Jump to content

'DICTATORSHIP OF THE WORST KIND': European MPs blast Trudeau for COVID 'rights violation'


Infidel Dog

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

LMAO Putin puppet Tucker Carlsons grainy footage of an arrest from 500 ft away.  Looks like a routine use of force you can’t even tell if the knee is in the head or elsewhere.   

? That still cracks me up.

Tell me if this looks grainy, like it's from 500 feet away, or like the police were in a desperate situation where they needed to subdue someone quickly with extreme force because they were surrounded by so many other cops. Wait, surrounded by dozens of other cops..... why did they "need to" knee-drop him from both sides, multiple times? 

You be the judge [j/k, just look at the cutesy photo and try not to say anything too 'left-ish' lol]:

 

 

Screen Shot 2022-04-11 at 6.15.26 PM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Bullshit when a cop is trying to get someone in handcuffs and the person is resisting, straightening their arm, squirming etc cops can and do routinely and legitimately punch/knee in order to charlie-horse a muscle group such as the shoulder or thigh all the time and gain control of the limb. It doesn’t even look like that cop kneed the guy very hard.  Republicans are the pro-police brutality party so don’t pretend your mock outrage is anything others than you demanding special treatment for “your side”. 

Here’s you schooling for today: Police training on how to hit a non-compliant suspect  

Gaining Compliance with Targeted Pressure
 

Pressure and Strikes

 

….There are two ways to activate pressure-sensitive areas, either by simply applying pressure or by striking. This will depend on the area of the body where the pressure point is located and the goal of the activation…. If a strike is to be used, it is best to have some control of the suspect in order to ensure accuracy, but this is not a necessity.

 

Strike Targets

Here is a look at some pressure points on the human body that are susceptible to strikes and are easily accessible to a law enforcement officer during a confrontation.

Radial Nerve (forearm)—Strike this point with a hammer fist, using the forearm to strike that of the arrestee midway up the arm toward the elbow. This technique is effective for when the resistive suspect is holding onto an object or grabbing hold of an officer's wrist. A strike to the radial nerve is likely to cause the resistive suspect to let go of what he or she is holding. You or your backup officers can then gain control of the suspect with other techniques.

Common Peroneal Nerve (side of leg)—Strike the arrestee on the side of the leg between the hip and the knee with your knee or shin. This is a good technique for getting a resistive subject to place his hands behind his back, while you are controlling the arrestee's arm. Striking the common peroneal nerve will not only cause pain, but will also work as a distractor to allow you to initiate a control hold. This strike will often result in the resistive subject losing control of his leg, causing him to go to the ground. If you are under attack by an aggressive assailant, you may choose to initiate a shin kick to the attacker's common peroneal, which may also cause him to go to the ground.

Brachial Plexus Nerve (side of neck)—Strike with the back of the forearm, front of the forearm, or back of the hand to the side of the subject's neck. A good situation for using this technique is when an aggressive assailant has ahold of another officer or victim. Striking the brachial plexus is not only a great distractor, but it may cause the arrestee to become disoriented or even temporarily unconscious.
 

https://www.policemag.com/342012/gaining-compliance-with-targeted-pressure
 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

So you admit Tucker was lying 

Or just wrong, like we all were, because she looks elderly and she uses a walker. Just remember that when she was first trampled no one knew her name or her age. We all thought that she was elderly.

I didn't even know that she was only 49 util today, and I've seen her in speaking in a video and seen close-up photos before, like the one where she's holding the Tim Horton's cup on the stretcher. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Here’s you schooling for today: Police training on how to hit a non-compliant suspect  

Gaining Compliance with Targeted Pressure
 

Pressure and Strikes

 

….There are two ways to activate pressure-sensitive areas, either by simply applying pressure or by striking. This will depend on the area of the body where the pressure point is located and the goal of the activation…. If a strike is to be used, it is best to have some control of the suspect in order to ensure accuracy, but this is not a necessity.

Your post is imploding from it's own abject stupidity.

It says right there in the bolded part that applying pressure is a means of controlling a person, and with 4 cops on top of that guy they obviously didn't need to use strikes. 

