Moonlight Graham
-
Posts
10,708 -
Joined
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Moonlight Graham
-
-
Breaking news: Very wealthy people contribute money to and influence elections.
-
1
-
-
Great list.
-
1
-
-
Name all the MP's immediately, boot them from Parliament, and charge them for their crimes. I hope they get the most serious sentences possible under the law to make an example of them.
Steven Chase is Senior Parliamentary reporter for Globe & Mail:
-
Now they can prosecute the W. Bush admin too. Yeah right.
I hope he goes to jail, and a lot of other politicians and White House appointees deserve it too. But if you're not in the establishment you just don't get the same protection.
We know the Trudeau gov foreign interference investigation will amount to nothing, save some public opinion outrage that gets lost in the next dozen news cycles.
-
31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:
That's super informative to me. So did the talks stop then ? Why didn't they continue from the opening position ?
Recommend reading the wikipedia entry on Camp David, 2nd intifada, and Gaza de-occupation.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
Your constant discounting of the Palestinians as having any legitimacy leads us to where we are today. If negotiations are not possible, then you will have constant war - which is what the Israeli PM and Hamas both want. So no more complaining about innocent civilians on either side, this is the situation you are comfortable with...
I've never said that some of their complaints aren't legitimate, that's a strawman. We're here today because most Palestinians, especially their leaders, do not recognize Israel's right to exist. There will be permanent warfare as long as Israel exists. Do you deny this?
They had negotiations for the UN Partition Plan, they failed. Camp David failed. Do research about why. The Palestinian governments have never wanted any final 2-state solution, except as a bad faith attempt to gain concessions to get closer to a 1-state solution of Arab control, which is what they really want. Maybe Abbas is different, I don't know. He's also a holocaust denier so who knows.
My preference is a 2-state solution. That is not the Arab preference, and at times not the Israel preference but at times Israel have also been ready to make a 2-state solution and make concessions. They conceded Gaza while asking nothing in return, and it's been nothing but a disaster, and driven the Israeli government harder to the right. You give them back all of the West Bank (which Israel should probably do) and we're back to pre-1967 borders, and pre-1967 they were also not satisfied and attacked Israel. The UN Partition Plan gave much more land than the pre-1967 borders, and the Arab leaders rejected it and immediately launched an attack on Israel. What has changed?
Every time Arabs launch a major attack on Israel, they end up losing, either many innocent lives or more land. Every single time. We will have peace when Palestinian/Arab leadership stops looking for a military solution, stops attacking Israel and is finally ready for good faith negotiations towards 2 states. And it would take a lot of faith for Israel to trust them on that and make more concessions at this point.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
Once again I am asking about the Oslo Accord.
Ask Arafat why it ended at Camp David.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit#Responsibility_for_failure
-
2
-
-
21 minutes ago, eyeball said:
You're going to hang that on a dubious majority in a dubious election nearly 20 years ago?
From the River to the Sea is also in Likud's charter.
Do you think the vast majority of Gazans and Palestinians believe in "From the river to the sea..."? This has been their belief since the day Israel was created and they won't stop killing Jews until all of Israel is conquered by Islam again like it was when the successors of Mohamed's caliphate empire conquered Israel shortly after his death and later renamed it "Palestine" and build mosques on top of the rubble of Jewish synagogues.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, eyeball said:
Then why didn't we take them in?
No they didn't, Canada helped Israel make that bed and forced them into it. We had Chief Justice Acton to thank for that - he rather infamously said one-Jew-too-many when it came to Jews immigrating to Canada back then
You're seriously blaming Canada for the situation and giving Palestinians a free pass? Zionism goes back a lot longer than WWII. Read your history and do your homework. Every 2-state negotiation has failed since 1947 because Palestinian leaders will not accept final borders with Israel because they do not want Israel to exist in any form whatsoever. Their goal is the complete elimination of Israel and they won't EVER stop attacking Israel until this happens. Not in a thousand years.
