Feb 7, 2022·edited Feb 7, 2022Liked by Line Editor
I first heard the phrase "The hard men" in an article about Northern Ireland, and how the shopkeepers would have either one side or the other hitting them up to 'support the cause', and it was just protection money. Thing was the "hard men" on both sides looked identical: practically a uniform of T-shirt, leather jacket, gold chains.
I just wondered if anybody had to do a "hard men/friendly guys" ratio check on "Occupy", and found that I cracked up at the very idea.
What it all adds up to, for me, is that this protest will be peaceful ... as long as there are no counter-protests that piss off the hard men, no BLM to drive a car into; as long as the long-suffering citizens of Ottawa don't start pouring out jerry cans by themselves, or offering any other physical resistance.
This is the best flavour-of-the-streets piece I've seen, the last 10 days. Many thanks.
These observations accord well with other, generally balanced accounts available elsewhere on the internet, but not at all with the picture painted by institutional media. What should we infer from the disparity? That institutional media aren't to be trusted is a hypothesis confirmed by plenty of evidence before the truck convoy ever hit the road (indeed, it's one reason why sites like The Line exist, and why people turn to them). That men exuding an aura of menace should clump together in their natural habitat of bars also isn't news, and it's hard to see what significance this fact has for truck convoy supporters in particular. One bit of hypocrisy anyone can observe is that media talking heads currently trying to discredit the protesters on this inferential ground are the same ones who label as 'Islamophobes' anyone who suggests Islam has its own fair share of men with a hard edge. If we can't deduce the general from the particular in the latter case (and we can't: it's a logical fallacy), we can't do it in the former.
The reality is that the protesters have a valid point, and if violence and disruption are the criteria, their mode of expressing it compares favourably with many activist-driven demos for which Trudeau has expressed sympathy in the past. I don't share the author's view that Trudeau should keep playing the evasion game: it's irresponsible and makes him look less civil and reasonable--even less Prime Ministerial--than several well-informed, articulate 'Freedom Convoy' spokesmen (you have to go online to see this, of course: the spokesmen don't get much air time on CBC). If Trudeau is willing to speak directly with aboriginal activists sitting in front of a teepee (great politically correct photo op, that), he can show the same courtesy to fellow citizens who have traversed half the country to see him. This is a political problem requiring political dialogue and compromise, not military intervention as some have urged; and it's no part of political wisdom simply to demonize critics of your policies.
Kudos. This sounds honest, including about personal perceptions and biases rather than portraying these observations as facts. Well, maybe a few times implying personal beliefs are unquestionable facts, but it's hard for many people to separate the two, especially in contemporary journalism.
"Hard men". Sure, yep. You'll find them in downtown anycity every weekend and, as mentioned, in a lot of bars. You definitely find them at points of tension like protests, looking to cause trouble or get involved when they can. But, of course, that has nothing specific to do with this protest.
"Mentally ill". Another fixture of downtown anycity, and Ottawa is no exception. I've had many an interaction with some very interesting characters in downtown Ottawa over the years. Also not specific to the protests.
"Anti-vaxxers". Sure. That's not what this protest is about, but it's about vaccine mandates and passports, so of course most of the anti-vaxxers will be supporting it. (The reverse is not true, that supporters are mostly anti-vaxxers. All crows are birds, but only a tiny fraction of birds are crows.) This one is certainly more specific to protest, though doesn't define its purpose or objectives.
I'll even let slide the bit of biased interpretation:
"...it's just a big friendly group of patriotic Canadians, you can pick and choose from many examples to support that case. But that's a lie. There’s a nasty edge to this group — small, but real."
Well sure, agreed. But that isn't a description of the protest, that's true of any downtown crowd on any weekend, any protest, or any large event. Still, it's fair not to mislead that every individual is a jolly old elf.
"If you believe that it's a crowd full of dangerous people, well, that's true, too, but it's not the majority, not even close. "
OK, I see you mean well. I note the different phrasing: "big friendly group" = "that's a lie" versus "crowd full of dangerous people" = "that's true". Both the asymmetric phrasing both leaning toward the crowds as being bad gives away the bias, and the mismatch between not even close to a majority, but still "full of" dangerous people.
I get it. You don't like the protest. You disagree with it. You want to highlight the negatives, but you are trying to be fair and acknowledge the positives.
This looks like ... well, no bullshit. I appreciate that. Thank you.
And of course the mentally ill are there: there is unlimited free food, socks, gloves, handwarmers, footwarmers, fires to warm up at... A homeless person in Ottawa would have to be really crazy not to come.
In part because it was omitted, though I suspect for good reason/legal ability to point it out, you're missing the point that the "hard men" were not only there but there in a specific role.
Much as he drew the parallel between the Police roaming in a group, so were the "hard men", he also mentioned that they were in the out of bounds areas where supplies and the Organizer's infrastructure was.
They are all White Nationalist elements, of which Pat King is either a direct leader of or has such a close association with that they stand beside him at every Public Display of strength he's made the past 5yrs or so.
These are interesting claims. But from the point of view of anybody reading this, it is just assertions of some person going by "RJ" in the comment section of a substack article.
To be of value, you need to either be making some self-evident reasoned point of internal logic that people missed, or have some external evidence of your claims.
Can you cite (a) evidence that there were White Nationalist elements in some organized group at the protests, and (b) that their presence in any way had anything to do with the actual protest.
Keep in mind that this would be very weird given that the Freedom Convoy 2022 was created by a Metis woman, Tamara Lich, who quickly brought on her friend Ben Dichter, a practicing Jewish man. Unless you are suggesting that these elements were there but not associated with the protest itself, which is then almost pointless then because you'll get all types of people with all types of beliefs at any protest or event. What matters is not the personal beliefs of every person, but what is the organizing theme, demands, and protesting mechanisms of the protest itself.
- @1:25 is a lawyer supporting it. (The interviewer is also a lawyer.) Does that mean that the protest was about lawyers just because there were lawyers there supporting it?
- @1:46:45 is a transgender woman named Ari. (She shows up over several days including carrying a transgender flag.) Does that mean the protest is about transgenderism?
- @2:09 is a doctor/trauma surgeon. Does that mean the protest is about doctors?
- @4:02 is a musician, and there other musicians interviewed (and another one here @1:30: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqjrn1MzIAA). Does that mean the protest is about music?
The movement was started by a Metis woman, and there were many indigenous people involved, such as Nate "Big Bear" here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZtdSYbhf-0. Does that mean this was an indigenous protest?
There were lots of immigrants at the protest, including many from former communist countries who on camera said they supported the protest because the actions of the Canadian government were scarily similar to the authoritarian regimes they escaped from. (And this was before the Emergencies Act!) Does that mean the protest was about immigration, or about communism?
