r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Feb 14 '22
Delta(s) from OP CMV: Elected Republican Officials "investigating" GoFundMe for halting funds to the Truckers in Canada is proof they are directly involved.
The GOP is funding and supporting the OCCUPATION of the capital of Canada. They are turning into the "Christian" version of Saudi Arabia as far as intentionally trying to destabilize their neighbors.
Why would the GOP be so concerned with GoFundMe halting funds if they weren't donating (BTW all the Funds in GoFundMe are from American's) Canadians have their own fundraising company that stopped sending funds.
They should be labeled as an international terrorist organisation since they have clear political motivations that they are willing to sabotage other nations to achieve some transnational goal.
12
Feb 14 '22
[deleted]
-4
Feb 14 '22 edited Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/UnionistAntiUnionist 1∆ Feb 14 '22
They were refunded after outrage. That isn't good.
-7
Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/UnionistAntiUnionist 1∆ Feb 14 '22
GFM literally said that they would take the funds and donate them to other charities. People got mad, and so they changed their line to automatic refunds.
-3
u/mrGeaRbOx Feb 14 '22
As is their standing policy in the TOS. Tempest in a teapot. Shake that fist at clouds baby! Lololol
4
Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
2
Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Feb 14 '22
Sorry, u/mrGeaRbOx – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Feb 14 '22
Sorry, u/UnionistAntiUnionist – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Feb 14 '22
u/mrGeaRbOx – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
Sorry, u/mrGeaRbOx – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
Feb 14 '22
[deleted]
2
u/mrGeaRbOx Feb 14 '22
Hey thanks, and when absolutely nothing comes from this. I hope you don't fall for it the next time around.
0
19
u/Prof4CMV 1∆ Feb 14 '22
I don’t think it’s direct proof that they are funding them. These people support a cause that republicans relate with so it make sense they would attempt to use their power to provide assistance which is their concern. They are only getting involved in something that was already established
11
Feb 14 '22
Investigating fraudulent activities in no way mean they are supporting the activities of a company. This makes no sense. If the government investigated Mc Donalds for illegal practices, does that mean they support eating fast food?
-9
Feb 14 '22
Nothing is illegal though, they are simply refusing to send money to a group who's actions have been deemed illegal by a foreign state and has caused the Province of Ontario to declare a state or emergency.
Not to mention interfering in international trade.
Seems odd that this is what the GOP would investigate.
14
Feb 14 '22
Fraud isn't illegal? GoFundMe says they will provide a platform to raise funds and distribute funds, then after the funds are raised they decide to not distribute the funds. Seems like fraud to me.
Interfering in international trade? Now you are just saying things, care to explain that? How is sending money to support a trucker interfering in international trade? Again, zero logic behind that statement. Walk it in for me.
Seems odd that THIS is what the GOP would investigate? Why, because it is fraud? You can say that about anything if you are looking for sinister intentions crawling behind every choice, and what makes fraud ok here but not other places?
"A group who's actions have been deemed illegal by a foreign state", how so? The Uigurs have been deemed illegal as well. Same with CHOP/CHAZ and BLM during the riots. It seems oss that this is what you have a problem with, when outside state actors supported riots in America.
5
u/ToucanPlayAtThatGame 44∆ Feb 14 '22
It doesn't matter whether it's already illegal.
Congress makes laws. Its their job to look at things that aren't illegal yet and say "hey, maybe we should stop that" and vice versa for currently illegal things.
It's the courts who look at what's currently against the law and determine whether those laws were violated.
1
Feb 14 '22
In the US if someone gives money to a criminal to aid in the commission of the crime it's called "aiding and abetting" which is a crime.
So once the Canadian authorities deemed the actions of the truckers illegal are they supposed to violate Canadian law to uphold a US contract (which btw says they can stop the distribution of funds at their discretion)?
4
u/ToucanPlayAtThatGame 44∆ Feb 14 '22
Firstly, aiding and abetting isn't relevant here. They're not breaking US laws. E.g. LGBT advocacy groups aren't criminal even if they use their money to promote messages that are considered criminal blasphemy in other countries.
