WestCanMan

I agree that CBC is saying some of the wrong things, but you can't say that just sick Chinese Canadians have to go home, or wear masks. You can't tell who was to China recently, or whose spouse is Chinese if you don't know them. When it's time for sick ppl to stay home they all need to stay home. Coronavirus isn't racist either.

I didn't realize that 43 people died in Canada from SARS. That's a lot.

What's worrisome is the high mortality rate here. If 3,000,000,000 people got the swine flu and 100,000 died, that's only one in 30,000. If 1B people got that flu then it's one in 10,000. Out of 10,000 people that's not a lot. One out of every 10,000 people is very close to death already. There were something like 130 deaths back when only 3,000 people were know to have had coronavirus. That's about 1/25 people. If 1B people get coronavirus and 1/25 die that's 40 million people. There's also the fact of whether or not it's killing relatively healthy people. The Spanish flu was actually killing some of the healthiest people around because their immune systems would go into hyperdrive and attack their own organs (cytokine storm).

There are 3 or 4 people in Canada with coronavirus. If you send everyone home that's coughing the entire economy will shut down. Can we really shut down the whole economy on day 1 of every possible pandemic?

They sucked you in the first time by getting you to believe that the impeachment in Congress was legitimate. So you actually were duped by CNN. If the Dems and CNN started a rumour (that's basically what they do full time is start rumours) that Superman was real and then you started insisting that Superman was real, it would be completely accurate to say that the Dems/CNN sucked you in. By the same token, you believe in this impeachment scam, which they started. So, it's an actual fact that you were sucked in by them. Get it? It's not like there are 60 dots to connect. You're the deluded one for thinking that I have some reason to squirm when I have these wonderful (/sarcasm) debates with you. I just tell the truth which leaves you with egg on your face every time. It's just that simple. Tell the truth, laugh, explain the truth to you in painstaking detail 7-20 times, laugh, rinse, repeat. FYI I have no need to defend Obama, but I'll admit that it's news to me that he was killing people extra-judicially before he was elected, which is the time when I said that I was supportive of him. If you don't believe me, try to understand what this part means: Ya see, that fits into the pre-Presidency timeline... And can you find where I said that Argus was a lefty? I might have said that he had Trump derangement syndrome at some point, like pretty much everyone in Canada does, but I never said he was a leftist re: Canadian politics.

For the record, the end result is that once again you were sucked in by the Dems, period. They never had an actual case to begin with, they just had to overreact to keep Biden's fat out of the fire. Re: Obama, he was a slick talker and an actual piece of crap. I was sucked in, just like everyone else, thinking that it would be good for America to have their first black President. He was divisive, had bad instincts, he was weak when he needed to be strong, and the only smart thing he ever did was get Bush's second stimulus pkg through.

There you go like Charlie Brown again, swiping at that football. The Dems and CNN said probably 1,000x that they had "BOMBSHELL NEW EVIDENCE, TRUMP IS ON THE VERGE OF IMPEACHMENT" during the collusion investigation. Every time they said that, it was a total lie. They had nothing. So now they're saying the exact same thing for the 1,001st time and you're all over it like ugly on an ape lol. Eyeball never learns.

You know what I meant. It was like a trial. Kangaroo court version. Anyhow you still never addressed the fact that the Dems just lied every time they talked about the call. Pretty bogus, hey?

The Dems told the exact same lie over and over again for weeks now, they wasted time for hundreds of congressmen, now they're wasting the time of 100 Senators (not to mention thousands of other people) and they have made another bogus accusation and misled Americans. There are a lot of people who are too willfully ignorant or who lack the intellectual capacity to correctly interpret the meaning of what was said on the phone call, as per the transcript, and then compare that to the story that the Dems are telling. I don't like being lied to, neither should you. Nothing the Dems are saying is worth listening to, and that's on almost every topic, not just witch hunt V 2.0.