I think the point is clear. You can always find people of various other characteristics. That includes finding people with objectionable beliefs. You can find them in any protest, any movement, any political party, and fan group for any TV show, or generally that fall into any other grouping of people.
It is standard rhetoric that when people can't find a legitimate objection to something they disagree with, there is a tendency toward flinging metaphorical poo by finding some individuals or sub-group that are distasteful for completely different reasons, then trying to smear the whole thing with their distastefulness. Guilt by association.
That Pat King was there, or that there may have been one or more White Nationalists there, is completely irrelevant to the protest. It has nothing to do with the point of the protest. It has nothing to do with the demands, approach, or who made up the many supporters of the protest. Pointing out that they exist and may have been there is a non sequitur.
I understand the instinct of people who disagree with the protest to turn to this type of rhetoric because it is pretty standard psychological fare when people don't have legitimate objections. We are still apes with many ape-brain components; we may have adapted from flinging real poo to metaphorical poo, but the instinct to smear opposition is from the same psychological forces. As thinking humans, especially in politics and in the press, we should try to go beyond barbaric instincts to smear and to think rationally and through evidence-based reasoning.
I also note that you do not explicitly say you are against the protests, so I don't want to put words in your mouth. But, you are making claims that seem to be accusations without evidence to support it, and even if true still have no bearing on the protest itself. Hence, my concerns with those claims. Are they true, and if so, why would that be relevant?
First off, if you aren't aware that Tamara Lich is the Secretary on the Executive Board of the newly founded Federal Maverick Party.
Co-founded by Pat King, avowed White Nationalist. King previously organized and led White Supremacist movements The Yellow Vests and WEXIT, where he met Lich who took over organizing the southern Alberta Region.
So if you really believe that A) Lich was the Leader of the Convoy and not King's Proxy, you're delusional, or that B) Lich is really a Metis woman and not scamming the Government you're again, have not done your research.
There has been a massive amount of people who are suddenly claiming Indigenous or Metis Heritage thanks to recent court cases in Western Canada. Pat King in his White Nationalist Blogs does so with a Spirit Bear on his wall. He too claims Indigenous Heritage, like Lich does, to insulate themselves from criticism.
Also, the Protest wasn't about racism, it was about Regime change and directing support and funding to mainstream Right Wing Parties who will help move forward the agendas of White Supremacists.
If you look at the foundations of most Antivaxxer Groups before the Pandemic, it's a Rainbow Coalition of Hippies, women of every ethnicity, but largely organized by those with White Nationalist ties.
Pat King wore a Soldier's of Odin hoodie to his Arraignment btw. Which is the equivalent of a biker wearing Hell's Angels Support Gear.
Sadly people in their eagerness to make change or fight perceived injustice, have no problem standing beside racists and Neo Nazis. Sometimes it is willful blindness, for others they are simply ignorant and not carefully looking close enough at the person standing beside them.
Pat King, not Tamara Lich, leads the Western Section of the Convoy. He simply hides behind her on paper, so his affiliations aren't damaging the protest. Sadly many minorities see no problem working with racists, as those involved with the Anti Masker & Vaxxer groups are largely privileged White Women or minorities new to Political action.
RJ, I don't think you are thinking through your comments. You are claiming both conspiracy theories about what is "truly" going on, without any evidence, and then arguing via ad hominem. You are saying that because Pat King has some generally bad ideas that everything Pat King is involved in is therefore bad, and anyone involved with Pat King is therefore bad. That is a non sequitur and guilt by association.
If you want to claim that Tamara Lich is Pat King's proxy, and that she doesn't have a mind of her own, please provide your evidence for that. I disagree strongly with many people I know, people I've worked with, friends, and family.
From what I've seen of Pat King I wouldn't agree with him on much. But, (a) there is nothing in either the origin of the movement or (b) the messaging of the movement that has anything to do with the topics for which people dislike Pat King. There is nothing in the public messaging, nor the actual carrying out of the activities, that negates the same meaning from the start. If there is some hidden goal, when is it supposed to show up? Not in the convoy, not the three weeks they were in downtown Ottawa, and still not now. And, if there were some hidden agenda, do you think the people of Canada in support of the actual messaging behind it -- ending mandates and passports -- would stand behind that messaging.
I don't care who Pat King is or was. If Pat King were giving out food to the homeless, would you say that giving out food to the homeless is therefore a bad thing? He was only one of the supporters. His views have no bearing on the protest or why people support it.
What you are doing is irrational. It is a mental "smear", that to have a person you don't like supporting something therefore "smears" the whole thing and makes it bad. The protest has to be judged on its own merits. This is why the term "ad hominem" exists as a fallacy.
You are making incredibly bad arguments and baseless claims.
At 1 hour, 54 minutes, the interviewer and asks Tom Marazzo, “Do you know is Pat King the leader of the convoy?” Marazzo responsds:
“No, no. Pat King is the leader of the convoy that he arrived in. And, ah, you know, I had a conversation with him and a few other people and I said, ‘Hey Pat, no offense but you’re a little bit of a hand grenade for us. OK? You do your thing. You’re always going to do what Pat King does.’ And we had no effort at all to stop Pat from doing what Pat was going to do. He came there, just like everyone else, for the same stated purpose, but he goes about it in a different way. But he brought people there, he brought support."
"He did a lot of things that people who don’t know, he did a lot of good things for a lot of people. He got drivers fuel. He got drivers food. He got drivers access to showers and stuff like that. But, on the other other hand, we were always terrified that he was going to go and do some live streaming — and I told him this so I don’t feel like I’m talking behind his back - I told him, ‘Pat, you’re a little bit of a hand grenade for us because we don’t know what you’re going to do on social media after you do, you know something.”
From the organizers themselves, Pat King was not a leader of the Freedom Convoy 2022, nor a spokesperson, nor endorsed. In fact, he was warned by them that his actions could be a problem for them and potentially undermine their efforts — efforts that were stated as being completely about a peaceful protest limited to the vaccine mandates and passports and welcoming of everybody of every walk of life, race, religion and background, and clearly stated by Tamara Lich herself on Marc Patrone’s podcast on January 22: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YATLJuopMc
He was, at best, tolerated as a participant because he brought other participants and helped out.
Now if you want to claim it was all a sham, didn't mean what it said publicly, and there was some hidden conspiracy with some different agenda, then I invite you to put forward the details of how that agenda was/is supposed to play out. Is it some secret plan that they'll promote peaceful and inclusive protest, promote the same policies as the WHO and bioethics councils against mandates and passports, and maybe have people live out happy lives in mutual respect and caring for each other for decades to come -- then some time in the distant future jump out from behind a bush yelling "Surprise! It was all a scam."
