Leaderboard

Of course Trump is your hero, he talks off the top of his head without the ability to support anything - just like you. Why don't you support your original contention?

No he shouldn't. How often have we heard politicians say "I cannot comment because this matter is subject to a police investigation" or "I cannot comment on a matter that is before the courts". Those are the correct public observations to make is such circumstances. He couldn't help himself, just like the rest of our bozo politicians. They wanted to score points with the Muslim community but all they accomplished is make themselves look like fools.

How many more lies? Incident involving man cutting 11-year-old girl’s hijab with scissors ‘did not happen’: Toronto police https://globalnews.ca/news/3965061/toronto-police-girl-hijab-attack-investigation/

Interesting, didn't think about that... wonder if her parents think about it too.

No, but they should interview the parents to find out who put her up to it. I want an apology from Trudeau and Wynne who were quick to blame Canadians for Islamophobia as they cried their crocodile tears. Bet they'll find some excuse why not to apologize.

It seems that is the message Trudeau wants to push. First the debacle with Boyle and now this. You'd think he would wise up and not comment on things before they are investigated, but in his rush to defend all things Islam, he's looking more and more the fool.

What would you do for 10 million?

Didn't that used to be the national motto of Yugoslavia?

Well, I guess when Trudeau said, "This is NOT Canada" he was correct. It wasn't.

Diversity is our strength.

I don't know about that, but this girl does play into the doubts many have about importing massive numbers of Muslims into Canada. She has no accent that I heard, so was born and grew up here, but she's still swaddled in robes, and her name Khawlah, is clearly one from her homeland. I had recent experience spending some time chatting with a very pleasant young woman whose parents were refugees from Vietnam. She was, in every way I could detect, entirely Canadian in her behavior, dress and outlook. She was given a very Canadian name by her parents. When I commented that that's not exactly a Vietnamese name she laughed and said her parents wanted to raise their kids here as Canadians, so gave them Canadian names and made sure they knew they were Canadian, not Vietnamese. That's something I don't see much of from Muslim immigrants, who insist on clinging to their old world culture an values and insist their children, particularly daughters, do too. My next door neighour was born here, but he too has an Arab name, as do his three sons.

Yeah, I agree. But she's 11, and her brother is even younger. Nothing you can do but give them and their parents a stern talking to.

We do have some idea of her family - she is 11 years old being forced to wear a hijab, with a mother who wears full face and body coverings. Religious fundies.

No. I said if I were her parent I would do that. I have done that when I was raising my kids. Stop exagerrating what is being said.

Quit exaggerating what's being said. No one is screaming for blood, no one said she should be in stocks and have tomatoes thrown at her. No one is saying she should be flogged. Knock it off. It's your rhetoric that's over the top.

I suspected she was lying from the beginning. The whole story was bizarre and contradictory. And there's been a rash of false Islamophobia incidents in the US, too. Being a child, though, I wonder if she somehow ripped or tore the hijab on her own and didn't want to get into trouble so made up the story. Or maybe she takes it off when she goes to school and her brother caught her without it on. Either way, she should be charged with mischief, YES. Also, 11 year old girls should not be in hijabs.

This alleged monstrous crime was big news on every news show. CTV and CBC even covered the police press conference live. All the progressives were breathless with glee at yet another confirmation of what an evil, racist society we have in Canada (but only the white people part of course). I bet Trudeau and Wynne had already planned visits to mosques so they could tearfully call for those vicious white people to be restrained.

See?...we NEED M-103 and laws supporting it lest fake Islamic trickery be pointed-out in the future.

Both JT and Wynne were quick to denounce this on Friday. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!!! http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/toronto-police-say-hijab-cutting-incident-never-happened-investigation-is-closed Shouldn't this child get charged with mischief? JT should apologize for fanning flames by reporting pure fiction.

The list will probably shock Argus to hell when he sees all of those successes by Trump.

Or how about all the white people that were/are being murdered in South Africa in the last few decades since apartheid was abolished? JT is now the PM of Canada which is fast becoming a shit hole full of crybaby snowflake liberals.

Doesn't justify subverting another countries democracy because you don't like the policies they adopt.

