An op-ed published by American Thinker is urging the National Hockey League to proactively bar Canadian fans from booing the U.S. national anthem, framing such protests as a provocation that approaches “a declaration of mob war” β and warning that Canadian supporters should remember “on which side their bread is buttered.”
The piece, written by Noel S. Williams and dated September 10, 2026, opens by referencing a video circulating online that depicts President Trump “whooping” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney “up one side and down the other with a hockey stick.” Williams pairs that image with the tariffs the administration has levied on Canada, including on hockey-related equipment, and predicts that “stroppy Canadians will boo our national anthem at upcoming hockey games.”
The Argument: Economics, Ownership, and the NHL’s Balance Sheet
The core of the argument rests on the league’s geographic and financial makeup. According to the piece, 25 of the NHL’s 32 franchises are located in the United States, with only seven in Canada. It further asserts that hockey is growing faster south of the border and that “the vast majority of day-to-day league operations, gate receipts, and local arena revenues are generated in the United States.”
Williams acknowledges that the NHL already sanctions fans for chants, gestures, and political antics, and concedes that the league should not “tamp down too much on the passion,” describing hockey as “not a sport for girly-men.” But the column draws a line at the anthem itself, arguing that drowning out a nation’s sacred anthem justifies an expanded list of league sanctions aimed specifically at disrespecting “The Star-Spangled Banner.”
The piece does not cite a specific incident of anthem booing by Canadian fans, nor does it point to a scheduled game or date on which such a protest is expected. Instead, it presents the prediction as a preemptive concern β an effort to “nip this in the bud” before the behavior occurs.
Broader Grievances Against Ottawa
Beyond the arena, the column takes aim at Carney directly, calling him a “peevish little twit” who is “exclaiming exaggerated support for French language and culture.” Williams attributes President Trump’s posture toward Canada partly to that dynamic, writing, “No wonder President Trump is taking a metaphorical stick to him. Give him another.”
The piece also invokes relative national power as a reason for Canadian restraint, stating that the U.S. economy is “at least thirteen times bigger” than Canada’s and that military estimates put Canada’s submarine fleet “down to two.” Neither figure is sourced within the column.
Williams closes the loop by invoking “Discretion being the better part of valor,” arguing that an American-dominated NHL should codify anthem protections and warning that otherwise “there’s always the prospect of a Canadian Bacon-type incursion to bring Governor Carney to heel” β a reference that treats the prime minister’s title dismissively.
What the Column Is Not
It is worth being precise about what this piece is and is not. It is an opinion column in a politically oriented outlet, not a report of a league decision, a diplomatic incident, or a confirmed protest. No NHL spokesperson is quoted. No Canadian fan group is quoted. No polling, no attendance data, and no broadcast numbers back the claims about revenue distribution beyond the author’s assertion.
That distinction matters because the column’s central proposal β that the NHL expand its fan-conduct rules to specifically cover anthem disrespect β is framed as a suggestion directed at the league, not as a policy in motion. Readers encountering the argument elsewhere should understand it as advocacy, not news.
The Political Backdrop the Column Assumes
The piece leans heavily on a set of assumed facts its audience is expected to accept: that Trump has targeted Canada with tariffs including hockey equipment, that Carney is the sitting prime minister and is promoting French-language and cultural priorities, and that U.S.-Canada relations are in a confrontational phase. The column presents all of this as context rather than argument, using it as the foundation for its anthem proposal.
The tariff reference is notable for its specificity β hockey equipment is a niche category, and its inclusion here serves a rhetorical purpose. By tying the economic pressure to the sport Canadians are most associated with, the column tries to make the cultural and the commercial feel like the same fight.
Where the Rhetoric Goes
The tone throughout is deliberately combative. Phrases like “uppity,” “they do have a lot of Frenchies up there,” and the headline’s “shut the puck up” are designed less to persuade a neutral reader than to rally one already inclined to view Canadian nationalism as a nuisance. The essay opens by calling Canada “the Colossus to the North” β a phrase that reads as sarcasm given the column’s own insistence that Canada is a fraction of the U.S. in economic and military terms.
That gap between the grandiose label and the belittling content is the piece’s operating method: inflate the target just enough to make deflating it feel like a win.
Whether the NHL has any appetite for the proposal is unknown, and the league has not been reported as considering it. Anthem protests in sports have historically been contentious for leagues in both countries, and fan conduct policies have generally been written broadly enough to cover disruptive behavior without singling out any one anthem or nationality. The American Thinker column asks the league to change that β to treat one specific anthem as a protected category and one specific fan base as the likely offender.
That is a bigger ask than it first appears. It would mean the NHL formally adjudicating which national symbols are off-limits and which are fair game, and doing so in a league whose roster, revenue, and identity are genuinely binational even if its money is not. For now, though, it remains what it began as: one writer’s argument, published on a conservative opinion site, aimed at a league that has given no public sign it is listening.
The column ends with a pitch to readers β a standard donation appeal β and a line about the importance of speaking one’s mind. It is a fitting close for a piece whose entire premise is that some people should stop speaking, or rather singing, theirs.
Source: www.americanthinker.com β https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/09/canadians-need-to-shut-the-puck-up/