All Activity

Any news source has bias. CBC is as bad as The Star but not The Sun. Where do you draw the line? Flash was garbage. The fact that Wikipedia works at all gives hope.

Tactical assessment of the issue at hand: Forum discussion of the specifics and possible solutions: Herb's contribution:

Yea that's what i was thinking. I saw you commiserating with Herbie so i figured i better give you some attention. We both know you get a little squirrely if you don't get paid attention to now and again Hey. I'm here for you Big hug!

Awww...takes a poor hard done by snowflake to commiserate with one I guess. I never said blah blah blah, you put that in the quote box. It is one of the most dishonest things you can do on this forum. 😭 LMAO!

.... LEGALLY. So they can go through the legal process and become americans same as anyone else. But why should they get to jump in line ahead of other people? America has a long history of deporting illegals. and shooting mexicans now that i think about it.

What are you babbling about exactly? The subject hasn't gone anywhere, it's still in the same place now as it has been for thousands of years.

Oh, so you DIDN"T mean what you said? Well that's pretty normal for you i suppose . But he didn't backtrack, they're switching targets See, the problem with you is you like to post lots of articles but you never actually have a point. SO nobody knows what you're trying to say. And then when you DO offer a point, it's not demonstrated by the articles. See if you were smart (HA!! as if) you would have looked at the arrest or deportation numbers. IF trump is backing off, those numbers will be going down. They're not. As of just a few days ago they're still climbing like mad Trump's Deportation Numbers, Explained | TIME So trump's not backing off, he may be switching focus but more people are being arrested every single day. Soooo .......... this is why you hate replying to me isn't it. People like @Nationalist and @WestCanMan just make fun of you and make you look stupid, but i take the time to PROVE you're stupid It's a hobby. What can i say.

LOLOLOL it does not HAAHAAHAHAAHAAAHA - holy shit you're always good for a laugh hey hey... maybe he's not trolling, maybe it's just "cognitive dissionence"! LOLOLOL! God there's so many words you just don't understand that you always get wrong I'll add this one to the list LOL

LOL got caught changing quotes and arguing with that again i see Classic eyeball, when you know you're losing you deny everything you've said and claim you never said it, pretend you were joking all along, and you create fake discussions with other people by pretending to quote them and then argue with that LOL i'd love to play poker with you someday. Your tells are so bad i'd own everything you have in 15 minutes Not that that's worth much.

Hannah Arendt argues that Totalitarianism was unleashed by Imperialism which in its turn unleashed the power of a subterranean stream of globalising forces that surfaced and began to flow with a power that the nation-state was unable to harness or control: forces such as the will to colonise, the omnipotent will which felt that there was nothing which could limit its power, and the mass feeling of powerlessness in the face of powerful institutions. Running deeply in a part of this stream is a paradoxical cross-current: a belief amidst an educated middle class in the actualizing potential of the moral personality and the universal importance of an ethical imperative. In relation to the above thought consider an interesting Philosophical and Historical perspective which relates to Ernst Cassirer's work "The Myth of State". Cassirer claims that all political theories of the 17th century have a common metaphysical/mathematical background. Metaphysical thought in the following century, amidst philosophers, took precedence over theological thought which in its turn was already being undermined by the subterranean stream of Stoical belief in a moral personality that surfaced first in the form of the thought of Thomas Jefferson's draft of the Declaration of Independence which began with these famous words: "We hold these truths to be self evident. That all men are created equal: that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights: that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." The above experiential reflection on the rights and dignity of man preceded their philosophical/ethical justification through the works of Kant, a few years later, which put the final nail in the coffin of speculative metaphysics of all kinds ,and also provided a philosophical foundation for both human rights and the inevitable philosophical consequences: the idea of a United Nations and Cosmopolitanism. Further, the Kantian "Copernican revolution" provided a rational, non-experiential foundation for religion and politics and superseded the social contract theory of Hobbes and Locke which originated from the empirical/scientific method: the method of resolving a known whole into less known elements and synthesizing these elements back into a constructed whole again. In this methodical process, an individual's moral personality mysteriously disappeared especially in the case of Hobbes who claimed that there was a legal bond between subjects and their sovereign which amounted to a pact of submission on all issues related to the sovereigns power and authority. Cassirer argues that what we were witnessing during these years of the Enlightenment was a revival of Stoic ideas which "seemed alone equal to the task of providing principles admitted by every nation, every creed, every sect." One critical element of this revival was the idea that if a man was forced to give up his personality he would cease to be a moral being, he would become a slave of a Machiavellian Prince or sovereign. Unfortunately Stoic thought did not sufficiently acknowedge the central concept of Freedom. This idea of practical reason had to be fashioned by Kant as part of a middle position between an experiential view and a foundation in Cartesian thought. He favoured a position with a foundation in action that maintains trust in nonmathematical and non- speculative theorizing. "Kantian" Actions were, however, subseqently evaluated in terms of theoretical standards and it was these standards that provided the 18th century with its strength, inner unity, and Spirit. This absolute Hegelian Spirit, unfortunately, resulted in Romanticism and its attempt to poeticize the world in all its aspects in defiance of the political and philosophical ideals of previous Kantian generations. The poetic spirit, in its turn, reduced history to a romantic account of the portraits of great heroes and reduced ethics to reliving the spirit of the Homeric pre-Socratic era. This Romantic focus probably diverted the Kantian stream of emphasis on free ethical action and the dignity of man into subterranean experiential caverns. The Romantic spirit dominated and Carlyle´s historical theory of hero-worship was transformed into race worship in which it was maintained that only the white man possessed the will power to build a cultural and political life(Gobineau). The black and yellow races, it was claimed, did not have the energy or the spirit for such work. Thus was born: "the totalitarianism of race that prepared the way for the late concept of the totalitarian states"(Cassirer, The Myth of the State"). Romanticism was opposed by Academic Philosophy and Science which, in its turn attempted to continue the project of Hobbes: subjecting politics to the scientific method. Psychology, instead of focusing on the Philosophical idea of action preferred to use a scientifically determined concept of behaviour which was value-neutral and for that very reason could not be used in the debate about the moral personality and the ethical imperative. According to Arendt, the negative sub-currents of globalization transformed a doctrinal religious prejudice against the Jews into a racial prejudice which manifested itself into the anti-Semitism of the first political parties in Europe in the 1870s. For Gobineau, Kantian ethics and its categorical imperative with its universal condition and assumption of a universal moral personality was a contradiction of the facts: there was, it was argued, no universal ethical attitude or personality. Behind such conviction was a scientific and epistemological claim that only the facts would reveal whether such a personality was a reality. If the claim was that such a personality was a universal phenomenon it would suffice to use the scientific method and engage in scientific observation to detect one actual case in which this was not true. One case observed sufficed for the universal theory to collapse. But all this teaches us is that a scientific and epistemological claim searching for the truth is a very different kind of claim to an ethical judgment relating to the idea of the good which is behind all ethical action. The idea of the good situates us in what modern philosophers call the "ought-system of concepts" in which arguments are constructed in terms of an ought major premise and an ought in the conclusion. We ought to have ethical self-knowledge but the fact that many people do not is still consistent with the major premise that we all ought to develop ethical personalities and the conclusion that an individual ought to develop his moral personality, that, in other words, an individual has a duty to develop their moral personality. Romanticism and the scientific imperative, together with the dissolution of religious and many other forms of authority, including the authority of institutions, produced what Freud called the "discontents of civilization" as well as the idea of a global cosmopolitan community that is the world historical equaivalent of a moral personality. Globalization does not mean the creation and maintenance of the commodious life styles promoted by Hobbes and his followers. Globalisation means many things but amongst these things we find moral and political attitudes that have been on the aims and objectives lists of both Aristotelian and Kantian moral and political Philosophy.