More fallout from Hawaii incident. Hawaiian congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D) blames the situation on "decades of failed leadership in this country." Link

I don't think anyone can deny the state that Haiti is in, regardless of the word that is used to describe it. So ultimately the debate is not whether shithole describes it well enough, because it does. The question is whether the use of that word publicly acceptable. Sure it's a rude way to say it but it is also very succinct. Keeping in mind this was said in a private meeting behind closed doors, it should not even be an issue. The whole discussion and associated outrage is a deflection from the larger point about immigration that Trump/ the GOP is proposing. We don't want people to have an intelligent discussion about immigration, we only want to inflame emotions and paint Trump as a monster. That way even if he DOES have good ideas... ETA It should be noted that Canada needs to have the same debate, and move in the same direction as Donald Trump proposes. Even our immigrants who've come here are saying the same thing, get rid of the lottery it is arbitrary and unfair.

Haiti is a shit hole for a reason. But sure...let the entire population move here and collect welfare. Why not? You're paying.

And why are we critical of people seeking the same? You and me aren't special because we were born here. We just won the geographic lottery. Sure we can't accept everyone but people should be let in based on merit, not the poverty of the country they came from.

That is typical of the liberal left wing fake and phony media. They like to take things said out of context. Trump did not really call Haitians shitty people. Trump called Haiti a shit hole. The lieberal media are full of a bunch of bigots and intolerant snowflakes themselves. The lieberals apparently never talk about how the democratic party had black slaves themselves and many democrats were members of the KKK. Democratic Senator Robert Byrd apparently was a KKK member himself. The pro liberal/democrat Clinton Obama crowd here should do a little more research on the people they love to cherish for a change. They might finally learn something for a change that not all conservative/republicans are all that bad. Even democrats have shit in their closets. Just saying.

Other Trump successes: Started re-negotiation of NAFTA Removed U.S. from TPP trade deal $300 billion more in China trade Slapped tariffs on Canadian dumping Appointed many federal appellate judges Approved KXL bitumen pipeline from Canada Removed Obamacare individual responsibility tax penalty Escalated military actions against ISIL with victory in Iraq Rescinded Obama EO's that hurt industry (e.g. coal) Boosted the arrest and deportation of illegal immigrants Funded resources for opioid crisis Reinstated Mexico City policy Motivated NATO deadbeats to increase defence spending Recognized Jerusalem as capital of Israel per U.S. federal law. Lowest unemployment rate since 2000 Business climate is outstanding...Dow passed 25,000 Donated his presidential salary !

Absolutely which is why she had to go. She is a bloated bovine parasite the last thing the Tories need to distract from his Highness Lord Justin of Trudeau.

You have to remember argus, conservatives are held accountable for every wrong word or little slip up, compared to the liberals that gets away with almost everything. And the media has proved it by the way the try and protect trudeau.

