended our pandemic restrictions by not getting vaccinated, impacted our economy by blocking our busiest border crossing, impacting people lives by honking their horns and forcing business to close in Ottawa. They have flags and goals of having our elected government overthrown. They drive around in cars essentially calling other sheep and idiots for taking a vaccine - yet its the people annoyed by them and calling them names who are divisive.

Honestly - get lost with that.

I love this statement.

[peter12]

We really truly thought we would be spared this alt-right populist nonsense.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Who exactly should Trudeau have met/had dialogue with?

Do you think that if he met with them (whoever it is) and didn't give into their demands (he wouldn't) would that have stopped the convoy, is having dialogue good enough to please these occupiers?

Do you think Trudeau should have to meet with any groups of people that demand something from him? If so, what would be the minimum number of people that require him to sit down with any group about any topic? 5? 50? 1000? 10,000? Where is that line drawn?

Do you think that if Trudeau had to sit down and have dialogue with any group on any topic (as crazy as those groups/topics may be) it would actually give legitimacy and attention to groups that don't deserve it?

Trudeau has a unique platform to set the tone for the national discussion. He could have stood up in front of the country and acknowledged that differences of opinion are acceptable. He should have said that the population favors a variety of policy decisions and he understands that.

Instead he doubled down with a tired of playbook:. Start with accusations of anti science, continue with accusations of misinformation, and then move on to "racism and mysogyny". It's so obvious predictable and tired. And people are starting to see right through it (although CP politics is decidedly not seeing through it yet).

Then he doubled down.

This is completely consistent for Trudeau who has never had the intention of governing for the whole population. Rather he prefers to simply pander to his ideological and geographic base.

This while episode highlights the dysfunction in Canada's version of democracy and our lack of a cohesion.

[CASe333]

The police were very effective in peacefully removing the protesters today at Windsor. It was cathartic to watch them peacefully break up the protesters and make some arrests. My favorite moment was when one of the protestors who was streaming saw her husband arrested and then she was mostly just worried that he had her keys. Not surprising from such selfish people. Before leaving she said a couple times "this isn't fun anymore". As I mentioned it was cathartic to see them deal with consequences.

The police would walk as a group and anyone that didn't move was arrested. Slowly the protesters gave up and left or the last stragglers were arrested. Over 25 arrests and no one hurt. It was good to see that they are able to deal with this when they want to. Listening to the protesters I was shocked at the entitlement and lack of understanding of laws. They thought if they stood on the sidewalk they couldn't be arrested!

It's worrying nothing continues to be done in Ottawa at all by their police. They could at least be enforcing the honking injunction among other basic laws but the honking started again. There are obviously lots of Ottawa cops that support the protestors but as can be seen in Windsor they will make arrests and can peacefully control the protestors if given the orders. Everything Sloly has done suggests he supports the protests in Ottawa and doesn't actually want to stop them. I think things are going to get ugly this week with Ottawa citizens starting to counter protest in greater numbers. Ken King tweeted for people to go confront the counter protests in Ottawa this morning. Again why is he not arrested for inciting violence at this point?

https://twitter.com/Bungbunged/statu...24034836996096

[Minnie]

NVM, covered already so I've deleted.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Let's not forget our gov'ts picked this fight by not being as decisive with the removal of restrictions as they were the implementation of them.
…snip drivel.

It was a smart move of the government to implement those restrictions on the off chance a global viral pandemic came along.

[LChoy]

Originally Posted by Envitro

WTF is an "assaulter". I've never heard that term before, and I've been adjacent to this community for a while now.

Wouldn't "team member" be a bit more appropriate? Is this purposefully using aggressive sounding terminology?

Let's say the two JTF2 members were injured during an operation in foreign lands... would they still be calling them "assaulters".

I'm keenly aware of each member having a particular job, like "scout" or "sniper" or "breacher", but have never heard assaulter in this context.

Assaulter seems kind of formal for news media to use, but it's the proper designation for a standard JTF member. JTF2 was originally the RCMP's counterterrorism unit before it got transferred to the military.
The first role any JTF2 member gets trained on once they join is for the "assault'" role. For about 2 years, they'll learn everything they need to know about assaulting a structure and the bread and butter hostage rescue skills. After a year, they can start taking on additional specialties such as demo, sniper,..etc. However unless they specialize or become an officer, JTF members are mainly known as assaulters

LChoy