Rue

Oh come on. Get with the paranoia. Smoke one of those legalized cigarettes. Z-man is smoking too many Liberal doobies.. Its clear Trudeau tried to pressure Judge Jody and she balked and walked. I doubt she runs next election. Watch her get a judgeship somewhere. I also think people need to take a long hard look at this elitist privileged snot Lord Justin of True-dough and toss him out on his ass next election. The pathetic attempt to pander to Chinese in BC on the weekend was about as pathetic as it gets. His pandering comments stereotype to such a degree I can not imagine how any person at his rally could have stood their grinning along with this idiot for photos. I am astonished after that last smiley idiot routine on Sunday China did not invade. Hell even Taiwan would have been tempted. He is the worst ethnic panderer I have ever witnessed. He makes the late Linda Lovelace look absolutely shallow.

That is of course the point. First off if the statement were true then China has every right to have its snitty fit and demand their darling Princess. be released. That said, it is absolute bullshit to say our system allows for politicians to influence judicial proceedings while Lord Justin poses as being above the law to China. Which one is it?. Our country is founded on the principle of the "rule of law" the most basic and fundamental of concepts that says NO ONE is above the law. The three branches of government, judiciary, civil service (administrative) and elected are to remain separate and apart and not allowed to influence one another. It is the most basic of legal concepts built into our legal system to prevent the erosion of democracy. If a politician controlled how the law was interpreted and enforced we would no longer have democracy. Trudeau knows that. This is precisely what he told China while a the same time he influence peddled on Lavalin and he has in the past over illegal refugees, the Aga Khan, Omar Kadr. If a Judge renders a decision interpreting a law in which the politicians did not intend it to be interpreted it is their role then to amend the wording which they then due with regulations. Isn't it interesting the same Liberals who used to absolutely piss their pants over Harper's comments over the Supreme Court of Canada Judges, now suddenly trying to back flop and justify influence peddling of the worst kind and sheeyat on Jody for not allowing herself to be politically compromised on areas of law she legally had no right to alter. To use the Justice Minister to look the other way on a legal obligation because the person you are calling favour for is a large contributor for you in Quebec is called influence peddling pure and simple. Trudeau got away with Kadr with a back room deal is it any surprise he did it again with Lavalin? He showed with the Aga Kahn he does what he wants and to hell with the consequences. Wasn't too long ago for example Jean Charest as a Sports Minister in the Murloney cabinet almost lost his career over calling up a Judge in his riding regarding one of his constituents. No the PM does not talk to the Justice Mnister or ANY Justice official on an on-going case yet to be determined in court. No it has never been something condoned let alone defined as a normal course of affairs. We all know why Jody was sent packing. She wouldn't cowtow to Lord Justin of Snit Snot so he had a snit snot and demoted her. Now its pile on time. She's an angry aboriginal. She's selfish and me first. She's not a team payer. All the usual Liberal scum parasite hangers on are issuing the anonymous barbs. This is a pathetic government. It blatantly violates the code of ethics and has its leader fly for a vacation with someone asking him for government donations and when confronted on it lies. He out and out lied. He said he would consult with the Ethics Commissioner and never did and stood up in Parliament like some little snit snot spoiled boy refusing to answer the question as to why he said he would talk to the Ehics Commissioner and then he did not. He had a Finance Minister use his insider knowledge to sell stock in his family company knowing it would devalue due to an impending law and Lord Justin sees nothing wrong in that. Lord Justin had no problem when his Defence Minister out and out lied as to his military record and got caught red handed. He had no problem with his Cultural Minister out and out lying in Parliament. He appoints not one but 2 Indian Affairs cabinet ministers, neither having a thing to show for their appointments. He made a back-room pay-off of 10 million to a terrorist abd promoted the terrorist's lawyer to a seat on a Federal court bench. My favourite though is he openly tells the world to break Canada's Immigration laws and enter illegally and he will push them to the front of the line ahead of legitimate immigration appicants and hey why not give them work permits. Trudeau follow the law? He's a snit. The very essence of his life prior to becoming PM is that he was and remains privileged and above the law, and people like him deicde what the law is at any given moment and we are to go along blindly. There's no legal process with this Liberal or any Liberal. As long as they want something, presto, its legal. Trudeau is a lying immoral privileged above the law elitist at this point breaking any law willy nilly when he does not like it. It is what spoiled rich kid silver spoons do. No one can say no to them, They demand and get and surround themselves with servants to bring him his milk.

