Leaderboard

The ongoing protests in BC, Ontario and elsewhere show the depths of ignorance, stupidity and vapid self-indulgence we've come to expect from much of the activist and progressive populations, along with the sheer bloody cowardice of our governments. Recall, the pipeline being protested was signed off on by the elected chiefs and band councils of the tribes in the area. The 'hereditary' chiefs tried to get elected in opposition to the pipeline, and failed. From which we can determine the natives in the area didn't care what they had to say and wanted the pipeline and the money and jobs that would bring. No matter. A chance to protest pipelines?! Progressives aren't gonna miss that if they have the slightest excuse! Watch them standing their, chins elevated, filled with the sense of righteous self-granted nobility and arrogance you only see from those with an enormous regard for themselves. They're 'standing with the natives'! Well, not the actual natives, just the 'hereditary chiefs', who should be in charge, you know! This democracy stuff was imposed by colonialism (yes, they say this. The bunch sitting on the rail tracks are much the same. Some of them are Mohawks, Many aren't. The Mohawk chief says he didn't authorize any protest and neither did the band council. No matter. The OPP is standing around shaking in terror at the thought of having to say "Boo' to a native. Meanwhile in Vancouver, the police arrested angry people trying to pull down the barricades natives and their far left allies erected in the middle of the road. Arrest the protestors? Oh no! The horror! The horror! Run away! Run away! (that seems to be the motto of both Canada's governments and its police departments whenever native protesters show up). I'm reminded of a movie called Soylent Green, a cult hit. In one of the scenes, these huge garbage trucks with their scoopers on the ground in front of them move into protesting crowds, scoop them up and dump them into the back of their trucks, to be carted out and processed as food. Excellent idea! I'm sure they'd all be delighted at being recycled into dog food. They're all environmentalists, after all. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/stephen-ledrew-canada-should-enforce-the-law-with-wetsuweten-anti-pipeline-protests?video_autoplay=true

This is why you are a failed product of our democratic system of discussion. You don't have the option to 'disagree' with facts. You are the result of people having too much choice. Your belief that you can literally choose anything has given you the ego of a god.

Do you have any idea of the process to amend the constitution? He literally has no chance to do that. Look it up.

You live in a province and are among a people who have implemented any number of laws, some of them clearly unconstitutional, in order to fight against diversity. So don't give me any crap about your love of diversity. As for 'creating wealth' if diversity did that then Africa would be the richest place on Earth. Diversity does not create wealth, it creates disunity. Quebec has been behind most of our disunity and has been a have-not province my entire life, sucking on the federal teat. Getting rid of it would make the rest of us richer and more united.

