Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

https://www.ourwindsor.ca/news-story/9269498-mad-at-max-bernier-s-people-s-party-of-canada-is-revolting-in-british-columbia/

"Maxime Bernier’s newly minted “smart populist” party may be crumbling in British Columbia amid allegations of racism, xenophobia and an infiltration of the radical far-right."

Thankfully, there are still Canadian conservatives who won't like their party become corrupted by the far-right, anti-UN frothers.

Don't get your hopes up. The Star fails to point out that this kind of elbowing and jostling for position and control happens with every new party. Further, if you go to the party's web site there isn't a single thing there that seems remotely racist or opposed to the UN. In fact, there's nothing on that site which even qualifies as 'far right'.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. There are lots of other reasons for immigration, such as economic orthodoxy says it's a good things, and large business influencers like banks and businesses that import workers support it.  The latter point is one that we haven't discussed in the past, I think.

Economic orthodoxy requires evidence based facts. And we have very little of that to support the contention it is even very helpful to the economy. As to big business, yes. Big business loves the flow of newcomers desperate for jobs who help keep wages down. It loves an inflow of already trained people so it doesn't have to train anyone. It loves a larger local market.

But what is good for corporate Canada is not always good for mainstream Canada. We are training a generation of high tech workers who flow south to higher wages and better opportunities because Canadian high tech companies won't train new graduates and won't pay competitive wages with the U.S. Instead they poach high tech workers from the third world who can't get the necessary visas to go to the US.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
6 hours ago, jacee said:

Inciting or promoting hatred against identifiable groups of people is a crime in Canada: 

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-319.html

Public incitement of hatred

  • 319 (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of

    • (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

    • (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

    • Wilful promotion of hatred

      • (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

      • (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

  • (2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

  • (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

  • (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Naturally you left out the counterpoint.

(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)

  • (a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;

  • (b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;

  • (c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or

  • (d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
9 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

These are all attacks on the words he uses, or how he says things, aside from hugging Kim Jong Un, which is a complaint with no actual merit.

Why do you never attack on him on policy, and only for throw away stuff like that? I'm starting to think it's because you don't have any good arguments against his policies, so you focus on his words and his tone, and how he greets dictators.

The worst thing about Trump is that he undermines the security of the West in general, as well as the U.S. in particular. The words he uses, as you say, combined with a lazy-minded, arrogant attitude have diminished American power and influence abroad, allowing its enemies to rush into the vacuum. Trump still hasn't even nominated a large number of senior people for State Department posts, and his administration shows a vacuous lack of understanding on how soft power works. As one foreign diplomat in Asia put it, every time there is a major meeting the Americans send one junior staffer and the Chinese sent twenty or thirty people, all authorized to make deals and agreements. 

Europeans now despise him, and to some degree, America, and the U.S. is becoming the ugly American throughout the world again. Meanwhile Trump farts out tweets that continue to divide Americans and presides over a widely divided congress while presenting them with nothing in the way of realistic policies. His administration has refused to even attempt to do anything about the massive and continuing cyber attacks from China and Russia, which make off with all the expensive new technological defense industry advances the Pentagon pays tens of billions for, and has also refused to do anything about foreign electronic interference in America's election systems. Probably because he presumes he'll be the beneficiary.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I think the anti UN stuff is a marker that more nutty ideas are coming.

Has Bernier ever suggested he would leave the U.N.?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
8 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Any left wing fascists who are so dedicated to tracking "far right" groups and censoring their Charter Rights to freedom of expression can start here:

Soldiers of Odin Canada

https://www.facebook.com/OFFICIAL.SOO.1/

Please report back when you catch them engaged in "terrorism" so the RCMP can be notified

The Soldiers of Odin are not a white supremacist group, and thus do not qualify as 'alt-right'. 

