Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/21/2023 in all areas

  1. The world was in the grip of the Cold War in 1952 when a nuclear reactor began melting down. That reactor, located at Chalk River Laboratories in Ontario, had suffered an explosion on Dec. 12. Radioactive material had escaped into the atmosphere, and millions of gallons of radioactive water flooded into the reactor’s basement. Thankfully, no one was injured, but the Canadians needed help to disassemble the reactor’s damaged core. The United States sent 28-year-old Jimmy Carter. In 1952, Carter was selected to join an elite team to help develop the Navy’s first nuclear submarines. Once he had trained his crew and the submarine was constructed, Carter was to be the commanding officer of the USS Seawolf. Then the partial meltdown happened, and Lt. Carter was one of the few people on the planet authorized to go inside a nuclear reactor. Carter and his two dozen men were sent to Canada to help, along with other Canadian and American service members. Because of the intensity of radiation, a human could spend only 90 seconds in the damaged core, even while wearing protective gear. First, they constructed an exact duplicate of the reactor nearby. Then they practiced and practiced, dashing into the duplicate “to be sure we had the correct tools and knew exactly how to use them,” Carter wrote. Each time one of his men managed to unscrew a bolt, the same bolt would be removed from the duplicate, and the next man would prep for the next step. Eventually, it was Carter’s turn. He was in a team of three. “Outfitted with white protective clothes, we descended into the reactor and worked frantically for our allotted time,” he wrote. In one minute and 29 seconds, Carter had absorbed the maximum amount of radiation a human can withstand in a year. The mission was successful. The damaged core was removed. Within two years, it had been rebuilt and was back up and running. For several months afterward, Carter and his crew submitted fecal and urine samples to test for radioactivity. https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2023/02/20/jimmy-carter-nuclear-reactor-navy/
    2 points
  2. Some of the takeaways: This is unchanged since the January poll The libs are falling hard in quebec. It's a close race in ontario but the CPC is still ahead. Aside from the occasional blip right around an announcement the liberals are continuing to stay in pretty negative territory. The polling suggests that the CPC would win a strong minority. It's not unusual for the incumbent to take a bit of a dip in the middle of a term but it does look like there's a lot of fatigue for the liberal brand and more interesting the NDP are also down, and there's not likely a lot of votes to steal from them. Obviously with 3 years to go (theoretically) anything can change but it's looking like the cpc will be in a strong position to take the next one. The question will be can they do a majority? PP will have to continue to build on his successes so far and break into the older voting block that so far hasn't been as strong for him
    2 points
  3. Thanks for admitting that it is INVESTORS who are demanding increased profits OVER PRODUCTION. From YOUR CITE: And it's working because the major oil companies have reported RECORD PROFITS. So much for blaming Biden, sorry.
    2 points
  4. 2 points
  5. Well I am not surprised ruling Liberal falling behind so much. With persistent high inflation, housing crisis when even high incomer can't afford renting an average home and with rising interest rates making buying one out of reach for majority even top high incomers and essentials like food prices going through the ceiling. I am surprised they still get 29% of voters!!!.
    2 points
  6. I'm sure that's true. You have no compunction about lying, so why would you feel the need to correct those lies? I do not have to come to terms with your conspiracy theory. I'll stick to the facts, thanks.
    2 points
  7. That was a quick backtrack. I am shocked to my core! If one refuses to be corrected when called out, it's no longer a mistake. It's a lie. Not to mention the sad attempts to paper over the false claim with non-supporting links. Nevertheless, now that you've acknowledged a distinction between lying and being mistaken, I'll look forward to watching you apply that to other scenarios. Maybe I'll quote you on it. ?
    2 points
  8. Looks like the whole 'Interference" thing was nonsense at this point. No sign of the emails, no witnesses, and the newspapers have admitted they didn't see any of that before posting the story either. Which is HORRIBLE journalism, it's one thing to protect a source, but if you do you have to be pretty damn sure the source is accurate and at least verify things like these emails exist. This isn't the first time we've seen allegations from the CBC which turned out to be false and unsubstantiated.
