Canadian Politics Redux

PJ_Soul

DarthMaeglin said:

Now it’s going to be the Ontario court’s turn to weigh in on whether protest rights trump property rights. The Quebec court seemingly sided with the protesters a couple weeks ago.

I honestly think this is a fair question, where is the outrage over the current national movement of occupation for political purposes? Are these protesters out of the way enough to get a pass, or is it because they’re on private property? Why no derision poured on them like the vitriol flung at the Ottawa protesters? It really feels like there’s different standards for different sides, based entirely on where someone stands on the issue of the moment.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/university-of-toronto-latest-offer-students-encampment-1.7213010

I think this has almost everything to do with the fact that the encampment is at a public university (I work at one of those myself), where intellectual freedom and freedom of speech are viewed as fairly sacred concepts, and also where students make up the bulk of the community. Student protests on campuses can't really be equally compared to other types of protests that disrupt the functioning of a city or residents. I fully get it. I think these encampments and demanding that universities cut ties with Israel are pretty stupid personally, since international connections of universities aren't even close to the same as connections of governments. These people would make more sense to me if they had an encampment set up on Parliament Hill.

DarthMaeglin

PJ_Soul said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Now it’s going to be the Ontario court’s turn to weigh in on whether protest rights trump property rights. The Quebec court seemingly sided with the protesters a couple weeks ago.

I honestly think this is a fair question, where is the outrage over the current national movement of occupation for political purposes? Are these protesters out of the way enough to get a pass, or is it because they’re on private property? Why no derision poured on them like the vitriol flung at the Ottawa protesters? It really feels like there’s different standards for different sides, based entirely on where someone stands on the issue of the moment.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/university-of-toronto-latest-offer-students-encampment-1.7213010

I think this has almost everything to do with the fact that the encampment is at a public university (I work at one of those myself), where intellectual freedom and freedom of speech are viewed as fairly sacred concepts, and also where students make up the bulk of the community. Student protests on campuses can't really be equally compared to other types of protests that disrupt the functioning of a city or residents. I fully get it. I think these encampments and demanding that universities cut ties with Israel are pretty stupid personally, since international connections of universities aren't even close to the same as connections of governments. These people would make more sense to me if they had an encampment set up on Parliament Hill.

I don't mind allowing students a bit of extra leash as part of their growth,  however where the article cites several reports of hate speech and intimidation,  I really think that is something that needs addressing (maybe investigations are ongoing and that's why the article doesn't mention any outcomes from those reports).

I truly wish I could agree with your claim that intellectual freedom and freedom of speech are sacred to our institutes of "higher learning" but there's been too many instances of speakers being canceled and similar occurrences that I cannot accept that premise. 

I honestly believe that any given university has the right to dictate what is and isn't acceptable on their campus,  especially since my experience has been that in order to attend an institution I had to agree to a code of conduct that placed ultimate authority with the school's administration. 

It's just been reported that the Toronto students have been given until 8am Monday to vacate, which is a reasonable extension I think. 

DarthMaeglin

This is just straight up funny, given we’re talking about a so-called institution for higher learning.

First the poor grammar, followed by the fact that ignorance of the law is not a defence before the law.

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

Now it’s going to be the Ontario court’s turn to weigh in on whether protest rights trump property rights. The Quebec court seemingly sided with the protesters a couple weeks ago.

I honestly think this is a fair question, where is the outrage over the current national movement of occupation for political purposes? Are these protesters out of the way enough to get a pass, or is it because they’re on private property? Why no derision poured on them like the vitriol flung at the Ottawa protesters? It really feels like there’s different standards for different sides, based entirely on where someone stands on the issue of the moment.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/university-of-toronto-latest-offer-students-encampment-1.7213010

I'll try to break this down as simply as I can... and in fairness... I think your statement or question here is way off base... because you're assuming these two protests are alike. They are not. Like... not even close. 

(Full disclaimer: After picking up a neat Dark Matter variant.. I got super high and did a walkabout in T.O. last weekend. I found myself at the UofT encampment... so I do have some first hand knowledge about what's happening down there....... and it was very peaceful and very quiet. Like VERY, VERY, eerily quiet.) 