"In these encounters, I have observed that all of the truckers I met have been, at all times, friendly, courteous, humble, considerate and peaceful. At no time have observed any aggressive or inappropriate behaviour nor have I at any time felt intimidated or unsafe. I state this as someone who was once the victim of assault on the streets of Ottawa in 2004 and who suffered PTSD as a result."
"5. I have also observed that the truckers, and their supporters, are made up of the most diverse, inclusive and varied cross-section of Canadian demographics that I have ever experienced in my life. As examples, I saw a Sikh truck driver with his children, an Indigenous elder giving a blessing to the gathering, a black preacher performing a Sunday service, Canadians of all ethnicities and multiple families with their children."
"6. I have observed truckers decorating the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier with flowers as well as guarding it. I also observed an encampment beside the Terry Fox Memorial as a means of watching watch over it. At no point have I ever seen violent or threatening behaviour."
"7. My ability to travel in downtown Ottawa, or to and from Parliament Hill has not been impeded by the presence of the truckers. On the contrary, the atmosphere on Parliament Hill has always been safe, welcoming and congenial."
"8. Regarding the honking of horns, I live downtown and my sleep at night has not been disrupted by any unwanted sound. I have observed that the truckers do not honk their horns at night. Furthermore, my everyday life has not been disrupted by any noise related to the Freedom Convoy during the day."
"9. What I have observed is not in accord with what I have seen in the media or what I have experienced directly either with the truckers, their supporters or the gathering of people on Parliament Hill. The media appears to be framing the convoy and the events around their presence in Ottawa in the most unfavourable, erroneous and distorted manner possible."
Or point out the nefarious activities on the hundreds of hours of livestreamed video.
Is there no evidence or no duration over which you might consider that perhaps you've judged it all wrong? The if the massive amount of publicly available data, messaging, videos, affidavits, and organizer testimonies isn't enough for you, what evidence would convince you of that?
Now I did err in not specifying that there are multiple Convoy groups from different regions, and that Pat King and Tamara Lich are Leading the Western Canada Group.
However, much like they both Led the previous "United We Roll" Convoy, the Western Convoy group are the Founding Lead Organizers of the Freedom Convoy. They were later joined by an Ontario based group as we as a large Eastern Canada Convoy Group.
I've been unsure if I was going to bother replying to you anymore for a few reasons. The main one being that I'm honestly not sure if you are simply a contrarian who likes to argue, or if you really believe the things you post.
I'm not trying to be rude or insult you, however I've noticed a number of your posts before this discourse.
You post lots of links to things that are either a blatant misrepresentation of the facts/context of an event/issue then use that bad info to either support your previous point or you come to a horribly fractured conclusion that you believe is the logical interpretation one should come to.
It's like you live a reality so based in False Equivalency that you must have it tattooed on your knuckles in Gothic Letters.
For example, you for some reason keep arguing that Pat King isn't part of the Organizer/Leadership group based on that ridiculous Tom Morazzo Press Conference.
One which Tom first mocks Pat & his Blogs, likely due to their violent and racist content, then quickly backpeddles for 5 minutes of how Pat is such an amazing guy who does so much for everyone and for "The Movement".
You do understand that there are many Organizers and different people in Leadership or support Roles, right??
Tom was a Spokesperson & part of the Leadership Group, however there's no evidence he was involved prior to Feb 7th. He eventually became the Primary Media Contact, holding daily Press Conferences & other Media Updates.
As for your other key bit of screwed up logic regarding Lich & Dichter's ethnic heritage providing proof that Racists and White Nationalism isn't a significant part of the protest, is so bizarre I don't know where to begin.
For starters both Lich & Dichter's claims about their heritage are highly suspect. If Lich was truly Metis why would she support Seceding from Canada & all that Government money??
As for Dichter, I find it difficult to believe any Self Respecting Jewish Man would align with the Convoy. Since this idiot actually RAN for the PPC Nomination where he lives, I doubt he's got very much in the way off self respect.
Again, I don't see a lick of evidence for anything you are claiming. How do you know all of this? Are you part of the organizing team yourself? It doesn't sound like it since you seem to be against it so much. Either you have direct knowledge from being involved, or you've gathered evidence from other information. Can you please link to that information or at least explain where you got it from.
Notable is where she refers to talking with other First Nations, what the goals are (vaccine mandates and vaccine passports), and at 10:50 she says, "This is bringing people together from all walks of life, all races, all religions."
"I was just contacted by a Clanmother from the NWT. She called to express her support and the support of our FN across the country. She is reaching out to the Tribes she is connected to across Canada to organize drummers, prayers, food, shelter and anything they can do to help and support this incredibly important cause. After years of a govt working their damndest to divide us by race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc I feel it’s safe to say that we are not divided! We are all coming together for a common goal."
Does this message from a Metis woman sound like white supremacy?
"A week ago I woke up, went to work, came home, built a Freedom Convoy FB and twitter page, started a Go Fund Me to help raise a little money for Chris and some truckers get to Ottawa, grabbed my guitar and melted some faces. Life is funny."
No mention of Pat involved yet, and not here as to the origin.
"1. Federal & provincial governments must Terminate the covid passport and/or any and all other obligatory vaccine contact tracing programs or inter-Canada passport system.
2. Terminate covid vaccine mandates and respect the rights of those who wish not to be vaccinated.
3. Cease the decisive rhetoric attacking Canadians who disagree with government mandates.
4. Cease to limit debate through coercive means to censor those who have varying or even incorrect opinions."
Tamara retweeted it and it's a video of her saying, "We are now starting to be attacked and smeared, and they're starting to say some pretty nasty things. ... So what I'm going to ask of you is to, if you are inclined, pray for them because they know not what they do. We are not here to spread hate. We are not here to create more division. We are here to stand up together and we are here to love one another, and forgive one another."
"Did you ever think there would be a time in Canada where Quebec and Alberta would come together and unify under the virtue of #Freedom? See what happens when politicians & the media get out of the way? You guys all make me want to cry."
Retweeted video by Ontario police supporting the truckers, calling them heroes, fighting for freedom, and representing Police On Guard who are fighting loss of freedom and divisiveness of mandates: https://policeonguard.ca/tag/ontario/
Retweeted an indigenous woman dancer: "We are so lucky to have such a strong indigenous community in Canada. Thank you to those of you who are actively standing with #FreedomConvoy2022"
Retweet of Jan 27 post saying, "Everyone in Ottawa PLEASE film everything and everyone. If someone calls for violence GET THEM ON CAMERA. Shout “fed” at them and surround them. Ray Epps types will be in there trying to set people up. The media has shown that this is what they plan on framing the convoy as."
Retweets from the organizers calling out warnings of agent provocateurs and reiterating to 1) not enter any government building or property, 2) treat all police officers with respect.
Retweet of colleague BJ Dichter banning Toronto Star for defaming the convoy, which he states, "This will not be tolerated at our peaceful demonstration."