In regards to your first paragraph let me start with this pictorial aid: In specific regard to your statement: "He despises me because I dare to question or challenge anything that has to do with Judaism or Israel." To clarify In fact have contempt for your words not because you question anything to do with Judaism or Israel but because you use the pretext of "questioning" Judaism and Israel to express hateful stereotypes of both as evidenced by your continuous comments including this one in your latest response, "He won't even answer me when I only asked him as to why does he think that Jews are so despised these days or why did Hitler appear to despise them also. Simple questions, don't you think?" When you have asked such questions in previous posts I responded to them directly as I do now and stated they presuppose there are good reasons to hate Jews and given in past responses when you raised these questions you did so in the context of first stating there are good reasons to hate Jews and Hitler and others have/had good reason to hate Jews I responded by saying your questions were rhetorical, i.e., statements. You don't care for an answer-you are in fact stating yet again you have good reason to hate Jews. The key is your use of the word "hate" in your questions. You asked: "Can you say for sure that those Palestinian camps do exist for the sole purpose of fomenting hatred towards Jews? " What I can say is it is public record is that the Arab league stated it would imprison Palestinians in camps after its armies were unable to prevent an Israeli state in 1949 and hold them in those camps as a reminder to the world that until they undo the state of Israel they would keep Palestinians hostages in those camps. That is an historic fact just as it is historic fact that It was the Arab League who imprisoned Palestinians and it was and remains Arab League nations that refused and refuse to take in any Palestinians as citizens even though they started the war that displaced them and they were th ones to tell them to leave the area until they could exterminate all the Jews. Still to this day with the exception of one country Jordan, which declared itself a Jewish free Palestinian state and offered immediate citizenship to Palestinians no Arab League country takes in Palestinians as citizens while those Palestinian Muslims who chose to stay in Israel do not wisht o leave or give up their citizenship and have access to the same hospitals, government services and legal rights as any non Mulsim Israei which is the exact opposite of what has happened to those Jews still living in Muslim states. Your comment, "Those camps exist because the Palestinians have always been there." is nonsensical. The camps never existed until they were created by the Arab League. In fact the Gaza strip was created as an open air prisoner by Nasser who ridiculed Palestinians and said they would never be allowed in Egypt. As for " always being there", Jewish, Christian and Muslim people have been in the Arabian peninsula for thousands of years. Historically Christians and Muslims proceeded Jews. People descended from people of the Arabian peninsula were called Arabs, short for Arabian Peninsula people and so they could have been of any religion. The descendants of these people today are most likely to be Beduins or those descended from the semites which would be Jews or some people today who could be Christian or Muslim. In fact most Christian and Muslims identifying themselves as Palestinian today are not-they are descended from Muslims or Christians who moved to the West Bank or Gaza when the British in the 20's and after no different than Jews who moved to Palestine in that era. The term Palestine is a Greek term and no it was never always there it only became called that as a geographic zone by Greeks and then Romans when they coined the phrase as a geographic term not as a national or state term. It referred to a geographic area nothing else. It only became used to describe a people without a country by Arafat after the black Sabbath uprising and Arafat failed to kill King Hussein and seize Jordan and was exiled to Tunisia. Until then Arafat, the Arab League and all Palestinian nationalists ridiculed the concept of a Palestinian being a national identity. So it is in fact a recent political term/ As for criticizing Israeli state policies as to settlements on the West bank or engaging in policies that may exasperate relations between Palestinians and Israelis, no one is more of a critical of that, then ironically JEWISH Israelis and their press. The fact someone challenges Israeli state policies is not the issue-using that as a platform or pretext to then go on to justify hating all Israelis for existing as Israelis and all Jews for existing as Jews is what is challenged. You asked this question: "My own government allows and tolerates hate rallies against my nationalist people. We are not allowed to express our opinions and points of view in public. If Jews are targets today, then I will ask you the same question then? Why is this so? " First off as long as you keep using ambiguous terms like "nationalist people" to hide your true identity by deliberately removing the word white you simply show how you hide your agenda and make a mockery of your attempts to pose as a victrim of political discrimination. Next, and as you are well aware, if a Jew, a Muslim, a Christian, a person with pale or dark skin in Canada wants to march and express their opinions, subject to municipal by-laws requiring permits for traffic control and fire and emergency safety they are allowed as this is a guaranteed freedom under the Charter of Rights. However if anyone in Canada wishes to march and express terminology that defines identified people as inferior or superior based on skin colour or religion as your "nationalist people" have done, they can depending on the context of their words, cross the line and engage in hate speech which is a criminal offence. Don't pretend you don't know the difference or why neo Nazis can't express hatred. In regards to Trump being pro-Israel it doesn't mean as a Jew or a Zionist I agree with all his policies and won't criticize him. He also in the last election welcomed the support of some very vile white supremacist organizations and many of his words to this day appeal to them. Anyone not just Jews including Republicans worry about that: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/who-does-trumps-white-identity-politics-reach/595189/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-campaign-sees-political-advantage-in-a-divisive-appeal-to-working-class-white-voters/2019/07/26/39234f00-aef1-11e9-8e77-03b30bc29f64_story.html https://www.newsweek.com/trump-racism-calculated-impulsive-1452337 Finally as for your stating the Democrats have always been "somewhat anti-Israel" this is a meaningless statement. t Eleanor Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Lyndon Baines Johnson and Bill Clinton to name a few from the past as well as many today are oppen supporters of Israel. In fact many US elected representatives Republican and Democrat are and also openly challenge Israeli foreign policies and certain trade policies and support a second Palestinian state on the West Bank. That doesn't make them anti Israel, it just means they are looking out for American interests. That is their mandate.