Where is the outrage?  Ok... you're asking basically what the difference is between the student protests and the Freedom Convoy. 

Biggest difference in my opinion and the clear as day reason there isn't 'outrage' about the student protests... 

Freedom Convoy blocked public streets, public sidewalks, cranked car horns, urinated on public and private property, harassed citizens, etc. etc. Beyond Ottawa... they blocked international border affecting trade and commerce which affected the public as a whole. 

Student encampments... like the one at U of T are very, very, very controlled and segregated from the public. They are using campus grounds to blockade themselves INTO something as opposed to ONTO something (Streets). I myself was able to walk around the whole thing peacefully without being bothered at all. Literally a fence separating the protesters from other people. 

Looking at those two comparisons, I would actually suggest that the student protesters are quite polite and respectful to others.  If they moved those camps from the campus and onto a street, they still wouldn't be in the same category in my opinion until they started cranking music and car horns at night. 

You're asking where the outrage is...  Freedom Convoy seriously pissed people off who wanted nothing to do with them. One of my best friends was one of them. And she HAD NO CHOICE.  Because they were ON HER FUCKING STREET. 

U of T in particular aren't bothering anybody.  I watched professors and students alike who seemingly wanted nothing to do with the protest... they walked in and out of their buildings.. in and around the campus... they were not bothered or harassed in any way. And neither was I. 

That said.. personal opinion here... I don't fully support what the students are protesting. I would go so far as to say it's pretty dumb and a huge waste of time. I felt the same way about the freedom convoy. Next level dumb. My feelings about the subject matter being fairly the same... the way both parties are protesting is vastly different. Thus my utter distain for the freedom convoy and my utter not caring about the student protests.

I could be wrong "Prove me wrong kids... Proveee meee wrong" ... but trying to get a University to stop caring about money is no different than asking an oil company to stop caring about money. 

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Now it’s going to be the Ontario court’s turn to weigh in on whether protest rights trump property rights. The Quebec court seemingly sided with the protesters a couple weeks ago.

I honestly think this is a fair question, where is the outrage over the current national movement of occupation for political purposes? Are these protesters out of the way enough to get a pass, or is it because they’re on private property? Why no derision poured on them like the vitriol flung at the Ottawa protesters? It really feels like there’s different standards for different sides, based entirely on where someone stands on the issue of the moment.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/university-of-toronto-latest-offer-students-encampment-1.7213010

I'll try to break this down as simply as I can... and in fairness... I think your statement or question here is way off base... because you're assuming these two protests are alike. They are not. Like... not even close. 

(Full disclaimer: After picking up a neat Dark Matter variant.. I got super high and did a walkabout in T.O. last weekend. I found myself at the UofT encampment... so I do have some first hand knowledge about what's happening down there....... and it was very peaceful and very quiet. Like VERY, VERY, eerily quiet.) 

Where is the outrage?  Ok... you're asking basically what the difference is between the student protests and the Freedom Convoy. 

Biggest difference in my opinion and the clear as day reason there isn't 'outrage' about the student protests... 

Freedom Convoy blocked public streets, public sidewalks, cranked car horns, urinated on public and private property, harassed citizens, etc. etc. Beyond Ottawa... they blocked international border affecting trade and commerce which affected the public as a whole. 

Student encampments... like the one at U of T are very, very, very controlled and segregated from the public. They are using campus grounds to blockade themselves INTO something as opposed to ONTO something (Streets). I myself was able to walk around the whole thing peacefully without being bothered at all. Literally a fence separating the protesters from other people. 

Looking at those two comparisons, I would actually suggest that the student protesters are quite polite and respectful to others.  If they moved those camps from the campus and onto a street, they still wouldn't be in the same category in my opinion until they started cranking music and car horns at night. 

You're asking where the outrage is...  Freedom Convoy seriously pissed people off who wanted nothing to do with them. One of my best friends was one of them. And she HAD NO CHOICE.  Because they were ON HER FUCKING STREET. 

U of T in particular aren't bothering anybody.  I watched professors and students alike who seemingly wanted nothing to do with the protest... they walked in and out of their buildings.. in and around the campus... they were not bothered or harassed in any way. And neither was I. 

