WestCanMan
-
Posts
18,071 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
87
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by WestCanMan
-
-
4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-wilson-raybould-attorney-general-snc-lavalin-1.5014271
Here's an article on their website that was last updated less than a month before the election. I'll await your response.
1) Just like I told you, that article doesn't reference SNC Lavalin's bribery in Mtl, but they wrote a story about it so they were 100% aware of it. Michel Fournier pleaded guilty to accepting $2.3M in bribes from SNC Lavalin in exchange for helping them win a contract to work on the Jacques Cartier bridge. That article only talks about SNC's overseas crimes, but they're criminals here too.
2) That article was CREATED AND RELEASED in March, 8 months before the election, and what you just posted was a link which proves that they merely edited it a month before the election. That doesn't mean it was released at that time, it was just a 7 month old story languishing in the depths of the internet.
Do you even know what edits they made to it? Do you have a copy of the article in its original form? For all we know it was edited at the PM's orders to make it look better.
-
5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
1. That one should be easy for you to cite. Just post budgets from 2016-2021.
Buddy, are you pretending not to know that Trudeau gave CBC all that money?
Just a few months after the 2015 election, March 2016:
Quote2. You're letting your personal feelings get in the way of analysis. I can accept the assertion of bias but not exaggerated claims.3
Whoa, sorry your Lordship, I forgot that you make all the rules and you're the judge and jury.... 😂
FYI there's no one on this forum that doesn't know about CBCs bias and lies, including you.
Here's a snippet from the Ott Sun...
https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-lets-talk-about-cbc-and-their-very-obvious-bias
-
In the case of the CBC admission, [you know what an "admission" is, right?] their ombudsman released a report into a complaint by Alberta Conservative MP Rachel Harder. She had shared a column Furey wrote last year about Alberta statistics of comorbidities and the role they have played in COVID-19 deaths.
CBC manufactured a story [you know what "manufactured a story" means, right?] made up of people opposed to Harder who were outraged she had shared a story based on facts from Alberta Health Services. CBC’s ombudsman said that story didn’t meet their standards.
Why did the CBC go after a conservative MP like that, when they were busy telling the truth? Not just 'the truth', they told the truth about something that the CBC was already busy lying about...
CBC's ombudsman said "that story didn’t meet their standards" 😂
1) That was all perfectly in line with CBC's standards
2) A proper admission/statement would sound more like: "We would like to offer our most sincere apologies to MP Rachel Harder, for slandering her, and to Canadians, for lying to you about one of the largest stories in the last 50 years, which directly concerns your own personal health choices, and there is no excuse. The people responsible have all been fired, and a review of the CBC's integrity and biases will be done by a panel of members selected jointly by the PCs and LPOC."
"That story didn't meet our standards" 😂
That was literally the opposite of an apology. It basically reads like "We're usually awesome, but this one time we weren't quite as great as usual".
QuoteI don't want either one of us to waste time on this. I asked you for a few cites, let's see where that goes.
Well, you have some cites now.
1) Trudeau gave the CBC $675M right after they helped him win the 2015 election, and
2) The CBC admitted to fabricating a story to slander a conservative MP and to lie about covid.
Where is this gonna go, Michael? Are you gonna start considering that CBC "news" is a based farce?
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
The next step of this would be for me to find a link where they actually did talk about the story or didn't. So you're saying that WE was in the news and CBC didn't mention it? Or SNC Lavalin during that election?
No, I'm saying that the CBC stopped talking about WE and SNC long before the elections.
QuoteThat would be pretty good evidence of them being grossly unfair. Is that your claim?
And if I found evidence otherwise, you would retract this claim and say you were wrong?
Fill your boots.
-
11 hours ago, Aristides said:
Yes it is fairly respectable but they make mistakes as does everyone.
So Russian collusion bombshells landed every second weekend for 2 years, and Trump's whole team is in jail for collusion?
Jussie was lynched? Sandman was a racist who flexed on an elderly native fellow? There was a 50-person car crash in Waukesha? M Brown was a gentle giant? G Floyd was a gentle giant? BLM protests were mostly peaceful, with just a few billion dollars in damages and a couple thousand injured cops, some dead folks, overrun police stations and part of Seattle taken over? There were 'seditious mobs' at the capitol, where some unarmed troglodytes almost managed to "overthrow" the gov't? There was a 'pandemic of the unvaccinated'? Trump referred to immigrants as 'animals'? It's not that big of a deal when members of the FBI commit crimes? Trudeau's hate-mongering against the unvaxed wasn't worth reporting on? The Freedom Convoy was really an unruly, destructive mob, flying Nazi and confederate flags everywhere? Kids needed a covid jab? No one was forced to take the jab?
