Venandi

This could be an entire thread. It was the predictable result of allowing demographic concentrations to grow (meaning fester) within the relative isolation of ethnic enclaves. It takes the form of "Sharia Councils" where participation is "voluntary" and it passes muster as a dispute arbitration process. Given the population density of some jurisdictions though, I see little hope of changing this without draconian action. Here's the rub though: not long ago the Herbs of the world ridiculed the very idea that this would happen, now they defend it as being culturally sensitive and voluntary. Well, it's not really voluntary within that community. What Herb doesn't see is the fact that even as he defends it, he has no other choice but to defend it... these councils are here to stay and his opinion has now been rendered irrelevant... just like the ones he used to ridicule. As to cancellations based on threat assessments expect more to come. I noted in the piece above that drone attacks received honourable mention and that's the only reason I'm even commenting on it. It's good to see that those in charge are reading and heeding the assessments though. Conservative minded folks won't like it, but they're doing the right thing here IMO. It's unfortunate... but I would be cancelling some of these celebrations too and for the same reason. At present there is insufficient awareness and deployable countermeasures in place to defend against it. Explosive solutions are the next phase in this scenario, they're cheap, easy and horrific. It's going to catch Herb by surprise when it happens (same as the the Sharia law thing) because he's too busy grabbing shotguns from duck hunters. It's a matter of perspective... and Herb has none.

Or maybe...

Roboduh, Herb and Flybaby ring in the new year: Meanwhile, at another venue, their hero's share a reflective moment:

Just for fun, have a look at the number of people who received MAID for non life threatening conditions and compare it to the number of people who donated organs after MAID. Ya... even you can see where I'm going with this eh? If I wanted to donate organs to a specific recipient why shouldn't I be able to do that, and why shouldn't I be able to do it in the form of a contract (offer acceptance and consideration)? Now throw in MAID for mental illness and consider the matter a bit further... you'll be able to fill a new thread with your thoughtful observations. And before you ridicule the idea, just consider that we're currently doing what you once ridiculed and now defend. Most people agree (or reluctantly agree) with the concept as originally envisioned but they don't like where it's headed... and your toxic BS does little to further your argument. Average people no longer GAF about your insults and (IMO), the days of treating toxic trolls like you with polite consideration are likely over... I don't think it's good look for any of your future arguments.

Probably because you aren't in it. That was a riddle... right?

"Retreads" eh? This is why no one can have a rational conversation with you. "Like you like to think" there isn't a reason they may feel that way. So ya, it isn't totally exclusive... just mostly and by a long shot. The 2021 immigration breakdown (by nationality) is available now.... why don't you post it for us and compare the numbers. Then post the projections for 2022 and beyond... Yes, I could do that for you but I'm not going to.

Welcome to the conservative party.

Sounds a bit toxic to me Herb. Nevertheless I agree with the sentiment... let me help you out with "defining that word." Agency in the context you're ridiculing refers to "the capacity of an individual or entity to act independently and make their own choices, particularly affecting outcomes in various contexts. In legal, philosophical, or social terms, agency emphasizes the role of individuals in shaping their destinies." Since agency denotes the capacity to act and the ability to make choices that affect individual circumstances, when access limits choices to "MAID or NOTHING BUT PAIN," those choices become stark to the point that they only qualify as choices in your mind. It simply reduces "the capacity to act" to the point of deciding which torturous outcome you find most palatable.

I can recognize your work without even looking at the screen name. The issue here is decisions that aren't really decisions at all... they're essentially forced outcomes. Anyone seeking MAID because they can't afford a private medical outcome (and can't wait for a public one) are making a choice in your world. I call it a form of euthanasia where agency has left the building. Our wait times are going to get worse, not better. Expanding access to MAID under those conditions isn't increasing agency, it's trashing it in the most morally reprehensible way possible. .

And those with heads firmly imbedded to the point that they have no eyes to see, ears to hear and whose only agency is gargling with the residue produced by their new accommodations.

Indeed it does, and that was the nightmare scenario some anticipated as resources dwindle and access suffers in its wake... that nightmare has now invaded our healthcare dreams and there's deliberate plans afoot to make it incrementally worse. Agency denotes the capacity to act... the ability to make choices that affect individual circumstances. When access limits choices to "MAID or NOTHING," those choices become stark and the capacity to act is restricted to the point of deciding which torturous outcome you find most palatable. So, if lack of agency is systemically induced it becomes euthanasia by your own definition of it. There have been some high profile cases here, some of them have been discussed on the forum. IMO though, there is no need to look further than offering MAID to veterans seeking assistance from an organization whose sole purpose it is to provide them with it. That's where ya lost me... the loss was measured in trust; your denials and Herb's toxic BS only serve to deepen that mistrust. And people who were vaccinated against their will to keep a job faced the same decision making process that you now define as "choice". Read this part again: That's where ya lost me... and the loss was measured in trust.