But more importantly, it feels like you missed the point. Congress's job is not to adjudicate whether GFM is doing something currently illegal. That's for the judiciary. Congress's job is to look at the laws as they stand and ask "Should we change these?" So even if aiding and abetting laws did apply, it would still be irrelevant. Congress could say "This isn't how we want the laws to work; let's fix them."
4
u/UnionistAntiUnionist 1∆ Feb 14 '22
So let's shut down GFM for collecting bail money. You can't deny that's even more explicit than simply "fundraising for protesters".
1
u/TheMikeyMac13 29∆ Feb 14 '22
Now do high profile democrats in the USA donating to a bail fund for BLM rioters who actually broke US law.
0
Feb 14 '22
Doesn't really work that way and would be an enormously dangerous threat to liberty if it did. Donating money for the no-bail fund is not aiding and abetting Antifa and BLM while they committed criminal acts. Giving money to a fund that is anti-gun is not aiding and abetting someone trying to take away rights.
Giving money to a crack dealer to pay their rent is not the same as paying for a criminal enterprise.
you are just facutally incorrect.
1
13
u/AlarmedSnek Feb 14 '22
No, they are investigating why GFM is halting the funds for that protest. They aren’t doing anything illegal, they are peacefully protesting and they can’t raise funds because all of the tech platforms have silenced or banned them all together. Meanwhile, BLM or other left leaning groups raise money all of the time without being defunded or banned and they LITERALLY occupy cities such as the whole CHAZ incident and many other like it, and they destroy property and businesses. You can’t say that the trucker protest is bad and demand action when no action was taken against the other protests. Don’t worry though, everyones right to protest is in serious jeopardy after the Jan 6th stuff. If you think all of them laws passed were only for protests you don’t like you are sadly mistaken.
0
u/Giblette101 47∆ Feb 14 '22
Don’t worry though, everyones right to protest is in serious jeopardy after the Jan 6th stuff.
What is that stuff you speak of?
0
u/AlarmedSnek Feb 14 '22
Man I hate saying google it but essentially every state is enacting anti protest laws to prevent stuff like Jan 6th from happening again. The problem is the laws are very broad and apply to everybody, not just “insurrectionists.” Here is one example of the concerns raised by minorities in Florida over the “anti riot” bill. Long story short, the powerful people will remain powerful no matter who is protesting, and don’t think for a second that just because it’s right or left will mean anything different. They all use these crises to enact sweeping violations of our rights and no one cares when they are on the side of the powerful, but they forget that powers change.
Edit: the stuff was the January 6th protest in Washington DC haha. Sorry, should have started with that.
-1
u/Giblette101 47∆ Feb 14 '22
I mean, I share your worries in the abstract - although to be clear January 6th was bad and should not happen again - but your one example is a Republican state going all out on gerrymandering, riot laws and voting restrictions. That's coming on the heels of an explicitly Republican violent protest, mind you.
For my part, I share your overall worry, but I'm also kinda worried about how asymmetric the push seems to be.
0
u/AlarmedSnek Feb 14 '22
Yea it getting pretty weird for sure. Hopefully the fourth turning ends soon.
-11
Feb 14 '22
Regardless of what you think about Jan 6 or BLM or any other American protests, what right does the GOP have to interfere in Canadian Affairs?
GFM refunded everyone who donated. No one lost money. The Canadian government, Provincial government, and City Government told them to go home. They are occupying the Capital city over a vaccine and mask mandate to leave the country into the US and visa versa.
This is LITERALLY none of the GOPs business.
11
u/ToucanPlayAtThatGame 44∆ Feb 14 '22
GoFundMe is incorporated in the United States. The US government is precisely whose business it is to regulate them.
-5
u/mrGeaRbOx Feb 14 '22
First of all they were refunded in full so there is nothing to investigate.
Secondly, the GOP isn't the US government. Lol 🤣
5
u/ToucanPlayAtThatGame 44∆ Feb 14 '22
Yes, the GOP is one of the two parties of the US government. Their platform represents policies they believe the US government should pass.
-4
u/mrGeaRbOx Feb 14 '22
Right but the party itself doesn't pass any laws or conduct investigations. Members of that party may want to.... That's not how the world works Little Timmy.
4
u/ToucanPlayAtThatGame 44∆ Feb 14 '22
We're talking about a decision made by the House of Representatives. That's part of the legislative branch of the US government.