I take issue with the idea of "hard men." I became politicized after my mother's horrendous experience with the Ontario healthcare system. She and I were treated as less than equal, as too demanding, as trouble-making pains-in-the-behind who had to be managed. It made me hard too as I learned to put on my best bulldozer face to deal with gate-keeping healthcare workers. It hardened my heart because I felt that the idea that healthcare was "universal" didn't seem to apply to our family. Putting the blame on the "hard men" without understanding how they got that way misses the point. When people feel dispossessed, this is what happens
I don't think you read the subtext correctly. "Hard men" are those who are violent, and often take joy in starting violence. The type of Guy that intentionally throws their shoulder into you when you walk by, that claims you made them spill a drink or some other fake excuse, if they bother with one, before they violently assault you.
That is well versed and comfortable with violence, pain, and intimidation.
That's who he is talking about. A militant and organized segment of the Convoy Protest, that was clearly organized in groups patrolling as an enforcement element for the Protesters.
This seems plausible. I was there this weekend, so there were obviously way more friendly types, and I never made a habit of going to rough bars, so maybe I didn't spot the hard men. It still seems like lifting the mandates, as well as being obviously right on its own, is the easy way to resolve this situation. Expelling people from society has worked poorly.
I honestly don’t understand the argument of giving into the demands of people behaving badly (no matter the issue) as a winning solution. Just encourages more bad behaviour.
So when you have unjustly persecuted people, and ignored them when they complain politely, if they start to complain impolitely, you are obliged to keep persecuting them? I don't understand that reasoning.
When the pandemic is over or diminished then the mandates will end. Do these people all hate doctors and nurses? I'm so thankful that this crowd wasn't around for WW2. "We've been fighting Hitler for nearly 3 years now and it's not going well. I'm going home. Freedom!" Doesn't sound so good does it?
We're dealing with a once-in-a-hundred-year pandemic. It is a real crisis. We've lost 30K people. The last major crisis that even comes close to this is WW2. That was incredible hardship for 6 years. You are right. It is ridiculous to think that wearing a mask to go shopping and getting a couple of needles is any kind of "tyranny". What a bunch of babies!
Great journalism in a world otherwise littered with bullet points adjusted for the reporters own beliefs. My only point of contention is your indication that Trudeau should not meet with them. Had he not met with others in the past I could understand your position. Understand, not fully agree, but understand. By choosing sides in which causes he will entertain he becomes a leader of some while excluding others so he reestablishes himself up as a polarizing figure and not a leader of all the people. His fawning attention to other causes only steels the resolve of future protest movements and with the name calling just adds fuel to their fire. Some leader.
I also think Trudeau would have saved a little face by visiting the protestors in the first or second day. Not the organizers, mind you, just a wander down the street with a few (his chosen) pitstops to have a 4 min chat with someone there. He is the PM after all, and this is like a townhall coming to him
“The hard men” sounds very Stephen King. I was looking forward to your comments after listening to The Daily Edition this morning. Well done! One of the first balanced descriptions I’ve read. Sleep well tonight.
I lived in Ottawa, mostly Sandy Hill very close to Parliament for a few decades, so very familiar terrain. Yes small and tight heritage downtown surrounded and insinuated with mixed residential. A terrorist's dream opportunity.
The crowd sounds like a carnival of nonsense. I would suggest it has no lasting political significance despite pols attempting to profit from it. A carnival has no centre, a melange of hucksters, assessing the hand-to-mouth opportunities available. I suspect this will disperse in inconsequence when their enthusiasm dissipates, as any party does, and the weight of the meaninglessness of it all folds its weight down upon them.
Just caught video of a new spokesperson desperately attempting to pull something from the chaos. Clearly putting a brave face on the fact the tide is turning against them and they are about to face the consequences for what they have unleashed. He wants to form a coalition of Cons, NDP, BQ, the GG. He should be begging for a team of psychotherapists.
Parties don't go on forever. The enthusiastic delusion will evaporate all of a sudden, like some kind of magical moment, with no announcement or prologue. Expect tears and depression.
The most important part of all this? The brazen and open display of corruption by the Ottawa Police. It is in this context that Matt's cryptic allusion to 'hard men' may be the more telling of a conspiracy of complicitous mentalities if not outright seditious coordination. This is what needs to be the object of intense scrutiny going forward.
The behaviour of the Ottawa Police chief is incomprehensible unless, in fact, he's aware his force is compromised and he is begging for an external intervention but he's too afraid to say why.
There needs to be serious legal action that will scrutinize all the parties to this fiasco. Why is the mayor and council not pursuing the legal action the young woman, and Ottawa resident, launched and who may turn out to be the true democratic hero in all this?
I won’t pretend that I have read everything you’ve ever written Matt. but I will say this is one of the most vivid and memorable I have read. On the war zone thing I think it’s more that it sounds like one at times rather than it is one. My late mother who grew up in England during WWII would definitely have been triggered by the noise if she were there. I imagine there are Centretown residents who feel that way too.
Now do the same analysis on Media and Government or Government adjacent (Unions, Butts, Carney, etc). Try going after power centers if you have the stomach for it. If I keep seeing these story choices, I will know that the Line chooses to only punch down.
I remember enjoying Matt's article the day it came out. It provided the clarity that enthusiastic mobile-cameras-which-talked on You Tube failed to do.
You won't sell subscriptions with articles like this. Work in some sensationalism.
Ha! I just bumped from a free to paid subscription after reading this :-)
Or be appointed to the Senate
I first heard the phrase "The hard men" in an article about Northern Ireland, and how the shopkeepers would have either one side or the other hitting them up to 'support the cause', and it was just protection money. Thing was the "hard men" on both sides looked identical: practically a uniform of T-shirt, leather jacket, gold chains.
I just wondered if anybody had to do a "hard men/friendly guys" ratio check on "Occupy", and found that I cracked up at the very idea.
What it all adds up to, for me, is that this protest will be peaceful ... as long as there are no counter-protests that piss off the hard men, no BLM to drive a car into; as long as the long-suffering citizens of Ottawa don't start pouring out jerry cans by themselves, or offering any other physical resistance.
This is the best flavour-of-the-streets piece I've seen, the last 10 days. Many thanks.
These observations accord well with other, generally balanced accounts available elsewhere on the internet, but not at all with the picture painted by institutional media. What should we infer from the disparity? That institutional media aren't to be trusted is a hypothesis confirmed by plenty of evidence before the truck convoy ever hit the road (indeed, it's one reason why sites like The Line exist, and why people turn to them). That men exuding an aura of menace should clump together in their natural habitat of bars also isn't news, and it's hard to see what significance this fact has for truck convoy supporters in particular. One bit of hypocrisy anyone can observe is that media talking heads currently trying to discredit the protesters on this inferential ground are the same ones who label as 'Islamophobes' anyone who suggests Islam has its own fair share of men with a hard edge. If we can't deduce the general from the particular in the latter case (and we can't: it's a logical fallacy), we can't do it in the former.
