Leaderboard

The entire argument has nothing to do with vaccinations, it has everything to do individual consent. Threating the individual in order to get the desired response is not consent. Do we not care about an individual consent anymore? Should consent no longer be an ethical position we hold?

Can unvaccinated children fly on planes or eat in restaurants? No. So it's not the parents who decide.

Let’s go Brandeau! So it looks like the protest is spreading across Canada. Reports of most major cities experiencing rallies at their Provincial Legislature buildings. People with signs all over the place, spreading joy and solidarity. It’s great to see. And those whining about minor disrespect against certain monuments; did you whine when BLM was defacing and tearing down statues? Didn’t think so…

If people are threatened or extorted, generally people will do the bidding of the extorter. Should consent no longer be an ethical position we hold?

You're right, it's not a cold at all, but it's also not a raging pandemic which justifies the forced vaccinations fo 5-30 yr olds. There's not a single leftist dolt here that has ever even attempted to defend the the cause of force-vaxing children, let alone said anything remotely convincing. None of you have the balls to say one sentence in defence of force-vaxing kids aside from "Global News said so!" or "I think that by vaxing children you increase the chances of my 80 yr-old ass surviving!" But even at that, there's no attempt to quantify such a statement. It stands as a shameless attempt to use children as a meat shield for the elderly folks who own TV stations.

Then there's this: Quebec big-box stores to require vaccine passports for entry So you could be naturally immune but unvaccinated and even though you're safer than those jabbed with the clot shot you can't get into a Walmart or a Costco to shop.

It reminds me of a tyrant’s desperate attempt to slam the door against opponents before climbing onto the roof to catch the helicopter and flee. To bring in mandates now when Covid restrictions and mandates, including masking and vaccine passports, are being eliminated in Britain, Ireland, Denmark, France, most US states, and in other modern western democracies is oblique and radical. The Charter is so violated that the country faces an unprecedented constitutional crisis. I’m not sure Canada will emerge from this as a free society.

I'll adjust my language, extorting those that do not vaccinate removes free will consent. What does going to jail for smoking pot have to do with vaccination consent?

You think government and anyone who disagrees with you is lying. Not much anyone can say. You will have to carry on in your delusions. You simply don't want the facts or anything that changes your mind.

You people use language the way the nuttiest Marxists and leftists if the 70s did ?. So... 'Forced vaccination' is now defined as 'you are not allowed in Chuck E. Cheese'.. No wonder mainstream Canadians are getting sick of these zealots... Please find someone who will agree to consume WestCanEnglish... I use the real English

Anti-Charter government overreach 100%.

You beat me to it. I was just looking at when Singh was sympathizing with terrorists.

A go fund me guy might have said that the liberal party has islamists in it. That's not actually untrue, there's one Omar Alghabra there who is credibly accused of being a terrorist supporter: https://thecjn.ca/news/canada/islamist-allegations-surface-after-mp-given-key-role/ Let's be honest, someone with Alghabra's hideous political views has no place in Canada's government, let alone a cabinet position. That's just as bad as a having a KKK member serving in the Liberal party. But I'll go ya one better. Here's Jagmeet Singh with some bigots/terrorists, acting like it's the most normal thing in the world. Is Jagmeet Singh really in a position to be calling the integrity of other Canadians into question? The answer is no. It's a joke that our newspapers give him credibility as a humanitarian. Terrorism is no more acceptable than racism. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/as-jagmeet-singh-condemns-terrorism-second-video-shows-him-speaking-alongside-sikh-separatist

Some truckers wear turbans. They are at the protest also. Fun to watch the lieberals scambling and clawing, drowning. Keep this shit up. I like it

The source has been found and it's little short of scary: CBC Power & Politics, Friday 28.01. The statement about possible Russian instigation is at 13.39 but there are allusions to forceful actions, hints of intelligence gathering and massive police presence. This is the kind of claims that are routinely made in authoritarian countries like Iran, Russia and China, with the opposite sign. No it's not a risk, anticipation and certainly no exaggeration. We have arrived.