Criminal law is about regulating social behaviour. It can't flex to suit individual circumstances. If it did then then each decision would be accused of being inconsistent and unfair. Remember this is criminal law not private civil law. In private civil law, Judges can consider individual circumstances when determining damages and behaviour. That said, it was in June of 2006 when the age of consent went from 14 to 16 but its not that simple because depending on whether the person engaging in sex is of the older age but is in a relationship of trust, authority or dependency, that 16 year mark is not absolute. So to be clear whole a person must be at least 16 years old to be able to legally agree to sexual activity its not an absolute. As well someone 14-15 is allowed to consent to sex provided the partner is no more than 5 years older. As well 12-13 years can consent to sex provided the person is less than two years older. In both the above mentioned situations there can be no relationship of trust, authority, dependency of exploitation. Sexual exploitation is the legal term now used where you would otherwise have the legal right to have sex but your position of trust or authority makes it illegal, i.e., you are a foster parent, teacher, coach, clergy, business manager, someone the child is financially dependent on. The laws above have nothing to do with God. If they did then Christians would point out Joseph was far older than Mary as some did in defense of Moore. Traditional Christianity, Judaism and today's mainstream Islam and many societies say one a girl men engages in menstration she is capable of sex and birthing children. Rules of sex in the past may have been justified by religions but were based on the primal function of reproduction. Any female capable of having her cycle was considered sexually acceptable. The concept of being a pedophile or a hebephile or engaging in sexual assault and exploitation has evolved and its a mix of the moral standards of the day and changing psychiatric definitions of sexual disorders that reflect the morality of the day at times. Criminal law is very much a reflective mirror of the moral standards of the day. At one point it defined sodomy as a criminal offence and said a prostitute.female sex worker could not be able to plead she was sexually assaulted given her profession. The fact is we have an entire marketing and entertainment industry that sexualizes children and uses sex to sell movies and products and portrays sexuality in provocative ways. Western social standards as to sexuality have widely fluctuated. In the 1960's the pendelum swung to wide open sex with indiscriminate partners and a confused female identity trying to balance being treated equally with their desire to choose not committed sex just like men. Gays and women came out so to speak as part of a general civil rebellion by blacks in the US and then all kinds of other minority groups to unfair treatment by the law. One man's LSD trip sexual encounter in a crowd with a woman at Woodstock also under the influence would not have raised an eyebrow and didn't as people openly had sex at Woodstock rolling in the mud. We went top cocaine fueled sex orgies and the Playboy mansion, Penthouse and Screw Magazine defending liberalism and sexual use of women as masterbatory objects at the same time. Gloria Steinhem had no problem providing an editorial to Playboy. You read back now the sexual standards of the 60's and 70's you can see there was a great deal of identity confusion brought on by wide spread use of drugs and the concept being promiscuous was part of the hip lifestyle. Now we see the pendelum swinging to an extreme reaction to it. Its posed as me too reactions to men being depicted and exposed as having harassed sexuality which may or may not entail actual sexual penetration by fornification once called rape. Rape was defined as penetration. Now its any act of unconsented sexual behaviour including technically touching, groping, kissing. So as we speak we have a litany of me too stories coming out and people being fired. All that said age has to be a reference. There's very few objective criteria one can use as markers to define sexual behaviour. Its one of the few. Your comment, " It would be best to find a means to measure maturity and conditional circumstances " is easy to say but try come up with a law to protect non consenting people without age as a measuring and conditional circumstance. I would suggest to you it would be impossible. I would also suggest to you there is no absolute way to measure maturity. Maturity is inherently an approximation point that varies in each individual. It could refer to physical characteristics, emotional ones, cognitive processing skills. You can have someone who is incredibly intelligent but has the maturity or physicality of a very young person making them easy to exploit. You have very emotionally aged abused children whose bodies are physically damaged. I've worked in the legal system with sexually abused children, geriatrics, women, disabled, and men. They come in all ages, ethnicities, sexual preferences and behaviours. Consenting sex between adults of equal values and power is no concern. Where it gets problematic is any relationship where there is violence or a marked imbalance in power is triggering an abusive relationship(s). The law does not have the ability or luxury to be vague and have some wide open definition that will never lead to consistent regulation. It has to define limits and age is as I said one of the few ways to do it.

Canada only relatively recently made 16 years of age the 'age of consent'. It was 14 before a few years ago now. Personally, I think ages are not the appropriate means to determine limitations. They are just politically expedient. I find it odd to watch Dr Phil repeat to a guest of 18 who sleeps with one under 17 as being unusually stupid not to recognize that the 'law' makes them a "criminal"?? The presumption is that the 'law' somehow is one passed down by nature (or God, with respect to most) as though these laws were already agreed to as ESSENTIAL by the perpetrators as much as the air they breathe. It would be best to find a means to measure maturity and conditional circumstances. The letter-of-the-law tends to get transferred into people's heads as laws of nature too easily.

Sure, there are many idiots out they who will believe people like you. They call them liberal zombies. Trump is my hero.

Trump is trying is hardest to drain the swamp. It's hard to do for Trump because Trump is surrounded by communist traitors. When the people stop listening to the liberal fake and phony lying left wing media and the traitor democrats who hate America things will get better. If that should happen American politics and America itself should end up becoming a more honest and trustworthy government. There are hundreds of millions of Americans on Trump's side, and maybe in time Trump will be able to drain that liberal/democratic swamp. Hang in there. Hey, you never know.