 

For your edification:

The police can use whatever level of force is necessary to achieve their lawful and necessary objectives, but their use of force is strictly regulated.

For example, police also have guns that they can use, but they're not allowed to just shoot people for not listening intently. 

An example of their use of force guideline is here, from the Newf Constabulary: https://www.ciddd.ca/documents/exhibits/P-0624.pdf

Quote

“Bottom Line”

  1. Force used must be reasonable.

  2. Are your actions what a reasonable, well trained prudent officer would do,

    faced with a similar set of circumstances.

Force is escalated based upon the level of resistance or threat.

When do we escalate from non-physical force to physical force? (Verbal Judo Institute)

Acronym – “S.A.F.E.”

S - Security Breach: Officer or others in danger or threatened Property under control threatened

A - Attack: Officer’s personal danger zone is threatened Officer assaulted / pre-assault cues

F - Flight: Unlawfully fleeing and verbal commands ignored, one must physically prevent the escape

E - Excessive repetition / non compliance: Exhausted all verbal options - Subject refuses to comply with lawful verbal commands

So you can see here that the police don't just get to beat up people who pissed them off, but then surrendered peacefully. Once compliance is established, the use of force is not necessary, and therefor it is not reasonable. Since "reasonable" is a requirement (the words 'must be' = requirement), not reasonable = not allowed. IE, the police are not allowed to beat up people who surrendered peacefully on their knees. End of story.

 

 

I know that you're far from being a "reading comprehension" guy, so I have a shiny picture for you. 

Note that in the shiny picture below, where it says "active resistance" at the 6 o'clock position, the officer's physical response is "physical control". When multiple officers have a lone man on the ground and his limbs are restrained, the officers have achieved physical control

That restrained person was completely unable to escalate the situation to "assaultive" with 4 dudes restraining him, so there was no reasonable need to escalate the police use of force beyond "physical control", which they had already achieved.

If there were other violent or aggressive persons in the vicinity, escalating the danger to the arresting officers, that may constitute a need for a quicker resolution to the active resistance scenario which the officers were still facing, but the officers were actually surrounded by dozens of other armed officers, and the crowd was far away and peaceful.  

Bottom line - the officers were not in any danger of being "assaulted" at that point and there was no need for haste or an escalation of force. Therefor, they had no need or right to beat the person that they were holding on the ground into submission. 

Quote

Section 26

Taking into account all sections, which govern using force, this section covers excessive force. Everyone who is authorized by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess thereof.

An now, without further ado, as promised - a shiny picture. TADAAAAA!:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Screen Shot 2022-04-11 at 7.58.50 PM.png

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Your post is imploding from it's own abject stupidity.

It says right there in the bolded part that applying pressure is a means of controlling a person, and with 4 cops on top of that guy they obviously didn't need to use strikes. 

 

For your edification:

The police can use whatever level of force is necessary to achieve their lawful and necessary objectives, but their use of force is strictly regulated.

For example, police also have guns that they can use, but they're not allowed to just shoot people for not listening intently. 

An example of their use of force guideline is here, from the Newf Constabulary: https://www.ciddd.ca/documents/exhibits/P-0624.pdf

So you can see here that the police don't just get to beat up people who pissed them off, but then surrendered peacefully. Once compliance is established, the use of force is not necessary, and therefor it is not reasonable. Since "reasonable" is a requirement (the words 'must be' = requirement), not reasonable = not allowed. IE, the police are not allowed to beat up people who surrendered peacefully on their knees. End of story.

 

 

I know that you're far from being a "reading comprehension" guy, so I have a shiny picture for you. 

Note that in the shiny picture below, where it says "active resistance" at the 6 o'clock position, the officer's physical response is "physical control". When multiple officers have a lone man on the ground and his limbs are restrained, the officers have achieved physical control

That restrained person was completely unable to escalate the situation to "assaultive" with 4 dudes restraining him, so there was no reasonable need to escalate the police use of force beyond "physical control", which they had already achieved.