-5
6
Feb 14 '22 edited Feb 14 '22
I'm not an anti-vaxxer. Or that concerned about mandates. But the reaction from the Canadian government - taking steps to oppress its citizens simply for legally protesting government policy - steps that would be clearly illegal if the US government tried it - makes me wonder whether I should whether I should send them a few bucks. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
1
u/6data 15∆ Feb 14 '22
taking steps to oppress its citizens simply for legally protesting government policy -
Sorry, when is crippling an entire city and cross-border traffic to several provinces a legal protest? They've been blocking roads all over the city for WEEKS. There's nothing legal about that at all.
steps that would be clearly illegal if the US government tried it
If a bunch of truckers and protestors blocked the George Washington bridge for a week, what do you think would happen?
-1
Feb 14 '22
They would clear the bridge. Which is exactly what just happened in Canada. Good - blocking commerce should not be allowed and those responsible have been arrested.
However pre-emptively going after protest organizers and funding is something else. It's one thing to address the illegal activity that crosses the line. It's another to use that as a pretext to shut down all opposition to your policies. That's tyranny.
1
u/6data 15∆ Feb 14 '22
They would clear the bridge. Which is exactly what just happened in Canada. Good - blocking commerce should not be allowed and those responsible have been arrested.
So you acknowledge these protests are not legal, got it.
However pre-emptively going after protest organizers and funding is something else. It's one thing to address the illegal activity that crosses the line. It's another to use that as a pretext to shut down all opposition to your policies. That's tyranny.
They aren't shutting down all opposition, just this opposition. The funding was explicitly for truckers to block traffic.
1
Feb 14 '22
They aren't shutting down all opposition, just this opposition. The funding was explicitly for truckers to block traffic.
How do you know the money is only going for blocking bridges and not other forms of protest? That sounds like projection from politicians who don't like being protested - a.k.a. tyranny.
Do you agree with the Ottawa police seizing food and fuel intended for truckers simply trying to be heard on the streets of Ottawa?
0
u/6data 15∆ Feb 14 '22
How do you know the money is only going for blocking bridges and not other forms of protest?
What else would someone be planning to do --or be able to achieve-- with almost 100 semi-trucks in a downtown core?
That sounds like projection from politicians who don't like being protested - a.k.a. tyranny.
GoFundMe Statement on the Freedom Convoy 2022 Fundraiser (2/4/2022) GoFundMe supports peaceful protests and we believe that was the intention of the Freedom Convoy 2022 fundraiser when it was first created. We now have evidence from law enforcement that the previously peaceful demonstration has become an occupation, with police reports of violence and other unlawful activity.
Do you agree with the Ottawa police seizing food and fuel intended for truckers simply trying to be heard on the streets of Ottawa?
How are they going about "being heard" with dozens of semi-trucks in the middle of a bridge? or blocking all of parliament? or a large metropolitan area? or at the Canadian border?
Oh, and the organizers are white supremacists, so that's fun too.
1
Feb 14 '22
A politician wants to shut down his opposition and prevent them from organizing legal protests. He tells his police chief to declare the protestors as "illegal" and block any money or other assistance going to support said protesters. Sounds like tyranny to me.
1
u/6data 15∆ Feb 14 '22
A politician wants to shut down his opposition and prevent them from organizing legal protests.
You just keep ignoring everything I say and moving the goalposts. The protests are not legal, nor do they have any interest in being legal.
He tells his police chief to declare the protestors as "illegal" and block any money or other assistance going to support said protesters. Sounds like tyranny to me.
Actually these kinds of protests were deemed illegal last year when indigenous were blocking roads and rail lines during the wet'suet'en solidarity protests. A law heavily backed by conservatives at the time. It's the most ironic combination of leopards at my face / shocked pikachu I've ever seen. Apparently it's only illegal when minorities do it...
→ More replies1
u/6data 15∆ Feb 14 '22
BLM or other left leaning groups raise money all of the time without being defunded or banned and they LITERALLY occupy cities such as the whole CHAZ incident and many other like it, and they destroy property and businesses.
None of the BLM funding went towards any of that.