-
3
-
-
7 minutes ago, eyeball said:
If we turn away Hamas sure but they represent Iranians not Palestinians.
Huh? Hamas is the democratically elected government in Gaza. They voted for a terrorist group whose raison d'etre is the destruction of Israel through terrorism via violent jihad. They specifically condemn any peace negotiations or diplomacy, only jihad. It's in their charter.
-
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:
You're leaving out some factors but yes.
It's humanitarianism. I would save civilians without screening them, that's what humanitarian aid is. I would be equally ok with not giving them status and sending them back to get them out of there.
I obviously wouldn't let them die. But there's a difference in helping people and permanently welcoming them into your society.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, eyeball said:
Probably for the same reason we didn't take in any Jews way back in the day when we turned them away and help force them onto other people.
It's just to bad there was no one powerful or willing enough to force us. It might have prevented a lot of bad consequences.
We turned away Jews in WWII because our government was filled with racist antisemites If we turn away Gazans now it's because the large majority of THEM are racist antisemites.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:
They're all terrorist 'supporters' if they voted for Hamas. They let Nazis come here too.
I think you have to state that you support Canadian values or somesuch but I think they just lie.
If they have relatives here that sounds better than Ukraine on that level.Are you comfortable and prepared to import hatred and antisemitism? Bringing in 5000 Gazans will guarantee that 100%. Are you willing to accept the responsibility for supporting that decision? The dancing in the streets of Toronto on Oct 7 and shooting at Israeli schools and firebombing synogogues etc? You can explain why these Jewish families have to live with more of that.
All for what? Why can't Arab countries take in 5000? They sure as heck would never take in any Jews.
-
2
-
-
52 minutes ago, Goddess said:
I doubt the government will do any screening. In practice, we have no standards any more.
Canada has become a haven for terrorists from all over the world.
Canada screens people for health/disease and past criminal record (according to the government records of their country of origin). For refugees, nothing else than that.
Most Gazans are taught in school and from their parents from a young age to hate Jews and Israel, to cheer their deaths and Hamas. There are many Arab neighbours perfectly capable of taking in Gaza refugees. Canada could help refugees escape, provide humanitarian aid, transportation, possibly provide temporary refuge. The number of permanent residents from Gaza that Canada should accept is probably zero, unless there's some method of weeding the good from the bad, which there isn't. Canada should be in the business of eliminating racial and religious hatred from its society, not importing it. If Arab countries couldn't take them in it would be a different situation.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:
a fifth column acts on behalf of an hostile foreign power
thus you are asserting the United Kingdom to be an enemy of Canada
sheer lunacy
Ok then it's just you wanting to destroy this country.
-
6 hours ago, herbie said:
Oh Jeez can I be in the Fifth Column too?
....
I swore oaths to the Queen in Scouts and Cadets. She's dead. It's all over now, the Royal family are just historical quirks, leftovers from an era long gone. We can swear oaths to the Canadian Constitution from now on.
The Comonwealth is just a club, an historical association we can share sports contests with. Maybe turn into a Trade treaty and give some meaning to.A fifth column can only act on behalf of a foreign country. Republicans wouldn't qualify.
You swore an oath to the Queen and her heirs and successors. You didn't swear an oath to a person per say, you're swearing an oath to a title, the monarch, the bearer of the Crown. The person, Charles or Elizabeth, have no lawmaking power, and they're supposed to remain apolitical. They're the head of state, it is for ceremony and tradition now. The Brits took the rest of the power away from the monarch centuries ago before Canada was even a country. But all power of the state vests in the Crown, for tradition and symbolism's sake. All laws are the King's laws, but none of them are decided by them. The monarch is the personification of the state itself, as a symbol. King Charles represents Canada in flesh and blood.
-
6 hours ago, Dougie93 said:
he's already on the $10 bank note
Not any more, unfortunately.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Dougie93 said:
you are the fifth column, inveighing against the Canadian oath of allegiance to the British Crown ; is sedition
There's no "Canadian oath of allegiance to the British Crown". It literally doesn't exist except in your imagination. The Canadian Crown reigns in our constitution. Long live the King! But start a new religion and believe whatever fables you wish you convince yourself of.
-
1
-
-
56 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:
the Commonwealth is clearly not what you believe it to be
The only thing I said it was is that it's not called "the British Commonwealth". They share or shared the same monarch, that is all.
There is no British monarch in Canada. British citizenship has no title here. They can't vote in federal elections here. Only Canadians.
If you don't want to be a Canadian anymore then do the honorable thing and give up your citizenship and leave, instead of trying to break up the country on behalf of a foreign nation. You're a fifth column.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Dougie93 said:
on the contrary
I love American freedom
I would prefer American freedom
yet I am bound by my solemn oath taken to defend & uphold the British Crown in North America
There is no "British Crown" in North American. It died in America in 1776, and Canada in 1953.
https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/crown-canada/monarch.html
You don't even seem to know what the commonwealth is. I can assure you it's not called "The British Commonwealth", as no such entity exists.
I laugh at all the Brits I talk to who think we're still a British colony. The Brit imperialists are so smug and class-based, "Canadians" being of a lower class to them of course.
-
1
-
-
On 5/22/2024 at 5:44 PM, Dougie93 said:
you are the one whom invoked the Vimy Myth to me, and rightfully so
hold to your oath, you said
as I say, I am a dual citizen, fiercely loyal to the American religion
none the less, I undertook that solemn oath in the face of God Himself
hand on the King James Bible, beneath the laid up Colours, by the Book of the Dead
at St. Andrew's Church on King Street West
"I ......... (full name), do swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her heirs and successors according to law, in the Canadian Forces until lawfully released, that I will resist Her Majesty's enemies and cause Her Majesty's peace to be kept and maintained and that I will, in all matters pertaining to my service, faithfully discharge my duty. So help me God."
So you're a republican and a monarchist? 😂
You have no loyalty to the monarch of Canada if you seek to break up their country.
A Canadian by convenience it sounds like.
-
1
-
-
I think it's increasingly clear that any UN body controlled by the General Assembly is apt to be corrupt due to the GA being made up of mostly dictatorship countries.
Harper was criticized for wanting to defund and leave parts of the UN. Looks like he was right. We owe him an apology on that.
John McCain wanted to create a League of Democracies. I still agree with this.
-
1
-
-
On 5/24/2024 at 10:59 AM, Michael Hardner said:
Therein is the dichotomy of Canadian politics. Scandals don't matter if you like the guy. Similarly, we toss out scandal-free (or almost) leaders like PMs Harper and Martin pretty easily.
But anyway, as you are all saying, at this point in history having a vision is the most important thing. PP might have it, but he's not talking about it so much... yet. His fans on here don't seem to think that it's important - I had a thread where some suggested he just needs to cut the Carbon Tax, CBC and some civil servants and we'll be ok.Harper had some scandals, like proroguing Parliament to silence debate and accountability. He had increasing issues with heavy handed control on his party. A reason he had to go.
Martin inherited Chretiens scandals, those Liberals had to go. Trudeau had to go a couple of elections ago.
With 24/7 news and social media it usually seems to take a true narcissist to want to be leader now. Who else would want all that attention? Some people want to be rock stars.
-
1
-
-
You don't reward a terrorist massacre and ongoing hostage crisis with calls for statehood. This only incentivizes that activity. Nor do you ever give statehood to a government bent on Israel's destruction. Has nothing been learned from Israel's deoccupation and elections in Gaza in 2005?
Calls for restraint in Rafah are fine.
-
3
-
Federal government mismanaging and wasting taxpayer money constantly
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted · Edited by Moonlight Graham
This government is extremely wasteful, I would agree with that. They seem pretty apathetic to waste. They're pretty bad at management.