The reality is that the protesters have a valid point, and if violence and disruption are the criteria, their mode of expressing it compares favourably with many activist-driven demos for which Trudeau has expressed sympathy in the past. I don't share the author's view that Trudeau should keep playing the evasion game: it's irresponsible and makes him look less civil and reasonable--even less Prime Ministerial--than several well-informed, articulate 'Freedom Convoy' spokesmen (you have to go online to see this, of course: the spokesmen don't get much air time on CBC). If Trudeau is willing to speak directly with aboriginal activists sitting in front of a teepee (great politically correct photo op, that), he can show the same courtesy to fellow citizens who have traversed half the country to see him. This is a political problem requiring political dialogue and compromise, not military intervention as some have urged; and it's no part of political wisdom simply to demonize critics of your policies.
Great journalism.
Kudos. This sounds honest, including about personal perceptions and biases rather than portraying these observations as facts. Well, maybe a few times implying personal beliefs are unquestionable facts, but it's hard for many people to separate the two, especially in contemporary journalism.
"Hard men". Sure, yep. You'll find them in downtown anycity every weekend and, as mentioned, in a lot of bars. You definitely find them at points of tension like protests, looking to cause trouble or get involved when they can. But, of course, that has nothing specific to do with this protest.
"Mentally ill". Another fixture of downtown anycity, and Ottawa is no exception. I've had many an interaction with some very interesting characters in downtown Ottawa over the years. Also not specific to the protests.
"Anti-vaxxers". Sure. That's not what this protest is about, but it's about vaccine mandates and passports, so of course most of the anti-vaxxers will be supporting it. (The reverse is not true, that supporters are mostly anti-vaxxers. All crows are birds, but only a tiny fraction of birds are crows.) This one is certainly more specific to protest, though doesn't define its purpose or objectives.
I'll even let slide the bit of biased interpretation:
"...it's just a big friendly group of patriotic Canadians, you can pick and choose from many examples to support that case. But that's a lie. There’s a nasty edge to this group — small, but real."
Well sure, agreed. But that isn't a description of the protest, that's true of any downtown crowd on any weekend, any protest, or any large event. Still, it's fair not to mislead that every individual is a jolly old elf.
"If you believe that it's a crowd full of dangerous people, well, that's true, too, but it's not the majority, not even close. "
OK, I see you mean well. I note the different phrasing: "big friendly group" = "that's a lie" versus "crowd full of dangerous people" = "that's true". Both the asymmetric phrasing both leaning toward the crowds as being bad gives away the bias, and the mismatch between not even close to a majority, but still "full of" dangerous people.
I get it. You don't like the protest. You disagree with it. You want to highlight the negatives, but you are trying to be fair and acknowledge the positives.
This looks like ... well, no bullshit. I appreciate that. Thank you.
And of course the mentally ill are there: there is unlimited free food, socks, gloves, handwarmers, footwarmers, fires to warm up at... A homeless person in Ottawa would have to be really crazy not to come.
In part because it was omitted, though I suspect for good reason/legal ability to point it out, you're missing the point that the "hard men" were not only there but there in a specific role.
Much as he drew the parallel between the Police roaming in a group, so were the "hard men", he also mentioned that they were in the out of bounds areas where supplies and the Organizer's infrastructure was.
They are all White Nationalist elements, of which Pat King is either a direct leader of or has such a close association with that they stand beside him at every Public Display of strength he's made the past 5yrs or so.
It's not random.
These are interesting claims. But from the point of view of anybody reading this, it is just assertions of some person going by "RJ" in the comment section of a substack article.
To be of value, you need to either be making some self-evident reasoned point of internal logic that people missed, or have some external evidence of your claims.
Can you cite (a) evidence that there were White Nationalist elements in some organized group at the protests, and (b) that their presence in any way had anything to do with the actual protest.
Keep in mind that this would be very weird given that the Freedom Convoy 2022 was created by a Metis woman, Tamara Lich, who quickly brought on her friend Ben Dichter, a practicing Jewish man. Unless you are suggesting that these elements were there but not associated with the protest itself, which is then almost pointless then because you'll get all types of people with all types of beliefs at any protest or event. What matters is not the personal beliefs of every person, but what is the organizing theme, demands, and protesting mechanisms of the protest itself.
For example, from this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_L7ATD3Q0A
- @1:25 is a lawyer supporting it. (The interviewer is also a lawyer.) Does that mean that the protest was about lawyers just because there were lawyers there supporting it?
- @1:46:45 is a transgender woman named Ari. (She shows up over several days including carrying a transgender flag.) Does that mean the protest is about transgenderism?
- @2:09 is a doctor/trauma surgeon. Does that mean the protest is about doctors?
- @4:02 is a musician, and there other musicians interviewed (and another one here @1:30: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqjrn1MzIAA). Does that mean the protest is about music?
The movement was started by a Metis woman, and there were many indigenous people involved, such as Nate "Big Bear" here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZtdSYbhf-0. Does that mean this was an indigenous protest?
There were lots of immigrants at the protest, including many from former communist countries who on camera said they supported the protest because the actions of the Canadian government were scarily similar to the authoritarian regimes they escaped from. (And this was before the Emergencies Act!) Does that mean the protest was about immigration, or about communism?
I think the point is clear. You can always find people of various other characteristics. That includes finding people with objectionable beliefs. You can find them in any protest, any movement, any political party, and fan group for any TV show, or generally that fall into any other grouping of people.
It is standard rhetoric that when people can't find a legitimate objection to something they disagree with, there is a tendency toward flinging metaphorical poo by finding some individuals or sub-group that are distasteful for completely different reasons, then trying to smear the whole thing with their distastefulness. Guilt by association.
That Pat King was there, or that there may have been one or more White Nationalists there, is completely irrelevant to the protest. It has nothing to do with the point of the protest. It has nothing to do with the demands, approach, or who made up the many supporters of the protest. Pointing out that they exist and may have been there is a non sequitur.
I understand the instinct of people who disagree with the protest to turn to this type of rhetoric because it is pretty standard psychological fare when people don't have legitimate objections. We are still apes with many ape-brain components; we may have adapted from flinging real poo to metaphorical poo, but the instinct to smear opposition is from the same psychological forces. As thinking humans, especially in politics and in the press, we should try to go beyond barbaric instincts to smear and to think rationally and through evidence-based reasoning.
I also note that you do not explicitly say you are against the protests, so I don't want to put words in your mouth. But, you are making claims that seem to be accusations without evidence to support it, and even if true still have no bearing on the protest itself. Hence, my concerns with those claims. Are they true, and if so, why would that be relevant?
