WestCanMan

Holy crap Boges. I can't even imagine the inside of your brain. Crazy crowdstrike conspiracy? How about crazy Russian collusion theory? Why is it a bad thing if Trump wants to find out what happened re: the 3 yr long witch hunt by the Dems? That's personal for him. The argument that Biden had that Prosecutor fired for investigating Burisma is definitely worth looking into. 1) It's an absolute fact that Biden did a quid pro quo. 2) It's an absolute fact that he lied when he said he didn't know his son worked there. 3) Even Hunter Biden acknowledged the fact that he "probably" got the Burisma jb because of who his dad was. 4) the new Ukrainian prosecutor isn't investigating Burisma, and Burisma is known to have experience corruption on a massive scale. Trump made a personal meeting with Zelenski contingent on an investigation, he didn't make the aid contingent on an investigation. You can go on CNN sites right now and find lies, here's one: https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/12/politics/july-25-timeline/ You notice that CNN says that Trump went right from Zelensky talking about Javs to Trump asking for an investigation into Joe Biden. Nothing is accurate about that. 1) Zelenski talked about buying Javelins. Not about another aid shipment. So when Zelensky talked about buying stuff from the US Trump didn't just blurt out "no need to pay, there's a free shipment headed your way". 2) Trump went on to talk about crowdstrike which has absolutely nothing to do with Biden. Nothing at all. CNN told a 100% direct lie about a material fact, as usual. The answer is there in black and white in their own website: https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/25/politics/donald-trump-ukraine-transcript-call/index.html. If CNN and the Dems are mad because Trump didn't tell Zelensky that free Javelins were on the way when Zelensky was talking about buying them, that's just plain stupid.

I didn't move at all. I said that you're a liar, you have a pack of lies, same diff. If you don't like it then start telling the truth ffs. I didn't make a vague accusation. I made a specific accusation which you're free to copy and paste if you'd like. It's still there. You have the option to make your case. You might not actually be a liar, but it's extremely unlikely that a person with your command of the english language is unable to interpret the preamble with far greater accuracy than you have done here. So, I'l backtrack a bit, and say that what you said is completely untrue and the only possible explanation, as far as I can see, is that you'r lying.

I already explained to you how the english language works, and how the preamble would need to worded in order for it to have any legal effect. If you don't understand that then you're just in over your head. I can't make you understand the language any more than I can teach an ant calculus. You don't get to go around making ridiculous accusations just because you were proven to be woefully wrong, or lying.

I'm not supposed to go digging up evidence at your command. If you think it's there, cite it. That's how it works. The burden of proof lies with the accusers.

Did what? Talked to Zelenski about an investigation into an obvious crime? So what? Everyone on the planet knows that Biden committed a crime because he bragged about it. That can't be investigated properly from within the USA, but there's an agreement in place whereby the USA and the Ukraine aid each other in Criminal investigations. The Dems are trying to prove that Trump withheld aid to force Zelenski to "dig up crap" on Biden. No one on earth has produced any actual evidence of that. The only actual quid pro quo was when Biden withheld $1B in loan guarantees from the US Gov't to force the Ukrainians to fire the prosecutor who was snooping around Burisma, where Joe Bidens son was gifted a $50K/mo job. You're in lalaland if you don't think that Biden blatantly committed a crime, or if you think that the Dems haven't done quid pro quos to cover their backs lately, or if you don't know that the Dems have started investigations into their election rivals. You're just a sucker to another Dem farce.

1) You're no conservative dude, you just have this fake account that says you're a conservative because you think that it gives your anti-conservative comments credibility. It doesn't. 2) Iran is like the mecca of terrorism. Their Quds force is deicated to terrorism and the destruction of Israel. It provides leadership and support for terrorists all over the world. Their leader is responsible for murders, turture and terrorism all over the world. Your support of his right to continue doing his dirty work is duly noted. 3) Who benefits when the leaders of the biggest terrorist orgs on the planet die? How about everyone? They can't reach their potential with guys like Soleimani in such a position of power. Care to guess again? Soleimani was killed in Iraq, ie on foreign soil. Not Iran. If the Iranians could stop funding terrorism, stop threatening everyone, stop attacking everyone, stop pushing their nuclear agenda then obviously there would be no need for this. Iran got cocky, they killed an American, that's not how you deal with Trump. The Iranian people should be happy that Trump didn't try to turn this into a war where a bunch of peons on both sides die. Trump has effectively targeted the #1 in islamic state, the #2 in islamic state and now the #1 in Quds. The number of innocent Iranians, Iraqis and Syrians that died under Trump's Presidency has been almost zero, especially compared to what happened under Obama. And this is during actual warfare. The leadership of terrorist groups are starting to get the picture that it's not just the peons that are dying. The people who are calling the shots will be less likely to call the shots now that they know the bell tolls for them. Of course Trudeau won't do anything to Iran. If he had his choice he'd be on their side. Trudeau stopped the bombing of islamic state immediately when he took over. Trudeau ran cover for the genocide in Syria when everyone else in the world was acknowledging it. Trudeau paid a terrorist who killed an American $10.5M. Trudeau is giving islamic state terrorists (he just calls them "fighters") the right to come back to Canada and walk free among us. Trudeau is bringing in people who openly support terrorism and he refuses to say anything about Al Quds Day hate rallies. Trudeau supports terrorism in every way that he possibly can, all the time. This right here is proof positive of your true colours. I could make an account called "TrueCanadianLiberal" and then call out Trudeau for all his crimes, call out the CBC for all their blatant bias and idiocy, but I just can't be that much of a weasel.