1. I think I said what I was whining about. 2. Mistaken to think political capital is invested in a 'leader' but rather in a democratic approach. 3. Authoritarianism - if we had this then there's no way that trucks would be allowed to drive around breaking the law with F*** Trudeau banners. Hysterical reactionism calls our way of live authoritarian, and it denigrates all the work it took to put this country together. 4. Well, yeah, they have been threatened and attacked before. Again, if it were authoritarian then the trucks would be flat under tank treads. The event was a success, and like I say - popular dissent is an exercise in democracy, nothing to whine about there. Given the success if it it's kind of baffling why you continue to call our great nation an autocracy...

I’m surprised and disappointed that you’re piling on against the protesters who clearly rely on posters like us to articulate their very valid frustrations. For God’s sake, the protest isn’t about whether or not vaccines can be a great protection against Covid. It’s about extreme and persistent government overreach that violates Charter freedoms and minority rights: freedom of movement, assembly, religion, speech, medical discretion, etc. When one of the constitution’s writers and Canada’s foremost intellectual are denouncing government measures as unconstitutional, we have damn good reason to be concerned. The convoy is trying to push back against totalitarianism, pure and simple. There’s simply no other way to put it. Denouncing protesters as radical morons is a dangerous lie. Regular middle of the road working people and their children are trying to raise valid concerns about how much they have given up these last two years on government orders: socializing, sports, family gatherings, seeing each other’s faces, businesses collapsing, restrictions on movement and travel. How much longer can Trudeau and governments defend these measures?

And yet people can post rumours and falsehoods without criticism from those who agree with their politics. Accountability begins at home.

No, walking into stores demanding people defy public health orders is bullying. Protesters were relying on the mall to get out of the cold, use washrooms or get a meal. They have just screwed themselves.

Because there are more consequences from Covid than just complete recovery or death. It’s illness that is stressing the health care system, not death. Once you are dead you are no longer a burden to the system.

