[scarberiankhatru]

How insensitive! Thousands of people are dead, many in the protest have lost family in the last few days. If Americans were dieing by the thousands in a war somewhere I'm sure we'd see protests in Toronto ... wait a minute, we did.

They're evening the score with terrorists...boo hoo.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

Sitting under a white tent on the lawn of Queen's Park this morning, Gunam Veerakathipillai says he has been on a hunger strike for eight days. The 52-year-old Pickering resident say he won't eat anything until he has a written promise from the federal government that it will intervene to end the carnage in his native Sri Lanka.

"I have lost 18 family members to the Sri Lankan armed forces so I can't live a normal life anymore. Nobody seems to care and that is why I'm taking this very hard decision," said Veerakathipillai, lying on a mattress, his voice cracking. "I'm suffering but my suffering is nothing. My people are suffering a hundred times more than this."

anybody catch this poor guy on the news? very tragic.

 

[nfitz]

They're evening the score with terrorists...boo hoo.

So basically you think that it's okay to kills thousands of innocent people, because some people of that ethnic group are terrorists.

By the same token, do you suggest we start killing 1000s of innocent Palestinians because some are terrorists?

 

[scarberiankhatru]

So basically you think that it's okay to kills thousands of innocent people, because some people of that ethnic group are terrorists.

By the same token, do you suggest we start killing 1000s of innocent Palestinians because some are terrorists?

Get a grip...it's a civil war.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Why do all your posts sound like your a bigot? Are you a bigot?

I dont understand none of your gibberish regarding this topic, you would do much better to stick with your transit posts.

 

[Ramako]

It's unfortunate, because getting stuck in traffic for five hours sucks, but I really take issue with the whole 'Nobody should ever protest on critical public infrastructure' idea because it quickly leads to 'Nobody can protest on public roads' which translates to 'Nobody can protest on public property' which eventually turns into 'Why don't you just protest quietly at home by yourself?'

Speaking as a law student who just aced constitutional law, I'd just like to point out that this argument is incredibly absurd.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Speaking as a law student who just aced constitutional law, I'd just like to point out that this argument is incredibly absurd.

Speaking as a cool dude who's good with the ladies, I disagree.

 

[Brian69]

It can't be said enough that nobody is saying Tamil's can't protest and lobby whoever to raise awareness about their perspective on the civil war. Its completely off base to be framing this as a free speech issue when it simply isn't. There are ample ways for the Tamil community to go about their cause legally and harmoniously with society. For whatever reasons, the organizers of these protests have chosen not to respect normally uncontroversial laws (blockading major infrastructure= illegal) in order to further their goals. No matter how noble or ignoble their goals may be it doesn't change that fact. A crime is a crime is a crime.

That the crime in question here (blockading a highway) is generally less serious than alleged crimes in Sri Lanka is irrelevant. The law doesn't make provisions for that nor should it. The world is full of dramatic injustices, were we all to use them to justify injustices in Canada it would harm domestic stability. To pick a similar domestic example, Shawn Brant is currently in jail in part for his role in the blockade of the 401 and the rail corridor.

+1

There are better ways to do things, but because the war is in its final stages the protesters admit they are using desperate tactics. Except in a very indirect sense the Tamil protests are not aimed at the government of Canada--if they were the Tamils would attempt to prevent access to government or political offices (and with their numbers I expect they might succeed). Instead, this protest is directly aimed at the people of Toronto in the mistaken belief that by pissing off the rest of us we will put pressure on the government to do something. But the opposite is the case; the public is putting pressure on the government to do something about the Tamils. This is what is called a bad idea because its clear by now that public opinion is fixed against the protestors and will not have the desired effect.

Although I'm not opposed to the Liberals and NDP bringing up the issue in the Commons I don't like the fact that it was directly tied to the Gardiner protest winding down because that will only encourage further closures as protesters have already been hinted.

Many of the interviews with the protesters have them saying they want Canada to directly intervene and stop Sri Lanka's actions. We all know this is quite unrealistic. We can use diplomatic channels to push Sri Lanka to end things in a better way but we can't tell them to stop a war that has been going on for decades. The protesters are running high on emotion which is creating unrealistic expectations for what they want Canada to do.

 

[Ramako]

I'm sick of all the people in this thread claiming that if you disagree with the Gardiner protest that you are somehow xenophobic or racist. I'm both first generation and "brown". What that has to do with anything is beyond me.