The house did their "trial", it was an actual joke where they just repeated the exact same lie over and over again: "Zelenski asked for military aid, Trump immediately asked them for a favour - investigating Biden". I know that you heard that dozens of times now, you just weren't aware of the fact that is an actual lie because you have your eyes closed, your fingers in your ears, singing la la la. Trump asked about crowdstrike at that point, and crowdstrike has absolutely nothing to do with Biden. It only applies to the Russian collusion witch hunt. Then Zelenski spoke again and the topic went around to the prosecutor (You know - the one who Joe Biden was investigating, because apparently there was something wrong with the fact that the prosecutor was looking into the major scandal at Burisma. Did you know that the new "solid" guy that Biden "put in his place" is not investigating Burisma? Of course you don't, because once again you have your eyes closed, your fingers in your ears, singing la la la. If the Dems told the truth and made a compelling case of it then there would be room for discussion about going further down the wormhole. That clearly did not happen. All of the Republicans voted against impeachment, some of the Democrats voted against impeachment as well, and Tulsi Gabbard voted "present". The vote against impeachment had bipartisan support in Congress, the vote against impeachment will have bipartisan support in the Senate, and some of the Senators who vote in favour of impeaching Trump, for no actual crime at all, will be the exact same Senators who voted against impeaching Clinton, and he was found guilty of two felonies and was subsequently disbarred from practicing law. Now you know these things eyeball, and your opinions in the future should reflect actual knowledge of the whole issue, and not just the CNN/Dem talking points. FYI, the Senate doesn't exist to be at the whim of serial liars. They all have actual jobs to do. The trial has gone on far too long without a single actual witness corroborating any of the key charges. There have been some liars and some speculators, the President of the Ukraine himself has made that abundantly clear in no uncertain terms.

Thanks Rue. I'm not personally a fan of race-based statistics. Even when the stats are 100% accurate they're still just wide open to all kinds of intentionally inaccurate interpretation. "OMG THESE STATS ARE CONCRETE EVIDENCE OF _________________! THAT'S THE ONLY POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION OF THIS STATISTIC! I KNOW, BECAUSE I GOT 64% ON A MATH TEST ONCE IN GRADE 7 AND I HAVE A BLA!" (sadly, the best thing about a Bachelor of Liberal Arts degree is that the abbreviation is so telling)

Have you ever heard of a thing called progress? When was the last stoning that you are aware of in a western nation? Was it in the year 2020? Nope, you have to go the the ME to see that kind of thing in 2020. You're talking about something that our grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents grandparents did and you're comparing that what people are still doing in 2020. Dialamah we're all aware that zealots & religious bigotry were a problem in most of the ME and most of Europe from pre-history up until 1,000 years ago. Some people changed a lot, some not so much, and in some countries the majority of people still live like it's 1,495 - they have no consideration whatsoever for the lives of humans who don't share their religion and they answer only to the god that's inside their own head. Western nations exorcized that type of radical bigotry and religious stupidity hundreds of years ago. It's enshrined in our constitution, it has 100% grassroots support, and it's upheld by modern-day law enforcement and has been for generations. There were only small pockets of resistance in the last 100 years which have finally been snuffed out. The ME is like a time machine, and the dial is set to the year shithole. I get that there are a lot of great people there. Truly great, decent people who are very altruistic and care far more about their families and friends and peace than they do about human scum like Suleimani or al-Baghdadi. Is that honestly what's preached in 100% of mosques? 50%? If you talk to people from Pakistan how many of them consider the actions of their Pakistani forefathers to be righteous and the actions of the Israelis to be evil? Every single person who holds those opinions is just an ignorant, evil, religious bigot.

It's irrelevant in that you're talking about a situation where, if women here don't take a minimal amount of care, they are still extremely unlikely to be the subject of a violent rape, or sexual assault. Contrast that with places where women need to adhere to strict religious codes or they will definitely be raped and the government won't do anything at all about it. So - definitely raped with no penalty to the attacker whatsoever vs might be kinda raped, but in instances where the attackers can be caught they will definitely go to jail. Regardless of religious affiliations or the type of clothing worn, period. Your stat just says that some people get raped here. Big deal.

More alarm bells.

Who are you calling a bigot dialamah? If you can find something here that's inaccurate here then go for it. But right now all the inaccuracy is coming from the apologist side.