MP Jagmeet Singh is accusing the truckers and their supporters of being racists and Islamaphobic. This is consistent with the anti-White rhetoric that comes from the NDP leader. This is arguably hate speech under 319 of the Criminal Code. On January 9, 2022, with no evidence to support the claim that the trucker convoy and their supporters are racists and anti-Islam, he posted the following: Jagmeet Singh @theJagmeetSingh "Today we commemorate 5 years since a terrorist attacked and murdered Muslims in a Quebec City Mosque. We said never again. And, today Conservative MPs have endorsed a convoy led by those that claim the superiority of the white bloodline and equate Islam to a disease." MP Singh conflates a tragic shooting with a workers' right movement. Curiously, the NDP were once, ostensibly , the party of the worker/laborer. The leader is now villainizing the workers who unite to protest restrictions on their ability to earn. It is clear that the purpose of the above tweet is to generate hate against white people and any white people associated with the convoy. In adding the Quebec shooting to the message, the intent is to conjure feelings of fear and resentment. This is dangerous language from the Burnaby South representative. It seems to me that the above tweet is designed to breach the peace and to incite an aggressive response against those in the convoy. The message is seemingly advising people that the convoy includes violent, hateful and racist people looking to harm others which would reasonably be construed as an encouragement to breach the peace and disrupt the truckers ' protest. This is the motis operandi of Jagmeet who previously spread anti - White fear mongering. His plan is to use white guilt to gain support with white supporters and to bring non-whites to his side by making them believe whites are hateful and dangerous and all non-whites are in danger. His business model is to sell fear: "If you want to be safe, only the orange can save you! Look how dangerous and hateful the whites are!" Sound exaggerated? Juxtapose the legitimacy of the suggestion that Singh and the NDP want Canadian people to fear and hate whites with his claim that : “Radicalized white supremacists, neo-Nazis, the alt-right have resulted in the deaths of people...” The man with a law degree added: “Mothers talk to me of the fear they have for their kids going out into the community, worried about the violence they might face.” The above, which can be dismissed as bald assertions, clearly lack evidence as no murders in recent Canadian history can be linked to any " white supremacist " organization. This is pure propoganda and part of Singh's plan to divide Canada for political gain and make people hate and fear white people. This October 5, 2020 tweet by Singh is clearly is an attempt to galvanize people to resist/hate/fear white people: Jagmeet Singh @theJagmeetSingh "White Supremacy & Neo-Nazism pose a threat to our national security They export hatred & target Indigenous, Black, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh & many other racialized groups across Canada I stand with anti-hate & civil liberties groups calling on PM Trudeau to take immediate action..." Again, the attempt to breed hate is real but the facts are false. Let's look at Singh's claims. One, Alexandre Bissonnette, was not charged with terrorism or convicted of a terrorist act. Bissonnette was never linked to any white supremacist organization and was on an anti depressant which suggests that this horrific tragedy was likely linked to mental health issues more than white supremacist organizations. However, this does not match the narrative that Singh wants to sell in order to divide the country. Singh also references the Toronto stabbing of a Muslim to spread his smearing of whites. Guilherme “William” Von Neutegem was charged with the murder of a Muslim man. To date, the case is ongoing and he has not been convicted of a terrorist act or any hate crime. In addition, no link to any white supremacist organization has been proven in court. The same details apply to the London car attack on a Muslim family- no convictions, no link to any organization. However, this does not stop MP Singh from claiming that these two examples are " proof " that hateful whites are a threat to non-whites and are looking to call visible minorities! By the way, Singh openly discussing the cases and portraying the accuseds as guilty and a part of a " violent, white nationalist " movement is a violation of the accuseds' Charter right to the fundamental principles of justice, such as a fair trail and innocent until proven guilty. But, when you are spreading hate and mistruths, who cares about the Charter? The only time Singh appears interested in a crime is when the accused is white. Look at his benign response to the Danforth shooting of white teenagers by a Muslim, the killing of Marissa Shen by a Syrian refugee, the killing of Hang-Kam “Annie” Chiu by Saad Akhtar who told police his motivation was to commit a terrorist attack in the name of terror group the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. When there is a conviction for a hate crime, like Akhtar, Singh is quiet because a Muslim committing a hate crime doesn't align with the business model of selling hate against whites. And when a Muslim, Umar Zameer, is charged with killing a white police officer, not much sympathy or support is expressed by the NDP leader. Don't your breath waiting for Singh to remember the anniversary of any crimes by non whites. Won't happen. Air India Flight 182 is the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history. Jagmeet and his party won't commemorate the event or remind anyone because the perpetrators were not white. Who were they? Don't ask Jagmeet. He is quiet on the topic... Of course there will be media outlets and the woke mob looking to find racism everywhere. Global news, and I'm sure cbc and ctv will follow, have an absurd article attempting to link " nazis " to the convoy. However, even global news admits the following: "A group affiliated with the convoy, Canada Unity, has produced a “memorandum of understanding” that it plans to present to Gov. Gen. Mary Simon and the Senate, and which it believes would force the government to rescind COVID-19 public health measures, or force the government to resign en masse." The people Singh and his elk attempt to link to nazi boogeyman are associated with the go fund me account, allegedly. No evidence has been presented to show there is any political ideology associated with the convoy. What if someone really was a Nazi and they organized a go find me for a cancer patient would cancer be racist? The desperate attempts of the NDP , Singh, Trudeau, the left and the media are embarrassing. No one can name a crime linked to any white nationalist group in Canada and there are no Nazis in Canada of any statistical value. Ask Reese Fallon and Hang-Kam Annie Chiu how worried they are about the white supremacist organizations in Canada. You can read how the leftist global news covered the hate crime, murder by Saad Akhtar. Their coverage focused on the murderer's mother and her opinion as to how innocent her son was. Hardly objective journalism as it didn't fit their anti white agenda: https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnews.ca/news/6591168/man-charged-murder-hammer-attack-toronto/amp/ There are anti Asian and anti semetic and anti LGTBQ attacks but they are downplayed by Singh and others when the accused are not white. There are anti Islam attacks and ideas but the NDP are quiet on those unless the situation can be used to spread hate against whites. The NDP, and their leader's, goal is to create division and hate and who cares about the Charter, the facts, and proportionally? At what point do we hold them accountable? Can they continue to spread misinformation and engender hate against whites in perpetuity? The NDP obviously has a mandate to make people anti white. Singh was instrumental in having the proud boys named as " domestic terrorists " because of his claim that white nationalists are a threat to the nation. They are now on par with ISIS and AL Qaeda. Sure, that makes sense. Other than the minor, non violent, incident in Halifax that involved an Indigenous member of the Proud Boys, what did they do wrong exactly? Not sure but were definitely never proven to have commited violence in Canada. But don't question Singh, if you do, it proves you're a "white supremacist". Take a look at the Criminal Code and ask yourself is Singh's anti-White rhetoric is a potential crime. Public incitement of hatred 319 (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction. Marginal note:Wilful promotion of hatred (2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction. In my opinion, Jagmeet Singh is clearly using misinformation to make people believe that white people are racists and hateful and that whites are organized in dangerous groups looking to enact violence based on their hateful ideals. None of which is true. The intended message of Singh is to feel negatively against whites. This is a crime as per my interpretation of the above section. What do you think?

