CdnFox

But you don't. And that's obvious and that's why people laugh at you ????? Wow. You get so flustered that your English skills crash. This is what people mean by you having a hissy fit Kid, you wake up every single morning and run around finding all my posts to put little down arrows on and that of the other people you don't like. That's the first thing you do everyday. The person here with compulsive Behavior would be you You've got this total rockstar Idol fixation with me and with a few other people and it's all you think about are interact with. The vast majority of my posts here are not replying to you, the vast majority of your posts here are replying to me Everything you accuse others of is always just a reflection of your own admissions of your own behavior

It 100% is. That is exactly what it is, when somebody comes towards a police officer with a vehicle to the point where they're actually striking the officer and they're accelerating that's time for the officer to shoot. A hell of a lot of officers are injured or even killed in exactly those circumstance.

I think technically it's more of a long term lease

Umm no. In fact it's quite real, you thought it was fake because you looked up the wrong company But westinghouse has indeed struck deals URC 2025: Westinghouse and Energoatom Reinforce Ukraine’s Energy Independence with Partnership for Fuel Assembly Capability And: In 2025, Westinghouse and Ukraine's Energoatom signed key agreements at the Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC) to boost Ukraine's nuclear fuel independence, establishing full-scale manufacturing in Ukraine for Westinghouse's Western-designed VVER fuel, a crucial step away from Russian reliance and towards long-term energy security and potential new reactors, including AP1000s, as reported by the Ukrainian Ministry of Energy and Energoatom. Key Developments in 2025 Fuel Manufacturing Partnership: Westinghouse and Energoatom agreed to deploy full-scale production facilities in Ukraine for components of Westinghouse VVER fuel technology, making Ukraine a producer, not just a consumer, of Western nuclear fuel. Energy Independence: This agreement is a major strategic move to permanently remove dependence on Russian fuel supply chains, enhancing Ukraine's energy security during the ongoing conflict. Support for New Reactors: Westinghouse reinforced its commitment to building new AP1000 reactors in Ukraine, discussing financing with Ukrainian officials and the U.S. Export-Import Bank (EXIM). Focus on Recovery: These deals were announced during the Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC) in Rome (URC), linking nuclear energy to Ukraine's long-term reconstruction. Background Ukraine relies heavily on nuclear power (around 50% of electricity), and reducing dependency on Russia for fuel has been a critical goal for years, with initial Westinghouse fuel supply contracts dating back to 2018. Westinghouse, now owned by Brookfield, has been a key partner in Ukraine's efforts to diversify its energy sources and modernize its Soviet-era nuclear fleet. Ooooopssieeee LOLOLOL A 2 second google search would have made that apperent. So the deal is very real and worth billions and you're a complete twat yet again. Hows those math lessons going? BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHA!!!!! You come back again real soon, we miss you when you're not here to laugh at

The interesting thing about your posts is that I can really tell what I've said that hurt you because you try and repeat it back but it's out of context The only one having a hissy fit is you kiddo. I assume your mommy didn't change your diaper yet this morning

Yeah, that's pretty much what we all think about you LOL i love it when you have these weird fantasies about me Sounds like a bad case of jealousy, you imagined a fake relationship and then got jealous of it

ROFLMAO!!!!! OH NOES! TRIGGERED ZUCCHINI COMMUNIST IS TRIGGERED! The only one who's been caught lying here is you. That's why you're so angry at me, I pointed out your lies earlier a few times and you can't possibly argue against them But it's always funny to watch you Spaz out No wonder you're afraid to talk to me

I can always tell when you realize you're losing an argument when you begin to make up fake things that I've never said and start to argue against those LOLOL You would claimed he had never explained himself. All I did was point out that he very clearly has explained himself. Whether or not you like the explanation is irrelevant, you said he hadn't given one and he has As for the validity I haven't dug into it. But I can say at this point is most likely I believe strongly that he believes it strongly even if it's complete nonsense. We all know trump says things that aren't true. But what is often forgotten is that he very frequently he convinces himself they are true and when he makes his comments he's making them absolutely believing that every word he's saying is correct. His argument here is that this guy was treated inappropriately and his case was mishandled or some such thing and that might or might not be true I honestly don't know. Like I said I haven't looked into it. But I am 100% sure that trump himself was badly mistreated by the legal system and that his conviction is a joke. Knowing that with absolute certainty it is not hard for me to believe that it's easy to convince him that somebody else was mistreated and that their conviction may not be as legitimate as some would say. Well you've been told the why. You may not agree with the why but pretending that this hasn't already been answered just makes you look childish. I would recommend if you want to compare the two that you go back and try and take a look at trump's claims of mistreatment by the legal system for the other person and see if there's any sort of substance to it or possible substance to it. I'm honestly not that interested. But it is absolutely true that that guy is no longer leader of that country. And it's probably quite true that even if he wins his court cases, which he might, maduro will have been removed from office and therefore no longer be the same threat that he was. Tell maybe the difference in the long run is that in both cases trump was satisfied with removing them from power and after they were removed from power he didn't consider them to be such a threat

Guess it depends on how you define scared. He certainly not scared of carney. But it is obvious that he knows better than to push things to the point where Canada becomes furious and he has had to back off a couple of times.