If there were other violent or aggressive persons in the vicinity, escalating the danger to the arresting officers, that may constitute a need for a quicker resolution to the active resistance scenario which the officers were still facing, but the officers were actually surrounded by dozens of other armed officers, and the crowd was far away and peaceful.  

Bottom line - the officers were not in any danger of being "assaulted" at that point and there was no need for haste or an escalation of force. Therefor, they had no need or right to beat the person that they were holding on the ground into submission. 

An now, without further ado, as promised - a shiny picture. TADAAAAA!:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Screen Shot 2022-04-11 at 7.58.50 PM.png

FFS does every tiny little thing need to be explained to you?

 

Pinning a guy on the ground and getting him into handcuffs are2 different things genius. It doesn’t matter how many cops are sitting on his back, if he’s refusing to be handcuffed and resisting putting his hands behind his back, stiffening his arms etc all that is resistance and cops can and do use strikes and pressure holds for compliance in those situations. Again it doesn’t looks like the guy is even being hit that hard with the knee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Or just wrong, like we all were, because she looks elderly and she uses a walker. Just remember that when she was first trampled no one knew her name or her age. We all thought that she was elderly.

I didn't even know that she was only 49 util today, and I've seen her in speaking in a video and seen close-up photos before, like the one where she's holding the Tim Horton's cup on the stretcher. 

Just wrong as usual. A NOT-elderly lady was NOT trampled and did NOT require medical treatment for her “strained shoulder”.   Which is NOT the same as the righties we’re claiming. Full stop.  

The fact that the protesters are so trashy and ugly you can’t tell the elderly from the non-elderly isn’t an excuse for yet more of your disinformation 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

FFS does every tiny little thing need to be explained to you?

 

Pinning a guy on the ground and getting him into handcuffs are2 different things genius. It doesn’t matter how many cops are sitting on his back, if he’s refusing to be handcuffed and resisting putting his hands behind his back, stiffening his arms etc all that is resistance and cops can and do use strikes and pressure holds for compliance in those situations. Again it doesn’t looks like the guy is even being hit that hard with the knee. 

That's completely stupid and you know it. Even if the guy was resisting, he couldn't keep it up for much more than 30 seconds against 4 physically fit, trained officers who already had him on the ground, and they were surrounded by dozens of cops and some peaceful protesters much further away. The only thing that was making the situation dicey at all was the fact that officers were brutalizing a protester.

There was no need whatsoever for such brutality. The precedent there was horrible, and an embarrassment to Canada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Just wrong as usual. A NOT-elderly lady was NOT trampled and did NOT require medical treatment for her “strained shoulder”.   Which is NOT the same as the righties we’re claiming. Full stop.  

The fact that the protesters are so trashy and ugly you can’t tell the elderly from the non-elderly isn’t an excuse for yet more of your disinformation 

Either you're the world champ of playing stupid or you're a window connoisseur.

Everyone who saw her talking in the video thought that she was elderly, the fact that she used a walker made her seem elderly, everyone who saw her on the cart in the hospital thought that she was elderly, it wasn't until her age was released that anyone knew she was under 60. You don't get to call people liars for making a minor, logical assumption when the facts aren't available.

Everyone that saw her trampled by a horse saw her trampled by a horse and your lies are meaningless.

The fact that you are resorting to sandbox insults about the protesters yet again is telling. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

That's completely stupid and you know it. Even if the guy was resisting, he couldn't keep it up for much more than 30 seconds against 4 physically fit, trained officers who already had him on the ground, and they were surrounded by dozens of cops and some peaceful protesters much further away. The only thing that was making the situation dicey at all was the fact that officers were brutalizing a protester.

There was no need whatsoever for such brutality. The precedent there was horrible, and an embarrassment to Canada.

The pro-police brutality party sheds a crocodile tear over this one instance of non-brutality that you’re exaggerating and milking to death with you grainy out of focus footage shot from 100 miles away. 
 

I already explained that being pinned to the ground isn’t the point if you’re resisting the cuffs. And it doesn’t even look like he’s being hit all that hard. You can’t even tell what part of the body is being struck.
 

And he’s never come forward claiming any injuries has he?  Case closed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Either you're the world champ of playing stupid or you're a window connoisseur.

Everyone who saw her talking in the video thought that she was elderly, the fact that she used a walker made her seem elderly, everyone who saw her on the cart in the hospital thought that she was elderly, it wasn't until her age was released that anyone knew she was under 60. You don't get to call people liars for making a minor, logical assumption when the facts aren't available.

Everyone that saw her trampled by a horse saw her trampled by a horse and your lies are meaningless.

The fact that you are resorting to sandbox insults about the protesters yet again is telling. 

 

Getting knocked down by a horse is not getting trampled by a horse you exaggerating drama queen. Living a trashy lifestyle and looking like you’re a senior citizen doesn’t make you a senior citizen. 
 

Hers a CBC article from 48 hours after the incident that correctly identified her as 49 although at the time they gave her the benefit of the doubt that she had a “serious” injury (right wing liars were reporting she had been killed at the time)  

 

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6358838

 

By the way it’s not like she and the other protesters weren’t warned and given many many opportunities  to leave.  Remember when you lied and said Zelensky started the war in Ukraine simply by refusing Russian ultimatums and “forcing” Russia to attack?  Even though that’s a lie your logic is that people who ignore warnings from their attackers then become responsible for the attack. So isn’t this lady responsible?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

The pro-police brutality party sheds a crocodile tear over this one instance of non-brutality that you’re exaggerating and milking to death with you grainy out of focus footage shot from 100 miles away. 
 

I already explained that being pinned to the ground isn’t the point if you’re resisting the cuffs. And it doesn’t even look like he’s being hit all that hard. You can’t even tell what part of the body is being struck.
 

And he’s never come forward claiming any injuries has he?  Case closed 

I already debunked the stupidity of your post.

1) beating people once they're already restrained by 4 cops who are surrounded by 80 other cops is brutality and only a really stupid person would think otherwise.

2) The distance and quality of the video doesn't make it even the slightest bit difficult to see what's going on

3) Csaba Vizi will lose his truck for certain if he takes on our fascist gov't, and our PM/AG. Go price a semi and see if you're willing to just give one away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Getting knocked down by a horse is not getting trampled by a horse you exaggerating drama queen.

It's not an exaggeration to say that she was trampled by a horse. That was the intent, and that was what happened.

It was a clearly unwarranted & excessive use of force.

Quote

Living a trashy lifestyle and looking like you’re a senior citizen doesn’t make you a senior citizen. 

By your own admission people were being reasonable in assuming that she was a senior citizen, therefor you're acknowledging that people weren't lying when they called her a senior - they were just wrong about her age, therefor you are a liar for pretending that people were lying when they called her old.

Quote

Hers a CBC article from 48 hours after the incident that correctly identified her as 49 although at the time they gave her the benefit of the doubt that she had a “serious” injury (right wing liars were reporting she had been killed at the time)

1) So it took 48 hours to confirm that she wasn't a senior, and in that span of time literally everyone thought that she was, for several reasons. Again you knew that you were just slandering people by calling them liars. 

2) Only an idiot reads/watches CBC. It would be a compliment to call it disinformation, it's actually just drivel. 

Quote

By the way it’s not like she and the other protesters weren’t warned and given many many opportunities  to leave.  

By your simple understanding of the matter, the choice to leave and just force their children to take a pseudovax which could harm them very badly would be reasonable.

By your simple POV the choice to just take the dangerous pseudovax that they didn't need in order to keep their jobs would be reasonable.

FYI those things are not reasonable, and just giving up would not be reasonable. Your understanding of the topic at hand is sadly lacking. The fact is that many of the people that stood up to our fascist gov't are the very best of us. That's why our MSM ran such a determined campaign of slander and lies against them.

Quote

Remember when you lied and said Zelensky started the war in Ukraine simply by refusing Russian ultimatums and “forcing” Russia to attack?  

Lying is your thing, don't put words in my mouth. I never said that Zelenski alone "started the war" but he created the reason for the war and when he had the opportunity to take reasonable steps to avoid war he chose not to. 