Unfortunately, responding to your nonsense isn't billable; the agency considers any interactions with mentally ill citizens to be a voluntary community service. They have some great writers on staff eh?

So in short, you have no original ideas and bring nothing of worth to the table other than inflamed Flybaby style rhetoric that simply tests the integrity (and the mean time between failure) of scroll buttons everywhere. Turns out that's OK though because due to the influence (and brutality) of Hamas, there will be no opportunity for lasting peace for a generation. There may be rebuilding, even a degree of prosperity in Gaza, but this generation will pass before Israel finds a true partner for lasting peace. Back in the days before Hamas (that would be UNEF and MFO tours for me), things were slowly going in the right direction (IMO of course). But then came Hamas with hardcore religious objectives and all the brutality you would expect of religious extremism. It shattered all previous efforts at a negotiated political solution having political objectives. Their religious objectives were (and still are) only attainable if Israel packs up and moves... I don't see that happening BTW. So, given your posting history here you seem to be stuck with one of two options: 1. Get onboard with eyeholes time machine construction efforts; or 2. Convince Israel to pack up and leave the area. Other than shouting at clouds, that's all ya got and I don't think it's going to work out... you can't even get along with other Christians and even worse, you have no idea how badly that reflects on everything you have to say here because you can't even negotiate with people who share your faith (in general terms). Think ye that might pose a problem? See what I mean? Until you sort out Christian issues between Christians and learn to make your own bloody bed, figuring out Islamic fundamentalists is going to be a challenge for you. And based on what I've read of your nonsense, you've never even set foot in the region.

Here's where all this is headed IMO... give em a bit more time, they'll get better at it: Homemade bombs thrown before Bondi mass shooting, but failed to detonate, police tell court https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/australia-new-south-wales-gun-laws-bondi-beach-9.7024728 Thinking this is about gun control and face coverings is overly simplistic... But, if you think that's the answer then it's time to get busy banning pressure cookers, tennis balls, threaded caps, fire crackers, the fertilizer you sprinkle on your corn patch and a long list of other stuff we could fill an entire thread with. There's going to be a bit of a lull here as things get quietly and incrementally worse behind the scenes, it's going to make the Herbs and Robos of the world believe that their simple solutions to complex problems (like banning face coverings) are working fine and dandy. Then, when they see that they got this desperately wrong, they'll get scared, and a scared liberal is a dangerous critter. They're going to gleefully vote for the sort of draconian interventions that could have been avoided simply by not being bat shi% crazy in the first place. They'll cast a wide net, hurt a lot of innocent people in the bargain, and make those they currently vilify and ridicule look positively progressive by comparison.

Careful... we've all seen what happens when you drop them:

Good idea... especially if you supported importing large numbers of people who applauded that death sentence in their home country. it would be unfair to deny them similar opportunities for religiously inspired hatred here in Canada. To that end, I suggest we house them all in the same hotel complex.

And neither do you.... that's the point. The difference is that you think you do and you'll happily act on it in the complete absence of the sort of proof you constantly demand of others. As I said above, the law of primacy is governing with character assassination efforts and it's easily exploited.... even by people with little more to say than Duh. IMO, trolls like you are one of the reasons this was a bad idea.

Redactions are easily weaponized as an I/O tool to create new victims for temporary political gain. They're easily proved wrong but the law of primacy still prevails in such matters. It's easy to imply wrong doing where there was none. Even a democrat can do it, actually, even you can do it... right? It's one of several reasons I was opposed to the release. Trump got this wrong, all it will do is victimize people who don't deserve it... and it will be small minded, vicious, partisan little trolls (just like you) who lead the charge.

Maybe, but in order to fully accept that as causal I'd have to believe they "dgaf" about their kids... or grandchildren either. BTW, I had to look up "dgaf." Clearly country mice don't get out enough eh? I tend to think that they just didn't recognize the problem they created despite being repeatedly warned about it. Either that or they're now too embarrassed to admit that they got it wrong and should have been more careful and less flippant toward those who advocated for caution. Regardless though, you're right... they own it. It was all them, and for good or ill, their kids know it too. And that's why the kids vote differently from the parents (I think)... they have more experience with failure and less of an appetite for more of it.