LMAO Aristedes. Maybe you were dumb enough to believe this stuff when it was being reported - I certainly wasn't - but with the benefit of hindsight, you need to be man enough to admit that they were all wrong about all of that.
CNN and CTV are a joke, right from top to bottom. Regurgitating their id10tic narratives is inexcusable at this point.
-
7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:
This is really what the social credit systems are about in China, and it’s no accident. Once the top-down command and control system is in place, it can be used to implement all matter of “social goods” as defined by the managerial class.
Dr Peterson:
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Aristides said:
Not when it is whatever you want it to be.
And your answer is always what CNN and CTV tell you it is.
Do you think their track record is fairly respectable, with the benefit of hindsight?
-
1 hour ago, Black Dog said:
That's because anyone under 18 is a child.
When mohammed's army defeated the Banu Qurayza, just after the Battle of Trench, any Banu Qurayza with armpit hair was deemed to be a man, and they were given the option of converting to islam or having their heads chopped off. Over 500 people, as many as 900, were beheaded at that time.
Mohammed's army then went to Mecca, and his exile from there was lifted, his army was unopposed.
Just FYI, their definition of a man is not the same as yours. They're just using whichever one is most convenient at the time.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Black Dog said:
That's because anyone under 18 is a child.
1) So you're acknowledging that there were children spitting on the naked corpse of a Jewish woman after the Oct 7th attack... How do you feel about the fact that kids there are that repugnant?
2) It works out for them, they can say that the Israelis "have children in their jails", but they don't have to admit that there's no one under 17 there.
-
30 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:
Where did you get that number? It's a fraction of their annual budget.
Trudeau gave the CBC an extra $150M a year for 5 years not long after he was elected the first time.
QuoteYour last sentence is a gross exaggeration.
Not at all. When the MSM in this country is as one-sided as CBC is, the opposition is just a sideshow.
It took several massive scandals and vax-fascism to give the PCs a chance to win, but if you listen to the CBC, there were no scandals and there was no vax-fascism.
I'm still not doubting that CBC and CTV can pull Trudeau's fat outta the fire. They will shout down the PCs every chance they get, and if Poilievre has so much as an unpaid parking ticket, it will be a problem for him.
QuoteYou're going to need some parts of the CBC, even Poilievre is saying so.
He's wrong. The CBC needs to be axed completely.
QuoteI stand by my assertion that their biases are less extreme than most on here say.
Yeh, I fully understand that about you.
-
On 4/25/2024 at 2:26 PM, Michael Hardner said:
Well it IS liberal biased to the same degree that University graduates vote leftish from what I have seen.
Buddy, Duffygate happened in 2012, and the CBC showed Trudeau and Mulcair yelling about it on tv for 3 years. They referred to the 2015 election as a referendum on Duffygate. $90k Duffygate...
Then the WE scandal came in at $900M - literally ten thousand times as much money, with ten times the level of corruption - and CBC didn't talk about it the very next year, when the 2021 election was held.
Trudeau's family made 3 times as much as the Duffygate total ($300K+), and another $150K in expenses. For what? Did Maggot have her own private jet to fly around in or something?
1) The Trudeaus lied about even making any money at all from WE, but we know they got $450K incl expenses
2) Trudeau prorogued parliament to shut down the investigation
3) The liberals then blocked that investigation for months
4) Then the CBC didn't even talk about the WE scandal in the last 9 months leading up to the 2021 election.
CBC was just as Trudeau-friendly with the SNC scandal.
The CBC knows that SNC had a court-documented history of bribing Canadian politicians because they wrote news articles about it, but when the SNC scandal came out they just talked about SNC's Libyan crimes.
In the end Trudeau created a law specifically to help a criminal entity circumvent due punishments, he tried to force the AG to use his SNC/DPA law, and when she refused he fired her. Then he lied about firing her.
The SNC scandal happened during the 2019 election year, but there was no talk of it on CBC within the final months leading up to the election. It wasn't a topic during the debates. Then when the election was over, the first thing the CBC did was say that Sheer should step down as leader of the PC's "because he couldn't defeat Trudeau, despite his scandals". Huh? I never would have guessed that the CBC considered Trudeau to have been involved in any scandals at that point. It's like finding out that eyaball is against forcing young people to take the covid jab.