Hello. This is Canada. Whoever is responsible will be paid $10 million.

I thought you were referring to soldiers as being child killers. Sorry. I am off this thread. Sorry. Misunderstood,

You are 100% correct. Given out for malaria. Fucked up some people. All of them can phack up peoplke: Atovaquone, Choloquine, Doxycycline, Mefloquine, Primaquine.

I defer to both D's No no. You are way off Jim. You are mistaking the people sent to put out the fire with the people who started the fire. Don't.

Jim you are quite correct. Ironically Einstein was neither a nationalist or any type of militarist. A lot of people to this day mistake is role with the role of Robert Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer of course after WW2 ended was Chair of the General Advisory Committee of the US Atomic Energy and publically advocated strict control of nuclear weapons and the US government because of revoked his security clearance. He was made a persona non grata. Einstein's views as to pacifism were well known and well enunciated. For anyone to say he was not sure of himself or his political views is absolutely incorrect. He spent many papers, interviews and talks on the concept of God and world peace. He referred to God in an abstract way as the source of the energy very much like Spinoza. He was against the notion of people praying to a personal God out of fear and saw all life forms and energy interconnected and so ethics as being the conduct of humans to be determined by us as to how we wanted to help or harm the world in our individual or group decisions. He was a scientist not a politician and as such transcended rigid ideological arguments calling on black and white positions. He believed in using logic and objective methodology to establish positions of understanding not emotions based on fear or pride. He was against the use of any weapons and so was Oppenheimer for that matter. To suggest they were pro guns or pro weapons is nonsense. For that matter, Harry Truman who authorized the use of the two nuclear bombs was the same man who personally confronted Curtis E. Lemay of the US Air Force and General McCarthur in Korea who both demanded he use the nuclear bomb against China. Curtis E. Lemay the head of the US Air Force and some say was the character Dr. Strangelove referred to in that movie, was actually put down by Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson, and Kennedy when he would try argue the use of the nuclear bomb in Vietnam or in a war against Russia. Eisenhower, then Kissinger in fact were the primary reasons Israel did not use nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike against Russia in the 50's, 60's and 70's. We've come far closer than people think to nuclear war and some of the people we think are war mongers were in fact the ones preventing these wars. I find if you could take someone who advocates the use of a gun and make them clean up the brains of someone blown to bits-it changes their opinion a lot of times. I would like to take everyone who advocates the use of weapons to clean up the bodies and put the parts in bags and label them. People who advocate the use of guns are never soldiers or police or emergency personnel, physicians, its usually people who fear others and feel the gun gives them protection. Its a fallacy of clean people. People with blood and body parts sprayed on them don't think that way. I always argue only soldiers and police are trained and can properly understand just how last resort weapons are and how they are not some panacea or Viagra for instant strength and power. If someone really wants to defend themselves they need to learn martial arts-the first thing it will teach them is to walk away and only use as much force as is necessary to contain if that becomes necessary. The primal need to have a gun is nothing more than a homo sapien demanding a club to bash someone in the head with. Its time we walk upright. This has nothing to do with leftist or rightist ideology and everything to do with discipline and learning to control primal instincts. Leftist and rightist ideologies have both embraced weapons and violence. People like Einstein and Oppenheimer were not either. They were scientists caught in a world where politicians wanted to use their knowledge for the wrong reasons requiring like Truman they make choices at certain times as to which use of the weapon would cause the least damage not the most damage. Truman's horrid decisions were right. Far more innocent people would have died in a continuing war in Japan. People also forget carpet bombings like in Dresden, Germany were psychologically as devastating as the nuclear bombs in Japan. Some people question if they were necessary,. Some argue it was the only way to get Germany to surrender. Weapons come in many forms. Bibles for example. The problem is guns have the most immediate effect. Words can be devastating but take longer to deliver and sink in. Show me a person who wants a gun and I will show you someone with small genitals except Annie Oakley. I learned how to use a gun. I think target practice or skeet shooting is a great hobby. Genuine hunters I have no problem with having rifles. They are a necessity to eat and in the event an animal is rabid, etc. Go run around a city shooting at people you need the gun stuffed up butt and shot off. Regards, John Wayne Annie Oakley Chuck Heston Jed Clampett

Taxme you will be pleased to know years ago there was a young man in a full brown SA uniform who would walk up and down the Bloor platform with a Nazi flag. His mistake was I was on the same side of the subway. The discussion did not last very long. No one has seem him since that day I ran into him. Moral of the story: I wouldn't worry about some fringe individual who wants to pray in the subway system there is always someone to accidentally walk over them with the overcrowding.