    2 points
  9. https://www.yahoo.com/news/texas-governor-universities-cannot-diversity-190000301.html Texas Governor: Universities Cannot Use Diversity, Equity or Inclusion in Hiring Daniel Perez Mon, February 20, 2023 at 2:00 PM EST Inclusive and equitable institutions that use diversity, equity and inclusion in their hiring benefit everyone, and a recent directive from the Texas governor saying otherwise is “grossly misconstruing” federal anti-discrimination law, a higher education diversity official said. Paulette Granberry Russell, president of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, came out strongly against a Feb. 4 directive from the office of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott that called it illegal for state agencies and public universities to use diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in hiring decisions. In a directive, Abbott’s office stated that DEI has been used in recent years to favor some demographic groups “to the detriment of others.” The directive states that employment decisions should be based on merit without additional DEI consideration. Points to ponder: 1. "Diversity, equity and inclusion" are just code words for RACISM. PERIOD. And they VIOLATE the Civil Rights Act. 2. This was Dr. King's dream: https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. So far, Texas has reached that dream, at least in the law.
    1 point
  10. Do I have to know, exactly? Of course not, it's different for different holes, genius. Ask yourself: how much time does it take to cut a hole with a grinder that's big enough for someone to go through? How fast can people go through that hole? How long does it stay open? When people go to a section of wall, thinking they'll get through, but border patrol appears and stops them, how far do they have to walk & how long do they have to wait before they can cross? It can get really discouraging, right? Discouraging, hmmmmm, that sound like a good idea. If you want less people to cross, maybe stop encouraging them and making it easy.
    1 point
  11. Which is what everyone does. Just as everyone wants an SUV because they're more useful. And the inherent problems with hybrids can and will be solved, look at Mazda's idea of an updated rotary engine that runs at a steady RPM for best mileage and least pollution. That will take care of people with only one car, which believe it or not is a minority. There's your range problem gone a huge reduction in fuel and CO2, tie in a little BEV putt putt in your 2 car garage and the family's all set. And at risk of 1,000 pages of excuses not to, Toyota and Honda are investing billions on FUEL CELL vehicles. Forge ahead with stories of the future with cars burning on every corner and vehicles exploding like the Hindenburg...
    1 point
  12. No, it's the definition of insurance policy. Milk them for as much as you can and deny them as much as you can.
    1 point
  13. No, I think the FBI did "play a role" but it wasn't part of any malevolent plot. Rather it was doing due diligence to prep platform owners for a likely round of interference, as the Russians were actively interfering in both 2016 and 2020. The FBI clearly spiked the Clinton campaign in the last weeks of the 2016 election with half-baked information that turned out to be nothing. They didn't do it out of explicit political bias, but rather it was a failure of media savvy. They were rightly criticized. They learned the lesson and tried to avoid a repeat performance. You want to spin that to be something sinister because this time around they didn't spike the Democratic candidate. As if the FBI under Obama was Republican in 2016 and the FBI under Trump magically flipped to be Democratic in 2020. It's absurd, but you seem to believe it instead of the plausible and practical explanations. Moreover, you want to say that they lied about it, but you can't produce any evidence that they did anything other than warn platforms about what might be coming. And the platforms were equally--perhaps more--sensitive to the ways that they were used against the American people in 2016 and they acted accordingly. Do you know how long the laptop story was "banned" from Twitter? About 2 days. BFD. If you don't think some basic due diligence is merited before giving a story like that a megaphone that could sway a presidential election, you can fark right off.
    1 point
  14. You would have to fight that on a riding by riding basis and prove that it is LIKELY that the interference changed the outcome - which is a fairly high legal bar to attain. And the best you could hope for is that riding would have a byelection. But it's REALLY hard to get there. What we would be better served with is recall options - they're ALMOST useless at actually recalling people but in cases like this they may well work and at least they're a shot across the bow to put them on notice people are watching.