CBC lied profusely about the Freedom Convoy, and when Trudeau went on TV and said "the unvaxed are very often racists and misogynists" and then went on to ask "Should we tolerate these people?", the CBC just let that one slide. I didn't even know about it until several months later.
CBC isn't just a little biased, CBC is every bit as bad as NoKo news, Xinhua, or any other state-run media. They're a step above MSNBC, that's about it.
CBC "News" is hot garbage in a flaming dumpster. No one with an IQ over 80 takes them seriously.
-
On 4/25/2024 at 12:38 PM, Michael Hardner said:
Well... but... you accept the premise without evidence, based on your gut feel. 99% of my online life on another forum is convincing liberals and such not to do such a thing.
There's no emotion needed, it's all just basic common sense.
The CBC has been a money pit and a bunch of overzealous LPOC fanboys for decades, but they lost touch with reality in the last ten years.
TBH, Trudeau got way more than his $675M worth from the CBC. We might as well just embrace one-party rule if we keep funding them.
-
1 hour ago, Goddess said:
That poor little rat is backed into a corner now.
-
29 minutes ago, Goddess said:
Photo from your article:
Look at that God-damned faker in the front, and the smug d-bag bottom left.
Those women are so vile it's creepy.
-
1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:
I don't believe, not for one minute, that the left has any intent to create equal footing for all men, women and children among all races, religions and ideologies in every corner of the world.
100%
QuoteTheir entire political theology is driven by hatred stemming from perceived inequalities.
Not really, or they wouldn't lie about it.
Inequality had nothing to do with the deaths of Floyd, Rayshard, Brionna, Trayvon and M Brown.
The dems just use division as a political tool, and their political strategy is to never let a good tragedy go to waste.
The ultimate hypocrisy/irony imo was that when that 16 yr old black kid was killed by the BLM police, CNN et al didn't even talk about it.
BLM was started because "police murder too many young black men", and they policed 7 city blocks for 3 weeks, and in that time they killed one child and shot a 14 yr old, critically injuring him. Did they ever say "Uh, geez, maybe this is a lot harder than we realized"?
If regular police were shooting black kids as fast as the BLM police were, it would end up being hundreds of thousands of kids/yr. Regular police work a lot more than just 7 sq blocks, and they do it 12 months a year, not just 3 weeks.
-
8 minutes ago, Rebound said:
So… we’re in agreement about something?
I'm going to go buy a lottery ticket.Yes indeed.
Have fun reasoning with robo and EF now 😂
-
8 hours ago, ExFlyer said:
So again, using you flawed logic all the people involved with the world wide protests are all anti semites??
Knowingly or unknowlngly, yes.
Iran et al have beed practicing this type of disinformation campaign for decades. It's slick. People fall prey to it fairly easily.
Did you know that on the very first evening after Palestinians attacked Israel, there were already pro-Hamas protests all over the place?
Why? What did they have to protest about? That their attacks didn't murder enough women and children? Did they want better access to the burning baby videos? Did they want to see videos of all the rape/murders?
What was their protest about?
Can you find the video where muslims are complaining about the horrific attack on Oct 7th, or do they all support it?
Can you find any video of muslims still being angry about Pakistan's 800,000 murders in 1947, and the 8 million people who were expelled with no right to return? Happy hunting 😂
Their strategy is to just always shriek their victim status as long and loud as possible, and pretend that they never did anything wrong themselves. They're like a shitty ex-wife on steroids. That BS resonates with all of their religious bigots, and the victim cries of millions of people always cons a few outsiders.
The muslims haven't been victims at any point since 650AD. They've been committing genocides and discriminating against minorities this whole time.
QuoteWould there be a possibility that they see a 6 month campaign of bombing, raiding , killing women and children, devastating hospitals, communities, cities and
These protests started Oct 8th.
Would there be a possibility that, seeing as this is the 4th Gaza war, and the Gazans keep doing larger and larger bomb attacks against Israeli targets, and they are openly calling for genocide against Jews, it's time to stop pretending that they need to be there?
Fork Gaza. If you're with them, then you're supporting genocide against Israel, because that's all they really care about.
They honestly care about a genocide against Israelis more than they care about the lives of their children. If you loved you children, would you keep them in a war zone for 6 months?
Quoterefugee camps
Do you really think that there are 75 yr old refugee camps?