Dougie remember the topic? Its whether Ford will cut drug benefits to seniors in Ontario. You seem to have a hard time staying on point. Maybe you need some drugs and you sound like a senior so hopefully they haven't cut your benefits yet. Due try some gin seng or ginko balboa, it will help you remember the topic.

Our record of similar interventions? Our record? Last time I looked Canada's sole role since Korea was to send some air fighters to Iraq, some advisors to Iraq and some soldiers to Afghanistan. In your world I get it. You selective leftists choose the outrages you want intervened and ignore the rest. Interesting how you selective trendy leftists choose the outrage you spitoot about.

Lol. I like the way you call a dictator who ignores his constitution and the laws of his country "the constitution". Foreign meddling as you call it has been insurmountable in getting rid of dictators. More to the point its selective leftists like you demand dictators be removed when the dictator is not to your liking. If this guy was a right wing dictator you'd be the first whining and demanding the world do something about it. Last time I looked Canada has not invaded Venezuela and no one will ask you to do a damn thing so relax and continue when you have your selective outrages, comrade.

Sorry I just got around to this thread. I was busy preparing my own new political party which I will explain another day. In regards to 1: which laws and policies? In regards to 2: what protectionist policies?..By the way do you intend to offset this by protecting Canadian businesses being endangered by price dumping from China or other countries which is why we have tarrifs? Care to explain how your doing away with these alleged policies, laws won't enable foreign companies to then flood our markets putting our businesses out of business in Canada then once monopolizing the supply of the products or services they sell us, upping the price after achieving this monopoly and having no competition? Here let me put it in simpler terms, if you want Canadians to roll over and have China stick it up our collective buttocks do you intend to guarantee China won't have a monopoly on the hemmeroid lotion we will then need to buy? In regards to 3: Every aging fat man tells his 22 year old mistress says he intends to go on a diet. Go on then finish the thought.. which fat do you start with and do your really intend to shut down MacDonalds? In regards to 4: Which economic forecasting tool do you need to tell you that in 2017 Canada exported 390.1 billion of which 300 of that went to the US, 15.8 to China and 12 or so went to the UK? Safe foreign markets? Get serious. We have one overwhelming market we trade with and we have made zero effort to diversify. We also have a trade deficit but not with the US... In 2017 we actually came out about 17 billion ahead with them. It's with China. Do you really need to be told Chinese price dumping policies are our biggest concern? You need to do a test to tell you when you pee too much? Really? In regards to 5: that makes zero sense and cents and contradicts 2. In regards to 6: All politicians say that and claim they will give tax incentives to do that and yet we do not invent For that matter Israel with less than 6 million people leads the entire world in terms of patents, trademarks, industrial designs, inventions, intellectual property and the Israeli government taxes everyone to death because of the constant security threat requiring a constant military cost. Canada has had zero military threat since WW2. It has had no military since WW2. It chose to close down its car and air industries and allow the US to shut down anything in Canada remotely close to competing with US sectors including the latest attack on aluminum. Go on explain how you intend to deal with the US tarriff on aluminum and get Canadians to invent things with tax incentives. Good luck. You think the hundreds of thousands of illegals we are welcoming to Canada will be cutting edge researchers and scientists? How about our education system? You intend to explain how you intend to have the next generation think without a cell phone telling them how to breath? In regards to 7: How do you increase trade with other countries if they won't trade with you? Its easy to say what you did. We had a PM, Jean Chretiens who made all these business junkets around the world claiming to generate trade with different countries. Nothing happened. It was an excuse to travel and pay off his sycophants with hotel stays and tours of foreign countries. In fact as much as I hate the Liberals they are trying. They have entered into a free trade agreement with the EU and proactive in world trade agreements. So were the Tories. Neither has deliberately ignored diversifying trade its a matter of you explaining to any government of the day how do they deal with the choke hold the US and China have on world markets we would like to enter. That said we do have free trade with South Korea, Chile, Mexico. We have tried to expand trade with Asia, Japan. Its been difficult. WE run head on into a collision with China and the US for the same potential markets. As well it doesn't help when our Prime Minister is a large douche bag when it comes to understanding foreign policy and thinks if he goes uninvited to India and prances about in pajamas and has his family pose like little trained circus monkeys this will increase trade. In regards to 8: More buzz words like diversify trade, increase trade, reward new technology....sounds very nice but no specifics, you smile with no teeth and tell people to practice good dental hygiene...kind of shallow... In regards to 9: they already exist, its called immigration law and citizenship- now of course if you do not want refugees, illegal immigrants. permanent residents, foreign workers in Canada, say so, stop couching your words. In regards to 10: Yah, yah many women and gay men have told me they think long term not short term in their relationships and I do not mean time. I always say/// hey come on now, length is not everything. You seem to have some naive notion that a politician who is voted in every 4 years is going to worry long term. Nah. Its like being a prostitute in Japan or China. Its not realistic although I am sure every now and then someone with a long term plan shows up. Your comment...." Yes we have considered this and are working on a costing plan."...reminds me of a prostitute as well...you know they are about to phack you but come on you want to know for how much. Usually if a prostitute (politician same thing) can't tell you how much they will cost its a bad sign. I believe in proper foreplay myself. I check to see the price and I look under the hood. You can never be too careful these days. Politicians are known for hiding things. Me I tell people, never turn your back on a politician and trust me, they are all hard to swallow. In regards to the military if you were in the reserve you would know we shut down our ability to make fighter jets or our own military equipment after WW2. If you want to rebuild our military industrial complex good luck. I would start with building a navy. Good luck undoing the vice grip of the US military industrial complex on our federal government. Finally in regards to climate change, I love you love nuclear. Yep no pollution to the climate from nuclear now is there. Go visit Chernobyl and Japan. Get back to me once your teeth and hair fall out. For God's sakes man, do some research on what is happening in Japan and Eastern Europe or with radioactive waste. Nuclear technology is no panacea.