Nope...political, social, and economic movements for change throughout history tell us the exact opposite.

We haven’t even gotten into what may be an active government cover up of what happened at the lab. Canadians still don’t know why our government allowed Chinese virologists to work in an infectious disease lab on Canadian soil with access to biohazards. We don’t know why they were fired. Talk about a government putting its own citizens at risk. They’re not telling us what happened on grounds of national security. What more secrets are there to protect? What happens when the government itself becomes a threat to the people? Is that what’s happening?

It’s two-tier citizenship. Canada isn’t a free country right now. The Queen should dissolve Parliament. Trudeau has no sense of history. Out of his depth. Yup it’s two-tier citizenship in Canada. Should the unvaccinated wear identifiers so you can avoid them on the street? What other public goods should we mandate? It’s been done before. Forced sterilizations of developmentally delayed people? Segregation or internment of races and religious groups? We’re living under a quasi-dictatorship. Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms is actively being violated. Why enshrine rights without enforcing them?

Great. Then we agree that neither of us is helping or harming the other. The risk is each our own. You take your risks based on yourself I'll take my risks based on me.

That's what's called FALSE EQUIVALENCY!

This is not a serious discussion. By this logic any condition with slightly higher chance of negative outcome justifies forced or coerced intervention. This has been noted many times before and you aren't adding anything new so I think I'm not going to spend any more of my time on you, it just doesn't worth it.

1. Not correct. There are lower percentages of vaccinated people with Covid in the hospitals per capita when you factor in that 80% or 90% of the population who have been vaccinated. Or there are more unvaccinated in hospitals with Covid per capita. Google it. 2. Pointless to debate the source of the virus here. We don't know for sure where it came from. 3. The chances of myocarditis from the vaccine is extremely low. The chances of catching Covid is far greater than the harm that comes from vaccination. They are also able to treat myocarditis. 4. One of the main reasons for children being vaccinated is because they are spreaders of the virus and can take it home to their aging relatives many of whom are immuno-compromised and may die if they get Covid. Sure the chance of a kid dying from Covid are far less; the chances of them spreading to others is very high. That's the reason they need to be vaccinated. 5. The government is not lying. That is absurd. They are acting to protect the populations. They may not have been perfect in every decision they made over the last two years, but they are doing the best they can and there would be thousands more deaths if they did nothing.

I referred to unhealthy people in the sense that people with co-morbidity still need to live their lives and be able to do stuff, too, but unvaccinated people make it more dangerous to do so. There was no back-tracking. You're making up my arguments and points for me as you see fit. The 2 weeks period for after-jab is supposedly because you're not protected (properly) until the period is up. If that's the case, how does that change the math? Sure. You're more likely to come in contact with vaccinated people than non-vaccinated people, considering they're 90% of the population. Thank you for that brilliant insight. You're still more likely to get infected and to infect others without the dose, especially if you're hanging out with a bunch of other unvaccinated people. This is what Michael was talking about when he questioned general math skills. You're so off target with this reasoning it's hard to even begin to correct you.

I would leave political ideologies aside. Focus on the major issue, do we wish to loose the idea consent? In the real sense, is extortion okay?

Almost all US states have ended mask mandates indoors. You’re just so used to them. Normalization of restrictions. Mask mandates should be abolished immediately.

You made your point - now time to go home. It was one thing to oppose vaccine mandate but it is another thing to oppose mask mandate. crowd of protesters entering shopping malls and restaurants in downtown Ottawa refusing to wear masks overwhelming the security people by their huge numbers unable to enforce the rules. This is unacceptable. Refusing to wear masks endangers everyone including innocent bystanders.

You’re right. I used to really believe in our public’s courage and ability to think for themselves. I still have hope, but I see a public that has become accustomed to being told what to do. There’s a real sense of powerlessness and resignation. Our governments should’ve encouraged us to take advantage of available protections but to continue to live normal lives. Instead, normal freedoms are being construed as extremist or criminal. It’s really sad. Kids are the biggest victims here. I remember after 9/11 there was a sense of civic duty to continue to live free lives and not let the terrorists destroy our way of life, yet a virus that now impacts most people like the flu has literally gutted our way of life — and that’s with one of the world’s most vaccinated populations. What are we doing?

Yes and this is the blindness of our zealous governments. They have a list of requirements that people who were born here with citizenship now have to meet in order to enjoy the rights of citizenship. You must carry a vaccine passport with mandatory shots to live freely. What’s more, as an unvaccinated person you will be vilified and mistreated. Instead of racial purity it’s public health purity that our government is pushing at all costs. Our Charter protections are routinely ignored.

So, you wouldn't vaccinate your child against diptheria, polio, covid-19,influenza or rubella to protect them? To travel to many countries, you need to get your shots.

Surely you realize that your post is nothing more than the unsubstantiated opinion of a random internet poster, right? Those are some extremely serious and well-supported accusations of bigotry against a leader of a Canadian political party and you wanna come back with "I think his bigotry was ok"? You realize that's not a contribution to the thread in any way, shape or form, right? It's the equivalent of someone posting "Me think Twudo bad." Grab a glove and get in the game MH.

Their lies like the president being a Russian agent were allowed to fester for four years. More truth in tabloids these days

And you're 5 times more likely to catch it from a clot shotter (vaccinated) as you are from a pure blood (unvaccinated). It's "easy math."

Under the pretense of security, you can do whatever you want. 'Hey, I want to protect fellow Canadians from further moral decay. Let's whip the homosexuals." "Hey, I think you are a communist threat, we'd better assassinate you or make you shut it." "Hey, I think the sniffles have a higher death rate than usual, you have to stay home."

Evidence? What was said, when, what was the context, and said by whom? How is the " Evidence " linked to " leaders" of the rally? Support your statement with facts and quotes and sources please. You're welcome for informing you of how idea Exchange work. Not just saying "Evidence "...

100% Jagmeet is dog whistling for violence.

1. 2. Hyperbole, and exaggeration. It was only a few years ago that the left was saying the same thing about Harper's anti terrorism legislation. That authoritarian result didn't come to pass. If government wanted to be autocratic there are already mechanisms in place.