What matters is that this is not a simple protest, but an attempt to literally hold the city hostage so that their demands are met. Holding people hostage, even if only for 6 hours, should not be protected expression. Being real distraught ain't a valid defence. I'm pretty left wing, but this is just a tad ridiculous.

 

[nfitz]

Get a grip...it's a civil war.

I really have to protest - there doesn't seem anything civil about it. Most uncivil if you ask me.

Seriously though ... it doesn't matter what it is; nothing justifies a government massacring it's citizens.

 

[nfitz]

I'm sick of all the people in this thread claiming that if you disagree with the Gardiner protest that you are somehow zenophobic or racist. I'm both first generation and "brown". What that has to do with anything is beyond me.

What matters is that this is not a simple protest, but an attempt to literally hold the city hostage so that their demands are met. Holding people hostage, even if only for 6 hours, should not be protected expression. Being real distraught ain't a valid defence. I'm pretty left wing, but this is just a tad ridiculous.

It's not a great tactic, and blocking highways should be avoided ... but surely calling for them to be deported - even if Canadian citizens IS racist.

At the same time though - it's only the Gardiner; it's been closed most Sundays recently anyways - and the city is trying to get rid of it completely. Let's not overeact here.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I'm sick of all the people in this thread claiming that if you disagree with the Gardiner protest that you are somehow zenophobic or racist. I'm both first generation and "brown". What that has to do with anything is beyond me.

What matters is that this is not a simple protest, but an attempt to literally hold the city hostage so that their demands are met. Holding people hostage, even if only for 6 hours, should not be protected expression. Being real distraught ain't a valid defence. I'm pretty left wing, but this is just a tad ridiculous.

I hope I didn't claim that. Disagreeing with the Gardiner protest doesn't make you racist and/or xenophobic, but the Gardiner protest sure did seem to bring out a lot of racism and xenophobia in people. There's a difference.

This wasn't a hostage situation. It was a protest. The goal of a successful protest is to make yourself as visible as possible.

 

[Ramako]

Speaking as a cool dude who's good with the ladies, I disagree.

I'm sure you are a 'cool dude' but that alone is not really a valid basis on which to form a useful opinion about civil rights.

Why don't you google Canadian Charter jurisprudence before making a ridiculous claim that banning protests on highways will somehow translate into the banning of all free speech.

Generally debates are more productive when people aren't just blowing smoke.

 

[Ramako]

I hope I didn't claim that. Disagreeing with the Gardiner protest doesn't make you racist and/or xenophobic, but the Gardiner protest sure did seem to bring out a lot of racism and xenophobia in people. There's a difference.

This wasn't a hostage situation. It was a protest. The goal of a successful protest is to make yourself as visible as possible.

No, you didn't claim that, but others did.

Yes, the goal of a protest is to make yourself as visible as possible, but as I keep saying, you only have the right to go so far in achieving that goal. Shooting up a school will get you attention too, but obviously that's not protected.

Now before you build another straw man, I'm not saying that shutting down the Gardiner equates to shooting up a school. What I am saying is that holding a city hostage, which was very much their stated intent, goes far and beyond simply holding a protest.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I'm sure you are a 'cool dude' but that alone is not really a valid basis on which to form a useful opinion about civil rights.

Why don't you google Canadian Charter jurisprudence before making a ridiculous claim that banning protests on highways will somehow translate into the banning of all free speech.

Generally debates are more productive when people aren't just blowing smoke.

I'm not arguing jurisprudence, nor am I making an appeal to free speech. I'm just trying to point out that you can't draw some arbitrary line between places where it's okay to peacefully demonstrate and places where it's not.

What's the difference between shutting down University Ave for a protest and shutting down the Gardiner? Elevation, I guess.

No, you didn't claim that, but others did.

Yes, the goal of a protest is to make yourself as visible as possible, but as I keep saying, you only have the right to go so far in achieving that goal. Shooting up a school will get you attention too, but obviously that's not protected.

Now before you build another straw man, I'm not saying that shutting down the Gardiner equates to shooting up a school. What I am saying is that holding a city hostage, which was very much their stated intent, goes far and beyond simply holding a protest.

See, but there's a visible and obvious line there. Violence versus non-violence. Violent demonstrations are never okay. Non-violent? Often are.

'Hostage' is an overstatement, and only applies in the sense that every public protest is a kind of 'hostage situation'. They're saying "we won't stop protesting until X changes." It's inherent to the very act of protesting.