Let me know when you get around to kicking nationals from China, Iran, etc. out. Do come up with you list of nationals you want to deport. That could be a long list don't you think in all seriousness. Also what if those Saudis came here to get away from the Saudi Arabian government? Call me crazy but deportations might be a tad more complex than you think. By the way and you will love this, at the current time Canada deports about 30 persons a day. It has no capacity to go higher than that. You know as we speak Trudeau is planning to allow all illegal entrants to stay in Canada and apply for work visas which in effect tells legitimate immigrants to phack off for following the law properly. But hey he is sure this will pan out in the ethnic communities and get him re-elected.

Corrected on the first. Defer to that. On the second, perhaps in the early stages on some aspects yes. However the Hua Wei spying concern was over a year old and Trudeau's fawning over China goes back to last election when he was at a woman's conference. I also think we would expect the Opposition Party to be very partisan. Its their job to be but I do get your point. I think we would all agree, everyone in the gov, needs to shut the phack up and let this play out in the courts and Trudeau had no choice but to dump McCallum who should have never said a word. I personally think China has become very spoiled and reckless and like the US is finding out there are limitations to just how far it can grow before it implodes economically. What I find fascinating is that the US system sees the multi-nationals use the governments of the West as their agents, while the government of China uses its companies as its agent. Exact opposites but the results become one and the same, a monopoly controlling supply and demand and prices. The only differences is the monopoly in China is out in the open. In the Western system, the monopoly is a network of multi-nationals that forms and then dissolves then forms in an ew network then dissolves, in a constantly mutating series of monopoly networks making it very difficult to know who really is in control at any given time. I thinkw e created the word illuminati like any conspiracy theory to make sense and order out of the true chaos of the ever changing network of monopolies in the West. I think greed fuels the West, and by greed I mean it not in a negative way but in the true sense, this obsession to pursue control over prices and generate prof no different than in China and both systems are based on the belief that production and acquisition of material determines success, value, and the reason to live. The problem with material acquisition as your value system is that necessarily its disposable, you have to throw it out to generate new production or the system crashes. I think our material system has done nothing but create a world of garbage or unused, no- recycled material goods. I think in that sense our economies our extremely inefficient and self-destructive. the garbage builds lie cholesterol in our blood streams and its killing us not so slowly. Imagine if we channeled just a fraction of the energy it takes to make disposable items and weapons and turn that instead to methods to reuse materials and re-distribute unused, unsold goods to those who need it. Wishful thinking. Its crazy but the energy that has gone into the military industrial complex of most nations could have easily solved any issues we have with the environment, disease, social inequality. We however our primates. We can't resist breaking down into competing packs with our Alphas leading us into oblivion. Give me a whale or porpoise-dolphin any day. Far more superior, the ones still alive.

Uh yah, that too. Lol.

