Moonbox

Oh please. Spare us the poor-you syndrome. You're hardly a paragon of civility, and I'm definitely not following you around. If you took the time to write thoughtful posts with even remotely coherent citation instead of just spamming every thread with the same nonsense, you'd probably have a better time. Cheers!

Uh, what? I support hate speech? So I'm bad guy, you're good guy? As always, your input is thoughtful, mature and totally reasonable.

Nope. They already ruled it was legal ? You're just making stuff up! Sure. That's very likely true. Choosing not to enforce a measure doesn't mean it was illegal. It means that the government felt it was too unpopular or the benefits of enforcing it weren't worth the trouble. That's it. Anything beyond that is your own conjecture. Again, no. The workplace mandates have continually and consistently been upheld. The harm of losing your job because you choose to be a goof is not being considered sufficient to successfully challenge any of these measures. They are failing through Union arbitrators, they are failing in higher courts - they are failing everywhere. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/vaccine-mandates-1.6342193 https://www.cba.org/Sections/Administrative-Law/Articles/2021/Ontario-Courts-reject-challenges-to-Ontario-govern I can keep going with these. They're not hard to find. Try to provide some substance to your arguments, rather than wishful fantasy.

I'm sure somewhere, at some point. There's probably been a pro-NAMBLA demonstration somewhere that could give this a run for its money. Thankfully the lunatic fringe is such a silly mob of angry and incoherent nonsense that their demonstrations only serve to marginalize them further.

Nope. Poilievre is unelectable and will alienate all the people the CPC needs to actually form a government. He doesn't appeal to anyone but the Party's rabid base. I'm usually a conservative voter both provincially and federally and I'd vote for Jagmeet Singh before I'd vote for that clown. This guy guarantees another 7 years or Trudeau.

Show me where. Provide your own citation and explain what you're talking about. That's certainly not part of the link I provided. Sure. The government made a political decision to end some of their mandates. That fact speaks nothing to the legal validity of those mandates, which have been supported and upheld in Court as you've just seen. The Attorney General and the Justice couldn't have been any clearer in the language of the ruling back in October.

I think this image properly sums up the OP. This has to be the most absurd post I've seen in 10+ years posting here.

Sure. You could have done 5 seconds of research yourself, but here's one that took me just as long to find: https://globalnews.ca/news/8237794/legal-challenge-saskatchewan-proof-of-vaccine-mandate-struck-down-court/ “The proof of vaccine requirements being put into place to address the pandemic are in line with provincial and federal legislation and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” wrote Wyant. I never said his challenge was heard, genius. I said it would fail just as the others like it. Why are you making stuff up and putting words in my mouth? As usual, you twist your brain into a pretzel trying to argue against something that's not even there.

When did I tell you that you shouldn't contribute? I have told you exactly what I have told you. When you provide bad sources, I explain how they are bad. When you make lousy arguments, I ridicule your reasoning. That you find it unpleasant is I guess no surprise, but then we find your broken-record nonsense unpleasant and tedious as well.

COVID tickets are trivial matters in the Court. Having some loser complain about a fine he/she knew was a possibility is as low-priority in the Courts as it comes. Larger challenges to the acts and measures themselves, however, HAVE been heard and tossed. Regarding COVID fines themselves, most of them aren't even being pushed forward yet. Just like the fine disputes are low-priority, so too are moving the fine cases forward. Regarding other COVID-19 related offenses, there have been quite a few that have been dismissed in the Courts. I don't know the exact number, but many charges have been dropped because law-enforcement has done a poor job laying charges and justifying them properly, and when that happens the charges fail. Seems the Rule of Law is working, no? Brian Peckford was a high-school teacher turned Premier and played almost no part in actually writing the Constitution. He signed it. That's it. it's funny how you guys can ridicule Trudeau and his drama teacher background (I do too admittedly) but then you hold Brian f'ing Peckford up as a shining beacon of academia. Hilarious. Of course truckers have a right to protest. They just don't have a right to protest however they want, wherever they want, and for as long as they want. The best and most important part of the Constitution is Section 1. Since it's crystal-clear you don't know the first thing about it, I'll let you go Google it (or dark-weeb it if google is too mainstream for you) and then you can get back to us, okay???

No it doesn't. The best and most glorious thing about the Courts is that they operate on common sense and reason, which is something that's in short-supply with your arguments. When an issue is pressing and important enough, it jumps the queue, because it must be seen quickly to be relevant. There have already been multiple lawsuits like Brian Peckford's against COVID-19 rules that have failed in the Courts. We therefore not only have legal precedence that has supported such measures, we also have rock-solid proof that it doesn't take 4-5 years to see cases against them. Congratulations. You're clueless on multiple levels.

Where did I ever tell you to STFU? I'm happy to refine your logic down to the kernels of nonsense that they are. If you want to be taken seriously, use common sense, provide proper sources and quit resorting to "MSM CANCEL-CULTURE LIES" as your catch-all response in every debate. Should be simple...for most people.

He deserves mockery. He's saying stupid shit on a privately run radio station, where he's being paid by others. If you want to be paid to be a public speaker/figure, you don't get to just say whatever you want. That's common sense. You're doing a job. If he wants to go ahead and make a podcast or his own youtube videos and rant his nonsense, he's free to do so, but nobody is obligated to pay him to do it, or provide him with a platform or extra visibility. Crying about it is absurd.

There it is again. The Charter! Muh Riiights! Good thing the Court system exists to review challenges against the government, which have thus far all failed. I've yet to see you actually form a coherent argument about what rights are being violated, exactly, and how the laws are being broken.

8 minutes of my life that I wish I could get back. Poor dude thought his private sector job was a place where he could stand on a soap box and rant the same tired nonsense that you guys post here. "You're all tricked, you're all foooooled." Oookay.

If you can offer points that actually make sense, and provide some facts that don't require mental alchemy to support your perspective, please share. The tired old line of "spoon-fed by the media" is a clear sign that you're not doing a lot of critical thinking. That's a mental crutch that you lean on far too readily and when you're denying even the most basic facts presented by the media/government etc, you just make yourself look obstinate and foolish. As alternatives, you cite garbage websites that on even cursory examination don't even support what you're saying. When pressed on these instances, your circuit breaks and you default back to "Blah blah mainstream media" and we're back to square one. If your perspective offered more than that, you'd maybe have a point. Maybe we'll see it one day. The sad part about all of this is I'd usually consider myself a Conservative and dudes like eyeball are ones I used to clash with most in the past. Here, on these issues, I find myself backing him up because despite our difference in politics, he's at least debating in good faith and with some basic common sense and reason. If nothing else, the batshit nonsense that's drowning this forum seems to have united folks of different political stripes against it.

but this is exactly what you usually do yourself, just like with how you were earlier quoting Jody Wilson-Raybould the other day to make-believe that she supported the Trucker's convoy. In both that case and this, you're the one coming up with creative interpretations that stretch common sense beyond breaking. That demonstrates a worrying lack of perspective.

Yes, most certainly. It's just that when you do mental contortions and back-flips to re-imagine and interpret everything you see in order to have it not conflict with what you're saying, it's hard to find a basis on which you can be debated with intelligently.

but you were calling it misinformation, which it obviously wasn't. Maybe you should address the egg on your face.

You support a guy who claims Sandy Hook was a hoax. That's literal/objective stupidity. When you invoke "cancel-culture" as a defense against something that idiotic, it proves how frivolously you throw the term around and how meaningless you make it. Like the boy that cried "Wolf", you resort to "WOKE CANCEL-CULTURE TOTALITARIANS" far too freely.

Wait...he raised his EYEBROW!?!? HOW DARE HE!?!? This is an outrageous affront to democracy and a clear violation of our Constitution.

If you find listening to absolute morons ranting angrily to be compelling, there are some pretty simple words to describe you as well. Yeah I mean telling everyone that the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax and then getting ridiculed for it is soooo unfair. Poor poor Alex Jones. It makes it so much harder for him and his pretend health expert to peddle their worthless merchandise to gullible fools.

That's strawman. I'm not sure how BlueAnon entered the conversation, other than as a distraction. The existence of dumb left-wing conspiracy theories does not make QAnon any less moronic, nor does QAnon stupidity make Alex Jones any less moronic. Once you've proven yourself to be absurdly stupid and a shameless and dangerous liar, your credibility goes down to zero. Zero is as low as credibility goes, so the fact that there are people out there even "crazier" than him isn't relevant. The guy is just telling angry white people what they want to hear and peddling his comically dumb products to them at jacked up prices. He couldn't be more of a joke if he tried.

but it can't match up against the copium the conspiracy folks are sniffing these days.

He may be entertaining, but his claims and theories are so outrageously foolish that nobody with an ounce of objectivity would consider him remotely credible. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, so the fact that he fits a few kernels of truthiness in with his deranged ranting doesn't make him any more credible. The serious parts (if there are any) are drowned in mountains of raving gibberish. Promoting the delusional idea that the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax is such an egregious lie and such an imbecilic and tasteless fantasy that it should disqualify this idiot from ever being taken seriously by anyone.