That said.. personal opinion here... I don't fully support what the students are protesting. I would go so far as to say it's pretty dumb and a huge waste of time. I felt the same way about the freedom convoy. Next level dumb. My feelings about the subject matter being fairly the same... the way both parties are protesting is vastly different. Thus my utter distain for the freedom convoy and my utter not caring about the student protests.

I could be wrong "Prove me wrong kids... Proveee meee wrong" ... but trying to get a University to stop caring about money is no different than asking an oil company to stop caring about money. 

So unfortunately we're saying that not all occupations are equal,  it all depends where they occupy. I don't personally agree with that perspective,  but I do understand your points. 

While I very much appreciate the first-person perspective you've given,  what you observed doesn't account for almost 40 reports of problematic behaviors, which cannot be ignored. 

I think I shot myself in the foot by my second paragraph there, lol. One of my biggest concerns here is that I see a battle brewing between protest and property rights (I do view campuses as ultimately being private property). In the end I shouldn't be able to occupy private property for a protest when the owner has clearly asked (or even told) me to leave.  The court ruling in Montreal the other day seemed to side moreso with the protesters than the landowners.

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Now it’s going to be the Ontario court’s turn to weigh in on whether protest rights trump property rights. The Quebec court seemingly sided with the protesters a couple weeks ago.

I honestly think this is a fair question, where is the outrage over the current national movement of occupation for political purposes? Are these protesters out of the way enough to get a pass, or is it because they’re on private property? Why no derision poured on them like the vitriol flung at the Ottawa protesters? It really feels like there’s different standards for different sides, based entirely on where someone stands on the issue of the moment.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/university-of-toronto-latest-offer-students-encampment-1.7213010

I'll try to break this down as simply as I can... and in fairness... I think your statement or question here is way off base... because you're assuming these two protests are alike. They are not. Like... not even close. 

(Full disclaimer: After picking up a neat Dark Matter variant.. I got super high and did a walkabout in T.O. last weekend. I found myself at the UofT encampment... so I do have some first hand knowledge about what's happening down there....... and it was very peaceful and very quiet. Like VERY, VERY, eerily quiet.) 

Where is the outrage?  Ok... you're asking basically what the difference is between the student protests and the Freedom Convoy. 

Biggest difference in my opinion and the clear as day reason there isn't 'outrage' about the student protests... 

Freedom Convoy blocked public streets, public sidewalks, cranked car horns, urinated on public and private property, harassed citizens, etc. etc. Beyond Ottawa... they blocked international border affecting trade and commerce which affected the public as a whole. 

Student encampments... like the one at U of T are very, very, very controlled and segregated from the public. They are using campus grounds to blockade themselves INTO something as opposed to ONTO something (Streets). I myself was able to walk around the whole thing peacefully without being bothered at all. Literally a fence separating the protesters from other people. 

Looking at those two comparisons, I would actually suggest that the student protesters are quite polite and respectful to others.  If they moved those camps from the campus and onto a street, they still wouldn't be in the same category in my opinion until they started cranking music and car horns at night. 

You're asking where the outrage is...  Freedom Convoy seriously pissed people off who wanted nothing to do with them. One of my best friends was one of them. And she HAD NO CHOICE.  Because they were ON HER FUCKING STREET. 

U of T in particular aren't bothering anybody.  I watched professors and students alike who seemingly wanted nothing to do with the protest... they walked in and out of their buildings.. in and around the campus... they were not bothered or harassed in any way. And neither was I. 

That said.. personal opinion here... I don't fully support what the students are protesting. I would go so far as to say it's pretty dumb and a huge waste of time. I felt the same way about the freedom convoy. Next level dumb. My feelings about the subject matter being fairly the same... the way both parties are protesting is vastly different. Thus my utter distain for the freedom convoy and my utter not caring about the student protests.

I could be wrong "Prove me wrong kids... Proveee meee wrong" ... but trying to get a University to stop caring about money is no different than asking an oil company to stop caring about money. 

So unfortunately we're saying that not all occupations are equal,  it all depends where they occupy. I don't personally agree with that perspective,  but I do understand your points. 

While I very much appreciate the first-person perspective you've given,  what you observed doesn't account for almost 40 reports of problematic behaviors, which cannot be ignored. 

