Leaderboard

The scare mongering continues to increase in volume and weirdness...

We just went through a period where 15 year old fast food workers could ask for your medical records

Pretty pointless if you're going to start by using the phrase "climate religious". You paint yourself as a wingnut right off the bat, and ensure that the thread is going to devolve into name calling pretty quickly.

-I've never heard of Secretary Albright promoting murdering children. -A lot of members of the US government voted for the second Gulf War. -The Afgan war was a response to the attack on the United States. It was poorly executed -The Libyan campaign was a NATO operation authorized by the UN, to create a no-fly zone over Libya. The operation was under Anglo-French command and conducted by the forces of 19 countries. I don't know why you lay the blame on American Democrats. You might be falsely accused of supporting Gaddafi. -Children die in war. It is a tragedy but it happens. President Obama's actions in this regard pale in comparison with the RCAF and RAF bombing of Dresden, causing the deaths of well over 100,000 deaths of civilians. -The recent expansion of NATO was not "pushed by the Americans, so much as the former enslaved countries of the Soviet empire begged to join NATO to avoid ever being under Russian domination again. The only war going on in the region is the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. -Bernie Sanders...who cares. -President Zelenskyy is defending the soverieignty of his country. If the US were to invade Canada, would you not want the Canadian government to defend us? -Who are Bankman-Fried?

Yeah, this: is not a Digital ID issue. However...in order for the centralized database connected to Digital ID to envelop all governmental and private entities they must establish there are evils to protect the simple-minded populace from. That's step 1. That's what this wants to do. Stop it at step 1 and Digital ID is not a problem. Apparently Mikey doesn't like that. So he's flexing his internet nanny muscles. Telling you he doesn't want you discussing it. Those arms are less impressive than you think Mikey. Large issues encourage multiple topics on internet forums all the time. Hands up. Who wants Mikey deciding which ones you're allowed to discuss?

I think Canada is still a civilized state, but there are always problems such as in dealing with change and progress. In fact just the other day I thanked god that I had the fortune of being raised in Canada, looking at the situation in the rest of the world. Canada is the best goddam country, in the world imo and that isn't just the Jack Daniels talking. .... Having said that, there is always danger and we must do as was so eloquently phrased long ago by our forefathers, to "stand on guard for thee" let that be our role on this, our native land to be the vanguard of the great Candian ideal...

No one cares about your ldiotic posts with the childish name calling here. 3rd grader name calling is NO SUBSTITUTE for making actual points. I doubt you even know what you're trying to accomplish by posting inanity and DESTROYING your credibility.

Some of us and more every day won't play boiling frog to you and yours. We're jumping out of the pot. Don't like it? We don't care.

It's interesting when you read the stories that look beneath the surface of this government's pious pronouncements to see the authoritarianism beneath. Not that surprising from a man who admires China's authoritarianism. These consultations are being marketed like they’re evidence of democracy in action, but that’s not exactly the case when you look under the hood. Previous expert consultations released in July consisted of a handpicked panel that broadly agreed with a censorship regime; further, these experts were paid for their input. In a previous round of online consultations last spring, which also pertained to media regulation, Canadian Heritage deliberately filtered out feedback from individuals who didn’t agree with the Liberals’ “National Action Plan on Combating Hate.” The feedback survey at the heart of these consultations was altered to prevent dissenters, labelled “non-allies” by one public servant, from completing the full set of questions. As has been the habit of Trudeau and his party the new online censorship laws seem primarily designed to appeal to various ethnic identity groups need for 'protection' from 'harm'. And as usual, there's the Liberal party both exaggerating the danger and presenting itself as the glowing white knight there to protect them from the evil white community they must all fear and despise. But once this law is in place how many arrests will we see? Something similar to the UK, perhaps, were thousands are arrested every year for social media comments? Well, if it helps the Liberals get more votes I suppose they figure that's more than worth the cost. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-trudeau-liberals-want-to-treat-adults-like-kids-with-online-harms-bill

I would hate to think Trudeau is the leader of Canada's defence in any serious situation.

So MANY ^LIES, so little time.... LMAO Democrats represent me and I've had a job and paid taxes for most of my life. And you STILL HAVE NO EVIDENCE of the "fraud" you and Trump CLAIM. When you have NO EVIDENCE of FRAUD, ALL YOU HAVE is the CERTIFIED VOTE COUNT. And your fantasies notwithstanding, that means JOE WAS ELECTED. LMAO

If I was spoiling for a fight I would have added that you are a mindless magachud who wrongly thinks that Trump was robbed of the last election. Or something along those lines. But I didn't. So no, I'm not.