You're just in denial of every basic fact that every single other human being on earth is well aware of. The fact that you don't think that Islamic State in Levant was an islamic group takes the cake. You're completely insane.

AL Baghdadi's islamic state. Duh? You're trying to make us all believe that islam is good & pure and then you show this insane ability to let your beliefs override basic facts that you know to be true. That, or you're just telling blatant lies over and over again like a Nazi propagandist, waiting for people to start believing they're true.

You need to learn to connect the dots dude. I am explaining very basic things to you which a child could understand. 1) You're acting like the actions of a few mouthy punks in Australia is proof that muslim women can't live in the western world and feel free from danger, but I proved to you that's not the case at all because.... 2) There are tens of millions of muslim women living in the western world and they get the full protection of the government, and they don't get threatened with impunity, and they NEVER EVER get raped with impunity. 3) HOWEVER, women in many islamic countries who don't wear the prescribed headwear are targeted for actual physical abuse and actual rape and they do not get any protection at all from the government.

You said that the horrific treatment of homsexuals had nothing to do with islam and everything to do with pre-islamic beliefs. You said that I needed to prove otherwise. Well, FYI, the people who started islamic state did so in order to have a state which was controlled and regulated purely by islamic laws and traditions. Not by the laws of Syria or Iraq, not by tribal laws, not by international laws, nothing else was to be considered but pure islamic doctrine. And they killed gays while preaching islamic text.

The act of merely threatening people, like you are describing in Australia, is illegal, and the government enforces those laws when they can prove them. The act of threatening women in Afghanistan is not illegal. If a woman is dumb enough to go out without a niqab and she gets raped the police won't raise a finger to even investigate.

No, it's just an obvious truth. Some people couldn't justify harming other people, they're what we consider "good" people by definition. Some people think that killing mass amounts of children at an Ariana Grande concert to advance their political goals is justified. Those people are evil by definition. So you live in complete denial of every actual historical fact of the last 75 years because of your religion and then you act like it's a cozy, friendly thing which prevents people from doing bad things to each other. Weak lies control people like you.

Who controlled Islamic State if not muslims?

I already proved that you were lying, and your last resort is an ad hominem attack. Nice try liar. 1) Reservations are there so that people who want to preserve their ways have enough land set aside to do so. It takes a vast area for humans to survive without farming. 2) Indigenous people don't have to stay there at all if they don't want to. They are all free to leave at any time. 3) It's a conflict because you act like reservations are a bad idea but you're also offended by rights that indigenous people have as a result of living on reservations. If they didn't want the reservations they'd get rid of them. Idiot. 4) go find some land somewhere that is only occupied by "indigenous" people of that area. There's no such place. If you find something in the preamble with legal ramifications which give a group special status let me know. Until then it's just you, your current pack of lies, and not much else.

I don't know what witnesses they wanted to call, they were just given a list of witnesses that they were allowed to call and they couldn't add names to the list. No one testified to being in the room and listening to the call in question, no one has ever heard Trump asking anyone to "dig up dirt", no one has ever said that they heard Trump say that US aid was predicated on the Ukrainians investigating Biden. No one. Republicans shouldn't have to participate in this witch hunt until there's some actual evidence. There's nothing right now.

Islam/sharia law forms the ideological positions of countries where the death penalty is still administered for blasphemy/questioning the actions of mohammed/apostasy, where homosexuals are killed for being considered offensive to allah, where the justification to kill religious minorities is unquestioned, etc. In western society you can choose your religion or sexual orientation without regard for your own safety, or the safety of your women and children. It is common for muslims to consider the existence of Israel to be an abomination, while their acceptance of Pakistan is unquestioned. Meanwhile, the formation of Pakistan has resulted in the deaths of 13 million actual humans and the mass systemic rape of hundreds of thousands of women. Where is the justification for this? And make no mistake, the evil within a person is judged solely by what they can/cannot justify. Does the justification in this instance come from a book that's 1,400 years old? If not, where then? Why is the existence of a religiously-bigoted hellhole like Pakistan worth 13 million lives and Israel can't even exist, despite the fact that they haven't even killed 100,000 people, and that's including the deaths resulting from wars in which the Israelis were attacked? Are you even allowed to consider these things Marocc, or is it a sin for you to exercise free, conscious thought? Are these things true? How does that make you feel?