I think I shot myself in the foot by my second paragraph there, lol. One of my biggest concerns here is that I see a battle brewing between protest and property rights (I do view campuses as ultimately being private property). In the end I shouldn't be able to occupy private property for a protest when the owner has clearly asked (or even told) me to leave.  The court ruling in Montreal the other day seemed to side moreso with the protesters than the landowners.

Of course all occupations aren't equal. The fact that you don't personally agree with that is the reason you don't comprehend the outrage I would imagine? 

I don't know how that's an "unfortunate" thing as you stated.  Can you explain why that's unfortunate in your view? And by that wording... did you have some sort of expectation or possibly misguided understanding that they were somehow equal??  As in... a protest is a protest regardless of any other factors? 

We govern and basically exist socially on a spectrum or scale. Laws are the best example IMO.  Assault is not just assault. Theft is not just theft. And while our Criminal Code tries to differentiate the scales and severity.. there simply is no manner of which to explicitly determine what is equal to what. This is left to judges, decades of case law, and debate. All of which takes years...  and years to be settled. And ultimately written into our criminal code. And even then... nothing is ever subject to not change. 

You say "I do view campuses as ultimately being private property" ... that statement doesn't require opinion or views or it being "ultimately" anything. It is private property.  That's a fact, not an opinion. 

Where things gets very muddy is the concept of differentiating private property, it's occupiers, it's purpose etc. etc. 

My home while the same under the TPA (Trespass to Property Act) as a campus... has a lot more moving parts and factors. Biggest one being, no one pays to come to my house, and my house is not inviting to other people. It does not provide a service nor do I advertise it as such.  (unless I have a yard sale) lol 

Private property owners who are businesses for example have a lot more circumstances to deal with than a private residence owner. I would venture a guess that campuses are the 'on steroids' version of that. Tens of thousands of paying customers literally live on the campus and spend most of their lives there. 

I haven't seen anything about this Quebec ruling or arguments, but I would venture a guess that what's being argued in courts with regards to the merits and legalities of enforcing Trespass laws is that businesses (Universities) must make sure that agreements (Student Code of Conduct, etc.) written laws (private) and policies are outlined clearly.  Also, they (The universities) obviously want public support in the form of the police to help out. 

If I'm a cop... or by extension the government.. and a private business like a campus calls me and asks me to enforce private property trespass laws...    I would want to use extreme caution to ensure that before I go in and arrest a paying member of that campus... that they have received lots of notice. The agreements have been spelled out.. they are clearly in violation of written campus policy etc. etc. 

As an aside here.. and this isn't directed at anyone in particular... I would say a lot of our population in general:  We're all pretty stupid. Blanket statement I know... but in general, we have a lot of stupid amongst us. 

We have 4 guaranteed/fundamental Charter Rights within our constitution... I think in total, it's like maybe 200 words total.. but I'll simplify it even more:

Freedom of Speech/Expression
Freedom of Religion
Freedom of Assembly
Freedom of Association 

I have this weird suspicion that a lot of people in Canada... and the US can only comprehend just that. Those simple freedoms. 

This is what Canadians in particular completely miss the boat on and either conveniently because of their personal beliefs or simply because they lack the education and understanding:

The first part of our Constitution.. Section 1 ... limits all of those. Which is in itself a bit misleading lol.  "HEY! We're Canada! We have FREEDOMS!"   (Small print;  but kinda not really.)

People seldom understand case law or even know what it is. those "Fundamental Freedoms" have been litigated over many generations and decades. And through that case law... our freedoms are constantly evolving.

I always chuckle when this is discussed with Americans or using American law.  Their guiding constitutional principles are literally called "Amendments." lol   

  

DarthMaeglin

I called it unfortunate simply because I truly believe in equality before the law for all, so in many ways I do see all protests as equal (but again, I do understand what you’re saying). Having said that, though, the worst laws are absolute (though there needs to be some sort of common starting point), so I think we agree on that?