Zelenski forced Russia to take a stand against NATO encroachment and he is absolutely as responsible as Putin is for this war - he was a willing combatant.

Quote

Even though that’s a lie your logic is that people who ignore warnings from their attackers then become responsible for the attack.

That's just your window connoisseur 'logic' again.

Sometimes people don't provoke attacks against them, sometimes they do.

Eg, if you told someone who could bench 70 lbs "I'm getting 4 of my friends to scratch you and pull your hair" and they said "Don't you dare, or I'll kick your ass", and you said "Oh yes I will", and then they slapped you around a bit, it wouldn't be their fault alone, you'd be 'consenting to violence' by refusing to back down from your threats.  

If, on the other hand, a 12 yr old girl took a liking to your Hello Kitty backpack and demanded that you give it to her, and then she bitch-slapped you for non-compliance, she would be guilty of assault. 

Get it? Sometimes you can be considered a willing combatant for refusing to obey an ultimatum, sometimes you're not. 

Quote

So isn’t this lady responsible?

She's awesome. You could only hope to be a moon-cast shadow of her on your best day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2022 at 2:09 AM, WestCanMan said:

It's not an exaggeration to say that she was trampled by a horse. That was the intent, and that was what happened.

It was a clearly unwarranted & excessive use of force.

By your own admission people were being reasonable in assuming that she was a senior citizen, therefor you're acknowledging that people weren't lying when they called her a senior - they were just wrong about her age, therefor you are a liar for pretending that people were lying when they called her old.

1) So it took 48 hours to confirm that she wasn't a senior, and in that span of time literally everyone thought that she was, for several reasons. Again you knew that you were just slandering people by calling them liars. 

2) Only an idiot reads/watches CBC. It would be a compliment to call it disinformation, it's actually just drivel. 

By your simple understanding of the matter, the choice to leave and just force their children to take a pseudovax which could harm them very badly would be reasonable.

By your simple POV the choice to just take the dangerous pseudovax that they didn't need in order to keep their jobs would be reasonable.

FYI those things are not reasonable, and just giving up would not be reasonable. Your understanding of the topic at hand is sadly lacking. The fact is that many of the people that stood up to our fascist gov't are the very best of us. That's why our MSM ran such a determined campaign of slander and lies against them.

Lying is your thing, don't put words in my mouth. I never said that Zelenski alone "started the war" but he created the reason for the war and when he had the opportunity to take reasonable steps to avoid war he chose not to. 

Zelenski forced Russia to take a stand against NATO encroachment and he is absolutely as responsible as Putin is for this war - he was a willing combatant.

That's just your window connoisseur 'logic' again.

Sometimes people don't provoke attacks against them, sometimes they do.

Eg, if you told someone who could bench 70 lbs "I'm getting 4 of my friends to scratch you and pull your hair" and they said "Don't you dare, or I'll kick your ass", and you said "Oh yes I will", and then they slapped you around a bit, it wouldn't be their fault alone, you'd be 'consenting to violence' by refusing to back down from your threats.  

If, on the other hand, a 12 yr old girl took a liking to your Hello Kitty backpack and demanded that you give it to her, and then she bitch-slapped you for non-compliance, she would be guilty of assault. 

Get it? Sometimes you can be considered a willing combatant for refusing to obey an ultimatum, sometimes you're not. 

She's awesome. You could only hope to be a moon-cast shadow of her on your best day. 

Yes it’s an exaggeration to say she was trampled by a horse. 
 

Yes when right media outlets reported that she was elderly when she wasn’t Is dishonest. Media outlets are supposed to check facts…something they’re not familiar with

Yes when they continue to report her as elderly when her age has been acutely reported is lying 

 

Yes when the peaceful demonstrators have cleared out and people remain to battle police who have provided them ample warning of what’s to come if they don’t leave…they know what they’re getting into

No, agreeing to peacefully leave the demonstration doesn’t mean they were forced to get vaccinated or vaccinated their kids you liar

Dangerous Psuedovax….thenkne Trump is taking credit for developing?  Are you saying your dear Trump developed a dangerous vaccine?