True on the first statement. He's not avoiding your second question, the fact is there is nothing Trudeau can do but let the foolishness play itself out. Let's be non partisan for a second. If it really is a legal issue, Trudeau needs to keep control of his minions and remain quiet and say NOTHING to the public and let the legal issues play out in court and let the decision and reasoning of the Judge speak for itself. It may not be the answer you want, but it is the answer. Sure the US and China are phacking around but Trudeau was very rank and amateur as the only 5 Eyes Intelligence Partner, extolling the virtues of Hua Wei while his allies Australia, New Zealand, the US and UK all told him they were spying on the West. Trudeau is an arrogant snot faced child. He thought he knew better about China idolizing this nation. Its a little late now for him to do a damn thing. He should have last year when first warned of this fiasco warned Hua Wei executives to stay in China and advise them of spying concerns. He did not. He chose to ignore his allies and welcome the head of Hua Wei allowing her to live a life of luxury in Canada. It was very naïve. Having his drunk China ambassador shoot off at the mouth should surprise no one. McCallum is a drunk by 8 am. He has no impulse control. His brain is rotted from the booze. He sent him off to China as a cushy assignment after he drank one too many scotch and shot off at the mouth as Immigration Minister. In the future Canada has to get a lot tougher with China no different than Australia, New Zealand, the UK. Canada should be concentrating on building up trade with other Asian countries. He blew it with India big time so he needs to concentrate now on Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea with whom we have a free trade agreement, Japan, Taiwan, and Bangladesh, Vietnam. Its time China gets isolated by us and all nations. a boycott of Chinese products is what we need. That and Trump slipping on a banana and dying as his foot goes up his buttox and pierces his brain. Ok.

Ford is a lot of things but he's not suicidal.

You are yet another example of an internet scholar who knows sweet phack all about either Islamic or Jewish history and who thinks he can change his name on this forum and come back to again patronize and tell both peoples who they are and what is good for them. Confederate state my ass. What a dumb thing to suggest and only someone who does not understand what sharia law is would say such a dumb thing. To start with when terrorists whoi kill Jews they do not ask if they are Zionists first and only kill them because they are Zionist which is what your dumb comment necessarily infers when they have been selected and killed in the US or Europe or elsewhere by Muslim or other terrorists. The killings of Jews across the world iss precisely because they are Jews. More to the point you are either deliberately ignorant or just plain out and out ignorant if you do not know what the Charter of the PA is, the Charter of Hamas is, the Charter of Islamic Jihad is, the Charter of the Hezbollah is, on and on. They don't distinguish between Jews and Zionists in their call for murdering them in war. Go bloody well read their charters. Next Jews did not thrive for centuries in the Muslim world while they were persecuted in the West. Again you make an absolutely incorrect and just out and out stupid comment that shows a complete and total ignorance of Jewish history and how someone like you read one article on the internet and now lectures.Go find out what kafir means. Go find out what dhimmi means. Go find out what sharia law did and still does to non Muslims in their countries before you make such stupid comments. Sharia law as it is interpreted in all existing Muslim countries will only permit non Muslims to live as second class citizens if that. Confederacy my ass. No Muslim nation has ever lived in a confederate state or in any state co-existing on an equal legal level with non Muslims. Even more amazing is that you can't figure out why or act as if you have never heard that the agenda of the PA and Hamas et al is not to live in a confederacy with Jews but to remove them all out of the Middle East by war and extermination if they do not flee. Go read their damn charters. Confederacy. Yah right. Someone else respond to this piffle. I am piffled out with Thompson River or is it Hudson Bay or whatever name you go by.

Well since you brought it up, one can only guess what this "free-school" taught you. If you are saying it never taught you that you need to pay for things, well yes that does explain it.

I teach a lot of new Canadian students and in particular Seikhs and I know many drive trucks illegally to pay their student fees because they confine in me. They have told me many things like working way over their twenty hour student visa limits, using other peoples' truck driver licenses because they look very close (beard, turban), paying to get the licenses without having to do the test, etc. I also know about the drugs they take to stay awake and how they tell me they are falling asleep while driving. They are worried about their safety/ Friday a student came to my class late and I told him I did not want to hear his excuse about being delayed on the 401. He showed me on his cell phone two large tractor trailers jacknife in front of the car he was a passenger in destroying two cars in front of him. He ran out with his camera and all you could see was a severed arm wedged in a cracked window and the rest of the car a pancake. I think your comments are unfortunately dead on from what these students tell me and many are desperate to pay student fees so break the law. Others are looking for quick money or to pay debts, etc. There are no excuses and no I do not think your comments should be construed as discriminatory-just discussion in a frank and candid manner no different than what these students tell me. I defer to truck drivers and the police on this issue. Its real and getting worse.

