Sailors in trouble for being patriotic

[The_Squid]

17 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Beating people up would be against the law. They would probably go to jail.  I am fully on board with someone not being allowed to be in the navy and in jail at the same time. Unless it's the brig. 

They did nothing wrong on the day in question, though.  From the article, it appears they just upset and/or offended people, and there's nothing wrong with that. 

 

When you associate yourself with far-right groups there may be consequences...  like not being allowed to stay in the military. 

[Guest]

Just now, The_Squid said:

When you associate yourself with far-right groups there may be consequences...  like not being allowed to stay in the military. 

Well, I hope not.  It would be a terrible shame.

[jacee]

19 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

This is a VERY important topic, it's about freedom of speech and right to protest.  Did these military guys (out of uniform and off duty) try and shut down their event?  They don't really have the power to do that.  What they were doing it seems is that they were confronting the protesters and objecting to their protest.  A protest of the protest.  All is see is them walking down to the protesters and having a conversion with them, there's no violence or physical threats from what I see so far.  I could be wrong if other info comes to light, but that's what I see from this article/video on cbc

I'm not taking any stand on who's political opinions are right/wrong, that's another issue entirely, but who's ACTIONS are right/wrong here?  Keeping in mind that civil servants and military personnel have codes of conduct relating to political activity, but these men don't seem to be trying to represent the Canadian military either & it doesn't seem like their "proud boys" group have been prevented by the military/government in the past for their political activity, hence the group still exists. 

What it seems is that these soldiers (out of uniform, off duty) said some controversial stuff to a victimized group (who were also saying a few controversial things) & it is embarrassing to the military/government on a PR front. The military/gov doesn't want to look like they or their members (especially all white men) are trying to oppress the rights of natives, which I get, but does this conflict with these soldier's rights to say things the PR machine doesn't want them to say?  Tough call...

They're neonazi racist types.

Their use of the red ensign (like other white supremacist groups) signifies their allegiance to the Canada that used to only allow white immigrants. They don't like the Canada of today.

The Armed Forces disapproves of them bringing bad publicity on them. Also, it signifies that they may not be able to work effectively in their units with nonwhite colleagues.

Their Proud Boy founder/leader:

" On CBC News Network Wednesday, host Hannah Thibedeau asked McInnes, "Given Cornwallis issued a bounty on the scalps of Mi'kmaq people, can you see why the Indigenous people were protesting?"

McInnes replied: "Can you see why Cornwallis issued a bounty on Mi'kmaqs?" "

http://m.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/07/05/cbc-interview-with-proud-boys-founder-gavin-mcinnes-goes-off-t_a_23018129/

Oh, now isn't that just special! :/

Seriously ... neonazi white supremacists are cement heads. Can't think their way out of a wet paper bag. It's some kind of learning disability I guess. They just keep talking in irrational circles, and can't  adapt to modern civilization. 

We'll see what the CAF does with them. It'll be re-education to stay in, for sure! 

Edited July 6, 2017 by jacee
Add

[Army Guy]

, I tend to agree with squid here, I know I can't believe I said that....But military members are held to a higher standard, regardless of being on duty or off duty....belonging to such a group with questionable back grounds or motives should have career implications....nor should it be tolerated for a lot of reasons, it does not match well with the things the Military wants in each member, like duty, honor, team work, loyalty to country, /military/ unit....

[jacee]

8 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Well, I hope not.  It would be a terrible shame.

Oh I think we can easily do without them in the military.

However, a course of reeducation wouldn't hurt them and some oversight/,controls on their extracurricular Proud Boy activities would be good.

[Hal 9000]

19 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Here's another example of why such posters are tedious to reply to.  Here we see same guy who is tired of people basing conclusions on group identity says:

Why should anybody to reply to arguments that are never modified and a reflect a complete lack of willingness to admit their incorrectness ?

As for your response - I don't expect you will concede what you have done here, or understand it.   

 

 

 

 

There is no correlation.  In the first case, yes I can look at Islam as a whole and determine what I believe it is - and that is in fact prehistoric.  Stating that Islam is a prehistoric religion, is not even close to assuming that "there are white guys involved, therefore the white people are wrong.  That is different than deciding my thoughts about a situation based on the parties involved.  In the second case, we are looking at a case and you are determining the side you choose to support based not on who is doing or saying the what, but which group appears to be the group that you don't like.  

IOW, like a true liberal, you don't care about the facts, you'll always choose the the side of your perceived victim group.    