Your lies about Putin’s imperialist Russian aggression and your idiotic logic haven’t changed I see.  Most of the peaceful convoy protesters left without getting vaccinated. There was no choice between staying to fight or getting vaccinated.  They were the hardcore zealots.   They were hardly “the best of us”    The vast majority of Canadians don’t support them or their badly misspelled signs. Best of YOU maybe?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Yes it’s an exaggeration to say she was trampled by a horse. 
 

Yes when right media outlets reported that she was elderly when she wasn’t Is dishonest. Media outlets are supposed to check facts…something they’re not familiar with

Yes when they continue to report her as elderly when her age has been acutely reported is lying 

 

Yes when the peaceful demonstrators have cleared out and people remain to battle police who have provided them ample warning of what’s to come if they don’t leave…they know what they’re getting into

No, agreeing to peacefully leave the demonstration doesn’t mean they were forced to get vaccinated or vaccinated their kids you liar

Dangerous Psuedovax….thenkne Trump is taking credit for developing?  Are you saying your dear Trump developed a dangerous vaccine?

She was trampled by a horse, so it's not an exaggeration to say "trampled". It just is what it is.

She uses a walker, so if she's not elderly she's partly handicapped. In any event, she checks one of the boxes that leftists go crazy for. 

It wasn't just right wing media that thought she was elderly, everyone thought that when they looked at her. Stop trying to act like people lied about her age ffs. If you want to see media lying just look back at every single newscats between 2016 and 2020 on CNN and CTV. They told so many lies about "Russian collusion" that some of the most severely retarded people in our society still believe it was a thing. 

Leaving that protest definitely means that more adults and children will be forced to vaccinate. 

Yes the pseudovax is dangerous, even the CDC acknowledges some of its side effects.

No Trump didn't 'develop' the vaccine in his spare time as POTUS, he's not the genius that you make him out to be, but he'd probably be one of the most culpable people for rushing the vaccine if it wasn't for all of the leftards pushing it on everyone.

Quote

Your lies about Putin’s imperialist Russian aggression and your idiotic logic haven’t changed I see. 

Are you referring to this:

Quote

 

Sometimes people don't provoke attacks against them, sometimes they do.

Eg, if you told someone who could bench 70 lbs "I'm getting 4 of my friends to scratch you and pull your hair" and they said "Don't you dare, or I'll kick your ass", and you said "Oh yes I will", and then they slapped you around a bit, it wouldn't be their fault alone, you'd be 'consenting to violence' by refusing to back down from your threats.  

If, on the other hand, a 12 yr old girl took a liking to your Hello Kitty backpack and demanded that you give it to her, and then she bitch-slapped you for non-compliance, she would be guilty of assault. 

Get it? Sometimes you can be considered a willing combatant for refusing to obey an ultimatum, sometimes you're not. 

 

?

I won't say that you're "lying" about Russia in this instance because all that you're really capable of doing is regurgitating CNN talking points.

Have a fun weekend Beave. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

She was trampled by a horse, so it's not an exaggeration to say "trampled". It just is what it is.

She uses a walker, so if she's not elderly she's partly handicapped. In any event, she checks one of the boxes that leftists go crazy for. 

It wasn't just right wing media that thought she was elderly, everyone thought that when they looked at her. Stop trying to act like people lied about her age ffs. If you want to see media lying just look back at every single newscats between 2016 and 2020 on CNN and CTV. They told so many lies about "Russian collusion" that some of the most severely retarded people in our society still believe it was a thing. 

Leaving that protest definitely means that more adults and children will be forced to vaccinate. 

Yes the pseudovax is dangerous, even the CDC acknowledges some of its side effects.

No Trump didn't 'develop' the vaccine in his spare time as POTUS, he's not the genius that you make him out to be, but he'd probably be one of the most culpable people for rushing the vaccine if it wasn't for all of the leftards pushing it on everyone.

Are you referring to this:

?

I won't say that you're "lying" about Russia in this instance because all that you're really capable of doing is regurgitating CNN talking points.

Have a fun weekend Beave. 