As far as students being “paying customers”, that’s not wrong, except as I see it they’re paying for access to the school’s facilities (teachers, labs, libraries), paying tuition doesn’t give them the right to camp out on the institution’s property (why would anyone pay for residence or outside housing then?). From what I’ve observed U of T is following the law by giving more than appropriate notice (as I understand the law, the police could have been asked to enforce the law yesterday at 4pm). And the actual students in the camp are subject to academic penalties as well, the fact the university has raised this point strongly suggests the occupiers are in violation of the student code of conduct.

 I suppose my next step should be to read U of T’s code of conduct for its students and faculty (since faculty are involved in the occupation as well).

PJ_Soul

University administration is very much a political game and extremely reliant on public relations, since private donors fund a massive part of what they do, so that's why no university is simply going to look at the letter of the law and take that route without looking at alternative options first, or without possibly making concessions or exceptions. Just turning to the law to get one of these encampments shut down, especially by some kind of force, could lose the university an entire new building or something. They really have to weigh all options carefully.

Parksy

PJ_Soul said:

University administration is very much a political game and extremely reliant on public relations, since private donors fund a massive part of what they do, so that's why no university is simply going to look at the letter of the law and take that route without looking at alternative options first, or without possibly making concessions or exceptions. Just turning to the law to get one of these encampments shut down, especially by some kind of force, could lose the university an entire new building or something. They really have to weigh all options carefully.

bingo bango 

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

I called it unfortunate simply because I truly believe in equality before the law for all, so in many ways I do see all protests as equal (but again, I do understand what you’re saying). Having said that, though, the worst laws are absolute (though there needs to be some sort of common starting point), so I think we agree on that?

As far as students being “paying customers”, that’s not wrong, except as I see it they’re paying for access to the school’s facilities (teachers, labs, libraries), paying tuition doesn’t give them the right to camp out on the institution’s property (why would anyone pay for residence or outside housing then?). From what I’ve observed U of T is following the law by giving more than appropriate notice (as I understand the law, the police could have been asked to enforce the law yesterday at 4pm). And the actual students in the camp are subject to academic penalties as well, the fact the university has raised this point strongly suggests the occupiers are in violation of the student code of conduct.

 I suppose my next step should be to read U of T’s code of conduct for its students and faculty (since faculty are involved in the occupation as well).

If you understand what I'm saying...  how do you still see all protests as equal? 

To me, your existential 'belief' in equality before the law contradicts the fundamental understanding that properties and people are all not the same.  Actions are not all the same. Speech... is not all the same. 

The 'paying customers' example is just describing the difference. Which.. IS a difference.  

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I called it unfortunate simply because I truly believe in equality before the law for all, so in many ways I do see all protests as equal (but again, I do understand what you’re saying). Having said that, though, the worst laws are absolute (though there needs to be some sort of common starting point), so I think we agree on that?

As far as students being “paying customers”, that’s not wrong, except as I see it they’re paying for access to the school’s facilities (teachers, labs, libraries), paying tuition doesn’t give them the right to camp out on the institution’s property (why would anyone pay for residence or outside housing then?). From what I’ve observed U of T is following the law by giving more than appropriate notice (as I understand the law, the police could have been asked to enforce the law yesterday at 4pm). And the actual students in the camp are subject to academic penalties as well, the fact the university has raised this point strongly suggests the occupiers are in violation of the student code of conduct.

 I suppose my next step should be to read U of T’s code of conduct for its students and faculty (since faculty are involved in the occupation as well).

If you understand what I'm saying...  how do you still see all protests as equal? 

To me, your existential 'belief' in equality before the law contradicts the fundamental understanding that properties and people are all not the same.  Actions are not all the same. Speech... is not all the same. 

The 'paying customers' example is just describing the difference. Which.. IS a difference.  

I should have been clearer in stating that for me the starting point needs to be one of equality,  I believe I said above that the worst laws are absolute however there should be a common standard to start with. 

No one has yet addressed the reported incidents tied to the encampment,  which needs to be examined.  At every turn the encampment has blamed these on outside agitators but that requires some sort of corroboration. 

I stand by everyone's ability to understand a point but not agree with or accept it. I also accept that I'm nothing if not a ball of contradictions. 

As far as students being "paying customers", if I purchase something in a store that doesn't give me the right to set up camp in the store to engage in a protest,  and I don't really see this as much different.  I already said that I'm ok with giving the students (faculty is different and stickier) some extra leash to play with but they had their time, which now makes it time for a grown-up lesson. 