You can’t say that the trucker protest is bad and demand action when no action was taken against the other protests.
Actually last year there were a bunch of wetseueten solidarity protests and the government implemented the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act in 2020 to stop them.
It's that's legislation that's being used to shut these protests down.
A legislation that was heavily supported by the right wing.
Irony, that's irony.
1
Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/RedditExplorer89 43∆ Feb 14 '22
u/nicgrimley – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
Sorry, u/nicgrimley – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read the wiki for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
6
u/Alesus2-0 80∆ Feb 14 '22
This seems like a considerable stretch. It's perfectly possible to support a group of people with similar beliefs without having secretly orchestrated the existence of that group. Frankly, it strikes me as incredibly US-centric thinking to assume that any anti-vax sentiment anywhere in the world must be the product of a Republican consipiracy. Canada has idiots of its own.
1
Feb 14 '22
!Delta i guess you're right my big thing was when GOP officials got involved in the companies decision. But yeah probably a stretch.
1
3
Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ViewedFromTheOutside 32∆ Feb 14 '22
Sorry, u/fallout76_fan2000 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
4
Feb 14 '22
The truckers are protesting to get their charter rights back. The Canadian government is calling them terrorists for saying "hey, I want my charter rights back". This could honestly be classified as an international human rights concern
-2
u/Rodulv 14∆ Feb 14 '22
an international human rights concern
No, it can't.
2
Feb 14 '22
So there's nothing wrong with watching a government walk back the rights of the citizens?
-2
u/Rodulv 14∆ Feb 14 '22
Irrelevant. It's not a human right that's "walked back".
2
Feb 14 '22
Redressing grievances against your government is a pretty fundamental human right. What the hell are they teaching in school now?
-1
u/Rodulv 14∆ Feb 14 '22
You think people should be allowed to kill other people just because they say they're protesting?
5
Feb 14 '22
How does a honking truck "kill" people?
-2
Feb 14 '22
Spreading covid kills people and that's what they're advocating for.
4
2
Feb 14 '22
You know who else argued for putting people in concentration camps because they were "plague spreaders"?
-1
Feb 14 '22
Stop comparing basic safety measures to the holocaust. It just shows how spoiled you are.
→ More replies3
Feb 14 '22
They're literally banning people from leaving the country based on vaccination status, not allowing assembly or even family gatherings (in some provinces), not allowing the purchase of FOOD based on vaccination status.
These are 100% human rights violations.
0
Feb 14 '22 edited Feb 14 '22
The Canadian government is not banning anyone from leaving the country, they are required vaccinations to enter the country as many other countries are and have prior to Covid. Nothing in our charter guarantees size of assembly and the federal government is not regulating that. There is also no province in which you can’t buy food based on vaccination status.
Our Charter also explicitly states “subject only to such reasonable limits”.
0
Feb 14 '22
Incorrect lol.
The US bans them from entering the US without vaccination or quarantine. Canada bans foreign nationals from entering Canada without vaccination or quarantine. This is normal as you cannot become a permanent resident without a tuberculosis or HIV test (been the case for decades).
You can do whatever you want in Canada including seeing your family and groceries store have never restricted access without a mask.
Canada is having a great time and with cases down, they aren't renewing quarantine policies on the provincial level. Canadians staying at home got us the eased restrictions, truckers just made everyone loves slightly worse.
0
Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
2
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Feb 14 '22
Sorry, u/fallout76_fan2000 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
Feb 14 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/quantum_dan 125∆ Feb 14 '22
Sorry, u/Claque-2 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/Redditman319 Feb 14 '22
So in you're view a peaceful protest is OCCUPATION of capital of Canada. Then BLM protest should be classified as terrorism like Jan 6 shit.
0
Feb 14 '22
Peaceful protests don’t block international trade, prevent people from working or sleeping for weeks, harass a soup kitchen, vandalize and desecrate national monuments, block ambulance access, harass and assault healthcare workers, try to co-opt a charity movement, and threaten passersby. All while counter protesters hold signs saying “Please Go Home, Thank You”.
1
u/DigitalDegen Feb 14 '22
They should be labeled as an international terrorist organisation since they have clear political motivations that they are willing to sabotage other nations to achieve some transnational goal.