[Michael Hardner]

17 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

1) In the first case, yes I can look at Islam as a whole and determine what I believe it is - and that is in fact prehistoric.  Stating that Islam is a prehistoric religion, is not even close to assuming that "there are white guys involved, therefore the white people are wrong.  

2)In the second case, we are looking at a case and you are determining the side you choose to support based not on who is doing or saying the what, but which group appears to be the group that you don't like.  

IOW, like a true liberal, you don't care about the facts, you'll always choose the the side of your perceived victim group.    

1) You are evading responsibility for your words.  You didn't talk about the religion, you talked about the people.

2) Not the same as " i'm just tired of people basing their conclusions on group identity", which is broader.

I do care about the facts, and I just stated some.  Your comment on me personally is based on running out of substantive criticism.

Most people decide on morality based on group identity, and we're all guilty here including me.  Stating clear principles and trying to follow them is the alternative.  I invite you to try to do that, as I promise to.

[DogOnPorch]

1 hour ago, jacee said:

They're neonazi racist types.

Their use of the red ensign (like other white supremacist groups) signifies their allegiance to the Canada that used to only allow white immigrants. They don't like the Canada of today.

The Armed Forces disapproves of them bringing bad publicity on them. Also, it signifies that they may not be able to work effectively in their units with nonwhite colleagues.

Their Proud Boy founder/leader:

" On CBC News Network Wednesday, host Hannah Thibedeau asked McInnes, "Given Cornwallis issued a bounty on the scalps of Mi'kmaq people, can you see why the Indigenous people were protesting?"

McInnes replied: "Can you see why Cornwallis issued a bounty on Mi'kmaqs?" "

http://m.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/07/05/cbc-interview-with-proud-boys-founder-gavin-mcinnes-goes-off-t_a_23018129/

Oh, now isn't that just special! :/

Seriously ... neonazi white supremacists are cement heads. Can't think their way out of a wet paper bag. It's some kind of learning disability I guess. They just keep talking in irrational circles, and can't  adapt to modern civilization. 

We'll see what the CAF does with them. It'll be re-education to stay in, for sure! 

 

Why DID Edward Cornwallis (among others) announce the bounty? Can you describe what you think happened?

[DogOnPorch]

Can't you just see the b@stards? Redcoats arriving at a quiet Native village and then proceeding to butcher everybody on-site like in Mel Gibson's "Patriot". Kicking dogs...shooting chickens. All for scalps for the notorious Darth Cornwallis. Pure evil...

Edited July 6, 2017 by DogOnPorch

[Guest]

2 hours ago, jacee said:

Oh I think we can easily do without them in the military.

However, a course of reeducation wouldn't hurt them and some oversight/,controls on their extracurricular Proud Boy activities would be good.

Ah yes, re-education.  What an utterly horrifying concept.  At least they are already in camps...

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Army Guy said:

, I tend to agree with squid here, I know I can't believe I said that....But military members are held to a higher standard, regardless of being on duty or off duty....belonging to such a group with questionable back grounds or motives should have career implications....nor should it be tolerated for a lot of reasons, it does not match well with the things the Military wants in each member, like duty, honor, team work, loyalty to country, /military/ unit....

Well, there's always "Conduct Unbecoming"...

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

Ah yes, re-education.  What an utterly horrifying concept.  At least they are already in camps...

 

With Gavin McInnes, one is never quite sure if he's collectively pulling our leg. But, I know he did get quite upset when he was sucker punched and pepper sprayed by protesters at a dinner he was attending. He started talking about fighting back at that point...old Oi Polloi fans...they do know how to fight.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

With Gavin McInnes, one is never quite sure if he's collectively pulling our leg. But, I know he did get quite upset when he was sucker punched and pepper sprayed by protesters at a dinner he was attending. He started talking about fighting back at that point...old Oi Polloi fans...they do know how to fight.

I went and looked them up.  Pulling legs might be as far as they get.  Given one of their conditions for membership, I think "Poor Boys" might be more approprate.

 

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

I went and looked them up.  Pulling legs might be as far as they get.  Given one of their conditions for membership, I think "Poor Boys" might be more approprate.

 

 

Do you think Gavin was being serious with his "rules"? He's a well known Devil's Advocate...

Anyways, some of these bike-lock swinging professors deserve the boot. 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Do you think Gavin was being serious with his "rules"? He's a well known Devil's Advocate...

Anyways, some of these bike-lock swinging professors deserve the boot. 

I have to admit I had never heard of Gavin before this week.

Agreed on the professors.  Bloody Poltroons...

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, bcsapper said:

I have to admit I had never heard of Gavin before this week.