The faculty at U of T just held a press conference and they clearly disagree with me in that they asserted repeatedly that THEY (with the students) are the university,  not the institution itself.  Guess the courts will get to decide. 

I also want to say that I'd have a much easier time with the protests if they weren't blatantly one-sided and there hadn't (at last reporting) been more than one problematic incident every day. 

DarthMaeglin

An interesting column (opinion) that provides an alternate perspective on the campus protests.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/opinion-we-are-anishinaabe-zionists-hateful-anti-israel-camps-disrespect-our-lands

DarthMaeglin

This column has to be some sort of satire, right? Please?!?

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/gunter-trudeaus-plan-for-misguided-gun-ban-mail-them-in

Edit: Nope, the government really thinks it’s a good idea to have a large number of firearms passing through our postal service, where could that ever go wrong?

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7181080

Spunkie

CBC - Indigenous 

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I called it unfortunate simply because I truly believe in equality before the law for all, so in many ways I do see all protests as equal (but again, I do understand what you’re saying). Having said that, though, the worst laws are absolute (though there needs to be some sort of common starting point), so I think we agree on that?

As far as students being “paying customers”, that’s not wrong, except as I see it they’re paying for access to the school’s facilities (teachers, labs, libraries), paying tuition doesn’t give them the right to camp out on the institution’s property (why would anyone pay for residence or outside housing then?). From what I’ve observed U of T is following the law by giving more than appropriate notice (as I understand the law, the police could have been asked to enforce the law yesterday at 4pm). And the actual students in the camp are subject to academic penalties as well, the fact the university has raised this point strongly suggests the occupiers are in violation of the student code of conduct.

 I suppose my next step should be to read U of T’s code of conduct for its students and faculty (since faculty are involved in the occupation as well).

If you understand what I'm saying...  how do you still see all protests as equal? 

To me, your existential 'belief' in equality before the law contradicts the fundamental understanding that properties and people are all not the same.  Actions are not all the same. Speech... is not all the same. 

The 'paying customers' example is just describing the difference. Which.. IS a difference.  

I should have been clearer in stating that for me the starting point needs to be one of equality,  I believe I said above that the worst laws are absolute however there should be a common standard to start with. 

No one has yet addressed the reported incidents tied to the encampment,  which needs to be examined.  At every turn the encampment has blamed these on outside agitators but that requires some sort of corroboration. 

I stand by everyone's ability to understand a point but not agree with or accept it. I also accept that I'm nothing if not a ball of contradictions. 

As far as students being "paying customers", if I purchase something in a store that doesn't give me the right to set up camp in the store to engage in a protest,  and I don't really see this as much different.  I already said that I'm ok with giving the students (faculty is different and stickier) some extra leash to play with but they had their time, which now makes it time for a grown-up lesson. 

The faculty at U of T just held a press conference and they clearly disagree with me in that they asserted repeatedly that THEY (with the students) are the university,  not the institution itself.  Guess the courts will get to decide. 

I also want to say that I'd have a much easier time with the protests if they weren't blatantly one-sided and there hadn't (at last reporting) been more than one problematic incident every day. 

Just out of curiosity... are you willing and able to criticize the Freedom Convoy for the same things? 

The paying customer example was one of citing a difference between a city street and private property, to be clear. 

These incidents that haven't been addressed... what are they? 

Parksy

Spunkie said:

CBC - Indigenous 

Great reporting...  I'm personally on the fence. Generally speaking though.....  whenever there is money, risk, corporations... always meet with skepticism. 

They touched on it in the video.... in some ways people are seeing it as a bribe... and they're not wrong. 

OPG for example has a lot to gain and will meet their obligations by solving this problem locally. The money they are willing to spend to communities is because it will likely cost them MUCH less than buying land far away from people and setting up shop there. 

If I lived in one of the communities... I would want to see the plan and dollar amount for a project like this to be done super remotely... and then I would compare that to what they're offering.  I say this because the X factor is the risk here.  And if it's known that a company could minimize or eliminate risk for say a billion dollars....  but it's cheaper for them / riskier to the public for 250 million dollars....  I would want a lot more incentive before I even considered local storage. 

