scribblet

Personally I don't hate anyone, but the deniers like to frame any disagreement as hate.

Here go - Godwin's Law Climatistas like to use the apocalypse as a propaganda tool, continuing dire warnings in order to keep control and keep in mind that most if not all apocalyptic predictions have been spectacularly wrong. The predicted massive shortages of natural resources and the end of economic growth which all seem to accept without question isn’t happening, they are still as plentiful but getting more expensive because of useless taxes. Common sense is what we need and the recognition that virtually all greenhouse gas growth comes from China or India and other poorer countries. Driving a Tesla or Prius isn’t going to change much of anything for the climate and most of the ‘green’ policies only hurt the lower income people. What we should be doing is continuing to cut back on pollution, trash etc. while building to adapt to earth’s changes, which we cannot stop. This is from 2007 but still holds true https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/feb/07/climatehysteria

Imagine their heads if Trump can extends his term by 3 years... no election in 2020 https://dailyworldupdate.us/supreme-court-can-extend-trumps-term-by-up-to-3-years-if-hes-acquitted-in-the-senate/

So now we have someone saying we should bring in rationing and mandatory cutbacks on everything we consume. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-climate-crisis-is-like-a-world-war-so-lets-talk-about-rationing/ Some environmental activists and leaders suggest we should practise moderation, take the bus, eat veggie burgers. But voluntary measures just can’t deliver when the problem is this big and time is so short. That’s why it may be time for mandatory cutbacks on the kinds of consumption that threaten all of us. It may be time for rationing. I guess what they really want is for us all to self-immolate, in order to save the world.

Trudeau and Butts will circumvent the Canadian Criminal Code to arrive at an “independent” definition of “hate speech" which they will enforce along with defining what they deem 'offensive'. If we base our expectations on the Trudeau regime's history of the promotion of Islam and Sikhism while negating anything about the Christian faith in Canada, one can pretty much guess as to how this will play out.

No sh.t Sherlock https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/12/13/worlds-highest-weather-stations-reveal-intense-sunshine-may-be-melting-ice-mount-everest/

Kudos to Denmark police for cashing 20 suspected terrorists and averting a massacre, The police in Denmark have arrested 20 Muslim terrorists who were involved in the preparation of a major terror attack, in a series of counter-terrorism raids across the country. According to the police, investigators carried out “comprehensive and coordinated” action at several addresses across the country to foil a major Islamist terror attack. https://www.timesofisrael.com/denmark-police-say-terror-attack-plans-foiled-20-arrested/ and another one shot in Paris... https://btnews.online/france-muslim-terrorist-shot-and-eliminated-after-attempting-to-stab-police-officers-in-paris/?fbclid=IwAR3MdQi0Htra-tbIMEe2eRL8IJccnzcA5YjRdmWLbPUW1yAb2lrFQBIfmNQ This one is scary.. ISIS urges followers to ignite fires in U.S. and Europe forests https://nypost.com/2019/11/06/isis-urges-followers-to-ignite-fires-in-forests-across-us-and-europe/?fbclid=IwAR3Sj6xGIm8O1gQMRpNBxFsjGdKJnNWMPkDxUIg0CxR-GggBkULSNt18yQQ

If f anyone believes that the Liberal regime would be fair about how it goes about this I've got some swampland I can sell you. We allready have limitations on speech, we don't have First Amendment rights, this is nothing but the jackboots of Liberal fascism attempting to stop any criticism they deem 'hateful'. .. as Blacklock's Reporter said: We Will Regulate Facebook... The Liberal Party in a campaign questionnaire yesterday said if re-elected it will regulate Facebook, YouTube and other social media to prohibit content deemed hurtful. Scofflaws will face significant fines. Authors of the questionnaire said regulations should also ban “false attacks” on politicians: “We will move forward with new regulations for social media platforms. Gee, false attacks on politicians, that one should be fun as they would be pretty much first up for the firing squad. This is an attack on free speech by fear and repression This says a lot about it and they are not wrong and if you think they won't be moving the goalposts as they decide what we should say or not say, Will we have to pay a fine or go to jail for using the wrong pronoun, will they censor the media in the name of 'regulating the media' https://www.thepostmillennial.com/the-trudeau-government-wants-to-censor-your-social-media/ Trudeau should listen to himself as back in May he said: says governments need to be wary of taking steps to regulate social media platforms that could be used by authoritarian regimes to further oppress citizens and stifle free speech. [/b[

And so it begin: and we know 'hate speech' will be defined by liberals which usually refers to anyone disagreeing with a liberal. https://pm.gc.ca/en/mandate-letters/minister-canadian-heritage-mandate-letter "Create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties."

I doubt you know that or that he 'barely passed', the rest is also nonsense.

Right. this is all reminiscent of the "scary Harper agenda" days you know...the so cons are coming, the so cons are coming , with hyperbole and innuendo intended to set liberals shivering in fear... guess it still works.

Right, because his so called religious agenda never materialized, didn't happen. in fact, some people were unhappy that he did not not pursue it. waiting for someone to mention but John Hagee

Marci McDonald was pretty good at fearmongering about Harper and religion, I wouldn't believe much of any thing she says about Harper, it was all supposition and innuendo. Harper went to church I suppose but his politics were informed by economics not religion. Obviously his actions during his term put a lie to whatever she purported to know.

No they were not. Harper never ever talked about his beliefs or made religious comments and actually neither did Scheer. it was the media that continually harped on it. j

Well I think there was one ...Stockwell Day

Lisa Rait said yesterday she will not run, no word from Ambrose yet but if she does run she's a shoe in (I think).

My understanding too, Corbyn was Marxist and anti Semitic, I can't imagine the damage he would have done had he got a majority. He promised free internet, to redistribute the wealth (read taxes and more taxes) nationalize some companies and massively increase public spending.

No, he quit rather than allow a very divisive time leading up to a review that could've torn the party apart. This now leads the way for them to select someone who can beat Trudeau.

He certainly fell on his sword for the good of the party, he is a good man. Now the fun begins.

No, it does not seem that way as Quebec only made it mandatory in 2017, prior to that there were exemptions. As I said, someone needs to google the French papers. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-becomes-latest-province-to-make-sex-education-compulsory/article37335042/

I thought that too, Martin was a good finance minister although his proposed changes to the OAS were pretty draconian so much so that he had to withdraw it. It wouldn't fly today either. https://archive.macleans.ca/article/1998/4/20/citizens-revolt#!&pid=12