    1 point
  15. I guess your still under the illusion that every one but Donald is to blame for Donald's loss. Priceless.
    1 point
  16. LILLEY: Trudeau deals with China's alleged election tinkering by hunting whistleblower (msn.com) Yet, 29% of voters still support him? Must be wacked out on drugs.
    1 point
  17. The broad strokes are ubiquitous, and the fact that even places like China base their legal systems on civil (Roman) law tells you how deeply "Christian" it all is. We're not talking about the individual laws themselves. We're talking about the "morality" behind them. Your example hurts your point more than helps it, considering Canadian and US legal systems come from basically the exact same place. What's the argument? That Canada is less biblical, or something? The point was that folks already knew these things were wrong, and formal legal systems were organized to enforce laws around them long before Jesus walked the Earth or Christian morality was ever a thing. Christianity, in many instances, was actually a step backwards for human rights and law, particularly with women and their status post-Rome.
    1 point
  18. There are conservative posters on this forum?
    1 point
  19. So the NBA held its all star game the other night. And they apparently consulted some Canadians about who to get to sing the Canadian anthem. Now, the thing about Canada's media and artists are they've taken their cues from academics. Anti-patriotism is fashionable. They chose some nobody who's black because, after all it's 'black history month' in Canada. Who then went on to shit on Canada in front of tens of millions of American viewers. Shitting on Canada gets you praised for your bravery and honesty by the rest of the mostly talentless welfare artists of Canada's cancon. So I'm quite certain she'll be fawned over and praised and the politicians won't dare say a word of criticism - particularly since she'll hold up the race shield. Now, it's her right to be a shrill, Canada-hating c*nt. This is a free country, after all. And none of the laws the Liberals are considering to control offensive or hateful speech will ever challenge people who deliberately set out to offend large groups of people who aren't members of preferred identity groups. But this talentless, Canada-hating sow is the child of immigrants we allowed to come and stay here from Jamaica. So it seems to me if she doesn't want to be dismissed as a sanctimonious hypocrite she should stop being a colonizing occupier of native land and leave. Wouldn't that make sense? She and her parents and her siblings should pack up, leave whatever land they might own here to the natives, and go back to the shithole they came from. They've all still got Jamaican citizenship, after all. Most Canadians don't have that option. They do. But they've decided to stay here and occupy the natives' land. While shitting on Canada in front of American audiences.
    1 point
  20. Yeaaaah, no. In forty years it will be the millennials' turn to be sneered at as "old' and "bigoted' by whatever ignorant rabble are young at the time.
    1 point
  21. Not really. I mean, he did at least try to address the issue and points to him for that. But - it turns out there's a THIRD way to balance the budget - hand some one else the bill. Which is largely what he did - he downloaded costs to the provinces and kept the money he should have transferred. I believe funding for health care for example went as low as 18 percent. He downloaded a bunch of other costs as well. It's not 'leadership' or 'courageous' at all to simply say 'I can't pay this... ummm... here, you pay it" The rest of his money came in the end from robbing the EI accounts. He took 70 BILLION dollars in money that had been collected on behalf of tax payers for a specific purpose and stole it to use for his budget. Literally more than all his 'surpluses' combined. Theft of the people's money isn't 'leadership' either. Even if you can get away with it legally. Other than that - we paid the deficit down thanks to the GST and massive trade surplus the Free Trade agreement created. Both of which he promised to scrap and both of which he kept. THat was someone else's leadership. Chretien did do a few noteworthy things and you can't blow off his achievements entirely, but your portrayal of his debt fighting is not accurate nor warranted. He did not beat the problem by leadership.