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
9 hours ago, jacee said:

The yellow uniforms vastly outnumbered by crowds of decent people who oppose hatred, Toronto police recently just kettled them down the subway stairs. :D

In other words, there are far, far more violently hateful people on the Left than on the Right.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Everything is 'racist' now, question immigration in any way means you are racist and now the Liberals are going to monitor us all for 'hate' speech - defined by them of course.

'Inciting and promoting hatred against groups of people' is defined by Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada. (See my post above.)

59 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Remember, it it was not enough that U.N. control our populations but also demanded an end to ‘Negative Narratives’ on Mass Migration.    Really - how dare countries want to determine their own policies. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/4731612/un-international-agreements-legally-binding/

UN migration pact is not legally binding for Canada

Chris Alexander, who served as immigration minister under Stephen Harper, tweeted that the pact “is a political declaration, not a legally binding treaty.”

Andrew Scheer is misrepresenting the UN Pact on Migration, fanning people's fears for political gain, coyly courting far right xenophobes. 

Will he lose his centre-right core voters in the process? Will the CPC end up a fanatic fringe party? We'll soon see ... 

Edited by jacee
Posted
56 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Everything is 'racist' now, question immigration in any way means you are racist and now the Liberals are going to monitor us all for 'hate' speech - defined by them of course.

That's basically true. Anyone who questions immigration gets such epithets hurled at them. Most of these groups which protest against immigration are middle aged people who simply don't like the amount of immigration or what it's doing to their cities. But whenever they hold a little demo - usually of a couple of dozen people, you can count on a couple of hundred frenzied leftists to show up screaming and yelling out that they're Nazis and Fascists and racists. There are videos of such confrontations with the crazed leftists calling Jews nazis. LOL. Or Asian immigrants!

Half of the people replying to polls say there is too much immigration. And two thirds say immigrants aren't assimilating fast enough. These people are not 'alt right' or white supremacists. However, if the mainstream parties and media continue to denigrate them as racists then a goodly number of them are going to find whatever group agrees with them, even if that group is more extreme than they'd otherwise like.

  • Thanks 1

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
2 minutes ago, jacee said:

UN migration pact is not legally binding for Canada

The law in Canada is whatever the progressive judges on the Supreme Court say it is. And if they decide it's legally binding, then it is. No arguments, no appeals, end of story.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
26 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

They say that the UN is dictating our policies and want us to pull out.

I’ve never heard pulling out of the UN suggested by anyone credible.  But I don’t agree that the UN should dictate our policy, if it is.  That’s a legitimate and reasonable point of view.

Posted
25 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I think the anti UN stuff is a marker that more nutty ideas are coming.

And these ideas are the kind of ideas you believe should be banned right?

Posted
3 minutes ago, jacee said:

'Inciting and promoting hatred against groups of people' is defined by Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada. (See my post above.)

https://globalnews.ca/news/4731612/un-international-agreements-legally-binding/

 

I'm not going into the round robin of whether or not it's legally binding, if we signed on to it then obviously the PM buys into it and will implement it, given another term or two. 

It is not inciting hatred to question levels of immigration or to question whether or not we want to bring in people whose values are intrinsically opposed to ours.  It is not inciting hatred nor is racist/bigotry to question mass migration and it's impact on our climate/carbon footprint.   Obviously the more people the more pollution etc. etc.  

Is it inciting hatred to protest Brunei's recent laws, is it hatred to say we don't want those values brought here? 

It is obvious that liberals want to stomp down on any opposing views by assigning labels and calling names and they plan to do it much more obviously now by defining 'hate' on social media then having it deleted.   That is, speech that they define as 'hate' which is obviously anyone disagreeing with their policies.  

What do you say about Muslim parents protesting sex education, is it racist to say they are wrong.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6637445/Muslim-parents-children-school-protest-sex-education-lessons.html 

Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province

Posted
12 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Nope, I'm just not blinded by hatred of Trump, which is the only reason anyone could believe that CNN isn't the Breitbart Of The Left, at best.