Agreed on the professors.  Bloody Poltroons...

Do yourself a favor and watch a few of his videos...you'll see what I mean. He has different characters/persona depending on the situation. I like his Che Guevara guy...

[jacee]

37 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Ah yes, re-education.  What an utterly horrifying concept.  At least they are already in camps...

Lol

You think it's horrifying for them?

Imagine how horrifying it is for the Indigenous people who are called on to reeducate them!

I think we need to rethink that concept.

Edited July 6, 2017 by jacee
Add

[Guest]

1 minute ago, jacee said:

Lol

You think it's horrifying for them?

Imagine how horrifying it is for the Indigenous people who are called on to reeducate them!

I think we need to rethink that concept.

They just need to wear insulated gloves when handling the electrodes.  No worries!

[Argus]

19 hours ago, The_Squid said:

Well said!   Fake tears....

 

these idiots acted like bullies.  The navy doesn't want to be associated with such stupidity. 

They did? How did they bully the much larger group of people there? They didn't even interrupt the 'ceremony'.  It continued in their presence. According to the news report.

"A witness to the interaction says the men kept their voices down as the ceremony continued and left after about 10 minutes."

Let's compare this to the way BLM blocked last year's gay pride parade and refused to allow it to go on until their demands were agreed to and signed off on - an action certain individuals here look at with benign approval and refuse to accept the bullying label for. Hypocrisy, much?

[Argus]

15 hours ago, The_Squid said:

The group that these people belong to are a bunch of alt-right racist bullies who feel the need to "stand up" to indigenous people... these people probably enjoy the fact that Gen. Cornwallis ordered the deaths of aboriginals.  They have no place being in the military.   Good riddance to them.

Cornwallis ordered his troops to respond to the attacks on his people by those same aboriginals.  Maybe you should read up on him a bit.

A wave of Mi'kmaq attacks began immediately after the letter. At Chignecto Bay, two British ships were attacked while two others were seized at Canso. At Halifax, attacks began on settlers and soldiers outside the fortified township, beginning with the first of several raids on the longhouse settlement at Dartmouth across the harbour.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Cornwallis

Edited July 6, 2017 by Argus

[Argus]

12 hours ago, The_Squid said:

These idiots in this group ("Proud Boys") encourage new members to beat people up as an initiation.

Evidence?

Edited July 6, 2017 by Argus

[Argus]

12 hours ago, The_Squid said:

When you associate yourself with far-right groups there may be consequences...  like not being allowed to stay in the military. 

And yet there are no consequences to associating yourself with far-left groups. Many of our political leaders, including our prime minister, speak of them in glowing terms, and shrug off their human rights abuses and mass murder. Why is that? Why is it the prime minister of Canada can speak glowingly of Fidel Castro, and of his admiration for the way the brutal, murderous klepto regime in Beijing gets things done, but nobody much cares. A few sailors, though, say they like Trump and believe in "God and Country" and the Left are aghast with horror. This is the deep hypocrisy of the Left, and their fixation that all must agree with them or be considered horrible, awful, immoral people who must be silenced and hopefully punished.

These sailors counter-protested against an anti-Canada protest, quietly and politely. Yet the chief of the defense staff feels the need to decry their actions and call up the natives to apologize, and everyone on the Left side of the political spectrum wants their lives destroyed.

Edited July 6, 2017 by Argus

[Argus]

3 hours ago, jacee said:

Oh I think we can easily do without them in the military.

Yes, what we need for our military are delicate, sensitive, caring, understanding progressives.

They make the BEST combat troops, I understand...

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, Argus said:

Cornwallis ordered his troops to respond to the attacks on his people by those same aboriginals.  Maybe you should read up on him a bit.

A wave of Mi'kmaq attacks began immediately after the letter. At Chignecto Bay, two British ships were attacked while two others were seized at Canso. At Halifax, attacks began on settlers and soldiers outside the fortified township, beginning with the first of several raids on the longhouse settlement at Dartmouth across the harbour.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Cornwallis

 

The French also issued a bounty...not to French soldiers, though. Same deal with the British. It was aimed at tribes who were enemies of the Mi'kmaq...thus the scalps. Yet, like Lord Amherst's poor understanding of the transmission of small pox with old blankets, the actual results were disappointing. Only ONE scalp was ever turned-in to the British for reward.

[Argus]

56 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Ah yes, re-education.  What an utterly horrifying concept.  At least they are already in camps...

There's something about the far left that is convinced that re-education camps are the proper way to order society - by forcing all who disagree with them to be 're-educated' and made to tow the party line.