14 hours ago, from the home of CC said:

bad call by the parents.

Paid the price though. 

28 minutes ago, blazes said:

As recently as last week, Trump proposed negotiating separately with Mexico and Canada re NAFTA.  This exclusion of Canada is a blow below the belt (if not a bloody nose).  I was actually thinking about Trump's vicious attack on Trudeau after the jollifications of the G7 meeting in Quebec.

Being viciously attacked by Trump only shows that you've bested him somehow or he dislikes you because you make him feel inadequate. Ivanka swooning over him, his out-manoeuvre on the handshake and his being far more popular worldwide just drives the Donald cray-cray. Besides, nobody takes him seriously any more, he's coming unhinged.

22 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

 

Really?

Liberals rise in polls as Canadians rally behind Trudeau in spat with Trump: Ipsos poll

https://globalnews.ca/news/4342222/liberals-polls-canadians-trudeau-trump/

Erm...that supports my position. Trump didn't give him a bloody nose, Trudeau became more popular by standing up to him.

10 hours ago, blazes said:

2. With an election due next year, Trudeau wants to show he's a tough guy, given that Trump has given him a bloody nose.  And also he "stands up" to Saudi Arabia, unlike Potus, who has courted the Saudis in his anti-Iranian move.

 

Trump gave him a bloody nose? On the contrary, it was the one thing Canadians have liked about him.

8 minutes ago, CanuckThai said:

The most apt response to the hours of political correctness came from an Australian Islamic cleric, Imam Mohammed Tawhidi who has been to Canada and is familiar with the Islamist networks in the country. He tweeted: “If you think all these Jihadi terrorists kill because they have a mental illness, then perhaps you are the one with a mental illness. It’s not mental illness, it’s their allegiance.”

 

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/fatah-mentally-ill-the-media-or-the-murderer

Well, we're not saying "ALL" Jihadi terrorists kill because they have a mental illness, just like we're not saying that "NONE" of the White killers were mentally ill. We're saying that each individual situation must be examined on its own merits, and whether there is mental illness or not is a function of that individual's circumstances. We're saying this in response to the paradigm that has been set up and promoted by the Right, where any White guy who decides to murder a bunch of people is almost automatically assumed to be mentally ill, whereas any Muslim guy who decides the same is automatically assumed to be a committed Jihadi. 

BTW, the Toronto Sun is the equivalent of the Washington Times as far as journalistic bent and expertise is concerned. 

1 hour ago, Credo said:

They are going to have more than a 'he-said' so argument.   I mean we have Cohen, who is less than honest and Trump who lies constantly.   

Yeah, like an actual tape of what he said. As if THAT's going to happen!

2 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

 

No your only point was "white people are bad". It is irrelevant what white people do. It's a lame strawman. Bottom rung in terms of intelligent debate.

 

As for sides I don't have a "side" in this. You seem to think life is about "sides". It isn't. Debating a topic isn't about winners and losers, it's about learning more about other people's views.

 

Which is why you are probably sitting there with a little notebook and paper writing down the score of "them and me" in debating points.  

 

As for what you said that is idiotic. Just re-read every 'attempted point scoring' post you made on this thread. 

 

Still - it's free entertainment and I guess it keeps you off the streets.

Well, that was a Harvard-level debate performance if I've ever seen one!

Starts with reductio ad absurdum (look it up) about my views being essentially "Whitey Bad". That claim itself ignores the fallacy  that you're claiming that attaching values on the basis of race or religion is wrong, while claiming the right to attach values on the basis of race and religion. Talk about Strawmen... Of course, it includes a healthy portion of ad hominems and imaginings about what I might be thinking or doing that are completely irrelevant to the discussion. Good job! If you were being ironic, that is.

And certainly I engage in debate to learn more about other's views but also to sharpen my own arguments. And certainly "winning" the debate is important; if I continuously engage with the Far Right and come off a fool (in the eyes of outsiders), then I strengthen their contentions and weaken my own. This is why you'll pretty much never find any fact-based arguments in your post or the others, it always comes down to "what you write/who you are is stupid/idiotic/foolish" and when I ask what is foolish, I get answers that demonstrate an inability to comprehend other people's points, deflections, obfuscations, insults and, of course, the Trumpian Topping to every Right-Wing Sundae, the declaration of victory and pretend pity for me, the poor fool who doesn't have a brain. 

Carry on, I quite enjoy these discussions even if your side is fact-free. Do let us know when you have a salient point in response.
 

1 hour ago, taipan1949 said:

What I am saying here fool is that the guy took a trained stance to aim and kill, not the usual "gangster" idiot with the gun on it's side and blasting away. Why don't you grow a brain and look what the RCMP said about the battle with this guy? They had never faced an enemy with so much ability.

Yes, I understood that despite my lack of a brain. Despite your prodigious intelligence, you failed to grasp my point, which was that anyone can learn to shoot, it is not something that tells you anything about whether they're trained by ISIS or whether they're mentally ill. What tells me about whether they're trained by ISIS is plane tickets to the Middle East and things like that. I'm kind of stupid that way, I like to see evidence before I draw conclusions. 

I recall various people immediately drawing such conclusions when the guy drove his car into about a dozen people in Toronto a month ago. How did that work out for you?

7 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

 

It's hard to know where to start with the idiocy in this post.

 

This is NOT a competition. Arrests and action don't just get focused at the groups with the highest body count.

 

In Pakistan, where Muslims are the majority - the rack up a much higher body count that "white men" - because guess what - they are THE MAJORITY. Guess who kills the most Spaniards in Spain? The most Thais in Thailand? Actually - don't think too hard, your brain will overheat. 

 

It seems to me that what you are saying is that we should ignore Muslims killing westerners in the name of Islam because "white men" are also doing bad things.