Germany along took in more refugees than the total number of Palestinian refugees in 1948.
FYI they aren't 'refugees', they're political pawns.
-
20 hours ago, blackbird said:
I wouldn't waste my time trying to debate with these hard core anti-Semites. They are not going to change. It is waste of time.
You may be right, but the truth has to be out there somewhere, and you can't just wait for CTV or CNN to come around.
-
1 hour ago, Rebound said:
But since Ariel Sharon in the 1980’s, most Israeli Prime Ministers have taken a hard line against the Palestinians, especially in permitting continual expansion of “settlers” in the West Bank.
To me that part makes no sense.
With the threat of genocide always looming, why do they keep poking the bear?
The way I see it, Israel's technological advantages can't keep them afloat for 100 more years, or 400 more years, or 900 more years, or 1400 more years... Eventually there's gonna be a genocide if they can't get on good relations with those people.
Israel's West Bank douchebaggery just gives the haters something to actually hate about.
-
1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:
Lol...how did that happen...oops...my bad.
No worries.
This is one of the most charged debates here in a while. It's easy to have a quick reaction when you're skimming through.
-
19 minutes ago, Rebound said:
Israel could be doing better for sure,
I dunno. It's tough dealing with hundreds of kms of tunnels.
During the last major war between Israel and terrorists the Israelis lost a lot of tanks. They can't afford to keep firing expensive missiles at cheap rockets, losing tanks, and losing soldiers.
"Going in" to an urban environment is costly.
"Semi-flattening and then going in" is much less so.
What they're doing comes at a terrible cost to Gazans, but Gazans are angling for a genocide against them.
Canadians have never had to fight a war with so much at stake. We just helped other people on other continents, we never had to protect our own families from certain genocide. We can't really judge Israelis by the way they fight vs how we fought IMO.
-
35 minutes ago, robosmith said:
I didn't say it IS, lDIOT.I said it is ethnic cleansing. AKA, displacement.
Well, you did, but I'll give you a pass based on your limited ability to speak/interpret the English language.
QuoteWe know that last time in 1948 there was NO right of return for MANY.
That's 100% fine by muslim logic: more than 10x as many Sikhs and Hindus were kicked out of Pakistan - with no right to return - and muslims are perfectly fine with that. Why are they upset about when Israel did it on such a smaller scale?
The Pakistanis murdered more people in 1947 than were displaced in 1948, and the muslims are all a-ok with that too.
Why do you think they're so hypocritical about these issues? Could it be pure, violent islamic religious bigotry?
I'll give you a hint: it's nothing else.
QuotePlenty of OTHERS are calling both Gaza AND their attack on Israel genocide. Duh
What the Gazans are doing IS part of a genocide.
They want to keep this conflict going long enough and generate enough propaganda photo-ops (aka dead women and children) to get a really good genocide against Jews started.
Just remember - if what happened in Pakistan was fine then what happened in Israel was nothing.
-
1 minute ago, robosmith said:
Defense of genocide is the meaning of the sarcasm. Duh
It's not a genocide, dummy.
Israel is fighting Hamas, and Hamas has hundreds of kms of tunnels under Gaza. When you fight people in tunnels, you either use bombs or you throw the lives of your soldiers away, and Israel needs every soldier they have to prevent an actual genocide.
FYI Gaza forced Israel to fight, and Israel has the option of fighting their way. Israel has no choice but to win because if they lose, there will be an actual genocide, like Pakistan did in 1948 and again in 1971. Not like what happened in 1948 in the region they're in now.
You've been wrong about basically everything that you've ever said here, but none of it has been as consequential as this. You seem to think that an actual genocide against Israelis, killing millions of people, should be an option.
-
@gatomontes99My whole point in that other post is that there's a legitimate war going on, and civilians should be getting out of the way.
I have friends from the ME and unfortunately it's not uncommon there.
More than one Christian from the ME has told me that when they flee their homes in the middle of the night, leaving everything behind, they just call it "going on vacation", and then they laugh. My wife's best friend did that twice before her family came to Canada.
It's gallows humour I guess. It's obviously extremely traumatic for them, leaving a community and friends behind forever just to go somewhere else and start from scratch, but they have to move on I guess. Wallowing in it would be a death, of sorts.
If you ever hear someone from the ME say "vuteverrr" and then chuckle when something unfortunate happens, it's likely because they've been through so much that a mere broken TV set is small potatoes compared to what they've been through.
-
8 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:
Hamas is preventing their own people from getting food. Let that sink in.