Godess when I stated that comment about smug I only meant me you can be assured of that, lol my responses sound so phacking righteous at times, not meant to be. When it comes to issues dealing with your gender and violence against it anywhere, I don't think you are anyone on this forum is smug. I just think sometimes we forget in the West, we still have a ways to go before we stop raping men, women, children, acting like perverts ah you know what I mean. As for you, no banana. Please don't refer to kumquats either.

Time lines in history are relative. When examining how a society evolves we usually look back at old societies from the past many thousands of years later and we think a 100 years is nothing. Sometimes we look at time lines in terms of centuries, decades, 1000's of years. Time is illusionary. It seems a lot shorter when one looks backwards. When one looks at the moment, a year, 10 years, 50 years seems a lot longer than looking backwords. When Christian society evolved in Europe which it still is, you can be sure women found the progress or amount of time it took to get to the point of not calling them witches or property seemed like it would never happen much as you do now with Muslim society. Its relative. Yes right now the majority of the Muslim world appears sexist, racist, name the ist and ism. Call it extremist, discriminatory, backwards, evil. Using your standards no doubt it is. Using my current standards it would be as well. The point though is this...when we do that, we reflect our bias that we assume we are at the cutting edge of what is morally superior and perfect and can look back at others and say we are superior to them and they are savage. And now? Ok, so these people are "savage" or "sexist" or "way behind us". And? When one does that they adopt a superiority complex. Thanks but I would prefer not to because while I reject where Saudi Arabia is at right now in terms of its social development, I don't feel smug about it. I can understand why women would challenge it and even you. I do. But my point is, the society I live in has its own sexual issues to work on. We are by no means an evolved society in the position to stick a nose up at anyone, not with our rates of sexual violence, human trafficking, sexual perversion, confused gender identities, and so on. Sorry but I see no sexual role models or perfect sexual/general relations society I live in. So I have been trying to make the point evolution of morals is relative and all us humans in all current societies have a long way to go. I would prefer to live in Canada and I am grateful I do and reject the Saudi interpretation of Islam but I don't think I am any better than them. I am no guilt ridden Liberal either. But I am saying the only difference in ape packs is not as great as many of us may think it is and we are all on a relative time line of evolution and the most advanced of us still picks his/her butt and eats fleas. Banana anyone? I personally think there are far more evolved life forms on this planet than homo sapiens, i.e., whales, dolphins, crows, vultures, pigs, elephants, mountain guerillas, horses, to name a few, not to mention the planet earth itself.

I hate doing his but fair is fair. Trudeau has his hands tied and is following the law. He has no choice. Rule of law states no one is above the law even the PM. In our system he can not interfere. I concede Scott Mayer making the point this concept has been applied subjectively and arbitrarily in the past and in law there is an inherent contradiction in he concept of sovereignty and how it has been applied. Extradition treaties supposedly recognize sovereignty and the right of nations to be considered equal to one another whatever that really means because countrues regularly criticize the domestic laws of other countries although they should not if you follow the doctrine of sovereignty. Certain countries also recognize each others domestic laws through enforcement of extradition treaties and when it does that it can create a problem. Our laws in Canada say if you ask to deport someone for a crime that does not exist in Canada not withstanding any extradition treaty we have with you, we will not extradite. In fact we have a protection clause that allows people to flee their countries and request our state protection as a refugee if the crime they commit in their country is not crime in Canada or the sentence in their country is more severe, i.e., capital punishment, whippings, much longer sentences in jail. We also will not extradite if the purpose of the extradition is political and not legal in nature although that has never been tested at a high level of court so far. With all that in mind, I can tell you legally the US grounds stated for extradition now that it is out do consist of crimes that are crimes in Canada so it passes that smell test so McCallum was wrong. Where it opens a legal argument as to being political and not legal in nature is that Trump has again stated just yesterday he would consider releasing the Hua Wei executive if the US gets a better trade deal with China. He should no have said that. Whether he shot off at the mouth again or its deliberate to allow Canada that loophole not to deport her who knows. I can tell you this. Behind he scenes Hua Wei got caught spying in the 5 Eyes intelligence alliance nations, i.e., Ausralia, UK, New Zealand and the US and probably in Canada and someone is sending China a message and Trudeau. Trudeau was downplaying the spying and talking of using Hua Wei in Canada for Canadian government services and he was going to fund it being used at UBC on sensitive research. Probably someone wanted to send Trudeau a message as much as China. He probably got it because two days ago he cancelled a Hua Wei contract and gave it to Hua Weis Finish competitor.

