Rue

I took awhile to respond because I had more pressing issues. I am calling your threads out as thinly veiled attempts to proselytize people to you specific views of Christianity and now specifically wish to challenge specific words of yours in response to me on this thread. 1-You stated: "I go wherever the talk takes me". So do I and every other person on this forum. 2. You stated: "As to all this personal garbage." Yes what about your personal garbage. You stated: "I could and perhaps should have said the moral Jews. " Those words continue your references to Jews in this thread. In the above response I argue you show that you believe you can write history to define any Jew as immoral who does not accept Jesus as the son of God. That is personal garbage you brought to this forum and I call you out on it. My beliefs or anyone's beliefs are NOT immoral because you do not agree with how we define anyone or any concept. 3. Next you stated: "Don't do it again." Do what...challenge as I have your collective references to Jews as immoral? What is that a threat? What will you do if I continue to challenge your words? Let me make it clear, make negative collective references of my people or any group, I will challenge you and use this term:NEVER AGAIN. 4. You stated: "I am not a Christian." The religion section of this board is full of your threads. I argue each one in content preaches your views of Christianity through the vehicle of rhetorical questions. 5.You stated: "Are you denying that Jesus had to run from Jews more than once because they threatened to stone him?" Now that is an interesting comment by you considering you also stated and I quote: "I know that it is a plagiarized and translation of another translation. That makes no difference to literalists readers whom I target when using literal themes." For someone who believes the story you throw back at me is plagiarized and distorted by translation why would you present it as you did and ask me to deny it? Why would I deny something I can not know is a fact or is not a fact? That is illogical. More to the point you also stated: "I don't care how authentic it is as this is the book Christians are using." For someone who denies he is Christian you sure as hell are using it, and you demonstrate you believe its authentic otherwise you would not ask me if I am deny it. I would suggest those two inherent contradictions by you are a manifestation of someone experiencing cognitive dissonance a common phenomena that occurs when someone tries to deny their true identity. I ask now, when you target "literalist readers" do you target yourself for throwing out that stone story and asking me whether I deny it? Let me conclude by explaining this, whether Jesus existed or not I do now know. If he did and challenged the status quo of his or her day then of course it could be that people might have challenged such beliefs and may have argued with him and in that sense their words in the argument back and forth could be phrased as "stones" hurled at each other the same way and ironically how you use a passage about Jews hurling stones at Jesus, to try hurl stones at me and Jews to justify your original generalized accusations of Jews betraying Jesus. When you use terms that assign collective descriptions to all Jews as you have that assign us culpability based on a belief or characteristic you think we all have or ANY of us have without talking to us to find out what we actually believe-those assumptions you pose as givens in your sermons I call out as personal garbage will bloody well see fit to challenge them.

You remind me of Dave Balon. The guy was always trying to deflect someone else's shot. He was one of the first NHL players to try wear a toupe while playing hockey in his final days in New York.

Hey now Letterkenny is too gay to be a stereotypical Canadian unless we are talking Toronto. I would go with Trailer Park Boys, Corner Gas, Beachcombers, (all re-runs) or Norm MacDonald.

Another day another anti immigrant rant. Immigrants only come here because its "rich" no other phacking reason. You spoke to them all.