Companies have shown the ability to develop remotely in order to mine the uranium for nuclear power... why not store it remotely? 

In the end, it does need to go somewhere... and soon. 

(As an aside... everything about nuclear power, generation, mining, storage is super fascinating.)

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

I called it unfortunate simply because I truly believe in equality before the law for all, so in many ways I do see all protests as equal (but again, I do understand what you’re saying). Having said that, though, the worst laws are absolute (though there needs to be some sort of common starting point), so I think we agree on that?

As far as students being “paying customers”, that’s not wrong, except as I see it they’re paying for access to the school’s facilities (teachers, labs, libraries), paying tuition doesn’t give them the right to camp out on the institution’s property (why would anyone pay for residence or outside housing then?). From what I’ve observed U of T is following the law by giving more than appropriate notice (as I understand the law, the police could have been asked to enforce the law yesterday at 4pm). And the actual students in the camp are subject to academic penalties as well, the fact the university has raised this point strongly suggests the occupiers are in violation of the student code of conduct.

 I suppose my next step should be to read U of T’s code of conduct for its students and faculty (since faculty are involved in the occupation as well).

If you understand what I'm saying...  how do you still see all protests as equal? 

To me, your existential 'belief' in equality before the law contradicts the fundamental understanding that properties and people are all not the same.  Actions are not all the same. Speech... is not all the same. 

The 'paying customers' example is just describing the difference. Which.. IS a difference.  

I should have been clearer in stating that for me the starting point needs to be one of equality,  I believe I said above that the worst laws are absolute however there should be a common standard to start with. 

No one has yet addressed the reported incidents tied to the encampment,  which needs to be examined.  At every turn the encampment has blamed these on outside agitators but that requires some sort of corroboration. 

I stand by everyone's ability to understand a point but not agree with or accept it. I also accept that I'm nothing if not a ball of contradictions. 

As far as students being "paying customers", if I purchase something in a store that doesn't give me the right to set up camp in the store to engage in a protest,  and I don't really see this as much different.  I already said that I'm ok with giving the students (faculty is different and stickier) some extra leash to play with but they had their time, which now makes it time for a grown-up lesson. 

The faculty at U of T just held a press conference and they clearly disagree with me in that they asserted repeatedly that THEY (with the students) are the university,  not the institution itself.  Guess the courts will get to decide. 

I also want to say that I'd have a much easier time with the protests if they weren't blatantly one-sided and there hadn't (at last reporting) been more than one problematic incident every day. 

Just out of curiosity... are you willing and able to criticize the Freedom Convoy for the same things? 

The paying customer example was one of citing a difference between a city street and private property, to be clear. 

These incidents that haven't been addressed... what are they? 

As I see it I'm applying the standards that were seemingly settled on as a result of the Freedom Convoy,  it's that simple. I still don't agree with how that protest was handled,  at least with the university protests the administration (government) is engaging in dialogue instead of insulting the protesters. But consensus was that the Ottawa protest was overboard and that should set the precedent for future protests.

As far as the reports of incidents at the U of T protest,  the reporting hasn't been more specific than numbers (I believe it was 38 reports over 21 days) and vague descriptions of hateful comments,  intimidation and denial of access. There was a clip I saw yesterday of a masked protester openly praising Hitler.  However the fact that the individual was asked/told to leave by the main group makes me disassociate that individual from the larger protest.  If the students want to claim that all the problematic incidents can be traced to outside agitators then I do feel it's on them to either prove their assertion or else wait for the outcome of the investigations.  But these incidents should not be ignored or glossed over.

Spunkie

Thank you for the critical thinking Parksy, as it give me something more to chew on.

Zod

Why do they have to put the waste in a populated area?  Can't they find somewhere remote, build an access road, and keep it away from a populated area?

DarthMaeglin

This reads like it was another outsider, though he was seemingly allowed into the encampment by the protesters who are controlling access (under whose authority?).

It’s also being reported that the injunction application won’t be heard until June 19-20, which is bullshit in my opinion. Part of me hopes that anyone whose convocation is affected by this makes note and returns to piss on the convocations of the protesters (except that makes two wrongs).

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/uoft-encampment-arrest-1.7218368