    1 point
  22. At the risk of being hated by both sides.... I feel like both sides in this argument are making some good points (and perhaps overhyping some). But - isn't the solution then to look at plug in hybrids? Environmentally you get about 90 percent of the benefits of electric vehicles with hybrids, depending on where you are perhaps more. You don't need to worry about massive electric infrastructure changes. That problem is bigger than people think, especially for those in condos or townhouses (which is a very sizeable portion of the public these days and growing). You need about a quarter of the batteries, so you are putting less strain on a limited resource giving more time for the next gen of batteries to be born. And the vehicles can still operate with the batteries at low capacity from age so there's less 'urgency' to replace them. They can still do long range road trips without having dedicated charging stations everywhere. It seems like for those who are proponents of EV's, Maxing out this tech until battery and electrification issues are resolved is really the best of both worlds. I mean - a sizeable hunk of the country still burns fossil fuels to produce electricity in the first place so until we beat that i'm not sure the gain for FULL ev's is worth the pain. I shall now put on my helmet and body armour and await your replies.
    1 point
  23. My dog can't tell the difference between political parties. Everyone smarter than him can. However, if you are one of those poor unfortunates who feel there's no difference between any of the parties, your solution isn't how you vote, it's what you do between votes. Voting is the final (and in some ways least important) part of the democratic process. There's a LOT of work we're supposed to be dong as voters (or even non voters ) before that which is critical. For example, get involved with your local riding association. Pick a good candidate to run for your riding and work with them to help set policy. You'd be amazed at how much influence a person can have at the riding level, and that can translate directly to your concerns being expressed in caucus. Attend the Policy Conventions - parties do take policy conventions very seriously and you can propose policy to vote on for the convention, you can go and vote on policy that's been proposed, and have important discussions with others within the party to share ideas. They matter a lot. Help pick a good leader. Not always the easiest thing to do but do your best and try to select someone who's going to be able to get the job done. And be useful at election time - volunteer, scruitineer, help with GOTV duties. People remember the volunteers - they are who gets you elected. If you're just sitting back and waiting to vote for whomever everyone ELSE has selected without any input from you, then you're really not doing your job in a democracy, and you can't be surprised when you don't get the results you want.
    1 point
  24. By God you are a profoundly stupid person
    1 point
  25. This is clearly evidence that the West must do whatever it can to appease Putin and stave off Nuclear War. That always works with these guys right? ?
    1 point
  26. Agreed, as a Navy soldier, Carter did the right thing. As President, Carter empowered Islamofascism, empowered the SOVIET UNION to march into Afghanistan, caused gasoline prices to skyrocket and further fueled INFLATION. And because of KKKlinton, Obama, and Unelected Joe, we can no longer say Carter was the worst president of all time.
    1 point
  27. You've got it, great pic! And by the way that thing, "voting" isn't only a word, thoughtless staple. If you cared to think even for a minute what it could mean, things could have been very different. But no such luck with that species... oh well just the evolution's business.
    1 point
  28. China will rig the next election on behalf of Trudeau anyway
    1 point
  29. Sigh...OK. Obviously you're either a complete plank, or just a measly little operative. I understand now. Which skirt will you cower behind once The Rona skirt is gone?
    1 point
  30. Holy crap. It's almost a full year old, so the production numbers are old/smaller, but otherwise you posted an article saying *exactly* what I've told you a half dozen times. When demand cratered in the pandemic sites were closed, companies went out of business, workers left the industry, and that it takes time to bring production back online, so it's lagging demand. It also says that the oil companies have a crap ton of permits they are developing, also not instant. Also, as in our past conversations, what it does not mention is even a single action Biden has actually taken that is holding back production or would prevent the oil companies from meeting demand. Indeed it acknowledges that production has gone up rapidly. Oh, also doesn't touch on global market pricing, but perhaps that is out of scope. It's a short article. Anybody curious about the issue should read.
    1 point
  31. @WestCanMan - She's right. With a grinder, about 10 packs of disks and a couple days...or with an acetylene torch...or perhaps a grenade or 2. You know...walls don't work...