This thread is specifically about further gov't censorship, the other thread is about digital ID. Not the same thing at all. Both topics are important enough to warrant their own discussion, don't you think?

Glad you are now so well informed let me know if you have more qusetions

Exactly. I guess you and I can each have a wing in that library of things we don't know.

Canadian demand for foreign (majority American) media has routinely thwarted any attempt by government to inhibit free speech and speech platforms. One only needs to review the history of print, radio, television, satellite and CATV content demand by Canadian consumers to see an identical trend for internet platforms and social media applications. Even China has gotten in on the fun (TikTok)...in Canada. The CRTC and other government regulatory agents of the Crown will not be able to stem the flow of ideas from across the border...never has achieved this objective. Canadian consumption habits will undermine any attempts to do so. Only the appearance of controlling the vertical and horizontal speech landscape is possible. Quebec's language handcuffs are a lesson in such futility. Years ago on this forum, we debated CanCon measures at length, only to watch foreign media continue to dominate Canadian bandwidth. Even the CRTC demands that CATV systems carry American 4+1 network content, synced by time zone to U.S. cities ! 70% of Canadian internet traffic goes through U.S. infrastructure...government won't stop that either.

It’s pathetic for Albright to blame Saddam Hussein. No one was forcing the U.S. to impose the sanctions. Of course Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, but that doesn’t exonerate all the terrible things we did to the Iraqi people.

The opening speaker is an unmitigated supporter of diversity statements, with no objective reasoning provided. Jonathan Haidt is a general skeptic and although his opposition was on a principle level, it made sense intellectually. There was an example from Harvard, and from the various State Governments who are banning ideas as well as a general overview at the end.

I added it to the list, and in the next few days will listen to it. I seen is about 30 minutes. Is good you warned about the beginning because I don't tend to keep listening if the first few minutes start by derailing.

What culture? The Trudeau government says we have no culture. Trudeau himself rather proudly said we had no common identity. The CRTC has been around for decades. How's that protection going so far? I don't see many signs of it. Unless you think watching American network news carried by CTV, CBC and Global with occasional local voiceovers is can-con. Does CTV even have any Canadian shows other than news and sports? Who here watches a lot of Canadian TV shows? What are they? Putting in place a complicated bureaucratic formula that requires small web producers and developers to fill out and file forms in order to qualify as Canadian is just so incredibly bureaucratically Canadian it would likely make other countries with successful home-grown media laugh uproariously. Justin Bieber? Nope, he doesn't qualify! Margaret Atwood? Nope! Not her either!

From my understanding of past discussions (correct me if I'm wrong Michael), Michael wants mass surveillance of everyone and to have it publicly accessible to everyone. Michael is big on transparency, not big on privacy or rights like warrants for search and seizure. Michael likes public order, and compliance to authority.

And your Net Nannying is getting tedious. Wrong-speakers being arrested for saying the wrong thing will be moved to the internet soon then quietly managed and arrested as offences when nobody is looking. It's already happening without a digital ID in the UK. Imagine when they get one. Using the Christian speech as wrong-think example, we saw 3 more examples in Alberta during the scamdemic. Go ahead, ask for the cite. We both know you'll be watching video of an Alberta reverend being pulled out of his car into a waiting police car. These are the kinds of things Digital ID will facilitate. It won't be so messy and much broader is the only difference That's the point you continue to pretend you don't get. Others see it though, no matter how much you think you can net nanny them away from believing their lying eyes.

1. Here's the key - there is no reality, only perspective. In all things, there is no tree falling in the forest, there is a perception - aural or visual - of a tree. As such, you can only strive for more perspectives, never achieving them. ---- Here's the best podcast I have heard on this topic recently, from the heart of economic Liberalism: https://www.economist.com/podcasts/2023/02/03/are-diversity-statements-a-threat-to-academic-freedom Note - The podcast starts badly and gets much better. The summary at the end is short, but highlights some important points: -This is a concern but hard to say how much of one -Bureaucratization of "Diversity" into an HR-style bullet point will likely dilute its radical-ness Let me know your thoughts. Unlike most on here, I am interested.

My contention is that you are incredibly STUPID, and you lack the intelligence to debate an issue like an adult. I never said it's everyone's fault but the policeman. I was responding to an ACCURATE statement that bad kids everywhere are the result of bad parenting. You're STUPID because your parents never made you go to school. At some point, after the kid leaves home he/she/it becomes responsible for his/her/its actions. Just shut the fck up. You don't have the intelligence to discuss any of this. You're just a child.

