Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Avoid walterdale bridge!!!!!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Replacement View Post
    Originally posted by noodle View Post
    Originally posted by Replacement View Post
    Certainly the protest blocked movements for all those people.
    A couple thousand people being inconvenienced for a couple of hours is pretty flimsy justification to restricting/removing people's Charter rights.
    Not what I stated in the reply.
    It's a literal quote from your reply. Did you not say what you said?

    Originally posted by Replacement View Post
    I was responding to this statement by you;

    "Blocking a single bridge doesn't block movements though, as there's other options to get across the river."

    Are you now moving goalposts on what blocked movement is?
    Not at all. Was the Walterdale Bridge blocked? Sure. That specific 1km stretch of the thousands of kilometers of roads in Edmonton was unavailable for a few hours. One river crossing out of the what, four that lead into the core was out of commission.
    Is it the only way Downtown? No, as thousands of other Edmontonians managed to inform themselves before/during their commute & managed to get Downtown with a modicum of inconvenience.
    Is any of this blocking of a road even remotely relevant to the mobility rights as enshrined in the Charter? Heavens no.
    Is the amount of hot air you blow a global warming equivalent to all the GHG emissions from the protest? Very likely so.

    We live in a free society & said freedom isn't always convenient. The inconveniencing of others is terribly flimsy justification for the reductions of fundamental freedoms.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
      There is a very fine balance here, and blocking a main bridge into downtown for an hour on Monday morning caused problems. It did not only impact the bridge, it also impacted several bocks and roads south of the bridge.
      There's no 'fine balance ' between fundamental freedoms enshrined in the charter & entitled people wanting a quick & trouble-free commute.
      Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
        ^
        (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

        Interesting, if the police asked the protestors to move, and they refused to obey a lawful request. Is that still considered 'peaceful' Another way this could have been resolved is if the general public/ protestors got into a fight, or something then it would no longer be considered peaceful. At that point the police could have shut the whole thing down.
        .
        There is a very fine balance here, and blocking a main bridge into downtown for an hour on Monday morning caused problems. It did not only impact the bridge, it also impacted several bocks and roads south of the bridge.
        "I was inconvenienced by folks expressing their fundamental rights to protest."

        Well I'm routinely inconvenienced by car drivers expressing their "right" to drive to work and create congestion... making me late for work every day...hmmm... A slippery slope!
        Live and love... your neighbourhood.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by GenWhy? View Post
          Originally posted by rupikhalon001 View Post
          ^
          (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

          Interesting, if the police asked the protestors to move, and they refused to obey a lawful request. Is that still considered 'peaceful' Another way this could have been resolved is if the general public/ protestors got into a fight, or something then it would no longer be considered peaceful. At that point the police could have shut the whole thing down.
          .
          There is a very fine balance here, and blocking a main bridge into downtown for an hour on Monday morning caused problems. It did not only impact the bridge, it also impacted several bocks and roads south of the bridge.
          "I was inconvenienced by folks expressing their fundamental rights to protest."

          Well I'm routinely inconvenienced by car drivers expressing their "right" to drive to work and create congestion... making me late for work every day...hmmm... A slippery slope!

          The "slippery slope" is found in this nature of attack;

          https://edmontonjournal.com/news/pol...3-220b45e3b83e

          Attendees had to be escorted away for their safety, by police, after attending a speech. Due to the crowd being frothed into a frenzy that what was occurring was vile hate speech. With those at the protest expressing fear while also producing it..

          Similarly the same occurred at events where Maxime Bernier was speaking during the election with Seniors being prevented from entering.


          I think theres a bit of inconsistency going on and that some of the same new age protesters would cry foul all day if their protest was shutdown but have no problem shutting down free speech whether its any of the above or an anti abortion presentation or a Jordan Peterson talk.

          Now I wouldn't be inclined to attend any of the first two, but I would attend a Jordan Peterson speech, and I would expect all such thing to be allowed and condoned, free speech and all.
          Last edited by Replacement; 31-10-2019, 10:45 AM.
          "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Replacement View Post
            I think theres a bit of inconsistency going on and that some of the same new age protesters would cry foul all day if their protest was shutdown but have no problem shutting down free speech whether its any of the above or an anti abortion presentation or a Jordan Peterson talk.


            Originally posted by Replacement View Post
            Now I wouldn't be inclined to attend any of the first two, but I would attend a Jordan Peterson speech, and I would expect all such thing to be allowed and condoned, free speech and all.
            This explains so, so much.
            Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by noodle View Post
              Originally posted by Replacement View Post
              I think theres a bit of inconsistency going on and that some of the same new age protesters would cry foul all day if their protest was shutdown but have no problem shutting down free speech whether its any of the above or an anti abortion presentation or a Jordan Peterson talk.