So let us summarize: 1-because the majority of NBA players are black there is no racism 2-because Asians are rich their is no racism 3-because you found a video of a black man expressing a subjective opinion that you think you agree with racism does not exist. You once again HAVE reduced your response to engaging in posing inferences from subjective perceptions as your "rational" basis to proclaim "systemic racism" does not exist. Been there and done that..and of course your posing as a victim of misrepresentation and deflection through the hurling of personal epithets when challenged for doing this. I again argue your continuing responses provide an excellent example of extremist ideology that leads to discriminatory belief systems including racism-a process whereby you or others project generalized assumptions as to behaviour on an entire group you choose to target and then use that set of generalized assumptions to accuse that group of lacking credible or desirable qualities. At this point I also contend your words are so blatantly discriminatory you fail to grasp that the tactic of posting the subjective opinion of a black man is an example of tokenism and a transparent one at that in this ltst response targets all Asians and blacks which I argue is a continuation of your respones in regards to the Floyd incident and your earlier comments about Chinese immigrants.. I also argue our attempt to deny "systemic racism" is without any basis other than your subjective ones. I would argue psychology and neurology have now more than proven through objective methodology that discriminatory thinking and thought processes are part of every human's cognitive processing. To make sense of a non stop set of stimuli bombarding our brains at any given moment we label and categorize or label the incoming information into generalized categories to try organize what would otherwise be chaos and fragmented thought. If our minds did not engage in discriminatory cognitive processes we would suffer very much the phenomena of schizophrenics bombarded with info they can't organize. So all of us unless we have a brain disease or illness preventing the organization of stimuli coming in, engage in apophenia the spontaneous perception of connections and meaningfulness of otherwise unrelated phenomena and also pareidolia where we misperceive stimuli coming in as clear and distinct when they may not be. Its who we are. We humans have brains that have a cognitive processing system subject to misperceptions. Our five senses we heavily rely on are not necessarily accurate. Hopefully when our minds develop, we learn that the more flexible our categories of generalization and the more exceptions to the generalizations we can perceive, the more developed our thought patterns become and the more creative and positive we become. In addition this enables neurotransmission structures in our brain actually grow thick like branches in a tree. Inversely, those of us who do not develop our minds whether its due to congenital deformity, acquired damage, after-effects of diseases, chemical imbalances, experience underdeveloped neurotransmission development characterized by rigid thinking and inflexible stereotypes and generalizations that dominate what we think we see and understand. Most of us Argus realize whenever we label someone with an "ism" or "ist" if we go too extreme in who and when we use such labels we trivialize and/or render the is of such descriptors as meaningless. Once again Argus you are challenged to complete your accusations. If blacks are the majority of players in the NBA how does this meanthere is no "systemic racism"? Explain how one cancels out the other. Explain how if Asians are rich this means there is no "systemic racism". Let me conclude Argus by stating if your claim was "systemic racism" is not exclusive to one group of people there would be no issue. So let us also make no mistake when you respond posing as a misunderstood victim denying what you said ... your denial is not about being consistent and careful with how we make any claims or accusations of systemic racism its about denying it exists. Let us also be clear. I made sure I stated systemic racism because your tactic otherwise would be to argue you only meant systemic racism, not racism. No Argue no back door to run from what you said this time. All "systemic" means is as an adjective is, "of, relating to or common to system." You deny racism exists. You deny the experiences of others because you actually believe you can. The very fact you believe you are entitled to negate the subjective experiences of others means what Argus? I argue it means your comments have become a racist parody in content, expression and intent. Please let me add a bit to your list of generalizations because you only mentioned Asians and blacks and I want to use your reasoning process here we go; 1-Jews are rich so they can't experience systemic discrimination 2-Ukrainians and Irish in Canada dominate hockey so they don't experience discrimination 3-gays are successful artists, businesspersons, politicians, so they don't experience systemic discrimination 4-aboriginals don't experience any systemic discrimination under the "Indian" Act 5-no visible minority or women experiences systemic discrimination.

Repatriate jobs in the US? That has not happened and will not happen. You think when given a choice of cheap slave labour in third world countries of having to pay people even the minimum wage in the US, businesses will repatriate? That sounds very socialist of you. How wonderfully romantic and nationalistic of you to buy into that horsecrap of a lie. This was never about repatriation.Your damn messiah leader is all about exploiting cheap labour in third world countries and getting deals to exploit 3rd world markets not repatriation. Go on list for us all the businesses since Trump's claim to make America strong again that returned. What a joke and you parrot that brainless bilge. Look at what he did with aluminum. He deliberately violated the free trade act with Canada and slapped a huge tarriff on Canadian aluminum to protect aluminum production in the US. Did any worker see one plug nickel of the increased profit the aluminum manufacturers made from uncompetitive prices that allow them now to sell their inferior product at higher prices? Not one phackin penny. It went into the hands of who? Go find out. Your President is a mouthpiece. He's a blow job. He opens his mouth and blows. He's done nothing for the American economy. Not a damn thing but start a trade war with China and Europe he has no idea how to finish.

In come the reports of a shooting with 11 injured and up to 3 killed as of 3 am this morning. The violence continues. As some would say its deeper than just Floyd. Now will the same people calling for the defunding of police now feel the same? Do they suggest less police would have avoided this shooting. This is a gun carrying society. Its etched into the very identity of most Americans as an integral basic right. Guns. Handguns to be exact. Oh let me guess will this be gang related?

Being disliked by Trump would get you elected to any office these days. Its not why Trudeau's campaign was rejected but it probably did not help. Trump is a world laughing stock. Trudeau's being disliked world wide has nothing to do with Trump. Lavalin, unresolved conflicts with Brazil, Iran, Turkey, Russia, China, India, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Britain, New Zealand, try all them for starters. You might also want to consider how popular he made himself with his lectures on feminism and climate change. You might also want to ask why when Norway and Ireland had 10 years lead on campaigning for the seats he would even attempt to compete against them. Back to Bolton. His book is yet again someone explaining Trump is a shallow corrupted nut case. Today he has tried to fire the lead prosecutor investigating Rudolph Guliani. Trump just keeps on his merry way alienating anyone who has ever worked for him. No problem Wes will soon be around to say Bolton is wrong, a nut case, a Chinese spy, etc. or hey all politicians are corrupt what is the big deal unless its Uncle Joe Biden then suddenly its a big deal. Trump does not go a day let alone a week without a personal dispute with someone. Such a loveable, stable leader. He has captured the soul of the US and with his inspired visions has made the US great again. I mean his handling of Covid and the Floyd shootings, wonderful warm examples of a great man leading his people in times of crisis. God bless Donald Trump.

Where do you start. Lavalin you bet Trying to lecture the world on feminism, climate change, yes. Trying to suck up to the UN by taking passive shots at Trump didn't work. His inept handling of disputes with Russia, China and Saudia Arabia, of course. His under-funding in NATO, yes. We have unresolved conflicts with Brazil and Iran. He pissed off the 5 eye allies New Zealand, Australia, and Britain over his approach to giving Hua Wei a contract in Canada that would have given them access to sensitive military information. His support of Kurds in their war against Iraq alienated Turkey. As far as I am concerned none of it really matters but only some deluded narcissist after alienating that many nations would think he could perform oral exercises on remaining members to get on the council. More to the point the council is a flaccid body. Not even Justin's famed oral abilities could get it excited.. . I am sure Justin still dreams of a Nobel Peace Prize on the toilet every night. That is the only throne he will sit on. Besides he can continue to exercise his talents with his best buds Billy and Seemus now that he has ceded the day to day matters to the PM in waiting Ms Rosedale Hedge Hog. My prediction is he does not run again. He will let Ms. Hedge Hog run against Pistol Pete sensing defeat. Ms. Hedge Hog v.s. Mr. Anteater Face. It will be a wonderful election.

Lol I get your point but saying Trudeau is easily distracted is an understatement.

They can qualify in Canada as federal skilled trade workers.

Your question is not logical. It presupposes to be Conservative one is against gay marriage or women having final say over what they do with their bodies. Neither issue is automatically rejected by one who would be Conservative and in fact under traditional Conservatism both could be defined as individual rights that the State should not decide for individuals. I think you need to revisit the labels people use these days when they call OTHERS conservative, liberal, progressive, racist, etc. Too much labeling and assuming what others think or believe without taking the time to ask them. Edmund Burke is often considered the classic example of a Conservative. If you find out anywhere in his writings he was anti abortion or anti gay let me know. As for me if you want a label, I like kosher doughnut ahole. Have a nice day. I love PEI. Viva Spud Island ( McCain Slave Colony)..

Zeroing in on the above point, CTV like all media outlets is trendy. It grabs the trend story and runs with it to the exclusion of all others reflecting its short attention span and assuming its audience has the same attention deficit. Part of this is caused by one simple explanation-it has no one capable of understanding let alone explaining financial issues facing this country. Its too complicated to put into 10 second sound bites. Its why we elect as our leader a part-time drama teacher born into a trust account where he has never had to work. We do not want to deal with the economy or people who understand it. Its too threatening and/or boring. This country has serious financial issues. Its bankrupt. Covid 19 has bankrupt all Western nations Cash reserves, interest rates, stock markets, all are unstable because we ave borrowed so heavily we can't pull back the out of control interest rates. No amount of tax increases can undo our deficit. The only way to survive economically is to literally strip down all governments and budgets and the average Canadian takes for granted the extent of their government services and will not be willing to go on a diet. People do not talk about that diet because it scares them. Instead the size of government budgets remain the same. The idea you can tell people to stay home indefinitely and can sustain that, is just not realistic. No politician wants to talk reality-that we have a permanently displaced unemployed work force, most of our employed are under-employed, and those working are often getting paid by tax money.

The training of police across the United States is inconsistent and not uniform due to the multitude of jurisdictions and budgets that might be available. Not all police officers will have the same training. There are a lot og erroneous assumptions about police training in these discussions. Budgets are what gets people trained. Cut the budgets they don't get proper training. Actually a lot of hand to hand training is NOT the same. There are competing opinions as to what to teach. Basic training in hand to hand defensive tactics has to be constantly practiced or you lose the lessons learned. Therein lies one problem. Not all officers get proper upgrading or refresher training. It depends on workloads, budgets, self-initiative to volunteer sometimes.

It used to be people predicted the world would end. Now they only say Seattle. What happened to the second sun, the huge meteor, the earthquake, the volcano...all the predictions of the end? Seattle. Bah. How limited in thought.

This is a complex issue so I will simply say to call Churchill a racist now as part of the reaction to the Floyd shooting is ill conceived and I refer to this article: https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/502684-winston-churchill-was-many-things-but-racist-was-not-one-of-them He was also accused of being an anti-semite but I would argue he was not: https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-hour/finest-hour-135/myth-and-reality-what-did-churchill-really-think-about-the-jews/ Calling him a bigot would be far too simplistic. A man like him hated everyone equally. From what emerges is he loved his wife and children but other than whiskey he had no fondness for anything or anyone although he developed a genuine friendship with King George. Great leaders like Churchill are by nature depressive. They have great moods of despair and react to that despair with gut idealism. Their sense of depression would be far more deep in context to define people by just skin colour or ancestry. Sure you can remove his words from their full context and take them literally. You won't get the full story. This is a man who defeated one of the worst racist haters life will ever know. To do that he could not be a racist. You can not defeat what you are only what you never wish to be.

Lol Bush his black face may have gone over in Holland. They have that character every Christmas with Santa who helps him carry presents and he puts coal in your sock if you were bad. On a more serious note, the UN as a moral authority is a bankrupt notion. Its been compromised fatally by human rights violating nations, corruption, and powerlessness. I never will have a thing to do with it. Had it not been for Elenor Roosevelt standing up to the entire UN turning its back on Jewish refugees and single handedly defending hundreds of thousands of displaced Jews they would have never been able to find refuge back in our ancient homeland. How the hell would I take the UN seriously abandoning Jews? It abandon innocent civilians slaughtered in Rwanda, Burundi. It paid scant lip service to massacres of southern Sudanese being slaughtered, Yazidis, Kurds, Tibetans. It allowed its UN Refugee Organization to be used by terrorist organizations as a cover to store weapons, transfer weapons and terrorists, and be used as launch zones. By so doing it not only took sides in a conflict but it endangered the very refugees it was claiming to serve and exposed them to death and attacks instead of removing terrorists out of their camps or their UN facility buildings. I know for a fact having worked on some international work investigating sex crime movement internationally its corrupt. You can not do a damn thing with it. You run into some individual paid a damn good salary sitting in a New York apartment far removed from their country of origin lapping it up ignoring their fellow citizens. It needs to replaced by an apolitical organization but the problem is the moment any organization is funded by a government, the political partisan corruption sets in. Trudeau is a sphincter muscle for trying to get a seat. Norway and Ireland had been campaigning for 10 years before Canada entered into the competition. Why even compete? Why? Why not wait for the round after that? Why even bother? Canada gains sweet phack all sitting on the Security Council.

Police brutality or excessive force yes must be held accountable.

I gotta say, I like everyone else comment after the fact on what we see in cell videos. We have to remember we may not have seen everything or we often project onto what we see preconceived ideas. You know I am only giving subjective opinions. I give you and Wes the other side of the argument at times but I agree there are two sides at least if not more to every incident and some people are completely ignoring or detaching the actions of the perpetrator or suspect from the cause and effect they trigger. That is a valid criticism. We do have a tendency after an incident to form angry lunch mobs. It is human nature. I am old enough to remember Robert F. Kennedy talking to rioting people after MLK was killed. I remember that as much as I remember MLK in our synagogue in Montreal talking about rising above anger and reaching out to people we think are our enemy. Leaders like that are needed now. In the US, they need some young Americans willing to get into politics in spite of all the corruption they might see. Easier said than done. You need to be a millionaire and then some to run for politics these days.

Discussions as to appropriate police training or use of force are not a conservative or liberal partisan issue. You lump all conservatives in a ridiculous generalization and therein lies the problem I have with you, me for that matter, anyone when we discuss police. We are all making assumptions and generalizations after the fact. Adding to it is trying to suggest it has partisan definitions. That is illogical and not helpful. You want outrage take a look at a tape today from Calgary of a sex predator in and out of the system 55 times randomly walking down the street and pushing at an old lady who falls and bangs her head. Luckily he was arrested without incident. We live in a world full of unstable people. To think any of us know what reasonable force is in any given situation is arrogant. Sure we comment after the fact on forums and have discussions. Of course but come on this is not left or right politics. This is about having subjective perceptions after the fact of what you and I see on cell phones now broadcasting to the media. Its a world of instant reporting and none of us know how much the cell phone captured in the entire incident and some of us like to add in our subjective projections and assumptions especially now Floyd triggered a floodgate of concern.

No. That makes zero sense. If someone is out of control they take his back legs and bend and cuff the legs up to the hands that are cuffed. The last thing you do is put a violent out of control person in an ambulance without proper leg restraints. You immobilize his legs first. You do not use a knee for a prolonged restraint, only a takedown and until the cuffs are on. There is no move to restrain his legs...he was cuffed and on the ground . At that point a hand pushing on his head sideways is more than sufficient if you need to restrain. At this point you are inventing as you go along to try talk around the knee restraint.

None of you know a police department's budget and how it allocates the funds its given . So how do you even begin to comment on what you do not want to pay for? Some of you think because you question police training and tactics it now magically gives you the right with no basis to start slashing budgets? The word defunding is a reactionary word that arose as a result of anger over the Floyd incident. Now this board suddenly sees every interaction with an officer as a platform to accuse them all of brutality and better still slash budgets. As for making sweeping generalizations about police unions, I pass. The need to say something negative whenever the word police is used, makes it difficult to discuss any issue with police. Oh well no one is talking about covid. I give this a few weeks to die down and shrivel away like the Russian troll until he comes back with a new name.

What is a water cannon? Do you understand the high frequency weapon they use that come from these armoured vehicles? It's bad enough you try claim a tank has to have threads now you want to pretend their crowd deterrent weapons are not weapons.

What is your problem man. Lol and please feel free to use the words oy gevalt.

I think I might change my name to Hitlerino.