First off, if you aren't aware that Tamara Lich is the Secretary on the Executive Board of the newly founded Federal Maverick Party.
Co-founded by Pat King, avowed White Nationalist. King previously organized and led White Supremacist movements The Yellow Vests and WEXIT, where he met Lich who took over organizing the southern Alberta Region.
So if you really believe that A) Lich was the Leader of the Convoy and not King's Proxy, you're delusional, or that B) Lich is really a Metis woman and not scamming the Government you're again, have not done your research.
There has been a massive amount of people who are suddenly claiming Indigenous or Metis Heritage thanks to recent court cases in Western Canada. Pat King in his White Nationalist Blogs does so with a Spirit Bear on his wall. He too claims Indigenous Heritage, like Lich does, to insulate themselves from criticism.
Also, the Protest wasn't about racism, it was about Regime change and directing support and funding to mainstream Right Wing Parties who will help move forward the agendas of White Supremacists.
If you look at the foundations of most Antivaxxer Groups before the Pandemic, it's a Rainbow Coalition of Hippies, women of every ethnicity, but largely organized by those with White Nationalist ties.
Pat King wore a Soldier's of Odin hoodie to his Arraignment btw. Which is the equivalent of a biker wearing Hell's Angels Support Gear.
Sadly people in their eagerness to make change or fight perceived injustice, have no problem standing beside racists and Neo Nazis. Sometimes it is willful blindness, for others they are simply ignorant and not carefully looking close enough at the person standing beside them.
https://www.theprogressreport.ca/progress_report_234
Pat King, not Tamara Lich, leads the Western Section of the Convoy. He simply hides behind her on paper, so his affiliations aren't damaging the protest. Sadly many minorities see no problem working with racists, as those involved with the Anti Masker & Vaxxer groups are largely privileged White Women or minorities new to Political action.
RJ, I don't think you are thinking through your comments. You are claiming both conspiracy theories about what is "truly" going on, without any evidence, and then arguing via ad hominem. You are saying that because Pat King has some generally bad ideas that everything Pat King is involved in is therefore bad, and anyone involved with Pat King is therefore bad. That is a non sequitur and guilt by association.
If you want to claim that Tamara Lich is Pat King's proxy, and that she doesn't have a mind of her own, please provide your evidence for that. I disagree strongly with many people I know, people I've worked with, friends, and family.
From what I've seen of Pat King I wouldn't agree with him on much. But, (a) there is nothing in either the origin of the movement or (b) the messaging of the movement that has anything to do with the topics for which people dislike Pat King. There is nothing in the public messaging, nor the actual carrying out of the activities, that negates the same meaning from the start. If there is some hidden goal, when is it supposed to show up? Not in the convoy, not the three weeks they were in downtown Ottawa, and still not now. And, if there were some hidden agenda, do you think the people of Canada in support of the actual messaging behind it -- ending mandates and passports -- would stand behind that messaging.
I don't care who Pat King is or was. If Pat King were giving out food to the homeless, would you say that giving out food to the homeless is therefore a bad thing? He was only one of the supporters. His views have no bearing on the protest or why people support it.
What you are doing is irrational. It is a mental "smear", that to have a person you don't like supporting something therefore "smears" the whole thing and makes it bad. The protest has to be judged on its own merits. This is why the term "ad hominem" exists as a fallacy.
You are making incredibly bad arguments and baseless claims.
Let's get it from the organizers too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md8iRwl9ZVQ
At 1 hour, 54 minutes, the interviewer and asks Tom Marazzo, “Do you know is Pat King the leader of the convoy?” Marazzo responsds:
“No, no. Pat King is the leader of the convoy that he arrived in. And, ah, you know, I had a conversation with him and a few other people and I said, ‘Hey Pat, no offense but you’re a little bit of a hand grenade for us. OK? You do your thing. You’re always going to do what Pat King does.’ And we had no effort at all to stop Pat from doing what Pat was going to do. He came there, just like everyone else, for the same stated purpose, but he goes about it in a different way. But he brought people there, he brought support."
"He did a lot of things that people who don’t know, he did a lot of good things for a lot of people. He got drivers fuel. He got drivers food. He got drivers access to showers and stuff like that. But, on the other other hand, we were always terrified that he was going to go and do some live streaming — and I told him this so I don’t feel like I’m talking behind his back - I told him, ‘Pat, you’re a little bit of a hand grenade for us because we don’t know what you’re going to do on social media after you do, you know something.”
From the organizers themselves, Pat King was not a leader of the Freedom Convoy 2022, nor a spokesperson, nor endorsed. In fact, he was warned by them that his actions could be a problem for them and potentially undermine their efforts — efforts that were stated as being completely about a peaceful protest limited to the vaccine mandates and passports and welcoming of everybody of every walk of life, race, religion and background, and clearly stated by Tamara Lich herself on Marc Patrone’s podcast on January 22: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YATLJuopMc
He was, at best, tolerated as a participant because he brought other participants and helped out.
Now if you want to claim it was all a sham, didn't mean what it said publicly, and there was some hidden conspiracy with some different agenda, then I invite you to put forward the details of how that agenda was/is supposed to play out. Is it some secret plan that they'll promote peaceful and inclusive protest, promote the same policies as the WHO and bioethics councils against mandates and passports, and maybe have people live out happy lives in mutual respect and caring for each other for decades to come -- then some time in the distant future jump out from behind a bush yelling "Surprise! It was all a scam."
Please, explain how this conspiracy is/was supposed to play out given that no such thing has emerged yet. What did emerge is perhaps best described by this United Way worker in their affidavit: https://www.jccf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Ottawa-Affidavit-C.pdf
"In these encounters, I have observed that all of the truckers I met have been, at all times, friendly, courteous, humble, considerate and peaceful. At no time have observed any aggressive or inappropriate behaviour nor have I at any time felt intimidated or unsafe. I state this as someone who was once the victim of assault on the streets of Ottawa in 2004 and who suffered PTSD as a result."
"5. I have also observed that the truckers, and their supporters, are made up of the most diverse, inclusive and varied cross-section of Canadian demographics that I have ever experienced in my life. As examples, I saw a Sikh truck driver with his children, an Indigenous elder giving a blessing to the gathering, a black preacher performing a Sunday service, Canadians of all ethnicities and multiple families with their children."
"6. I have observed truckers decorating the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier with flowers as well as guarding it. I also observed an encampment beside the Terry Fox Memorial as a means of watching watch over it. At no point have I ever seen violent or threatening behaviour."
"7. My ability to travel in downtown Ottawa, or to and from Parliament Hill has not been impeded by the presence of the truckers. On the contrary, the atmosphere on Parliament Hill has always been safe, welcoming and congenial."