              Originally posted by Replacement View Post
              Now I wouldn't be inclined to attend any of the first two, but I would attend a Jordan Peterson speech, and I would expect all such thing to be allowed and condoned, free speech and all.
              This explains so, so much.
              As does your reaction. Which was more predictable than mine given you've cited the same Karl Popper meme countless times and that you utilize it as a defence mechanism in every instance that precedes an attack on others views.

              Which I sense is coming down the pipe..

              But I would attend a Peterson speech due to an interest in a range of views and fluid thought. I wouldn't be inclined as you to label him. Not that I would agree with everything he would have to say. But your affliction with Karl Popper just seems so convenient.
              "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                But your affliction with Karl Popper just seems so convenient.
                Refusing to tolerate the intolerant is a personal maxim & every time feckless folks like yourself attempt to call me out on it I will continue to repeat it.

                You're more interested in supporting the intolerant it seems. Are you a fan of Peterson's anti-science views, his misogyny, his racism or is it just the whole divisive, hateful, regressive package that interests you?
                Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by noodle View Post
                  Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                  But your affliction with Karl Popper just seems so convenient.
                  Refusing to tolerate the intolerant is a personal maxim & every time feckless folks like yourself attempt to call me out on it I will continue to repeat it.

                  You're more interested in supporting the intolerant it seems. Are you a fan of Peterson's anti-science views, his misogyny, his racism or is it just the whole divisive, hateful, regressive package that interests you?
                  The only thing you are illuminating here is your feckless polarized thought process which is so predictable.

                  I find Peterson interesting if only because he highlights the very pre-emptive condemnation that increasing exists today in society, ironically under the guise of tolerance. Nor would Karl Popper approve of all the manners in which his work is being used.


                  You can proceed to label me a bigot, racist, etc, as you've done before.

                  I will not be influenced by your proclamation, and I will not be deterred by it.

                  Do what you must ..
                  Last edited by Replacement; 31-10-2019, 11:30 AM.
                  "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                    I find Peterson interesting if only because he highlights the very pre-emptive condemnation that increasing exists today in society, ironically under the guise of tolerance.
                    How is condemning someone for their sincerely held & expressed regressive views "pre-emptive"?

                    Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                    Nor would Karl Popper approve of all the manners in which his work is being used.
                    Citation please. Unless you're using your laughably incoherent ability to try and perceive the thoughts of others.

                    Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                    You can proceed to label me a bigot, racist, etc, as you've done before.

                    I will not be influenced by your proclamation, and I will not be deterred by it.

                    Do what you must ..
                    Oh I know full well that you'll never change your ways Replacement. Your own ego precludes the level of introspection & self-development that personal growth requires.
                    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by noodle View Post
                      Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                      I find Peterson interesting if only because he highlights the very pre-emptive condemnation that increasing exists today in society, ironically under the guise of tolerance.
                      How is condemning someone for their sincerely held & expressed regressive views "pre-emptive"?

                      Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                      Nor would Karl Popper approve of all the manners in which his work is being used.
                      Citation please. Unless you're using your laughably incoherent ability to try and perceive the thoughts of others.

                      Originally posted by Replacement View Post
                      You can proceed to label me a bigot, racist, etc, as you've done before.

                      I will not be influenced by your proclamation, and I will not be deterred by it.

                      Do what you must ..
                      Oh I know full well that you'll never change your ways Replacement. Your own ego precludes the level of introspection & self-development that personal growth requires.


                      I resist responding in kind. You are a highly intelligent, analytical, thoughtful, articulate, individual who happens to disagree with others on certain issues, which is fine, in open discourse. I have no doubt that in your reckoning you do that completely out of principled action. What I would perceive as your fault however is pre conclusion on that which you would attack. Its not enough to simply label something regressive so as to attack it. That parallels confirmation bias and Strawman attack more than it Parallels the work of Popper.

                      I do change my ways. But not always in manners in which others, or yourself would approve.

                      Ego is a false embodiment, an irascible distraction in the sands of time. I am but a particle. Soon to be blown in cosmic wind. btw personal growth, and the concept, is a self congratulating ego construct. Nice try.



                      The interesting thing is we wouldn't be having any of this exchange if you believed both;

                      1) That I'm a bigot

                      2) That you devoutly follow Karl Popper.


                      In anycase many varying takes on Popper exist. This is a reasonable read;

                      https://www.politicalanimalmagazine....f-intolerance/
                      Last edited by Replacement; 31-10-2019, 12:04 PM.
                      "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

                      Comment


                      • Welp reported my own post to get this locked since this is just turning into another attack each other thread.......

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Dark Magnus View Post
                          Welp reported my own post to get this locked since this is just turning into another attack each other thread.......
                          would that have been your opening post or the one where you said "**** rubber bullets real ones need to be used" or one of the others?
                          "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X