>Shutting down a protest because it completely shut down a major city center

It did not do this at all. When I zoom in on Ottawa and ignore gatineau. I would assert the city center is say UofOttwa to the east side, if not all the way to the rideau. Maybe kowloon market, china town, little italy, centretown west is the west side. With a southern spot of maybe the 417 highway?

What did the protest block? You'll have to zoom it significant more. It blocked what wellington and queen for 2 blocks? It did absolutely nothing to 90% of the city centre.

To suggest a protest at parliament hill is 'completely shutting down the major city center' is absurd.

> harassed locals for weeks seems like a totally legitimate use of government power to me.

Ok, fine, so we set the precedent that you agree with. You're fine with future governments crushing legitimate protests under the same misrepresentations as well? Afterall, how much conservative protests are there? Pretty rare. We're going to be crushing left-wing protest for the most part.

>They also blocked a major bridge border crossing and attempted to block other border crossings.

Did they? Which bridge in Ottawa did they block? Or do you mean ambassador bridge which is a related but unconnected protest. This blockade ended before the emergency act was ever implemented. We are talking about Trudeau crushing a legitimate protest in ottawa. The emergency act was used for ONLY ottawa, took them days to even do anything.

>That makes them less of a protest and more a rebellion.

A rebellion! Oh wow. A peaceful protest in front of parliament with bouncy castles and hottub is a rebellion. I guess they just never quite got around to the rebelling part...

I honestly didnt even see the canadian media label them a rebellion. Sure even doug ford called them a military occupation. But rebellion!

>I can’t think of a single country in the world which would allow an absolutely tiny minority to shut down border crossings for extended periods of time.

People linked Trudeau being in favour of the extremely violent hong kong riots and the only marginally violent farmer protests in india. Yet he refused to even talk to them once. Couldnt even send a staffer to go talk to the protest once.

I would hope ANY government would be forced to talk to a protest at least once before declaring national emergency and crushing them with force.

>Preventing trade to that extent is arguably a form of violence; using horns in residential areas late at night is definitely violent.

Oh wow, we are even redefining what violence is. Why are you doing this? There's a clear reason. The protesters have the right to 'peaceful protest'. You are required to redefine 'violence' in order to invalidate their charter rights. I see what you are doing.

You are even redefining what a residential area is. For the record... you have to go about 4 blocks or more away from the protest to get to the first residential building. Where they were parked is not residential at all. Census data is public. The protest was never 'harassing residents'. At most they were 'harassing counter protesters' which is what it is.

>Also “crushing” a protest usually involves lots more violence then was employed.

Now you're redefining crushing?

>The actions of the Canadian government seem anodyne to any government I’ve heard described as “crushing” a protest.

Crushing means 'to subdue completely' or 'oppress grievously'. Well the day before they gave the emergency act back. There was not a single protester in ottawa and parliament hill. They subdued the protest completely. AKA they crushed a peaceful protest.

There's a reason why Bill Maher called Trudeau Hitler right before he crushed a peaceful protest. After he tyrannically crushed the protest and made protesting illegal for conservatives. Bill Maher seems to be saying that Trudeau = Hitler.