So? there are 40,000,000 people in Canada. Find the stat for the number of women raped for not wearing a hijab in Pakistan or Afghanistan. Guess what? There isn't one for two reasons: 1) no sense in reporting it because you'll just get laughed at 2) no one is dumb enough to walk around in those countries without one. A personal acquaintance who lived in Afghanistan told me that where the Taliban are in control you can't even have your windows open if there's a woman not in a hijab.

There's not much wiggle room for you to argue this jacee, it's all pretty cut and dried. I'm too busy for this right now.

That's not what that means. It means that "ok we know you did it, but you won't go to jail for it". That's what you can "get away with". For example, in hockey, fighting is against the rules but you can "get away with it" because you only gat a 5 min penalty and then you can play in the same game. In a stricter sport, like soccer, if you fight you're kicked out of the game and your team plays the rest of the game a man short. It's not allowed. Your coach will never give you a secret signal that "it's go time". If you are on a date with a girl and she's half-clothed and you put your hand where she just told you not to put it, that's wrong by Canadian standards. But it's not, "I have proof so you're going to jail for a few years" wrong. You could "get away with it" but you might have to take a course or do community service and you'll have a bad reputation. That's it.

Yes I can. The PM of Canada got involved in condemning hate against a girl who (lied) said that her hijab was cut. The child wasn't even harmed and she was as protected as she could possibly be. I'll stand by the statement that I made and I'll also say that there's zero chance in hell that you can find any evidence to the contrary.

You're being intentionally misleading. People go free for a lot of things over here but it's not for a lack of trying to find a perpetrator. Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman's killer(s) didn't go to jail. If you can prove the crime then the perp will do the time. The pertinent fact here is that if a Canadian man, of any religion, grabs a girl and rapes her just because she's wearing a hijab, that man will go to jail for the crime of rape, plus the 10 yr hate crime sentence will be tacked on. In Pakistan they basically have a minus ten years because she wasn't wearing a hijab rule of thumb.

Yeah the topic of "various forms of rape" requires a whole book, but I'm only talking about "what forms of sexual assault" you can "get away with" here vs over there. Over here it's down to basically nothing, over there it's open season for all levels of rape in a lot of entire countries. I guess that the people who are apologists for religious bigotry rape in the middle east could make the case that until recently a lot of people got away with rape because of their social status (B Clinton, H Weinstein), which is akin to bigotry rape, and indigenous women in certain northern communities were also victims of that type of rape (dirty cops), but in this context - rape in general in today's Canada - that's not a real thing.

It's alarming that you would even think that way. I've been married for fifteen years and never felt even a bit rapy towards my wife. I've never forced any of my girlfriends or any girls that I went on dates with to have sex either. Admittedly I haven't committed any rapes against members of the general public either, so it's kind of a 0-0 tie, but in my lifetime I know of far more women who were raped by random men than by their partners. Also, "rape" within a relationship usually involves a man "moving the goalposts", so to speak. IE, going to the next base. It's still a sexual assault, but it's not to be confused with a total stranger grabbing a woman who doesn't even want to have an intimate conversation with them and forcing them to do all kinds of things, including some that they would never consent to with anyone at all, even their partners.

Read the post I just wrote above this one. If you can understand it then you'll come to the stark realization that talking about the relative amounts of activity in each of our brains is not a flattering topic for you. It's completely idiotic to say that there's even a hint of inaccuracy in the claim that I made. And I know that you're not doing it out of stupidity because no one is that dumb, you're doing it to be difficult because of your ignorance and bigotry. Once again, I have ample proof of your bigotry if you want to call me out on it.

1) You're covering old ground 2) Just because there are different forms of bigots-only housing doesn't make it ok. No one, me included, is acting like it was ok for Trump to do it in the '60s, and it didn't become cool when we started it in 2003 or whatever.

You're confusing "we were naked and I said he couldn't touch me there" with "I was walking to my car and 3 guys took me into a van and forced me to have sex for 2 hrs because I wasn't wearing a hijab." Not all rapes are the same. You could add "I got sentenced to ten years in prison because I took off my hijab" if you want.