Not for very long in this forum. Even Jewish critics of Israeli policies towards Palestine are called anti-Semites who support terrorists. It looks to me like you understand my point just fine. Anyway good luck with it.

In fact is is true. And on the very day that the UN was saying they didn't have evidence, this happened UN says more food needed in Gaza as looting hampers deliveries | Reuters Now hamas says it isn't their guys, yet their guys always have food and none gets to the refugees and it always happens in areas where hamas is operating. Whether hamas is stealing the food directly or getting someone to do it and taking it or buying it from them, that's what's happening So you can lie like the uneducated twat you are, or you can start looking around. Isreal has ONLY halted food when there were concerns about it being taken and given to hamas. Well i agree, maybe you can work your way up to that level of understanding over the years. Right now you're no where close.

No. Not at all. My older neigbour still receives two printed newspapers. She likes the crosswords.

America has a LONG HISTORY of welcoming immigrants AND XENOPHOBES like you who hate them. But fortunately you're NOT American so your OPINION doesn't matter.

So what you're saying is you need to LIE AGAIN. Or are you just completely CLUELESS? This whole thread is about Trump back tracking on MASS DEPORTATION. At least Stephen Miller's 3000/day and chasing farm hands through the strawberry fields version of that. Of course you always make these general claims with NO REASONING because you don't know how to do that. LMAO

This guy Rodriguez will never be PM of Quebec. The PQ will win in 2026. I'm curious what this guy Pierre St-Pierre Plamondon (PSPP) will do.

Nope, outlier fits perfectly. Apparently it's YOU who doesn't understand the meaning. What did you believe it means? LMAO

Yes, you are still being dishonest. Instead of actually explaining what you were talking about existing 100 years ago, you change the subject.

I don't understand your point. Yes you can defend Israel when it acts justly and criticize them when they don't. There's a lot of gray area and subjectivity for sure that's up for debate.

18+ would be nice.

So what you're saying is you were actually wrong and you're providing proof of that? Don't sweat it bud. We knew you were wrong to begin with

You're saying you can have it both ways? Let me know how that works out.

True i'm afraid and fairly well documented Why is that the level of intellect you require to be spoken at? I said two things that were true. I wasn't rude, i didn't call you names, you're free to provide evidence if you wish to refute them. Instead you act like a complete príck and have a little hissy fit. Which really WOULD suit an intellect that can't go above 5. The food issue is not a war crime. You may not like it but denying food to enemy forces is legit. They are the ones holding the people hostage So, i asked if that was the only example of a war crime you had and you freaked out. It would seem we've exhausted that argument. Pathetic showing btw. I think even your 5 year old friends would be disappointed in you.

Awwww. I'm sorry...you were saying something about dishonesty?

I want to be clear about this - Americans can correct me. In America, a person can declare/reduce federal taxes with state/local taxes paid. If you pay state/local tax, you do not pay federal tax on the amount (SALT). This means that state/local government bureaucrats can spend money from other states. Amazing.