If my family was in Gaza, with all the rockets and bombs going each way, I'd get them out.
Any decent Gazans feel the same way.
The only people still there are people who can't go to Egypt either because Egypt won't let them in or Hamas won't let them out.
Hamas apologists: "Israel shouldn't go after Hamas. They should leave them alone to manufacture more rockets and bombs."
5 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:They are attacking the people building a peer so they can deliver food. Why do you feel the need to belittle meinstead of addressing the issue? Is it because youbdont have a legitimate rebuttal?
I said that to robo, not you. Look again 😉
-
1
-
Anti-Conservative Bias in CBC and MSM
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
Are you f'ing kidding me right now?
Schiff's bi-weekly bombshell announcement were an exaggeration Aristedes. You should hold him to a far higher standard than any anonymous internet poster.
Are you saying "His lies were actually bi-monthly", or that he didn't lie?
Did CNN not completely fall for the Jussie story, and then shout down criticisms of it, and then deny evidence up 'til the last possible second, and then ignore the racial division angle of the story completely?
Man up. Pick a subject I made there and try to tell me how "exaggerated" it is, stop sticking up for CNN's lies.
Their biases aren't small. They're not normal. They're not healthy... no healthy person talks like the liars at CTV and CNN.
Wrong. "Lying by omission" is an actual thing. "Lying by exaggeration" is an actual thing.
Bias, at the extreme level at which it's evident and CTV, CBC and CNN reporting is "lying".
Omission is still lying, just without the colour commentary.
What Tucker says isn't gospel, but it's sensible.
Morning Joe is a toxic liar and nothing that he says is based on anything that's happening here on earth.
At the time, his story sounded far-fetched and ridiculous, just like our own hijab hoax story in Canada. It never deserved serious consideration or widespread coverage, but most importantly, when the story unraveled, the alt-left media still portrayed him as a victim, and completely neglected to even consider it as an attempt to create racial division, which it clearly was.
Let's be clear - Jussie was in no way a victim here. Jussie Smollett actually was a race-baiter and a hate monger and liar - those are all basic, indisputable facts.
CNN referred to it as a "crash".
There was no "crash".
By contrast, when a car in N Carolina killed 1 person, it was a car attack. At no point has CNN ever considered Waukesha a car attack, but 6 times as many people were killed, twice as many people were injured, and the person who did that had used the exact same vehicle to run over his baby momma just a couple months earlier.
CNN always downplayed the extent of the rioting, lied about all of the circumstances surrounding the Brown and Floyd incidents, mischaracterized the level of police brutality, assumed racism based on no evidence at all from either incident, and condoned all of the violence and chaos. At no point was it ever too much, it was always just viewed as "a reaction to police racism".
I saw rioters that day, but somehow CNN saw "seditious mobs" in action on that day. FYI there's literally no such thing as a seditious mob.
The absolute fact of the matter is that CNN did not see seditious mobs - NO ONE EVER HAS, in the whole history of the earth by definition - they saw a riot and used words to describe which they thought would implicate the rioters in something that they weren't necessarily guilty of.
That was lying and bias at its worst.
No, only one was charged criminally, and even when he was found guilty he wasn't disbarred.
Alt-left media did not report on the FBI's guilty plea. Caswell Thomas lives in the US, he claims to have gone to law school, and he didn't even know about it. Most leftists here didn't know about it until I told them.
Go ask any leftist you know if any FBI members were convicted of crimes and I guarantee you that 80% of them don't know.
You tell me, is it a big story when an FBI agent is convicted of a crime against the president?
Was it really given the coverage it deserved?
Oh waaaaa. Canadians were forced to take a jab that killed them. By our gov't. That's why the protest was there. They had every right to be there.
Stealing almost every crime from the Nazi playbook was overkill...
The gesunheitspass was overkill, as was freezing bank accounts of dissenters, forcing people to take the jab, stealing gas from the truckers, beating protesters who had surrendered peacefully, the PM hate-mongering Canadians on TV, the media covering up his hate mongering but lying about the decorum at the event and pretending that there were hate symbols everywhere, CBC lying about the connection between co-morbidites and covid deaths, social media outlets banning the truth from FB and Twitter...
I think the media absolutely should report what he says, like for example when he calls the unvaxed "racists and misogynists", and asks if Canadians "should tolerate them"?
Let's not tolerate each other to the max. I'm down.
CBC admitted to lying. The gig is up.