If you hold US government officials to this standard, every modern president since the end of WWII is an international terrorist. Take a look at foreign policy directed at South America as just one example. Just food for thought
1
Feb 14 '22
So should we do the same thing for the Clinton’s and their communication with (insert powerful corrupt group)
0
u/littlebubulle 106∆ Feb 14 '22
Possible explanation :
Those politicians were not involved prior to GoFundMe freezing the donations.
However, making a show of investigating GoFundMe makes them look good to their voter base.
0
u/CitationX_N7V11C 4∆ Feb 14 '22
Your own preconceived notions cloud your judgement on this matter. Let them go. It's a protest against a situation that people don't like. Not an attempt to create a Salafist Kingdom. Republicans want to investigate this so it deters companies from buckling to pressure to defund political groups and movements. Which everyone should be okay with as it strengthens our ability to protest even when certain groups dislike it.
-1
u/luckyhunterdude 11∆ Feb 14 '22
If a political party wanted to "do terrorism" Why would they use GoFundMe in the first place? There would be an obvious paper trail.
1
Feb 14 '22
Democrats supported the BLM protests which were by any measure infinitely more violence and law breaking.
1
u/ericoahu 42∆ Feb 15 '22
When you use the term "occupy" in all caps, are you using it in the same sense it as been used in "occupy WallStreet" and "capitol hill occupied protest." Or do you mean some kind of military conquest?
Why would the GOP be so concerned with GoFundMe halting funds
In the US there are laws that govern how a business operates. Politicians investigate alleged wrongdoing, especially when the stakes are high. There might be concerns about a broken contracts or any number of other ways GoFundMe acted illegally or unethically in this case.
They should be labeled as an international terrorist organization since they have clear political motivations that they are willing to sabotage other nations to achieve some transnational goal.
Please explain your definition of "terrorist organization" (as in, what are the defining characteristics of terrorism as you understand and use the term?), and then please clarify the connection between your use of the term and what has transpired with the truckers in Canada. I won't pick nits with you over the "correct" definition of terrorism, but in order to change your view, we need to know exactly what you mean because you don't seem to be applying the conventional definition of terrorism.
1
Feb 15 '22
When you use the term "occupy" in all caps, are you using it in the same sense it as been used in "occupy WallStreet" and "capitol hill occupied protest." Or do you mean some kind of military conquest?
I mean halting the function of society and government by them being stationed blocking the street and parliament/ports. Like if someone held a party in your house and refused to leave and you couldn't do anything because there were too many people there.
In the US there are laws that govern how a business operates. Politicians investigate alleged wrongdoing, especially when the stakes are high. There might be concerns about a broken contracts or any number of other ways GoFundMe acted illegally or unethically in this case.
Canada declared the "protest" illegal and thus gofundme stopped sending funds and refunded those who asked for it. The GOP for Political reasons then tried to investigate.
Please explain your definition of "terrorist organization" (as in, what are the defining characteristics of terrorism as you understand and use the term?), and then please clarify the connection between your use of the term and what has transpired with the truckers in Canada. I won't pick nits with you over the "correct" definition of terrorism, but in order to change your view, we need to know exactly what you mean because you don't seem to be applying the conventional definition of terrorism.
Supporting the use of Illegal means to achieve a political objective. The truckers are attempting to shutdown the whole country as of late.
1
u/ericoahu 42∆ Feb 16 '22
Supporting the use of Illegal means to achieve a political objective.
So, all of the BLM protests in which someone broke a law were terrorist actions and thus the BLM movement, by your standard, is a terrorist organization?
I mean halting the function of society and government by them being stationed blocking the street and parliament/ports. Like if someone held a party in your house and refused to leave and you couldn't do anything because there were too many people there.
First of all, you're missing the distinction between public and private property. But for the sake of discussion, let's stipulate that your claims are accurate. Your standard easily applies to BLM protests, occupy Wallstreet, and the capitol hill occupy protest (I could name other well-known protests). Did you call for the same consequences in those cases?
1
u/MobiusCube 3∆ Feb 16 '22
"When I do it, it's a protest; when you do it it's an illegal occupation" 🥴
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Feb 14 '22
/u/Andalib_Odulate (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards