Rue

You do not question You believe anything anyone who you think agrees with you says. The fact you came on this forum extolling the virtues of a bi-polar mentally ill person called Brother Nathaniel telling everyone to read him and follow him speaks to YOUR ignorance and how you will believe anything someone tells you as long as it conforms to your hate agenda You pose as a questioner. You don't question you deny, You are a holocaust denier and a Hitler apologist because you think that is what suits your neo white supremacist agenda. Its there in all your words. You hijacked this thread to deny the holocaust and the moderator protects you for doing that. Good for you.

You missed the point Dialamah. The way to get him back to Canada was not predicated on pleading him guilty. Not at all.

Yes now explain what proof you have it means he could not have thrown the grenade he claims he did. See the problem is people assume he could not have thrown the grenade but whY Explain why please. In fact look at the deris. Its not on top of Kadr its to the side of Kadr. That was not his body under the debris. He's not bneath the rubble he is to the side of the rubble. This is a classic example of the description of a photo not matching the photo. Been there one that with idiots after the fact who interpret pictures incorrectly.

I agree with Jacee's interpretation of the law but don't agree with the methods being used by the railroad blockers.

I just think the way t go about achieving that can't be done blocking railway tacks. I also question people who are not indigenous now copy catting Mohawks. They wouldn't know a Mohawk from one of my tribe. They think we both have big noses. The issues about the environment can be dealt with. Next the way to deal with legal issues that remain resolved is through dialogue not tantrums and ultimatums by either side.

Here is what I think a debate between Donny and Bernie would sound like: "What?" "Vut?" "They love me.." " Bernie Bernie" " I am the greatest President the US ever had..." "Not everyday a Jew moves to Burlington and becomes Mayor..." " France..yah that Macoroni guy....married his mother.. very strange but I like gays... lots of gays love me" " Gay lovers? No Can't say I have...we do have gays in Burlington....they ski..." " Polanski...wat about him..." " Herb Litvak...did you say Herb Litvak....he's a shmuck..." "Our economy...well you know watch it grow " No no you can't use that word say African American...." " Obama was African you know..." "Vat? Vat is dat? " No no...I don't engage in that..I think the French President does......." " Oy I got a concusssion " Suction....did he say suction no no my lips are always like this....why are you always bent over anyways..." "What? Did you just tell me to bend over...what..." STOP FULL STOP

Oh I can explain that. He farted. (oh that was immature I admit)

Message received. I also concede BC's point. I have been in a similir situation to what BC said and the union did not help me in that situation. All I am saying is not all unions are bad and not all management are bad and sometimes we need unions and sometimes we probably are better off with some other system when unions get too powerful and corrupt and lose touch with their own mandate. Truthfully I am not too sympathetic to the teachers' unions. I have too much insider knowledge on their inside b.s. politics from work I have done with them to be without bias against them. I do know some damn good unions and some shady ones. Just like business people. They come in all shapes and sizes. That said I respect teachers and governments trying to be fiscally responsible.

It can be and in other sectors or places it is anti-union. It depends on the work sector.

Whatever the issues are, copycats are now showing up at railroad tracks and most of them are not even indigenous peoples showing this has become an exercise for self-entitled guilty white folk who don't work. If they really cared this is not the way to go about offering constructive dialogue. This is what sheltered silver spoons do using indigenous people or the cause of the day to have their tantrums. At the end of their displays, these twats will go back home to Mama and dinner waiting.

Interesting is right. Not one of his damned 6 lawyers thought to plead him not guilty and only raised their legal arguments not as to the accuracy of what he said but to admissibility only once he was not allowed back in Canada. Interesting indeed.

Eye I did make one error I now admit. Kadr did apologize once. Apparently he said once to the widow of the deceased: “I’m really, really sorry for the pain I caused you and your family,”... https://toronto.citynews.ca/2010/10/28/omar-khadr-apologizes-to-widow-of-soldier-he-killed/ However As I said however, he has never offered any amount of money to the family or stated what he did was wrong and he waited a long time to even say the above.. Now in regards to the many articles that exist that speculate he could have been killed by friendly fire they did not provide eye witness statements as to someone other than Kadr killing Speer. In fact you provided an article raising "scenarios". Scenarios are theories not eye witness reports. Next, Mr. Kadr himself admitted to killing Speer, specifically: par.5: "In February and September 2003, agents from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (“CSIS”) and the Foreign Intelligence Division of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (“DFAIT”) questioned Mr. Khadr on matters connected to the charges pending against him and shared the product of these interviews with U.S. authorities. In March 2004, a DFAIT official interviewed Mr. Khadr again, with the knowledge that he had been subjected by U.S. authorities to a sleep deprivation technique, known as the “frequent flyer program”, in an effort to make him less resistant to interrogation. During this interview, Mr. Khadr refused to answer questions. ,, par.20: ["The record suggests that the interviews conducted by CSIS and DFAIT provided significant evidence in relation to these charges. During the February and September 2003 interrogations, CSIS officials repeatedly questioned Mr. Khadr about the central events at issue in his prosecution, extracting statements from him that could potentially prove inculpatory in the U.S. proceedings against him (CSIS Document, Exhibit “U” to Affidavit of Lt. Cdr. William Kuebler, November 7, 2003 (J.R., vol. II, at p. 280); Interview Summary, Exhibit “AA” to Affidavit of Lt. Cdr. William Kuebler, February 24, 2003 (J.R., vol. III, at p. 289); Interview Summary, Exhibit “BB” to Affidavit of Lt. Cdr. William Kuebler, February 17, 2003 (J.R., vol. III, at p. 292); Interview Summary, Exhibit “DD” to Affidavit of Lt. Cdr. William Kuebler, April 20, 2004 (J.R., vol. III, at p. 296)). A report of the Security Intelligence Review Committee titled CSIS’s Role in the Matter of Omar Khadr (July 8, 2009), further indicated that CSIS assessed the interrogations of Mr. Khadr as being “highly successful, as evidenced by the quality intelligence information” elicited from Mr. Khadr (p. 13). These statements were shared with U.S. authorities and were summarized in U.S. investigative reports (Report of Investigative Activity, Exhibit “AA” to Affidavit of Lt. Cdr. William Kuebler, February 24, 2003 (J.R., vol. III, at pp. 289 ff.)). Pursuant to the relaxed rules of evidence under the U.S. Military Commissions Act of 2006, Mr. Khadr’s statements to Canadian officials are potentially admissible against him in the U.S. proceedings, notwithstanding the oppressive circumstances under which they were obtained: see United States of America v. Jawad, Military Commission, September 24, 2008, D-008 Ruling on Defense Motion to Dismiss — Torture of the Detainee (online: http://www.defense.gov/news/Ruling D‑008.pdf). The above interrogations also provided the context for the March 2004 interrogation, when a DFAIT official, knowing that Mr. Khadr had been subjected to the “frequent flyer program” to make him less resistant to interrogations, nevertheless proceeded with the interrogation of Mr. Khadr (Interview Summary, Exhibit “DD” to Affidavit of Lt. Cdr. William Kuebler, April 20, 2004 (J.R., vol. III, at p. 296))." The above paragraphs can be found at: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7842/index.do The above case report goes on to explain that the evidence was iegally obtained., i.e, was obtained by breaching Kadr's Constitutional Rights under s.7 and the fundamental rules of natural justice. NO WHERE DID ANYONE SAY THE EVIDENCE OBTAINED WAS INACCURATE. In fact had it been his lawyers had full opportunity to have plead him not guilty. Instead they chose to please him guilty. His lawyers were not tortured or forced to do anything. Most certainly under Canadian law he evidence was illegally obtained but it did not make his staements inaccurate. The fact is the kind of sleep deprivation used did not inflict pain and Mr. Kadr would not have felt physical pain coercing him to say what he did. The technique used on him would not alter his capacity or free will but it would make him less likely to yell, scream or become emotional. It would be the equivalent of giving him Lorazepam a mild anti anxiety agent. Next the articles about it could have been friendly fire are not forensic evidence or contradictory eye witness reports.In fact these after the fact articles written by people who do not understand the close proximity Kadr was in with Speer immediately prior to the attack did not address the or the constellation of open wound patterns on both Kadr and the deceased, the blood splash pattern or what Kadr was in fact doing. More to the point if these writers felt the evidence was not fulsome or conclusive why did his lawyers not think this as well> Perhaps they can go ask Kadr's lawyers why they did not plead Kadr innocent. Instead they plead him guilty. They only raised an appeal once they realized he would not be allowed back in Canada and the appeal did not claim the testimony was false, but that it was obtained illegally. That timing and the choice of legal arguments on appeal says it all. Let us be clear, the entire line of defense on appeal was only raised once and only once Kadr was refused re-entry to Canada on procedural irregularities...no lawyer who had the full opportunity when representing Kadr let hm plead guilty in the first place stopped him from doing so. His lawyers without coercion voluntarily pleaded him guilty based on his interviews knowing the techniques used because they had no concern as to the techniques used. They only raised the issue of constitutional illegality ONCE and only once he was not allowed return to Canada which was there right and quite frankly their arguments dismissing the evidence were correct but these legal arguments were based on procedures pertaining to admissibility not the accuracy of what Kadr said. Do also please give me the name of the eye witnesses who saw someone other than Kadr kill Speer. None exist. [

Your comment makes no sense. People with PTSD do not choose it as a set of values as terrorists due violence as a code to live by. Exhibiting a range of behavioral symptoms caused by their bodies not having adjusted outside the environment and sequences causing their trauma is not a choice people with PTSD make. to There is no deliberate choice to it like their is with being a terrorist. Ptsd is a range of subconscious reflexes triggered by noise, smell, taste, sight, memory. Terrorism is not like PTSD a subconscious state of maladjustment it is a conscious chain of thoughts and values one chooses to embrace.So your analogy makes no psychological sense and wrongfully equates mental illness with terrorism.The pathology of the two are distinct and most terrorists are social misfits but not mentally ill. Some are sociopathic or have border line personalities but as general rule they make choices to be violent with full undiminished capacity. Terrorists had a choice to be human and practice their religion as a code of peaceful behaviour. Thry chose to use their religion to justify their violent and lethal intolerance of others.They chose instead the path of inhumanity and to reject basic rules of civility. They made a choice. How about you make a choice Maroc. You justify Muslims engaging in terror but are the first to claim Iskam is a religion of peace. Do that dance with someone else. Please do not confuse me with the others. No amount of civilian clothing misleads me. You mistake me for someone who can not distinguish a terrorist from other Muslims. We have our ways. Now for my friend French Patriot I can assure you terrorists leave no souls around looking for the light when they get taken out. They just burn and burn with this never ending high pitched squeal and smell of sulphur They call it heartburn or dyspepsia if you are an atheist. There aint no virgins where tgesectoastec marshmallows go...just grinning skeletons with hooded robes devouring each martyr's genitilia slowly as they burn. It's a bbq right out of Salvador Dali's visions. Now back here in the the material world we put body parts in all kinds and sizes of bags. My soul mates the vultures and rats do not worry about bags nor for that matter practicing halal. I like vultures. They do the job better than I ever could and they never get heartburn. Trust that was not too cryptic. Sometimes these threads on death need a little crypticism.

Now look Shady if that is the choice even moi would vote Trump. What a choice. I can't take 10 seconds of Bernie, 15 of Donny. I will concede of course Shady from an economic perspective, Trump's government would be better than Bernie's blithering armchair 60's theories on government. Talk about dinosaurs. Do me a favour because you are a fiscal kind of person I get when it comes to economy what do you and Wes and Trumpers think of Bloomberg in terms of financial policies. I do not think he will win I am just curious.

You think the armchair millionaire socialism of Bernie Boy is even close to Putin's version of fascism? Really? Couldn't be more opposite. Hello what planet do you live on Iron? You don't think Trump and Putin are not the same person? Have you really ever seen them together at the same time? You know Hilary and Donny have doubles.

True. Which is why I support Romney over Trump. Thank you. If you actually play back the comments Romney made on Russia he was dead on.

They are-see Mandy's response. I have been before labour boards on grievances but its unusual. Most are settled, especially those dealing with occupational health and safety issues.

Excellent points but your argument applies to some but not all unions just as unethical business practices apply to some but not all companies. I can not argue certain unions are corrupt, reactionary, etc. of course not. I also though think as a worker, I am better off in a union to have my rights protected than depending on the Employment Standards Act.

..wow you are a commie. Now the native people I know use bullet boats. Lol. No solar panels. Good luck trying to catch one of them bullet boats. I actually had a canoe when I was younger. A heavy canvas canoe with wooden rims and tar patches. Hah. I think this canoe concept came from some guy in Miami smuggling drugs.

Homo Sapiens have a primal drive to gratuitously kill unlike any other life form on the planet (except certain Chimpanzees). As well when we are in groups, neurological studies have shown being in a group has the same effect on our frontal lobe as drinking alcohol, it triggers chemicals that numb that part of the brain and make it easier to kill or become violent. This is a throwback to our past primal imperative to survive by hunting in packs which increased the likelihood of killing what was needed to eat to survive. So that group interaction developed into a way to better kill an object of the hunt. Now we still have a killer drive but most of us through evolution have rechanneled its expression and/or repress it However our psyche has two components. The one that nourishes life and strives to create (positive) (eros)(yin) (light) and the one that strives to kill (negative)(thanitos) (yang) (dark). These two are equal propensities or drives within our psyche and supposedly in a healthy mind they balance each other out. Some of us are born missing an X chromosome and so would have no feelings so can kill in unlimited manner and feel nothing. We also know from anthropological and psychological studies that as a general ruke when you can see another man's eyes, it becomes much harder to kill him then when you do not have to see his face or eyes unless of course you are a person missing that x chromosome (sociopath) . Also those same studies showed that the more different someone looks from you, the easier it will be to kill them. Both these phenomena have been well documented. In fact so much so the American Armed Forces engaged in studies giving unsuspecting soldiers LSD, others LSD after telling them, and other sugar pills, to see if the LSD could make them braver or more capable of killing. The studies were a failure in that all they got was conflicted patterns of behaviour. Police or social workers or emergency doctors/nurses can tell you from their experiences, certain drugs like stp, crystal, cocaine, amphetamines, metaamphetamines, etc., can hype people into hyper drive where they have extra-ordinary energy that can turn into unfocused rage that kills. We also know people in manic phases of bi-polar disorder or in about 5% of certain kinds of schizophrenia (usually paranoid schizophrenia) can kill but these are cases where capacity to know right from wrong is diminished or completely prevented. Interestingly with sociopaths, they kill without remorse or feeling and know exactly what they do. So some people kill because of drugs or missing a chromosome or mental illness but really eople kill the same reasons others do not. Its a part of our inherited primal tendencies and whether we become civilized and repress the tendency to kill or not depends on our dna, inherited genetic characteristics, how the environment may influence us and ultimately our own individual choices we make. All the above goes out the toilet when it comes to war and terrorism. In a state of war or when dealing with terrorism, in the heat of the moment adrenaline causes the body to do unpredictable things to survive and ordinary people can become super-extraordinary (super string and without fear) in concentrated periods of time, or become catatonic (go into a trance) or become paralyzed (entire body, certain limbs, eyes). We also know people with Tourette's Syndrome (specific tics and twitches or repeat mannerisms) or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or stutterers, might find in the heat of conflict there symptoms not there as the intensity of the situation triggers adrenaline and other chemicals that deaden or shut down those symptoms. The same does not happen with bi-polar or schizophrenia. I have met and spoke with sociopaths. You would not know they are. You would have not a clue. What I do know as well working as a volunteer in a conflict zone with terrorists and the mothers of terrorists and brothers and sisters of terrorists is that these terrorists are not victims-they are quite aware of the choices they made and how it impacts on their families and others. They do not care. The part of their soul that cared is no longer there. In that sense the closest analogy is a vampire. They are alive but without a soul. They make that choice while the majority in their communities DO NOT and REFUSE TO and in fact shun them. They are not the glorious heroes they are depicted of. Many were already alienated from their communities. The profile they usually have in common is they feel powerless, unimportant, not in control of their destiny, and want to be respected and admired and thought of as the top of their communities. They do NOT like themselves. They hate who they are. They have as much hatred and contempt for their own people as they do their "enemy". Their "enemy" is a reminder to them of the parts of themselves they hate. The "enemy" is the thing they want to be but feel they can not be so they try extinguish this "enemy" which is the part of themselves they feel they can never be, They kill to block out any reminder of what they can not be. They are not in fact victims. They engage in victimization. Their victims are their own people as well as the innocent civilians they kill who they call the "enemy". Soldiers are not victimized by them. Soldiers are there to negate their power. Victims are people they have power over. They have no power over soldiers. Soldiers do not fear them. Soldiers are more likely to fear an "enemy" soldier than a terrorist. Terrorists are actually not brave. You get them one on one and many of them cry, plea, whine, urinate their pants, shake with fear, regress to an infantile state. They often need drugs or alcohol or getting into a religious frenzied state from chanting to be able to fight. Many panic and run. The ones that "die", the supposed martyrs are a minority of these terrorists and are dead eyed. You look at them there is nothing in the eyes. Something in them was snapped by their own fellow terrorists who trained them. Such terrorists are made to believe their life has no value and the only value they can have is after they are dead. They are not victims. I have seen people from the same environment and some walk away from this, others embrace it. You have the vast majority of people from conflict zones reject it. If it was as simple as saying terrorists were victims, everyone in the world would be a terrorist because all of us face situations where we loath ourselves or our lack of control over what we think is our destiny.

Marocc and Kactus you will exploit any issue if you think it supports your view of Muslim extremist views. The coronavirus has nothing to do with religion. Not a damn thing. It hasn't been inflicted on Muslims because they are Muslim. Muslim nations as we speak arrest and detain fellow Muslims in squalid conditions and these prisoners are tortured, infested with lice and disease from the poor conditions. Have either of you been concerned? Why suddenly only with Muslims imprisoned by the Chinese? Where have you two been? Where have the two of you been all these years as Muslims at the hands of other Muslims have been exposed to countless diseases and squalid conditions? Tell me. Please. Why the selective outrage? What bullshit. Someone had to say it.

I must agree. The numbers of one school system would not be much. As someone who feels religion and public schools should be separate I in theory don't like separate schools based on religion but the practical reality is Catholic schools do not exclude any other religions and do not impose their religions on others in their schools and this is evidenced by the sheer no. of non Catholics who opt to go to Catholic schools. That said, the separate Catholic system is an anachronism from constitutional decrees and is a separate issue. I just don't think it would save money or help what ails our schools. Also I would argue this...no matter who the government is, it can not run a school system that is also a social service system on the scale it does without running huge deficits. The social services segment added to the school system, i.e., buses, special accommodations for disabilities, teaching assistants, teaching aides, ...these costs based on our desire to make school accessible and equal to all while great in theory, costs in reality and those costs have been sky rocketing. There is only so much taxes can collect for such services. Our expectations of social services being as large and unlimited as they now are can not be anymore. We can't afford it. The state as a big endless supply of breast milk for anyone who is thirsty is just not working. That tit has shriveled up and we still have thousands screaming for that tit. Something has to give and parents addicted to the tit do not want to consider alternatives because they are afraid and no one has been able to articulate any that would give them confidence to be fair. We need to look at the amount of social services and ask do or should they remain in public schools? Is it time we decentralize certain students into special needs institutions that can be run privately such as with the model they use in the state of Colorado which has proven quite successful as providing subsidies to such private institutions to service special needs children is still cheaper than doing it in regular schools. The idea we can be all things to everyone with all needs in a public school system was never financially viable. It is a political reality no one wants to deal with because its not politically correct or sensitive to say certain children should not be mainstreamed-it provides a feel good exercise for the parents of these kids but does not address their issues which are high intensity needs and expensive and can't be served properly throwing them out willy nilly in public school settings where costs become redundant and serving such students competes with other costs. Just like OHIP can not provide unlimited services, neither can a school system with social services. No one wants to talk limits and what those limits are and whether there are alternative service providing methods.

You also get why as a Jew(minority) from Montreal, being bilingual was for me not a political issue but one of common courtesy. 90% of the province spoke French, why would I not? I never saw it as a political issue until it was used symbolically to express a greater anxiety Quebec felt in North America. I did experience a Catholic church anti Semitism in the Quebecois culture but nothing that could not be settled on a hockey rink or football field and sometimes in certain work sectors where being a Jew or any minority was verboten. There's a reason we went into professions and started out own hospitals in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada, no different than many other minorities. My model of dealing with it was from the Irish I grew up with. Never apologize for your heritage but don't get to stupid about it you still need the guy to play hockey with. Levesque as you were well aware was in the Minister in charge of electricity in Lesage's government and actually felt Quebec got ripped off in hydro deals although how he arrived at that conclusion when it was in fact Newfoundland ripped off in the hydro deal with Quebec is beyond me. Levesque was no bigot. He was there at the first concentration camps as a war correspondent seeing it first hand. The man never used a bigoted word against minorities in Quebec. Some of his colleagues though were out and out bigots. Parizeau was one example. Luciens Bouchard who was a Tory was no bigot. But other than those two, and Johnson of course, the rest of that movement got taken over by neo nationalists with out and out fascist tendencies couched in reference to protecting minorities and the references in French were never subtle. Those of us brought up on the Mordecai Richler perception of Quebec, i.e., the minorities caught in between the old time English and French realized without us in the middle as a buffer zone they really did not like each other. So we managed as the buffers and we did well. We were the most cosmopolitan city even more so than Vancouver at one point with all our minorities thriving and providing bagels to both English and French and everyone was interconnected by the religion of Maurice Richard and Les Canadiens which to this day remains sacred ground. Today I have to agree with you, what Quebec asks for is what all other provinces want but.. I would add.,.. HAVE NOT been given because they haven't been able to use language as the pretext to claim victimhood. Ah its a strange world. I respect Quebec's right to protect its culture no different than I do native peoples, Newfoundland's or Alberta's on and on but when it comes to political jurisdiction squabbles over who controls natural resources, I become grumpy Sky. As a taxpayer I do not car which government does the job as long as both governments to not be redundant and corrupt about it. I think too many politicians are simply building their power base and only that. What do I know, because I define Quebec by only two things, bagels and Les Canadiens. Everything else is b.s. Albertans need to invent their own bagel. They have had both their teams win Stanley Cups so they have no need to whine. Only Vancouver and Winnipeg get to. Quebec City never should have had any team and Atlantic Canadians I wish could have their own team in Halifax called the Mooseheads or even better the Atlantic Stompin Toms named after the patron saint of PEI.

Bull. Here is one of his gems: "When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." Oh let's just pull the last sentence and ignore the rest of the context hmm? How about this gem: "The Oscars were a great night for Mexico & why not — they are ripping off the US more than almost any other nation." Then: "And if you look at black and African American youth, to a point where they’ve never done more poorly. There’s no spirit." and: "Our great African American President hasn’t exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are happily and openly destroying Baltimore!" and: "I’ve read hundreds of books about China over the decades. I know the Chinese. I’ve made a lot of money with the Chinese. I understand the Chinese mind.” and: “We have people coming into the country or trying to come in, we're stopping a lot of them, but we're taking people out of the country. You wouldn't believe how bad these people are," ... "These aren't people. These are animals." The litany of hate mongering crap that he spreads on twitter and to the media is public domain. Yah its fun fun. Trump engages in the deliberate technique of engaging in inflammatory language he knows will inflame the media but at the same time cause it to focus on him. In this manner he feels he controls the media to showcase his message to his followers. He also feeds his need to constantly make everything about him. His message of exclusion and polarization is specifically designed to keep himself pleased by putting down others to show how great he is and you go along like a fish on a hook. Its a fun chant. Yah so was Zieg Heil to a lot of people.

No I just listen to the context in what he says. I don't live in a fantasy cult world where I take snippets of what he says and ignore the rest.