You know I can not disagree with what you said Argus. he second part is a fact. Also and again I can not pose as a Muslim scholar from the little I know yes many later passages of the Koran read as violent. Absolutely. However there are numerous commentaries on them that may not lend them to their literal violent meanings and we do not take that into consideration in dialogue. That said the human rights records of Sharia Law states are not an example of moderate views no and that is why people who are Muslim left those countries aside from economic reasons of course. I played devils advocate for the sake of debate and fairness. I defer to Muslims now on the violence theme itself. As for any religion mixing with politics its dangerous yes. However I do not think Israel being a Jewish state in the Zionist sense prevented or prevents Muslim Israelis from all the legal rights alhough of course on this forum you still hear the b.s. of Israel being an apartheid state when Muslims have all the rights no Jew or Christian has in th ese Sharia law states. That is nother topic. Also I do no thing because the Queen of England is also head of the Anglian church either Muslim or Jewish citizens of England fear her. So you understand my point quite well. I am for fair play in discussion no denying extremism exists in Islam or other religions. I think Turningrite understood my point and I did not read his post which made me debate some stuff I di dnot need to. Next I agree with readers who say religious parties have been around particularly Christian ones like the Christian Heritage Party. To me hey are part of the democratic right to express political conscience. I think the best way to deal with them is in open debte. Am I worried Muslims are taking over Ontario? At this point no. If they move to Wa Wa Ontario maybe.