Telling the truth and making the hard, sensible decisions are never popular. Anyone can be Bernie Sanders and say "you have a right to get everything that you want, regardless of your effort level or your contributions to society" and get the support of the people at the bottom 35% of the population, economically speaking.

What the Dems/CNN are doing amounts to the justification of further aggression by Iran and their terrorist followers. Everything that comes out of the mouths of Dem/CNN talking heads right now is just juicy propaganda for islamic terrorists. They're acting like the US was in no further danger of attacks from Iran before Trump killed Soleimani, like Trump's decision was against the urgings of the intelligence community, and like Trump killed a legitimate hero of the Iranian people, etc. If I was Iranian and I watched CNN I'd feel like the media and the Dems were giving me all the reasons/justification that I need to make an attack on the US. They tell this story as if the Iranians hadn't been taking tankers hostage, attacking the US Embassy in Iraq, and like they hadn't just killed an American contractor in Iraq, etc. The Iranians or their legions of terrorists will definitely make several attacks on Americans citizens, and when they do, CNN and the Dems will blame Trump. What the Dems/CNN refuse to acknowledge right now is that when Obama was President, the ratio of dead American civilians/military personnel to terrorists & their leaders was horrible for the US. Since 2016 the number of American military/civilian deaths to terrorists and their leaders has swung drastically in favour of the US.

1) You say that you don't hate the religion/religious persons who created the Charter, and then you tell lies to make other people fear them. What could possibly prove/disprove your level of affection for something than the types of lies you tell about it? Actions speak louder than words. Get it? 2) I thought that you despised the fact that indigenous people have reservations. You talked about reservations as though they are prisons for indigenous people. Now you hate the fact that they have 'distinct status', which is a significant part of the whole 'reservation' concept. Which is it? 3) Indigenous people, and people of all religious affiliations or lack thereof, get all the protections in the Charter of rights. Period. The indigenous people get more say in what happens on their own land. That's it. This fundamental ideal that all people get all the protections of the Charter, Constitution, etc is the main reason why, for example, foreign laws which discriminate against women can never be part of the Canadian legal system. Girls are born with the same rights to property, inheritance, divorce, etc that boys have and no other system of law can contradict that.

The Republicans weren't allowed to call witnesses. The Dems called hearsay witnesses, they didn't bring in any witnesses who had anything relevant to add in an actual trial. We know how the Dems feel about impeachment, we just haven't seen any evidence that it is warranted.

There's no legal intent, or effect, period. You're lying again. Don't put words in my mouth just to try make your petty argument into something that it isn't. Your a liar, not a mindreader. You are a hater. This thread was started because of your hatred for Christianity. The constitution doesn't favour a certain subset, learn to read. I'm not trying to shut you up. You can keep lying if you want, that's in the Charter. I'm just pointing out that you're a liar and a hater.

Wrong. You're lying about the legal implications of the preamble to the Charter to start a conversation about changing it. And if you're being honest, when you talk about the need to change the preamble, it's exclusively because of how you feel about it, since we've already established that it has no legal ramifications whatsoever. Your "arguments" are nothing more than a combination of lies and your own insecurities. That's a non-starter for an actual conversation. This thread just illustrates your need to see a therapist or to grow up.

What's really happening here is that you are using the preamble to the charter of rights as an excuse to vent your hatred of Judeo-Christian beliefs and white Canadians. The clause that you cited has no legal ramifications whatsoever. It just hurts your feelings. EDIT: What countries, cultures don't have some skeletons in their closet? You want to point out Canada's flaws, our country has had a grand total of less than 5,000 slaves going back to before our nation was even formed. There are countries in the ME that still have slaves after more than 2,000 years and they still administer the death penalty for blasphemy. Canada is doing just awesome dude. If you're looking for a chance to do some real virtue-signalling or direct some hatred towards towards shitty people in backwards cultures you should start with Iran, Pakistan, etc. There's a reason why there's no immigration into those countries, and why they don't need border walls to stop people from just waltzing in, looking for a place to settle down.

More awesomeness.

That's all ya got? The Iranians tried to score a Benghazi v2.0 touchdown and they just got hoisted on their own petard. This isn't Murika starting shit overseas, it's America taking out the garbage. Even Trudeau commented on it: