Moonbox

I think the tone for this thread was set with the thread title and the OP. ?

I just watched the video. He doesn't say he controls Trudeau or Canada's Cabinet. He doesn't say anything of the sort. He mentions that he's proud that Trudeau and part of his cabinet participated in the WEF's Young Global Leaders program, among other leaders around the world. To take THAT quote and then warp it into THAT headline is absurd. Once again, you've tossed a citation in the discussion that doesn't even say/prove what you're arguing it does. I'm not sure if you're just taking the headlines at face value without reading them, or if you're so desperate for anything that even pretends to support your world views that you'll swallow it without thinking. Either way, chalk up another silly citation for Goddess.

You referenced a book about the Great Reset that you never read and can't really comment on or reference properly. You made some claim that there's a video of the author bragging that he'd infiltrated the Canadian government (video not provided). You vaguely referenced the WEF as some...bad thing or whatever, but don't actually have a proper argument to make about any of it. I'm not a teacher, but if some sad and angry lady is nattering about stuff, I might challenge her to calm down and actually make coherent point rather than say a bunch of random bullshit she can neither explain nor reference properly.

He said that 2 doses offer very limited protection against Omicron, but that 3 offer reasonable protection against hospitalization or death. These comments were specifically for Omicron, and they said they're updating their vaccines to be able to deal with Omicron. Your sources then spin that to mean the vaccines not effective at all, which is obviously what you want to hear so you repost that headline over and over to each other thinking your foolishness is validated.

That's not really how this works. If you think his book is relevant to the conversation, you can explain why. Telling someone they need to read a whole book for the purpose of an online discussion is kinda silly.

The quote you responded to was just asking about the CIA. Regardless, I'm curious what you figure this all means, and what does Mr. Schwab have to say about all this?

You were asked if you think she works for the CIA, and you responded with: She's featured on the WEF website. Not hard to find. Chrystia Freeland | World Economic Forum (weforum.org) You should see the video of Schwab bragging about how he has "infiltrated" the Canadian government - he says half of them are working for him. So maybe you can explain why you figured WEF references were an intelligent answer to that question.

The funniest and most clueless thing you've said so far. The utter cluelessness and comical hypocrisy of that comment is next level LARPing. Bravo. You are a fascinating specimen.

I'm safe thanks. Turns out some trucker protestors huffed all the glue in my garage and I had to writer Dear Leader love letters instead.

You are a fringe minority. You're a joke. Canada doesn't take you seriously. When you can't articulate your arguments beyond asinine hyperbole and nonsense about Trudeau love letters and communists etc, you confirm what everyone already thinks about you. You're clowning around and that's all the respect you're going to get from anyone.

This is evidence she works at the CIA? I'm truly fascinated with your clownshow now. You have my rapt attention. Please continue.

I don't doubt it. The gist is that you cover for your incoherence with ranting and hyperbole about dictators and other villains you figure count as big zingers. ?

North Korean this time. I'll add that to the list of bogeyman terms you like to brainlessly throw around. ?

You're complaining about it. Derp.

You're arguing about a swastika that may or may not have been at the rally. Most of us don't actually care and understand that the trucker's aren't Nazis or Nazi sympathizers, regardless of the fact that there are probably are a handful of extreme idiots. You're focusing on battling a strawman that nobody actually cares about anymore and can't let it go.

The fact that you're sick with COVID and can't even accept isolating tells us how reasonable and willing to compromise you are on these subjects. This is why nobody takes the trucker's protest seriously and why nobody is listening to you. Whatever other valid arguments you may or may not have get drowned in foolishness, ignorance and selfishness.

Unless I'm mistaken, most of those deaths aren't even attributed to the vaccines. They're people who died after getting the vaccine, but other than a tiny handful who had blood clots or other rare complications, they weren't caused by the vaccine. Folks here will be quick to scoff at the distinction, but if you vaccinate 500,000,000 people there are bound to be some that just drop dead randomly on certain days regardless of whether or not they got the vaccine shortly before. Because there will be a record of recent vaccination, doctors etc will examine those deaths but they determine that almost none of them were vaccine-related.

Shutting the most economically important border crossing down and leaving auto plants closed isn't good for the economy, is it? If you wanted to make an intelligent economics argument, that wasn't the way to do it.

Or...I don't spend my time or efforts convincing myself that the governments, corporations, health organizations, media, courts etc. all over the world are all in on a grand conspiracy to turn me into a slave. It's a very nice, simple and comfy fiction you can use whenever things aren't going your way. It's too bad it's a mind-warping nonsensical farce. It's pure coping, and nothing else.

It takes a really special type of delusion for you to go from calling other posters straight-up idiots to then pivot and cry foul about being treated poorly. That's such stunned and bizarre reasoning there's really nothing else to say. It tells us everything there is to know about you as a person.

It's deliberate. The separation of legislative and judicial systems is very important for maintaining impartiality and ensuring the Rule of Law rather than the Rule of Public Opinion. If it wasn't set up this way, then the Law would end up swaying back and forth at the whims of whatever Party was in power at the time, which has obviously bad implications.

You're not distinguishing between the Judicial and the Legislative systems. That's what you're misunderstanding. I explained the difference in my previous post where I mentioned you @Army Guy. Hope that helps.

@Army Guy I don't think you have a great understanding of the differences between Legislation and our Court system. Parliament drafts and implements legislation. The Senate reviews and approves it. The Governor General is mostly ceremonial and rubber-stamps the Legislation. After that it's up to the Courts to decide on how these Laws are to be interpreted, enforced or struck down. The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest Court in the land and their decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian Law. Parliament can write new laws, scrap old ones or update them if they want, and the Supreme Court would then have to interpret and then apply those new laws, but only insofar as they're Constitutional. If the Supreme Court deems new laws or revisions violate the Constitution, they can strike them down, and that's it. That's the end of it. The separation of Canada's judicial and legislative systems is a vital part of our society.

I don't think you're reading what I'm saying properly, or maybe I typo'd somewhere. I DO agree with the mandates being enforced. I do not agree with the protestors' demands. Is that clear? At best I can understand the sentiment of being tired of lockdowns and wanting to move on with life, but I have absolutely no respect or sympathy for the idiots out there protesting making the problem worse and making it last longer than it needs to.

No the first time you used the source you just sort of outlined what the Ministry of Justice is responsible for. As far as I could tell it didn't even touch on the SoC, which is the highest legal authority in Canada and where the buck ultimately stops for appeals and challenges. The government and the Minister of Justice can draft and legislate all they want, but even with Senate approval the SoC can still strike down legislation it deems unconstitutional etc. I'm not a lawyer but I did enough law and philosophy courses in university to at least have a basic understanding of how our legal system works, which unfortunately is not true for too many posters here.