Trampled means stepped on. The horse didn’t step on her. Full stop. Her “strained shoulder” from getting knocked over is not an injury.   That’s just a fact. 

She is not elderly that’s just a fact tjat the Tucker and his fellow liars won’t correct. And if she’s so disabled and fragile she probably shouldn’t have chosen to stand with the die hard holdouts once the police warned what was going to happen next and everyone else wisely chose to leave peacefully.
 

Contrary to your lies, Zelensky never told Putin to “bring it on” but these Ottawa diehard holdouts said exactly that to police  amd they knew exactly what they were getting themselves into. 
 

Glad you’re able to criticize  Trump for something although if theses vaccines are as deadly as you claim and will supposedly kill millions it’s strange that you still support him so. Don’t you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Trampled means stepped on. The horse didn’t step on her. Full stop. Her “strained shoulder” from getting knocked over is not an injury.   That’s just a fact. 

She is not elderly that’s just a fact tjat the Tucker and his fellow liars won’t correct. And if she’s so disabled and fragile she probably shouldn’t have chosen to stand with the die hard holdouts once the police warned what was going to happen next and everyone else wisely chose to leave peacefully.
 

Contrary to your lies, Zelensky never told Putin to “bring it on” but these Ottawa diehard holdouts said exactly that to police  amd they knew exactly what they were getting themselves into. 
 

Glad you’re able to criticize  Trump for something although if theses vaccines are as deadly as you claim and will supposedly kill millions it’s strange that you still support him so. Don’t you think?

The horse went straight over top of her. The intent of doing that was to trample her. Whether the horse was able to avoid stepping on her or not is unclear, but the intent was.

Now you're splitting hairs between "a 49 yr old unhealthy woman" vs "elderly woman". There's not much difference. No one needed to trample an old woman with a horse.  

Contrary to your own stupidity Biden has been bringing up the possibility of NATO in Ukraine since Obama was POTUS. Kamala Harris just went to Europe to reaffirm America's intention to eventually bring Ukraine into the fold right before Russia went in. 

Here are your own gods saying that Zelenski was blathering about joining NATO as late as Feb 14. By some strange coincidence, Russia invaded 10 days later.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2022/02/14/zelensky-ukraine-would-like-to-join-nato-sot-fm-intl-vpx.cnn

Quote

Zelensky: Yes, we would like to join NATO

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reiterated that his country intends to join NATO when asked about the remarks of his country's ambassador to the UK, who suggested Kyiv might abandon those ambitions to avoid further Russian aggression.

Source: CNN

Only a complete idiot would be unable to connect the dots between "Let's bring in NATO" and "How about if we bring in our tanks instead." 

Again, your own gods said that, therefor you have no choice but to believe it in its entirety, and to regurgitate it. Any less would constitute blasphemy against CNN on your part.

Don't make me have to send a link to your heresy to Don Lemon (and whoever's left there since they started clearing out the pedophiles). 

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

The horse went straight over top of her. The intent of doing that was to trample her. Whether the horse was able to avoid stepping on her or not is unclear, but the intent was.

Now you're splitting hairs between "a 49 yr old unhealthy woman" vs "elderly woman". There's not much difference. No one needed to trample an old woman with a horse.  

No the intent was not to trample he and indeed she was not trampled, if she was she would have had more than a strained shoulder. 

And no it’s not hair splitting to call out the fact that a 49yo is not elderly. 
 

 

As for the rest of your blathering idiocy, as I’ve said many times, Ukraine considering joining NATO or being invited to join NATO or even ACTUALLY  joining NATO doesn’t justify Russian invasion nor is it a threat to Russia  Latvia Lithuania and Estonia all border Russia and joined NATO, along with many other former Soviet puppets in Eastern Europe. The Cold War was over NATO is not out to invade Russia suddenly for no reason

There is nothing that justifies Russian invasion, much less the mass killings and rapes Russian troops are carrying out   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2022 at 5:59 PM, BeaverFever said:

No the intent was not to trample he and indeed she was not trampled, if she was she would have had more than a strained shoulder. 

