Stan

All i see is an ubermensch

Well of course it's virtue signalling, this governments entire political strategy involves pandering to the right groups with empty emotional talk. It works very well with the same sort that thinks the PM is pretty to look at, these aren't deep people, and you don't have to work to hard to convince them that our virtuous liberal government is fighting the good fight against those mean old Americans, it's pretty tired and boring stuff.

I mean, im a bit of a nerd, but it's only a shadow, its not much different than when the side of the earth opposite yours faces the sun and puts you in shadow, otherwise known as night time.

I think the idea that these liberals are more feminist or that they want more equality, more women in cabinet etc, falls down somewhat when instead of electing a female leader, for the first time ever, they went with they guy who gave them the best chance at power, the guy with the biggest liberal name in the game. I have no doubt that some of the women in his cabinet would be better PM's than him, but, the liberals believe so strongly in feminism that they need to elect a man, a feminist man mind you, to prove their point.

I rolled my eyes so hard when i read that i think they went all the way around. This was the first major Hurricane, category 3 or greater to hit the US in 12 years, there have only been four category 4 storms or greater to hit the US since 1970, in the 40-50 years before that there were 14. In 1900 a hurricane hit Galveston Texas, estimates place the death toll of that storm between six and twelve THOUSAND. Harvey has now broken the US rainfall record at 52 inches, bear in mind that there are many more instruments in many more locations to measure this rainfall than there would have been in 1900, in 1979 another much weaker Hurricane dropped 43 inches in Houston. So there is no global warming trend to be found here, you really only do a disservice to the science when you suggest otherwise, there is plenty of evidence for AGW without conflating every storm with it. It doesn't help. It was a strong storm and it stalled in a bad spot, if it had moved as they normally do we wouldn't be having this conversation, it was a category 4, no new category was required to classify it, it wasn't anything new. That Galveston storm didn't stall, it went straight north through the US and Canada towards NFLD, it killed dozens in shipwrecks.

Im not going to respond much to you, all you do is deflect away from points made and never seriously answer anything, the point is you and others will gladly defend him on ideological grounds and you will use any method you can to do it, even when its in complete opposition to other beliefs you are likely to hold. Are all children, "children". or are some children fully aware that when they murder someone at the age of 14 that they were murdering them, seemingly yes, and are other children at the age of 15, who grew up in a family of terrorists, somehow incapable of understanding that they were building bombs to kill people? Maybe, but it seems pretty unlikely. It's really your side that flogs the argument of him as a child, it's convenient to refer to arbitrary ages of adulthood and ignore the reality, if he had been 17 3/4 would he have been a child? How about 18, the day he turns 18 all the lights come on and now he suddenly knows what he's doing? it's nonsense. And I don't think you really care about any of it, you care that he was there sticking it to the Americans, the rest of this is just backdoor ways of defending him. But he was a child, and i bet if i looked i would find more than one of you here hoping for an under 18 voting age, letting children, who seemingly know nothing, vote, imagine. His rights were violated, he was also building bombs that may have killed some of our own people, fighting against us, and he knew as well as anyone what he was doing, building bombs is a meticulous, cold blooded, premeditated task. That's why you don't help hm with a settlement, or try to keep it quiet. If he he didn't know what he was doing than why is it ever legal in this country to charge a minor as an adult? They are all children, why the hell are they allowed on the highways? Are we somehow unaware of all the accidental deaths these children cause?

Certainly, but he's an American, he is the real enemy here, I don't think we should underestimate how much a general anti American sentiment leads so many to automatically side with someone who may very well have blown up our own soldiers with the bombs he was making (maybe got some muricans too though..yay!), but of course, not in anyway responsible for.

Seems like he owned up to it without any arm twisting, and now you're on the attack for seemingly no reason.

So, recently i saw an article about someone in Canada, a minor, charged and convicted as an adult, this happens with some regularity in Canada. So generally minors who purposefully murder or otherwise commit violent acts probably come from bad families and bad parents, and no doubt each case is looked at individually, but it's a bit hard to imagine how a 15-16 year old building IED"S, coming from what seems like a fairly advantaged, yet evil family, wouldn't at least know what he was doing was wrong at least as much as any other teenager who murders or rapes someone. Building bombs is a very cold blooded thing to do. http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/crown-seeks-adult-sentence-for-14-year-old-charged-with-first-degree-murder/wcm/d73a7bfe-c08b-4f91-8edb-f65c6ae5948a That 'kid' was 14, so is this a purely ideological, no one under 18 could ever, ever, ever know any better and should never be charged as an adult, or what exactly makes Khadr so special that in his particular circumstance he couldn't ever, ever be responsible for anything he did, and then i wonder how many of the same people who believe that under 18 is a 'child' forever and always, would also be fine giving 16 yr olds the right to vote. That's quite an illogical soup.

Idk about 'mass rape', but the idyllic, peaceful lives of our native population before our arrival is a myth. There was regular fighting, slavery, early death, and yes our first aboriginal peoples in the arctic were removed, killed off perhaps, by the ancestors of it's current inhabitants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorset_culture

Interesting...no, i wouldn't put it like that, designed to once again soften the issue for the liberals, that's probably more accurate. look at poor Omar, look at how human he is, the medic who saved his life must have thought so, otherwise he wouldnt have saved him. Except they try to save everyone, friend and enemy. The rest of his opinions aren't relevant.

So if you are asked to work for the government providing services the public needs you add no value to the country? Seems like a strange point to make.

He was not interrogated or tortured, for 10 years, that's a lie. The supreme court has nothing to do with the civil law suit or the settlement, aside from providing evidence of a judgement that his rights were violated.

I have no doubts his rights were violated, but I also don't believe that he was a "child" that's an arbitrary definition, and many of the same people who cling to it would in almost the same breathe tell you that the voting age should be lowered, on top of that many so called children of that age tried to volunteer to fight for us during the world wars, some succesfully. He knew what he was doing, and he chose to build bombs that may have killed many people and maybe threw a grenade that killed at least one, over defying his father, which we have no evidence at all that he ever considered doing. In my opinion he behaved as the enemy and deserved to be treated as such, as it seems his whole family was prone to doing. However his rights were violated and that's why we have laws. The most galling thing about the settlement for me is to have to watch Ralph Goodale scold conservatives when he was an mp in the government that was found guilty of abusing Khadr's rights, it wasn't conservatives, it was the liberals, meanwhile the internet is full of trolls trying to convince every fool with a computer that it was evil old harper that violated his rights, it wasn't. They simply did not volunteer to bring him back, but they did so when they were told to, unlike the previous liberal government, they did not violate his rights, it's their fault we are paying this settlement, why aren't all of those people who bleed for Khadr demanding that the LPC pay this settlement? It is voluntary, they could have kept fighting him in court, and yes, probably lose, but 10-15 million more fighting a man who may have killed some of our own soldiers with IED's is worth it imo, we spend that every minute. My opinion is that the leaders of this liberal party wanted to help him, they sympathise with him, it's a seemingly common feeling on the left, and make no mistake, the people pulling the Pm's strings aren't traditional liberals.

Yea, but the Irish were 2nd or 3rd class white people, gingers even, they deserved it.

I have the same basic beliefs, mostly I don't care how other people live their lives, unless it goes to extremes and starts affecting the vast majority of the rest of us, I think that's a reasonable compromise point of view. I think it's really conservatives who do most of the compromising on their personal views, but the nature of progressiveness is that there is always something more to progress towards, it won't ever be possible to satisfy people who hold that sort of world view, and they will never stop trying to progress us.