"8. Regarding the honking of horns, I live downtown and my sleep at night has not been disrupted by any unwanted sound. I have observed that the truckers do not honk their horns at night. Furthermore, my everyday life has not been disrupted by any noise related to the Freedom Convoy during the day."
"9. What I have observed is not in accord with what I have seen in the media or what I have experienced directly either with the truckers, their supporters or the gathering of people on Parliament Hill. The media appears to be framing the convoy and the events around their presence in Ottawa in the most unfavourable, erroneous and distorted manner possible."
Or point out the nefarious activities on the hundreds of hours of livestreamed video.
Is there no evidence or no duration over which you might consider that perhaps you've judged it all wrong? The if the massive amount of publicly available data, messaging, videos, affidavits, and organizer testimonies isn't enough for you, what evidence would convince you of that?
Now I did err in not specifying that there are multiple Convoy groups from different regions, and that Pat King and Tamara Lich are Leading the Western Canada Group.
However, much like they both Led the previous "United We Roll" Convoy, the Western Convoy group are the Founding Lead Organizers of the Freedom Convoy. They were later joined by an Ontario based group as we as a large Eastern Canada Convoy Group.
I've been unsure if I was going to bother replying to you anymore for a few reasons. The main one being that I'm honestly not sure if you are simply a contrarian who likes to argue, or if you really believe the things you post.
I'm not trying to be rude or insult you, however I've noticed a number of your posts before this discourse.
You post lots of links to things that are either a blatant misrepresentation of the facts/context of an event/issue then use that bad info to either support your previous point or you come to a horribly fractured conclusion that you believe is the logical interpretation one should come to.
It's like you live a reality so based in False Equivalency that you must have it tattooed on your knuckles in Gothic Letters.
For example, you for some reason keep arguing that Pat King isn't part of the Organizer/Leadership group based on that ridiculous Tom Morazzo Press Conference.
One which Tom first mocks Pat & his Blogs, likely due to their violent and racist content, then quickly backpeddles for 5 minutes of how Pat is such an amazing guy who does so much for everyone and for "The Movement".
You do understand that there are many Organizers and different people in Leadership or support Roles, right??
Tom was a Spokesperson & part of the Leadership Group, however there's no evidence he was involved prior to Feb 7th. He eventually became the Primary Media Contact, holding daily Press Conferences & other Media Updates.
As for your other key bit of screwed up logic regarding Lich & Dichter's ethnic heritage providing proof that Racists and White Nationalism isn't a significant part of the protest, is so bizarre I don't know where to begin.
For starters both Lich & Dichter's claims about their heritage are highly suspect. If Lich was truly Metis why would she support Seceding from Canada & all that Government money??
As for Dichter, I find it difficult to believe any Self Respecting Jewish Man would align with the Convoy. Since this idiot actually RAN for the PPC Nomination where he lives, I doubt he's got very much in the way off self respect.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_convoy_protest
Again, I don't see a lick of evidence for anything you are claiming. How do you know all of this? Are you part of the organizing team yourself? It doesn't sound like it since you seem to be against it so much. Either you have direct knowledge from being involved, or you've gathered evidence from other information. Can you please link to that information or at least explain where you got it from.
I have provided evidence, with links and quotes: https://adnausica.substack.com/p/protesting-the-pretext-of-the-protests?s=w
Here's Tamara Lich's Twitter: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC
Please point out any indications of what you suggest.
Here's her interview on the Marc Patrone show from Jan. 22: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YATLJuopMc
Notable is where she refers to talking with other First Nations, what the goals are (vaccine mandates and vaccine passports), and at 10:50 she says, "This is bringing people together from all walks of life, all races, all religions."
How about these Tweets:
Jan. 18: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1483517173582548994
"I was just contacted by a Clanmother from the NWT. She called to express her support and the support of our FN across the country. She is reaching out to the Tribes she is connected to across Canada to organize drummers, prayers, food, shelter and anything they can do to help and support this incredibly important cause. After years of a govt working their damndest to divide us by race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc I feel it’s safe to say that we are not divided! We are all coming together for a common goal."
Does this message from a Metis woman sound like white supremacy?
Jan 21: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1484532504027484162
"A week ago I woke up, went to work, came home, built a Freedom Convoy FB and twitter page, started a Go Fund Me to help raise a little money for Chris and some truckers get to Ottawa, grabbed my guitar and melted some faces. Life is funny."
No mention of Pat involved yet, and not here as to the origin.
Jan 22: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1484989990241288193
"1. Federal & provincial governments must Terminate the covid passport and/or any and all other obligatory vaccine contact tracing programs or inter-Canada passport system.
2. Terminate covid vaccine mandates and respect the rights of those who wish not to be vaccinated.
3. Cease the decisive rhetoric attacking Canadians who disagree with government mandates.
4. Cease to limit debate through coercive means to censor those who have varying or even incorrect opinions."
No announcement of a differing agenda here.
Jan 23: https://twitter.com/FredFredderson1/status/1485351714580574225
Tamara retweeted it and it's a video of her saying, "We are now starting to be attacked and smeared, and they're starting to say some pretty nasty things. ... So what I'm going to ask of you is to, if you are inclined, pray for them because they know not what they do. We are not here to spread hate. We are not here to create more division. We are here to stand up together and we are here to love one another, and forgive one another."
Jan 23 she retweeted this: https://twitter.com/HamieGill/status/1485455614985842688/photo/1
And this: https://twitter.com/BeeNaas64/status/1485430512395042818
Jan 24: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1485711111232102408
"Did you ever think there would be a time in Canada where Quebec and Alberta would come together and unify under the virtue of #Freedom? See what happens when politicians & the media get out of the way? You guys all make me want to cry."
Jan 25: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1485957523349950465
Retweeted video by Ontario police supporting the truckers, calling them heroes, fighting for freedom, and representing Police On Guard who are fighting loss of freedom and divisiveness of mandates: https://policeonguard.ca/tag/ontario/
Jan 27: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1486709198452785154
Retweeted an indigenous woman dancer: "We are so lucky to have such a strong indigenous community in Canada. Thank you to those of you who are actively standing with #FreedomConvoy2022"
Jan 27: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1486853368492474368
Retweet from colleague BJ Dichter, "Please join us in Ottawa for a peaceful and loving protest where we can rediscover freedom together."
Jan 27: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1486922367544827906
"We are going to win this by showing love for one another. Be spiritual and be kind to all those around you."
Jan 28: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1487066415786082307
Photo of Hutterites supporting the convoy.
Jan 28: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1487083245300764678
"Calm, peaceful and with love for everyone including those we disagree with."
Jan 28: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1487093588987101187
Calls out the expected agitators and agent provocateurs, and says "Keep calm and peaceful."