It's incrementally heading that way. The government implemented new laws at the start of the pandemic to give non-democratic powers to a position called the Top Health Authority, or something. Yes, it's an emergency, but democracy needs to be protected before it goes too far. This has to be done before citizens get flattened under the treads of tank wheels. Thats why I think these people are speaking out now.

I can’t believe how backwards our federal government is. The US has lifted indoor mask mandates in all but 5 US states. Meanwhile we still have parts of Canada in lockdown. So sad what’s happened to Canada.

CBC coverage on the protest is extremely negative. Showing the Minister of Transportation long on a long rant about vaccine mandates. One question stood out: Does the government intend to implement an inter-provincial vaccine mandate? The clear answer, after much rhetorical yammering and stammering: Yes it's in the works right now. Now we know. By the way, just because 90% of truckers are vaccinated does not mean they like it. What's at stake here is the requirement for CONTINUED UPKEEP of the vaccine schedule, which they would have signed onto in a new employment agreement. You want to work you have to not only be vaccinated, but accept any vaccines prescribed by some health authority. The people who decide these things on spur of the moment data. There is no proposed vaccine schedule, it's a sliding door. Could be every year, could be be six months, three months, two. Point is they will have the right to decide for you to get these injections, not you.

1. Yeah, they don't cover bureaucracy. You want a world where decisions are vetted and actually shared with stakeholders ? Talk to @eyeball he has some front-row perspective on how that went with the Fisheries department. I've come to agree with his assertion that in-camera lobbying is a problem, and a starting point for redesigning a political engagement that would make bureaucrats accountable. Be careful what you wish for, though. Just because they ask the people, doesn't mean you get what you want. I keep having to explain this to folks whose favourite candidates lose election after election...

Maybe it's time just to drop the notion that Canadian media, most of them, carry objective, impartial and honest information? Easier from there. OK "defacing monuments". No I don't support it nor condone it. But anyone with a grain of objectivity would have noticed that these are just too different matters on vastly different planes: a dumb individual behavior by an individual or a small group; it happens every day in every city day and night and often, small villages too. It's just us, humans. Hardly a breaking national story. And the second one is unchecked, virtually unlimited bureaucratic overreach that's been spreading over the country for two years now and there's no working mechanisms nor hope to stop it, and if we won't find a way to stop it, it will consume sooner or later the entire democracy why wouldn't it? It's just as simple is that: unchecked authority is first a risk, and now, a threat to democracy. So, why mix the two? What understanding does it add to the picture? And lastly: where is national political leadership? Do they have an idea or comment perhaps? Is it conceivable (was, apologies) that G7 democratic leaders would have no comments on a critical national issue, and event like we're observing these days, and in fact, turn invisible, a newly acquired survival trait? No it is not. This is not what democratic leaders do, but many of the authoritarian ones have done just that. Running away from unpleasant reality; pretending it does not exist. And yet another sign that this democracy is seriously sick. Maybe someone should notice.

Well...yes...but I think.k the wording might signal a recognition that doomsday reporting will not be met with patronage anymore.

Every time Mr. O'Toole begins to earn my support, he and the CPC do something to alienate me. During the election, he lost my vote by supporting the Northern Gateway pipeline. This week, it is the hypocrisy of the CPC who are encouraging the truckers to block the roads, but when the First Nations did the same thing only protesting a far more serious issues, they said the Government should tear down the blockades.

Well, have no fear dear, no one will be bringing any guns to this truckers demonstration. It will be all peaceful. Of course if trouble does break out it will no doubt be due to some communists whom will go to the demonstration and try and start a fight and a riot. And that is just what the Canadian leftist liberal media would like to see happen and the Canadian media will have their story to report on TV news. See, these demonstrators are here to start trouble and are here to maybe try and overthrow the government. Ha-ha-ha. If trouble starts it will not be the peaceful demonstrators that will start anything. I can guarantee you that.