Letters to the Editor: Feb. 23, 2022

The Emergencies Act assisted Ottawa police in enforcing the law

In his Feb. 20 column, Ben Shapiro asks why the Canadian government needed to invoke the Emergencies Act in order to deal with the entrenched truck convoy of protesters in Ottawa. He claims that "after all, the police (in Windsor, Ontario) had removed trucks from the Ambassador Bridge, re-opening that trade artery with the United States." He fails to mention that for a number of reasons, tow truck operators in Ontario flatly refused to undertake that task and police had to engage companies from Detroit to clear the bridge. Police in Ottawa encountered the same refusals from local tow operators.

And, although the ostensible reason for the protest was to oppose the vaccine mandate for truckers carrying freight between Canada and the U.S., it quickly morphed into a myriad of wide-ranging causes including taking the government down. And, for the most part the regulations that were being protested were not federal, imposed by Ottawa, they were provincial and imposed by provincial Conservative governments.

Over three weeks, protesters turned the Ottawa streets into a zoo. Ottawa police did not anticipate the magnitude of the protest and let things get out of hand in the beginning. But they needed help, and the Emergencies Act allowed the Mounties, provincial police and police from other municipal jurisdictions to assist in enforcing the rule of law.

I agree with Shapiro's characterization of the Prime Minister as "lightweight and unpopular" but he was popular enough to get elected again recently. Would Washington tolerate tractor trailers blockading Pennsylvania Avenue? I doubt it. Polls indicated that 72% of Canadians favored removing the protesters and it required special measures. Use of the Emergencies Act did not bother me and I doubt I will be on the wrong side of history in the matter.

Rod Ralph, Ottawa and Vero Beach

We need to think about ‘freedom and responsibility’ regarding vaccines

Irreversible binomials have become a common part of our English language. Some examples include: “fine and dandy”; “out and about”; “aid and abet”; “vim and vigor." One binomial that is not so commonly used is: “freedom and responsibility.”

We are fairly good about practicing “freedom and responsibility” when we drive a car and obey the traffic laws, express our views while respecting the views of others, or buy a house and maintain its appearance.

We start being not so good about practicing “freedom and responsibility” when we vote in an election and refuse to accept the results regardless of the outcome, or speak out against abortion without accepting the responsibility of raising the child that we insist be born.

We are not good at all when it comes to practicing “freedom and responsibility” regarding vaccines, which have helped to eradicate viral infections like polio, measles, and rubella. In today’s world, vaccines have performed admirably against COVID-19 by using mRNA (a technology 10 years in the making).

Despite the tremendous success of current vaccines, they have become unpopular in some political circles. This is where the irreversible binomial “freedom and responsibility” would help. Some insist that they have the freedom to refuse a life-saving vaccine, but they ignore the responsibility of the consequences which include: infecting others who are unable to get vaccinated; unnecessarily occupying a hospital bed which may be crucial to another person; or acting as a petri dish that allows the vaccine to mutate.

Our democracy is currently in peril. Perhaps pairing “freedom with responsibility” more often may be the key to preserving this wonderful experiment called America.

Daniel Kraft, Port St. Lucie

It's no wonder President Trump had problems getting his message out

We’ve all heard the question “If a tree falls in the forest and there is nothing there to hear it, is a sound actually made?” Mainstream media knows the answer: “No.” Hunter Biden’s laptop was found weeks before the last presidential election, but the MSM saw fit not only to not report it, but to actually suppress it. Fox News and one or two other news-media firms reported on the damning news contained in that laptop, news that surely would have prevented Biden from becoming president. But many uninformed voters who voted for Joe knew nothing of it because the only news they listen to is the MSM.

Now Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation has uncovered the significant role Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party played in infiltrating, and spying upon, a sitting president. Our Congress wasted almost four years trying to indict President Trump for bogus ties to the Russians, ties that were entirely made up (many, such as Rep. Adam Schiff, claimed they had “irrefutable evidence” of such ties). With Democrats, MSM, Hollywood, technology moguls, etc., reporting such inflammatory disinformation, is it any wonder that Trump had to resort to tweeting to get his message out?

Happily, Durham is not through with his investigations. Hopefully, many more charges, against many more significant people will be forthcoming. People (like Hillary Clinton) who should be in jail for all the illicit and illegal acts they’ve committed, will probably always be protected, though I don’t know why. Perhaps a Republican majority in the House will change that. Moreover, some will be promoted. Jake Sullivan, who was Hillary’s senior policy advisor, is now Biden’s national security advisor. I can only wince when I think of the advice he’s giving Joe Biden. But then you won’t learn about that from the MSM.

Wig Sherman. Vero Beach

This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: Letters to the Editor: Feb. 23, 2022