I have credibility with the educated posters here. The Downs Syndrome crowd you run with don't even know what day it is.

This was one of those "You can put on your war stockings and pretend that you went silverback vs the balloon because we need another sovereign country to talk tough about balloon-shooting." It's a win/win for Biden and the turd, and the MSM will hail it as a major victory no matter what. If Trump shot down those balloons it would be called an act of nuclear aggression against our trading partners, and the balloons would be called "The beloved freedom symbols of the Chinese people."

Not spamming or crossposting, just didn't see any attempts at an answer. At which point down this road, quasi near democracy becomes a non democracy? Where is the line at which good experts become Xi-style handpicked experts? Should we be worried already - or when?

I believe the CRTC is a force for good when it comes to encouraging Can-con. We need to protect our culture from American domination. We simply don't have the money or population to compete with the US 1-to-1. This is a reasonable limit to free speech with broadcasting. Foreign companies/artists do not have a right to unlimited broadcasting in Canada. Things illegal put online should be illegal regardless of publishing format. Serious threats of violence etc. I don't trust the Trudeau gov, they have shown they have some authoritarian-type leanings in terms of population control and mass surveillance. But its possible the bill is fine, we need to see the details.

I'm confused. The topic you're referring to seems to be about a digital ID for healthcare and government services. This one is about internet censorship.

You don’t read posts. The answers are in my prior posts and I’m not repeating myself. If you don’t think my posts sufficiently answer your questions, that’s fine. I generally don’t agree with your views, which is fine.

So is universal access to health care - but nobody is forcing you to do so.

When it’s digital it’s much more accessible. Basically all of your personal data is stored digitally and accessible by decree. We already learned from Snowden that the public is under surveillance, but we at least have the pretence of “no search and seizure without a warrant” in a court of law. When that information is available at the speed of light from the comfort of someone’s laptop, you’re asking for abuse. We already know that “emergency powers” and “national security threat” give a pass to such surveillance. We also know that if security services want to skirt due process, for example using surveillance without a warrant, they can find the evidence and use it retroactively. We saw retroactive crime law implemented during the pandemic. People who legally donated to a protest were suddenly deemed to be engaged in criminal activities (and therefore had their money seized) for doing something that wasn’t a crime at the time they did it (making a donation). The sheer willful ignorance and lack of indignation among people in positions of authority and supposedly intelligent people, including on this forum, was incredible to watch. The take away from history is that we must protect individual rights, including the right to privacy. That’s why we have laws and a constitution. That’s the theory anyway. I don’t think our rights are protected enough. Why would we give another inch of access to personal information to the powers that be? You know it only takes a crisis for government to justify further infringements to privacy and individual rights.

This is no laughing matter. Remember syringe-happy exsperts ready to send you to bimonthly rounds of experimental injections with entirely unknown long-term outcome? Government pays to unknown, unelected, handpicked, lacking any democratic transparency or accountability obscure "experts" to justify what it wants to do and out of your pocket. Is it a pattern already? How worried should we be? Xi can do that as easily.

Sure it exists. Try keeping up.

Pretty much ALL violent crime (in and out of the blue suit) is the product of bad parenting.

It's interesting to learn how these so called 'expert consultation panels' are selected. Instead of 'handpicked, filtered out, paid for, and those who broadly agree with the consorship regime', we might be far better off selecting ordinary folks at random from a telephone directory... "I am obliged to confess that I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University. Not, heaven knows, because I hold lightly the brainpower or knowledge or generosity or even the affability of the Harvard faculty: but because I greatly fear intellectual arrogance, and that is a distinguishing characteristic of the university which refuses to accept any common premise." ..... William F. Buckley

I’m talking about you trying to apply logic. Where none exists. Read more slowly.

What's even richer is that you're one of the Canadian schmucks that believe what you're told by the Russian state media. 🤡 Doesn't count? What on Earth are you talking about??

We get played every election cycle, so I wouldn’t be surprised. Hope you are doing well, btw!