Jan 28: https://twitter.com/Tamara_MVC/status/1487120332955738118
Photo of her (alleged) grandmother, an indigenous woman on a drum, and notes "#Stopthehate"
Jan 28: https://twitter.com/CCryptonaire/status/1486900592102424578
Retweet of Jan 27 post saying, "Everyone in Ottawa PLEASE film everything and everyone. If someone calls for violence GET THEM ON CAMERA. Shout “fed” at them and surround them. Ray Epps types will be in there trying to set people up. The media has shown that this is what they plan on framing the convoy as."
Jan 28: https://twitter.com/TheRealKeean/status/1487131569034866694/photo/1
Retweets from the organizers calling out warnings of agent provocateurs and reiterating to 1) not enter any government building or property, 2) treat all police officers with respect.
Jan 28: https://twitter.com/BJdichter/status/1487256766656172032
Retweet of colleague BJ Dichter banning Toronto Star for defaming the convoy, which he states, "This will not be tolerated at our peaceful demonstration."
...
(continued in Part 2)
I take issue with the idea of "hard men." I became politicized after my mother's horrendous experience with the Ontario healthcare system. She and I were treated as less than equal, as too demanding, as trouble-making pains-in-the-behind who had to be managed. It made me hard too as I learned to put on my best bulldozer face to deal with gate-keeping healthcare workers. It hardened my heart because I felt that the idea that healthcare was "universal" didn't seem to apply to our family. Putting the blame on the "hard men" without understanding how they got that way misses the point. When people feel dispossessed, this is what happens
I don't think you read the subtext correctly. "Hard men" are those who are violent, and often take joy in starting violence. The type of Guy that intentionally throws their shoulder into you when you walk by, that claims you made them spill a drink or some other fake excuse, if they bother with one, before they violently assault you.
That is well versed and comfortable with violence, pain, and intimidation.
That's who he is talking about. A militant and organized segment of the Convoy Protest, that was clearly organized in groups patrolling as an enforcement element for the Protesters.
Nobody looks more like a hard man than an off-duty or plain clothed or undercover police officer.
This seems plausible. I was there this weekend, so there were obviously way more friendly types, and I never made a habit of going to rough bars, so maybe I didn't spot the hard men. It still seems like lifting the mandates, as well as being obviously right on its own, is the easy way to resolve this situation. Expelling people from society has worked poorly.
I honestly don’t understand the argument of giving into the demands of people behaving badly (no matter the issue) as a winning solution. Just encourages more bad behaviour.
So when you have unjustly persecuted people, and ignored them when they complain politely, if they start to complain impolitely, you are obliged to keep persecuting them? I don't understand that reasoning.
How are these people unjustly persecuted?
Fired from jobs, banned from many schools, banned from weddings, funerals, social life, travel, leaving Canada. That sounds like persecution to me.
These people are entitled babies who wouldn’t know persecution if they fell over it.
When the pandemic is over or diminished then the mandates will end. Do these people all hate doctors and nurses? I'm so thankful that this crowd wasn't around for WW2. "We've been fighting Hitler for nearly 3 years now and it's not going well. I'm going home. Freedom!" Doesn't sound so good does it?
We're dealing with a once-in-a-hundred-year pandemic. It is a real crisis. We've lost 30K people. The last major crisis that even comes close to this is WW2. That was incredible hardship for 6 years. You are right. It is ridiculous to think that wearing a mask to go shopping and getting a couple of needles is any kind of "tyranny". What a bunch of babies!
Great journalism in a world otherwise littered with bullet points adjusted for the reporters own beliefs. My only point of contention is your indication that Trudeau should not meet with them. Had he not met with others in the past I could understand your position. Understand, not fully agree, but understand. By choosing sides in which causes he will entertain he becomes a leader of some while excluding others so he reestablishes himself up as a polarizing figure and not a leader of all the people. His fawning attention to other causes only steels the resolve of future protest movements and with the name calling just adds fuel to their fire. Some leader.
I also think Trudeau would have saved a little face by visiting the protestors in the first or second day. Not the organizers, mind you, just a wander down the street with a few (his chosen) pitstops to have a 4 min chat with someone there. He is the PM after all, and this is like a townhall coming to him
“The hard men” sounds very Stephen King. I was looking forward to your comments after listening to The Daily Edition this morning. Well done! One of the first balanced descriptions I’ve read. Sleep well tonight.
Fantastic coverage - well worth my five bucks a month, keep up the good work!
I lived in Ottawa, mostly Sandy Hill very close to Parliament for a few decades, so very familiar terrain. Yes small and tight heritage downtown surrounded and insinuated with mixed residential. A terrorist's dream opportunity.
The crowd sounds like a carnival of nonsense. I would suggest it has no lasting political significance despite pols attempting to profit from it. A carnival has no centre, a melange of hucksters, assessing the hand-to-mouth opportunities available. I suspect this will disperse in inconsequence when their enthusiasm dissipates, as any party does, and the weight of the meaninglessness of it all folds its weight down upon them.
Just caught video of a new spokesperson desperately attempting to pull something from the chaos. Clearly putting a brave face on the fact the tide is turning against them and they are about to face the consequences for what they have unleashed. He wants to form a coalition of Cons, NDP, BQ, the GG. He should be begging for a team of psychotherapists.
https://twitter.com/Justin_Ling/status/1490925393498767362
Parties don't go on forever. The enthusiastic delusion will evaporate all of a sudden, like some kind of magical moment, with no announcement or prologue. Expect tears and depression.
The most important part of all this? The brazen and open display of corruption by the Ottawa Police. It is in this context that Matt's cryptic allusion to 'hard men' may be the more telling of a conspiracy of complicitous mentalities if not outright seditious coordination. This is what needs to be the object of intense scrutiny going forward.
The behaviour of the Ottawa Police chief is incomprehensible unless, in fact, he's aware his force is compromised and he is begging for an external intervention but he's too afraid to say why.
There needs to be serious legal action that will scrutinize all the parties to this fiasco. Why is the mayor and council not pursuing the legal action the young woman, and Ottawa resident, launched and who may turn out to be the true democratic hero in all this?
I won’t pretend that I have read everything you’ve ever written Matt. but I will say this is one of the most vivid and memorable I have read. On the war zone thing I think it’s more that it sounds like one at times rather than it is one. My late mother who grew up in England during WWII would definitely have been triggered by the noise if she were there. I imagine there are Centretown residents who feel that way too.
Now do the same analysis on Media and Government or Government adjacent (Unions, Butts, Carney, etc). Try going after power centers if you have the stomach for it. If I keep seeing these story choices, I will know that the Line chooses to only punch down.
I remember enjoying Matt's article the day it came out. It provided the clarity that enthusiastic mobile-cameras-which-talked on You Tube failed to do.
Hi Editors.
Is all good with you both and yours? Just wondering if there is going to be a dispatch this week.
All the best and missing you.
E
You can’t rush art.
Fair enough. I'll use that with my customers Monday.