In regards to 1: your continuing to refer to Muslims and now " half a dozen Muslims" you work with as the basis to claim you are an authority on Islam is illogical and at this point absurd/ You engage in what is called the "friend argument" and I will simply explain what it is and not waste any further time referring to it: "The friend argument is an argument used by people who want to claim knowledge about and/or sympathy with a group, by referring to their "friends" belonging to this group. It is commonly used to clear and absolve oneself from suspicion of racism, xenophobia or other kinds of prejudice. It is a particular form of the "Not prejudiced, but..." statement. The friend argument is one of the laziest ways to try to worm out of accepting the responsibility for endorsing prejudice. The idea is that someone cannot be prejudiced if they have friends of that demographic; if they had a real prejudice against that full group, then none of them would be okay to hang around, and conversely, then that member of said group would no longer be their friend. Having a friend who belongs to a demographic that one hates isn't incompatible with a prejudice against that demographic - and this is the key to the fallacy.fri" In regards to 2: speak for yourself. Turning rite's sole argument with me is a very narrow one and far different from yours. I am not a Muslim. Only a Muslim can tell you if Jihad is a fundamental part of their religion. It is illogical for you to expect me to explain a Muslim's beliefs. That would be patronizing and disrespectful. I don't claim to know what Muslims believe you do and I am saying to you, its clear from what you state, you are arrogant and lacking in humility to think you can pose as a Muslim scholar who understands what Muslims believe and how they interpret their Koran. I do know you do not understand what JIHAD means and think it means war. What I warned you of is that the words you quote are Arabic and their meaning is not limited to just one meaning, let alone the one you give it. Jihad in Arabic has different meanings depending on the context of the sentence and words before and after the sentence in which it is used. JIhad refers to a struggle or striving towards or great effort made to achieve something praiseworthy. It is often used by people like you to have one meaning, armed war against non Muslims. I also know people like you go on the internet and read that there are 109 or 164 verses of violence in the Koran. Then you read their English translation and presto you claim to be an authority on what they mean and then in your case would have me believe you know 6 Muslims let alone all 6 are Muslim scholars who then taught you the entire Koran which you are now an expert on. Lol. What I also told you is that in addition to not understanding Arabic and so how when reading Arabic a word like Jihad is fluid and has more than one meaning, I told you that you need to read that word or passage not in isolation but in proper order and context with other words and passages to properly understand it. Not only that but to read the Koran you would not just read its passages but numerous essays and commentaries on the passages you read to truly get their meaning. I also told you the Koran is not in chronological order. It was placed in order of largest to smallest chapters. If you read the Koran as it is traditionally listed it will make no sense. You need to understand its chronological order to then understand how later passages deleted, changed, clarified, amended earlier passages and if you don't read the verses or passages or surahs in proper order, you will be reading passages that Muhammed later rejected or changed. Would you have me believe you read the full 114 verses of the Koran in chronological order understanding their inter-connection and the context behind each word? Lol. Next please don't tell me you read the Koran. You went on the internet and skimmed some articles. It would take many years to try read the Koran let alone all its commentaries. Only an arrogant individual lacking in humility would read the Koran let alone Bible and claim they understand it and are an authority on it. Read 2:191 . Oh yah its violent. Read it. Sounds violent...I mean the passage gives Muslims permission to use force when those around them are persecuting them and trying to expel them from where they live So is that where you stop reading? Did you go on to read the verse also clearly states that if and when the aggressors or persecutors stop the aggression/persecution, then the Muslims MUST ttop the fighting. Did you read 2:190 and then 2: 192? How could you understand 2: 191 without reading the verses before and after it? For example, Verse 2:192 goes on to state that Allah is forgiving and merciful and so Muslims because they must be as Allah is must also be forgiving and merciful toward those who do not engage in aggression or persecution. The passage when removed from its true meaning is of course violent and could be used by a violent person to justfy violence. The difference between us is you write off Muslim as only being violent and only have one violent meaning, I do not. I also said you are ignorant of Arabic. No you can not understand the Koran relying on an English translation you read on the internet. For example, the word ‘fitnah’ in verses 2:191 and 2:193 is wrongfully assumed by people like you to mean “disbelief” when it means ‘persecution’ I also know the fact you only refer to the Koran shows you can't understand it. For example with verse or suragh 2:191, you also must read the commentary of Ibn Kathir that contextualizes the verse because when you do it then explains its actual meaning which is far different than the literal one give all the passages in the Koran like 2:191 you claim are violent. I have read on this forum time and time again people claiming to be scholars on Judaism, the Torah, the Kabalah, The Talmud and take passage after passage out of context. They know who they are. I also have read people quote the Gospels to justify hating others and killing. I was taught to step into a Christian church, a Seikh Temple,a Mosque, a Buddhist temple, a Hindu Temple, and feel the same thing. I show deference. I don't have to understand everything or even agree with everything. I don't accept sexual segregation between the genders in worship, calling gays immoral, teaching women they must listen to men, etc. I don't claim to worship fundamentalist or extremist beliefs. I also don't claim to know the things you know. So that is why I argue that you and I do not understand Islam as we claim to just like we don't understand all religions. We know very little. Only an ignorant man thinks he knows. Someone with any semblance of knowledge knows that knowledge reminds him he is ignorant and can never stop thinking, learning, questioning. You are already an expert on Islam. Me. No. I am not an expert on anything. I just have opinions like you and love a debate. What I do know is some people use Islam for terrorism. They use the Koran as a weapon just as others use guns, or other holy books. Their choice to be violent, and to try rationalize that violence as being a religious expression is bullshit. No religion says to be violent. What I do know is its tempting to call all Muslims violent. It's much harder to call them humans and that the violent ones among them, the inhuman ones are not the same as the others and in fact kill more Muslims than they do non Muslims. Its easy to hate. I leaned over putting body parts in bags. It would be easy to hate Muslims. I have been spit at by Jewish settlers and Muslims. What I represent is in many respects hated, naïve and not welcomed. It's what make Canadian soldiers come home with ptsd wondering why did they bother? I now say to you, before you walk away from Muslims you think you have all figured out, learn the difference between an innocent Muslim civilian and a Muslim terrorist because if you can't you are a terrorist just like the Muslims you think you know and hate. Learn that difference because no one gave Canadian soldiers a chance to understand when they went to Afghanistan the innocent civilians they were supposed to protect from terrorists would be raped by people they were told were also civilians they must protect and so were told to walk away from as they raped these kids. You think I sound righteous? I am speaking from as low a point as it gets to take to learn equality and that is when you pick up body parts or are told to stand down and do nothing when you know what you see is wrong. Use your gift of choice to read, discern and be more mindful before you slap the labels on anyone. Those labels are illusionary man. They are bullshit. They are used to manipulate you into hating to provide the fuel to empower terrorism. The more you hate the more you pump up Muslim terrorists and feed Muslims to them for dinner. Or is that the point and should I call you Osama or would you like a British sounding name like Bertrand or Montgommery. That Trudeau logo is kind of latent in confusion as to your jihad.