All of this is why I thought the data dump was a bad idea. There was too much potential to hurt innocent acquaintances and victims alike. At some point you have to trust the DOJ to do the right thing. I'd accept the idea that different administrations have differing motivations wrt prosecutions, but I'm just cynical enough to believe that if Trump was culpable Biden would have outed him... same deal for Clinton under a Trump administration. All of this has Roboduh demanding evidence to support wild allegations... you have to know something is up when that happens. I don't believe a word of it and the redacted photos of Trump with the Miss Universe contestants stands as an example of what I mean.... it was a deliberate hit job that did no favours for Democrats in the credibility department. The alternative to trusting consecutive DOJs to do the right thing is to release everything with total transparency and let the chips fall where they may. Not only does it strike me as the only other viable option, it completely defangs those who would seek to vilify innocents for their own gain. I would (again) point to the redacted photos of Trump... the only reason for those redactions was to falsely suggest that the girls were underage. While I'm glad it blew up in Democratic faces, it reinforces the notion that the release either shouldn't have been done at all, or should have been done with total and complete transparency.... nothing in between. If I were going to release this I would never have done it incrementally.... IMO Trump got this badly wrong.

This hasn't gotten bad enough to scare the people who need to be scared though, they still have confidence in the ability of police and intelligence services to deal with it and they don't see it as likely to get worse. Because of that they will default to "see, it's working... we got the bad guys." Trouble is, any complacency now is sure to catch up with us sooner rather than later....there's more of this coming and these successes should be seen as motivational rather than being viewed as confirmation of "all is working as it should." There's a brief period of time here to stay ahead of the curve by committing more resources to countering these activities. Getting it right 100% of the time is the sort of thirsty work that puts a serious strain on resources and it comes at a time when resources are a premium commodity. Hard decisions need to be made now and not delayed to the point that even Herb agrees with the threat assessments. In short, anyone favouring maintenance of the status quo is hugely more optimistic than I am and likely fall into the category of those who think gun control measures and banning flags (and such) will prove successful. I'm rooting for these folks but I think they have it wrong... we're beyond that now and I fear they will soon be calling for bans on such things as pressure cookers and fire crackers. Any complacency now will come a cost. We're collectively at another one of those junctures where a decision needs to be made... do you want to pay now, or do you want to pay later.

IMO, truth that aligns with observed reality isn't recognized for two main reasons (there are others of course) but: 1. People who haven't been there don't recognize the depth / extent of the animosities or the lingering investment in the emotions, losses and injuries that created them in the first place. Many immigrants will do just fine in a place like Canada until there is a political shift they can't bring themselves to abide... it may come in the form of Canada importing or supporting the very people the new arrivals see as the cause of them fleeing in the first place. The reaction will likely be volatile/violent.... same as back home. Expecting Palestinian Canadians to get along with Israeli Canadians in close quarters is more optimistic than my experience with both parties allows me to share at any level of the reality spectrum; and 2. People will falsely assume that breathing crisp Canadian air and participating in a political system that (essentially) saved them will be sufficient for them to lay aside previous injuries and animosities. Some can and do, they are the ones that thrive... but, that's simply not regular human nature and it flies directly in the face of real hatred and real injury. The extreme end of that spectrum of hurt and loss is something most Canadians simply can't relate to, they will use their own losses and injuries as examples of "overcoming adversity" and mistakenly assume that there is a correlation between the two solitudes... usually there isn't. At the lowest possible level of what I mean, take a moment and look at the petty animosities and inflamed rhetoric right here on this forum. People who have never even met IRL despise each other and the injuries that inflamed them are as childish and petty as their over the top reactions and name calling. Do you think it's possible to have a rational conversation with Flybaby or Roboduh? I don't. They and others like them are willing participants in a problem they argue doesn't exist. Their level of participation, and the gleefulness of that participation actually trashes their own argument that it can be overcome... and they can't even see it. If you want to understand the mindset we're talking about here, imagine getting up in the morning, systematically following each and every post of a highly prolific poster and dropping a blood trail to connect each one of them. Then, after a cup of coffee, suggesting that getting along with radically different religions and cultures is something easily accomplished.