FYI when you ride a horse over someone the intent is to trample them.

Quote

And no it’s not hair splitting to call out the fact that a 49yo is not elderly. 

Right, but when 10,000 people see an old-looking woman with a walker and they all think that she's elderly it's not "lying" when you call her elderly, it's just being wrong. 

She was called elderly thousands and thousands of times before anyone knew better. Not everyone checked into her age to see if she was shy of 50, and that's not even a major consideration in this story. The police shouldn't be trampling peaceful protesters, period. 

Quote

As for the rest of your blathering idiocy, as I’ve said many times, Ukraine considering joining NATO or being invited to join NATO or even ACTUALLY  joining NATO doesn’t justify Russian invasion nor is it a threat to Russia

You're either incredibly stupid or willfully ignorant/hypocritical, it makes no difference to me, but a rational person understands the similarities between the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Ukraine invasion. They understand that NATO in Ukraine was a bridge too far. 

Not a threat to Russia lol. That's just plain effing stupid.

Quote

 Latvia Lithuania and Estonia all border Russia and joined NATO, along with many other former Soviet puppets in Eastern Europe.

And none of that compares to NATO in Ukraine.

Quote

The Cold War was over NATO is not out to invade Russia suddenly for no reason

Russia knows about the bioweapons 'research' labs. They know how many strategic nukes and hypersonic missilies will be at their border if NATO strolls in. It was not an option for Russia so they invaded.

Leftists were too stupid to see what would happen if Biden kept pushing NATO in Ukraine. Trump wasn't that stupid, that's why this war didn't happen under Trump.

Quote

There is nothing that justifies Russian invasion, much less the mass killings and rapes Russian troops are carrying out

That's the dumbest load of propaganda that I've ever heard. FYI even American casualty reports say that almost no Ukrainians are dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2022 at 11:59 AM, WestCanMan said:

FYI when you ride a horse over someone the intent is to trample them.

The horse didn’t  ride over her. She was knocked backwards on her ass by the horse 

 

On 4/20/2022 at 11:59 AM, WestCanMan said:

Right, but when 10,000 people see an old-looking woman with a walker and they all think that she's elderly it's not "lying" when you call her elderly, it's just being wrong. 

They called her elderly after it was known she was not elderly. And 50 isn’t elderly either. 
 

On 4/20/2022 at 11:59 AM, WestCanMan said:

 a rational person understands the similarities between the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Ukraine invasion. They understand that NATO in Ukraine was a bridge too far. 

Umm nope that’s a lie!  It’s a fact that the the majority of Americans don’t agree with you Putin supporters . Even the majority of Republicans don’t agree with you. So literally by any definition of whose opinion should be counted as “rational people” you are not included. Literally nobody other than your fringe extremists considers this to be the same as the Cuban missile crisis. You are the fringe kooks. 
 

And yeah NATO was not a thereat to Russia. Only a total Putin-brainwashed idiot would think NATO countries and their threadbare militaries were secretly plotting to attack Russia out of the blue for no reason even as they’re  signing huge energy deals with Russia.  How stupid does a right wing kook have to be to believe that?

 

The rest of your post is just idiotic nonsense shit you make up or just copy-paste from the Kremlin. Everybody knows it, even most Republicans.   Your dumbass bioweapons bullshit is nonsense and NATO doesn’t even have hypersonic missiles yet you uninformed “genius”  

 

On 4/20/2022 at 11:59 AM, WestCanMan said:

FYI even American casualty reports say that almost no Ukrainians are dead.

Outright lie, you liar.  Bucha massacre is well documented  
 

The officially counted tally is:2,224 killed and 2,897 injured. But this is only 1 of the sites they’ve been able to get to   
 

Plus all the mass rapes  Yes we know Republicans are fond of most types of white-on-white and white-on non-white rape

https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2022/04/ukraine-civilian-casualty-update-20-april-2022

Edited by BeaverFever
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Tell a friend

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

    • Total Members
      10,744
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Mark Partiwaka
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • exPS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • gatomontes99 went up a rank
      Proficient
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Recently Browsing

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