But that's what carney said he would do. That was his promise. He was going to "build baby build " and he was going to supercharge the economy and he was going to catalyze literally everything in sight and we would move at a pace never before seen in our history So what you reply boils down to is "what, you actually believed him???? BWAAAHAHAHAAH~"

but I didn't. As we discovered everything I said was absolutely accurate. The only one who made it fool here was you of yourself by taking the time to look up something that nobody said and then provide the shocking evidence that the thing that nobody claimed isn't true There's no making this look good kid. This was you being in a rush to try and find something that you could call me out on as you always try and once again for the billionth time because you're rushing and not paying attention you wound up looking stupid You mean now that I've told you. Yes and you will completely stupid for having to be told It doesn't change the fact that that never happened. Westinghouse has many contracts with Ukraine and that is easily verifiable and agreed to new ones in 2025 and that is easily verifiable and that those are backed by guarantees as described above. All of that is common knowledge and reported. It's all 100% true it's not up for debate. So the only thing on the bottom of my shoe is you being A tard and me wiping the floor with you again The only part of this which is sort of controversial is the direct connection between the loan from Canada and the guarantee. It's true the Canada provided that money and it's true that that organization provided the loan guarantee but it's harder to say that because of the Canadian loan that's why the deal was struck. Money is fungible. But it's pretty obvious there's a connection. We donate money to a fund that then provides money to the Ukraine to buy contracted goods from Westinghouse which is owned by Brooksfield. Anybody over the age of four can successfully connect those dots But as always I appreciate you being stupid, doubling down on your stupid, and then quadrupling down on your stupid until eventually you reach Max stupid LOLOLOL!!! At this point I imagine in your brain you've already admitted defeat having realized you've made it hard of yourself again and are now considering blaming the whole thing on my post count 😆😆😆😆

Well, more hilariously amused then worried And you're little but you're not old Like I said however in free in your head and you wake up every morning and immediately run to the internet with your little bowl of cereal to give down arrows to me and anyone who is a big meanie to you LOLOLOL Goddess already posted hers but here's you this morning chasing me all over the forum like a whipped dog Seriously - who does that?!?!

Well that's not quite true, But at the same time while I'm poking fun at the american (who is actually albertan) who keeps making jabs about us not being the 51st state, It is pretty obvious that trump is concerned about potential military conflict with Canada where is he isn't with others. In any real war america would win eventually but not before paying a rather steep price and possibly winding up with many decades of terrorist attacks within its own borders. More so than any two countries on earth, our people can blend with their people and be completely unnoticed even when engaged in casual conversation. There's no Shibboleth or Goedendag here And the American people wouldn't stand for it. There's already a lot of pushback even over the economic sanctions. Trump is more leery of pushing Canada than he is with other countries. There's a couple of good reasons for that

He was taken to the hospital. The fact that she hit him at this point is accepted fact, it's not conjecture or based on the video . Which would make you the liar

It looks to me like he jumped out of the way but the reality is apparently she actually hit him. He was taken to the hospital and treated for light injuries so she didn't hit him hard but she actually made contact with him. To me that ends any debate she drove her car forward and actually struck an officer there's no way that officer could know whether or not she was going to mow him down or what she was doing. And you can see in the video the splash of glass when he fires the first shot, he fires it the moment she starts moving towards him. He didn't fire early and he didn't wait for her to hit him and he was in danger, she wasn't 'driving away' she was driving at him. He saw a threat he saw his fellow officer with his arm stuck inside the window and he saw a car accelerating towards him directly and he fired. This feels like a sad tragedy it just didn't need to happen but it's not the police's fault

But that's just not true. And this debate has been held in Canada where there have been similar shootings or police officer fired into a vehicle that was coming at him and in Canada using a vehicle to harm a police officer is something like the number one or number two way the police officers are attacked. I don't know what the stats are for America but I'm sure it's probably similar And no it's absolutely common practice and absolutely the correct thing to do to draw your firearm and point it out of vehicle when the person involved is not listening to instructions and his potentially hostile. Because at any moment they might drive forward and kill you. And that's exactly the scenario they found themselves in You're completely making crap up to suggest that the officer was on trained, it's complete fabrication to say it's against protocol to draw your weapon when dealing with someone in a vehicle is refusing instructions, I mean like you've just got nowhere to go with this. The woman did not follow the police's instructions, the officer reached into the vehicle and she attempted to drive away and strike another officer and at that point she is using a lethal object and directing force against officers and at that point it is 100% protocol in both Canada and America to stop the threat. He fired three times, he didn't do a MAG dump or anything, and he was trying to get out of the way. You can't do that, you cannot drive your vehicle at a police officer and not expect them to shoot you. We may never know what's going through her head but the end of the day while I don't believe she's any kind of domestic terrorist or whatever she made a horrible decision and it had consequences