It might have been an accident but you've hit upon the real issue here and why that very issue worsens when demographic concentrations are ignored and the people within them are (largely) warehoused vertically in ethnic enclaves and allowed to ferment in ethnic isolation. Like Sweden, France and others; not doing this was the challenge we faced and it demanded hard work and money you (not actually you but we and us) were warned it would take well in advance of ignoring the advice. We collectively didn't "front end load" the work or pay the upfront cost and as a result of that, we absolutely will pay a rear end fee (and it will be expensive). That simple reality was clearly articulated years ago as we started the experiment and it was shouted down as being racist. There was a prevailing notion that the first breath of cold Canadian air would (somehow) dissolve all of the prejudices, animosities and religious hatreds etc. that these folks fled from. The prevailing wisdom was that it would never fester and grow the same legs in a different country with different values, that we were above all of that and those who suggested human nature would prevail were Chuds. IMO, it was a logical absurdity that stubbornly persists to this day. Regardless of sample size, be it a high-rise complex or ethnic neighbourhood, people will keep to the lifestyle, customs, traditions and religious observations (with all the same warts) of the homeland they left behind. If you were displaced as an immigrant to a radically different country you would likely do the exact same thing.... as do most foreign expat workers in Muslim countries. When all of these animosities bubble to the surface and inevitably manifest with the same explosion of violence that happens "over there," there's a tendency to blame external factors like gun control... and miss the ensuing fire's ignition point and accelerant entirely. As this continues to fester, other forms of violence follow... look at the home country for hints of what that will entail. My point in saying that is simply to predict that the discussions over gun control (as being causal) may soon become "the good old days." Here's what I think will happen in the future: First.... ethnic violence will come to town in ways that you will no longer be be able to ignore, reconcile or mitigate AND IT WILL SCARE YOU. That's the tipping point, when you get scared you will completely abandon the principles of freedom and fairness you now pretend to treasure. The people who previously defended this experiment, the folks who screamed racist and deflected the reality of human nature will themselves fall victim to the conditions they created and defended. They will react badly and vote for strong action to correct the very mistakes they themselves once championed. The result will be draconian actions that cast a broad net and hurt a lot of innocent people.... and the zeal with which it is undertaken will come to offend people like me (who urged caution from the beginning) more than it will those who voted in the authors of chaos in the first place. You can already see this playing out in real time if you choose to look and as it accelerates, the historical pleas to do it right, to pay the bills and consider the future effects of ethnic concentrations (50 years hence) will then come to be seen as moderate and logical in comparison to the chaos you will willing create to mitigate the chaos you previously created and championed. This is the reason I now support mandatory military service and a minimum of two foreign deployments prior to being included in the supplementary "citizen army" currently being considered in an alternate (and unrecognizable) galaxy far away. The absurdity of the original idea now seems to be recognized by the military itself, and like those obnoxious "elbows up" T shirts that assaulted the senses of regular gym rats; it's now relegated to a trash heap labelled SFI... which stands for "Stupid fuc&^%$ Ideas."

Cool...that's pretty much how I see your input. It's uninformed to the point that I know where you haven't been, what you haven't seen, and what you haven't done. I think you'd be surprised by the efforts taken at the command level to mitigate collateral damage. I'd also suggest that "collateral damage" isn't the euphemism you seem to think it is. In any TOC or CAOC there is an entire (24/7) cell dedicated to this... in addition to limiting civilian casualties, it also advises on potential infrastructure issues... roads, pipelines, underground water/sewage, electrical supply etc. There's also JAG reps on hand during deliberate attacks to advise on the legal aspects of the Law of armed conflict and they are red card holders. In future, Israeli efforts in Gaza will come to be seen as a model for high density operations with an entrenched enemy willing (I'd say dedicated and eager) to using human shields at every opportunity. This is manifestly illegal by any interpretation of law, morality or ethics, it's deliberate, premeditated, and orchestrated... it complicates everything and it isn't an accident. You seem to be deliberately ignoring this. What actually qualifies as disinformation is the suggestion that this isn't true, that it isn't taken seriously, and that it doesn't result in numerous deliberate attacks being modified or aborted. In short, and in my experience:

In response to the ubiquitous "cite please" here are some AI responses I saved that are applicable (specifically) to the Gaza Strip... anyone wanting a more comprehensive breakdown with individual links will have to do their own homework: Approximately 75% supported the October 7th Hamas attack, which resulted in substantial loss of life and violence against civilians. This reflects a willingness among a significant number of Palestinians to endorse extreme measures in the conflict. More than 85% reject the idea of coexistence with Israel, indicating a preference for confrontational approaches rather than diplomatic solutions. A notable 71.1% are committed to restoring a "historical Palestine", which implies asserting claims over what is currently Israel and reflects a rejection of the legitimacy of the Israeli state.