    1 point
  32. Just to be clear - it sounds like your argument is that because there's a couple of laws (literally 2) that you feel were biblically based that you don't like, this somehow means that all laws that may descend from biblical belief are wrong. Murder is a biblical no no. Are you suggesting we should allow it? Pretty sure perjury is too, quite a few others i can think of. Unless you can demonstrate that the majority of laws that come from religious morality are bad, you can't dismiss them just because there's a couple you don't like. The fact is that we generally run into trouble when we try to base our laws entirely on morality rather than people's rights anyway, but that's another subject. ROFLMAO - you think we don't have 'Blasphemy" laws that punish speech currently? LOL! And the ndp are suggesting we should add to that with making it a criminal offense to dare question the use of the term 'genocide' with regards to the first nations We absolutely see that all the time right now, we've just changed the 'religion' involved. We do not live in an era of free speech. You can pay a very heavy price for saying something against the dogma of the day.
    1 point
  33. Australian political freedom fighter Simeon Boikov (Aussie Cossack) made the right choice seeking refuge in the Russian Consulate - unlike the unfortunate Julian Assange. Political Aussie Cossack has been a guest of the Russian Government since December 13th 2022. Police have tried every tactic in the book to unlawfully arrest him. Police tried to negotiate as huge crowds of supporters gathered outside the consulate's walls. The mass was shouting: "Free Aussie Cossack, Free Julian Assange. Both Aussie Cossack and Julian Assange are fighting for our freedoms from tyranny of Mammon Satanists".
    1 point
  34. I just posted this in the trickle thread. It took 2 years for them to admit they were never tested for transmission. They are only now admitting that natural immunity is stronger. How long do you think it will take before they admit they were never tested for safety or efficacy either?
    1 point
  35. Liberal MP Housefather argues on Feb. 16 at #PACP committee that MPs should have to sign non-disclosure agreements to see contracts with vax companies. At the same time provides one of the core reasons why some people chose not to get the shot. Shorter testing < liability. This is related to a motion tabled by Bloc MP Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné requesting the contracts. Pfizer got Slovenia to acknowledge that safety & efficacy of the was not currently known. We can assume Pfizer got Canada to acknowledge the same thing. In which case, Health Canada has got a huge problem on its hands for its “safe and effective” claims. d76942_5af19ff7389d405585ae0c9db50eb306.pdf (usrfiles.com) Albania's contracts are the same: Albanian Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine contract - DocumentCloud Likely that the redactions in Canada's contracts involved the same claims of "no safety and efficacy information". Yet that is NOT what Canadians were told - the were told 100% safe and 95% efficacy. The public was told the shot was approved with full statistical data to back up claims. Lies. All lies. Canada releases redacted versions of COVID-19 vaccine contracts - The Globe and Mail The clinical trials were fraudulent. Wonder when we will see this on a headline? Two years from now? It took them 2 years to admit they were never tested for transmission. Forced vaccinations, mass firings, denial of informed consent = crimes against humanity.
    1 point
  36. Yes you heard that right... they had to sign NDAs on the vaccine negotiations because the vaccine didn't go thru normal testing lol.
    1 point
  37. It's cute that you have an opinion. Come back when you have facts, data, evidence etc. You know, the stuff grown ups are always going on about.
    1 point
  38. This has nothing to do with George Santos. I hope we all agree that Santos is a liar and a fraud, and he does not belong in Congress no matter what party he’s with. If he was a Democrat, the Republican Congressmen would be demanding his ouster… and they’d get it. The real story is: Why are the GOP Congressmen defending him? They should be holding hearings and kicking him out as soon as they can.