You are certainly blinded by love of Trump. 

Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, Argus said:

The Soldiers of Odin are not a white supremacist group, and thus do not qualify as 'alt-right'. 

The SOO are indeed a racist, white outfit: 

Soldiers of Odin (SOO) is an anti-immigrant group founded in Kemi, Finland, in October 2015. The group was established as a response to thousands of migrants arriving in Finland amid the European migrant crisis.[1][2][3]

SOO has denied claims of being a racist or neo-Nazi group in interviews and on their public Facebook page. However, the group's founder, Mika Ranta, has connections to the far-right, neo-Nazi Nordic Resistance Movement and a criminal conviction stemming from a racially motivated assault in 2005. According to the Finnish public broadcaster Yle, a private Facebook page for selected members of SOO shows that racism and Nazi sympathies are rampant among higher-ranking members. The group's nature has raised concerns of anti-immigrant vigilantism.[4][5]

Edited by Realitycheck
Posted
45 minutes ago, jacee said:

'Inciting and promoting hatred against groups of people' is defined by Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada. (See my post above.)

https://globalnews.ca/news/4731612/un-international-agreements-legally-binding/

UN migration pact is not legally binding for Canada

Chris Alexander, who served as immigration minister under Stephen Harper, tweeted that the pact “is a political declaration, not a legally binding treaty.”

Andrew Scheer is misrepresenting the UN Pact on Migration, fanning people's fears for political gain, coyly courting far right xenophobes. 

Will he lose his centre-right core voters in the process? Will the CPC end up a fanatic fringe party? We'll soon see ... 

Scheer's base is rednecked racists. Furthermore, he is not that bright and has all the charisma of a pile of doggy-doo.  

Posted
1 hour ago, Argus said:

Has Bernier ever suggested he would leave the U.N.?

What is wrong leaving the un? Do you know who is the chairman of the un's human group?

Posted
7 minutes ago, egghead said:

What is wrong leaving the un? Do you know who is the chairman of the un's human group?

The UN is a cesspool of corruption. If it fell into the river with all the representatives in-house, well it would be a good start.

 

Posted
12 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Seems like you missed the point again. Actions speak louder than words. The problem isn't that Trump is lying about NK de-nuclearizing, the problem is that negotiation isn't the path to de-nuclearization and Trump's strategy isn't the best way to de-nuclearize NK.

Focusing on lies and praising of dictators, that completely misses the point, what actually matters is policy, not the fluff that sells the policy.

And that sounds like a lot of fluff to try to deflect from the fact that Trump's actions failed, in this case regarding NK. We all know he will lie to try and cover up for it.

Posted
1 hour ago, Realitycheck said:

Scheer's base is rednecked racists. Furthermore, he is not that bright and has all the charisma of a pile of doggy-doo.  

Total b.s. and irresponsible to paint people u disagrees with that way, but then it's the liberal way.

Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province

Posted
1 hour ago, egghead said:

What is wrong leaving the un? Do you know who is the chairman of the un's human group?

I think it’s Iran right now.

Posted
18 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Total b.s. and irresponsible to paint people u disagrees with that way, but then it's the liberal way.

I carry briefs for no political party. I consider all pols corrupt and venal. Scheer I have met and debated and he limped away from the exchange badly embarrassed in front of a group of Canadian Vets. He is an empty shell and a shallow man.

Posted
3 hours ago, Argus said:

The Soldiers of Odin are not a white supremacist group, and thus do not qualify as 'alt-right'. 

 

"Far right" does not automatically equal white supremacist group, and the term 'alt-right' is primarily a U.S. term imported by Canadian media and lefties.

SoO Canada is a nationalist group not affiliated with European groups of the same name.

  • Like 1

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,915
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    MDP
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • LinkSoul60 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • LinkSoul60 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • MDP earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • MDP earned a badge
      First Post
    • DrewZero earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...