It's sounding like it may even be MORE tragic than that. It's sounding like SHE wasn't interested in ice or politics or anything AT ALL, but her WIFE was and talked her into the situation. I believe the wife was with her at the time and got out of the vehicle crying that it was all her fault and she told her to come down there etc etc. If so it's REALLY sad that a woman who by all accounts was a good woman and a widower with children got her self killed by listening to the deranged ideas of a far left loon

I see now that there's an update saying the officer WAS hit by the vehicle and suffered minor injuries and was released from hospital. so, maybe she panicked and didn't mean to hit him, maybe she tried to go around him and just misjudged or maybe she thought he'd dive out of the way and not fire, but you can't blame a cop for shooting if you drive a vehicle at him.

I've had a chance to watch the video from two angles now, I have to say this looks pretty clear-cut to me. An officer is reaching into the vehicle another officer is standing directly in front of the vehicle. She accelerates fairly quickly and is moving directly at the officer in front of her and partially dragging the officer who was reaching through the window although he breaks off but I'm sure the officer in front was thinking his buddy was in trouble and he was about to get hit. The car barely misses that officer who fires and moves to the side with litearlly what appears to be inches between him and the vehicle, in this video it almost looks like the vehicle brushes him. Later in that broadcast you can another angle and clearly see that the officer still had his arms stuck in the vehicle and the officer who fired was directly in front as it accelerated when the first shot was fired. It is 100 percent believable that the officer who fired believed both himself and his fellow officer was at risk and the woman intended to injure or kill and that may very well have been her intent until she was struck with the first bullet. If the shooting officer had not moved to the side he would have been hit by the car. This isn't even close, this is 'officer was in danger and also saw another officer in danger and fired' You CANNOT drive away with an officer still reaching into your car, you CANNOT drive directly towards another officer in front of you and NOT expect to be shot.

I may have you in logic reason facts honesty and looks, but even i am forced to admit you regularly best me in grammies gramher graham .... oh never the fcuk mind.

No there isn't, who told you that? The last time the GDP shrunk was the great recession back in 2009, show me a graph anywhere that showed there were more fish or the trees got bigger instead of being cut down or anything like that. The aquifers didn't change Give your head a shake

If she's deliberately trying to kill a cop? Yeah. Are you seriously advocating police murder now? Exactly how many police officers would you say a mother of a 6 year old should be allowed to kill before we say it's a bad thing?

Westinghouse IS a brookfield company you dolt. It doesn't say Brookfield, it says a brookfield company, How very like you to double down on stupid tho It's clear in the very first sentence of my post that it was WESTINGHOUSE. How the hell are you getting FASTER at looking like a complete tard every time we talk?

It's unfortunate that we've put ourselves in this position. But it is what it is. If the gripen won't do then we wait i guess. Sucks but you don't do the WRONG thing just because you can do it faster. There's a great deal of sign of them doing that. And trump has been clear that he's quite prepared to use economic and even military force to take the territory he wants. It isn't just rhetoric, ask Venezuela. And he's threatening other countries as well and there's a very real chance it'll go for it. One of the best ways to put pressure on him with regards to that is to stop buying their military equipment and start developing closer ties with Europe. Already we're seeing Europe begin to band together to shut trump down on talking about Greenland. If republicans other than trump begin to realize that America is about to become isolated and less relevant they will pressure trump to back off. You do not buy from people who are threatening your country. Again that's as simple as it gets and there's no getting around that. You can't blow off what the leader of another country is saying about your country has simply rhetoric It don't matter to them that we purchased from someone else and we don't consider them an ally. There are a lot of Americans including a lot of American Military that will not be excited about that. And it's the strongest health statement saying we're not interested in working with you cooperatively in any more of the conflicts you pick around the world. It also leads to better developments with European equipment. The more we buy from them the more it's worth it for them to expand their development process. And we may never win a war with America, but if it's painful enough to beat us that's all we need to deter them. Any war with us means it's happening in their backyards and in their homes and if we're not dependent on them for gear that's a pretty big risk even if they win in the end. Well the first part would certainly be true. The stronger we are, both militarily and economically by the way, The more Americans would tend to respect us and the less they would be interested in picking a fight. Let's face it, in a straight up fight the average man can kill a cat and certainly would but no man is excited about the idea of getting into a fight with a determined cat. Even if you win you're going to get scratched to crap and it's going to hurt like 10 hells and that's enough to deter people

Play stupid games, catch stupid bullets. An unfortunate event but seriously, what did they think was going to happen