    1 point
  39. You were wrong in fact, but perhaps less so in substance. And certainly in comparison. The Russian interference in both elections was found to be fairly minor and generalized. It is widely agreed by neutral sources that it had little impact and what impact it might have had would likely have been to push people in directions they were already going. For example: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-interference-affect-the-2016-election/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/09/russian-trolls-twitter-had-little-influence-2016-voters/ In short, the 'interference' was things like POSSIBLY orchastrating the timing of the wikileaks documents. But - those were REAL documents, the info was real. Russians frequently reinforced negative impressions of Clinton and strongly promoted them, but they were based in real things the Clintons had done or were accused of. And the effect was minimal. They did it in a broad way rather than a particularly targeted way and while it certainly will have had some effect it almost certainly made no difference in the election In the Canadian case, the Chinese out and out lied to Canadian Chinese voters and spread disinformation in a very organized fashion targeting vulnerable ridings. And according to the CSIS reports, they were successful in turning a few ridings with their efforts - in other words there are more liberal seats and fewer CPC seats right now directly because of their efforts. The Richmond riding in greater vancouver is an example. So - it would be relatively accurate to say the Russians did not interfere effectively in US campaigns while the Chinese absolutely did in Canadian ones.
    1 point
  40. Full Democracy is not a desirable thing. Full democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. It is the tyranny of the majority. A representative democracy is a good thing, provided what's in place is a solid constitutional protection of the rights of the individual. Liberty - the ability to conduct your life without unreasonable interference from the gov't - and freedom come from having a central authority that is effectively and strongly restricted from overreach, not from voting.
    1 point
  41. Sorry, I was wrong. I found some articles that talk about Russian interference in U.S. elections. My mistake.
    1 point
  42. Sure. Just one page back on default. "The FBI had Hunter's laptop in their possession for 11 months before they released a statement in Oct 2020, one month before the presidential election, saying that the laptop story was Russian disinformation. They knew for a fact that it was not Russian D because, like I said, they had it for almost a year themselves. So they LIED."
    1 point
  43. Demonstrating against the war will get you ten years in Russia. The difference between Australia and Russia couldn't be more clear. Thanks for pointing it out comrade.
    1 point
  44. Isn't this an epitome of great Canada democracy (quasi) in one short example? What is a "school board"? A bunch of bureaucrats hired by the government and responsible, and loyal to it 100% as their employer. Now the happy bunch (again: of government bureaucrats 100% owned by the government and with zero democratic legitimacy) creates a code of conduct and a policy. Wait: what democratic mandate do they have to create codes and policies for the schools, without any transparency, public discussion, approval by legitimate representatives? Go figure. And then, you elected representative is sanctioned under the policy and the code. What? You see now who is running the show? And who is in it a minor, insignificant figurehead? You don't really need to figure that out: just see. Right here.
    1 point
  45. Okay, now you're just lying. Plain old lying. WWJD? Probably not lying. You see? I didn't say that Christians are bad. I said your message wasn't very Christian. Which is exactly what AOC did. So go peddle your faux outrage elsewhere. If you have to embarrass yourself with outright fabrications it's a clue that it's probably not an issue worth raising.
    1 point
  46. So you believe that Federal officeholders forfeit their free speech rights? LMAO IF ANYTHING, House members have GREATER free speech rights as their speech is ALSO protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution. ArtI.S6.C1.3.1 Overview of Speech or Debate Clause You're welcome.
    1 point
  47. She terrifies central CanaDUH. That’s a good sign.
    1 point
  48. Actually I've felt she was the best thing to come along in Canadian politics in a long time. I like her bold attitude. She said she would fire a bunch of people, and she did. That's why she got elected, I presume, because people want her to do what she's doing. Clean out the dead wood and fire the goddam riff raff. Health care nuts ahouls bw held responsible for their incompetence handling Covid. Most of all, fight Truduae. And that's where these media attacks are coming from right there. Enemy of 'the State', CBC's out to get her. It is not surprising however to watch you government boot-lickers swallow up all that crap.
    1 point
  49. You don't know much . . . . Ontario calls you. Run along now.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...