This is one of the main reasons I can no longer be a liberal. When naive and ignorant leaders continue to say how unfair, racist, and colonial our country has been (even though evidence illustrates how exceptionally progressive Canada has been relative to almost every other country and tribe), after a while people believe it. We start pretending that Indigenous, blacks, and most racialized and ethnic groups never invaded, killed, kept slaves, or traded them. In Canada there were Indigenous groups that behaved far worse than the Canadian government. The reward for suppressing some facts and exaggerating others is new forms of injustice. That’s why Trudeau has been irresponsible and helped foment the division and new forms of racism we see today. He was naive to think that his rhetoric wouldn’t be used for nefarious purposes. He’s not alone among western leaders. The problem too is that pointing out Trump’s antics made it easier for Liberals and Democrats to justify their rhetoric. The focus on race is making us come apart in a country that didn’t have a lot of racial division just five years ago. Much of what’s happening is the spillover effect from George Floyd’s death in the US, a country with a much more brutal history with race that is today one of the most accepting countries from a policy perspective. So if in Canada we don’t have racist policies in government or organizations, what we’re really talking about is improving people’s attitudes towards groups outside their in-groups. What’s going to do that? Certainly not trying to make the people who are alive today who happen to be a certain colour feel guilty or like bad people. Taking or destroying their property won’t do it either. Right now the only racist policies I know of are the Indian Act (which the government wants changed but most Indigenous want to keep) and these new “racialized-only” job postings and unfair treatment of people who are accused of racism without any evidence and who are mistreated by their employers on the basis of such false accusations, even after investigations dismiss the accusations, as in the TDSB. Actually some of the content of mandatory equity training that is sweeping across organizations is also an example of systematic racism because it makes value judgments about racial groups such as, “White people are fragile” and “White people are privileged” or “Black people are oppressed.” Clearly some white people are not privileged and some black people are. Generalizing about all people who happen to be a certain colour is racism.

Your problem is, you are applying logic to various bodies of government. Logic doesn’t apply there, there are too many agendas.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/seven-years-after-vowing-not-to-purchase-f-35-jets-liberals-are-now-buying-them

I'm not worried, our Prime Minister Cry-Cry McFancysocks will protect us from the massive Chinese war-machine!

US F-22's shot down the balloon that was traveling over the Yukon (Canadian airspace). This is so embarrassing. We can't even defend our own airspace against a balloon without America's help. IT'S A BALLOON! "I ordered the take down of an unidentified object that violated Canadian airspace. [NORAD] shot down the object over the Yukon. Canadian and U.S. aircraft were scrambled, and a U.S. F-22 successfully fired at the object," Trudeau said in a statement on Twitter.

No, Biden phoned him and told him what was going to happen. Lol

Amazon testing delivery drones.

Most of the countries in the thread title were victims of regime change. Suffered directly or indirectly at the hands of the US. Libya and Iraq had moved away from the US petrodollar. Yes I know the fact check BS on that. Funny thing, now Russia is in their cross hairs, and they’ve moved away from the petrodollar too. Weird, eh?

Sorry you missed the bulletin herb. Those "running dog lackeys of the wall street imperialists?".... They flipped. They're with you and yours now. And did you forget so soon how you needed to show ID to be allowed certain societal amenities during Covid. Actually you get a pass on that one because they don't have societal amenities in Fort St. Jimmy. No I'm not talking about indoor toilets. But do you guys have a movie theatre yet? See, down here if you wanted to do anything social you needed to show ID. But you do have the internet up there. Surely you've heard of China's Social Credit score. How about ESG? Heard about that one? It's a score that allows the money managers at the top (Wall street, for instance) to deem whether or not their fellows are performing up to snuff with their obeisance to leftist dogma. Environmental, Societal, and willingness to be Governed by excessive regulations. ESG. Some says it's a slippery slope to the social credit system China has. But if we land there, they'll need a central data base. Do you know what they'll need to connect it to? Digital ID.

Not a bit of it. But that's the clear point of this and similar exercises. This sort of thing is why you have people saying we shouldn't celebrate Canada Day, why statues are pulled down and all references to Canada's history are replete with whiny complaints about how bad our people were. We bring in half a million immigrants a year. We expect them to want to integrate and be a part of the Canadian family, and then we go on endlessly about what a shit family it is, what a shit country it is, and how everything in our country was horrible. And yes, it does work, especially on younger people who are indoctrinated in this garbage by their teachers.

Why are you continuing to manipulate the conversation? I breathe mathematics, brother. The issue is not with the 84.5 %, the issue is with your logic, how you were presenting your idea that "is impossible for 95% of the truckers to be vaccinated because only 84.5 % of Canadians are." Is not impossible as you can see through this: 95 % of truckers < 84.5 % Canadians. Anyhow, is clear with you, you have a child at home, you even said that, that you love very much, like every parent and is sensitive when it comes to vaccination. Is the only explanation I could see on how you take all information to fit one narrative. I never understood this idea of North Americans switching sport teams as socks. It seems governments applies to the same principle? Once you don't like a man, is not a Canadian government anymore? So better to support a Donald Trump of America which has no status currently? I don't agree with this logic.