 

Do you think a single intelligent person buys such drivel?

 

The bottom line is that radical, millitant Islam is a problem. In this case, you have a well trained Jihadi and ISIS have taken responsibilty - BUT - Canada denies ISIS had a part and YOU claim that "white men are the problem" as some attempt at diversion.

 

Lame on both counts.

Well, you certainly feel passionate about this, enough to post the same nonsense twice.

My point is that there are Muslim militants, as there are White Supremacists, hateful misogynists, angry homophobes, upset Sikhs...you name it, there's a grudge there somewhere and people willing to act on it. Yet only a tiny minority of each of these groups (and any others I've missed) ever act upon their anger and hate, and the majority of these who do appear to have mental issues that underlie the hate and anger. Sure, the numbers of these loons are probably proportionate to the numbers of their group, because mental illness doesn't discriminate. 

Your side have posited that this hate, anger and subsequent violence is something inherent to Muslims such that they act disproportionately to their numbers. This is patent nonsense and easily disproven by your own post as well as any dispassionate look at the numbers. By no means have I proposed that we should ignore Muslim militants killing White people any more than I have proposed we should ignore the opposite. What I'm saying is that this is an increasingly common phenomenon that transcends religion, race and various other criteria. That you have chosen to focus exclusively on Muslims rather than identify Misogynists (who killed more people in Toronto within the last month or so) or Islamophobes (who killed more people in Canada a year or so ago) demonstrates your hypocrisy and hatred of the "other". 

As to your last points, ISIS also took responsibility for the Vegas shooting and practically every other mass killing that might plausibly be connected to them. Their credibility is about at the same level as Mango Mussolini in terms of what they say. My point that White Males are by far the majority in terms of mass killers and shooters in Canada and the USA is indisputable and you don't even attempt to dispute it. Do they kill above their population percentage? Definitely they do, have not heard of many White Female shooters. The White Male population of the USA is around 31%, or 38% if you include Hispanic White people. They surely shoot way above their weight there. Probably holds in Canada although I haven't run the numbers (mainly because we don't have the statistical heft of American mass shooting numbers).

So what is it I've said that is idiotic? 

4 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

You're determined to play the fool here, you might as well go on. GK listed a number of terrorist attacks with Islamists in Canada and the rest of his post mopped the floor with you, so I see no point repeating what he said. I might not be able to find a link to satisfy this specific strawman you have about Islamist mass murder. This guy in Toronto forget to yell out, hello a snackbar, so I guess he was actually Catholic or something. Doesn't mean a thing to relatives to the dead and injured. I am certain they believe this was an attack inspired by Islam.

I see "fool" has become the latest Right-Wing epithet - as always, follow the Donald, if it's up, call it down, if evidence contradicts you, blame the facts or tell people not to believe their eyes and ears. 

And, FYI, what relatives of the victims believe is of no bearing whatsoever, it is facts that matter. Fact - misogynist White males have killed far more and far more often in Canada than Islamic militants, terrorists or sympathisers. In fact, Sikh terrorists lead the standings in Canada at the moment. Ready to go tear off some turbans? Oh, I suppose I shouldn't encourage you, any excuse to go after brown folk will do for the likes of you. 

13 minutes ago, taipan1949 said:

What I am saying here fool is that the guy took a trained stance to aim and kill, not the usual "gangster" idiot with the gun on it's side and blasting away. Why don't you grow a brain and look what the RCMP said about the battle with this guy? They had never faced an enemy with so much ability.

No, you're drawing a false parallel, where because a guy knows how to handle a weapon, that means he doesn't have mental issues, it means he's a "well - trained terrorist". I am saying people with mental illness can also learn how to use weapons. 

We're also pointing out the rampant hypocrisy on the Right where anyone shooting up schools or churches but is White is "mentally ill" (no comments on how White folks handled their weapons?) whereas anyone brown or black is a terrorist. 

6 minutes ago, taipan1949 said:

As a Marine I looked at his stance and this B...ard had training, not mentally ill.

Did...did you just solve the mental health problem in North America? Just put them in the Marines and they are no longer mentally ill?

Wow! You should be up for a Nobel Prize!

1 minute ago, taipan1949 said:

Anyone who actually believes and follows the koran is mentally ill.

How about the Bible? Or any other of the religious texts? Just the Koran?

Have you had a chat with God about which one is the most correct?

2 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

The Toronto Star has a long history of providing biased  stories to promote its agenda. It is no secret it has long been the print media ally of successive Liberal and NDP governments.

 

There have been multiple Islamic terror attack attempts which have been stopped.  These events are rarely reported because the government does not wish to cause civil disorder. Recent  events such as the attempt to  blow up the passenger train between Toronto & New York. Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser are now serving life sentences.

 

What do you call the  terror attack on the Canadian Parliament and the mnurder of the Canadian CplCirillol as he stood guard at the National War Memorial, or last october's stabbing of  the police officer in Edmonton, by the Islamic zealot screaming, or the nutter with a golf club that went beserk at a Canadian Tire outlet last year, or the Aaron Driver bombing, or the  fire bombing of the jewish school in Montreal? Those weren't  Hindus doing the attacks.

 

The only nonsense is coming from you. The firearm had a serial number and this was used to  trace  its distribution line. Rambo movies cannot be handgun training for the simple reason that weapons are not used in the manner that they are in  the movies.  Anyone with some experience with a handgun knows that they are inaccurate unless one practices and uses proper technique. This technique is not presented in Rambo movies.

 

You dismiss anyone who does not share your extremist agenda. The terrorist attacks have been prevented so far, and because Canada is a safe zone for terrorists. It is easy to get into the country and with the large fundamentalist population in Calgary, Toronto and especially Montreal where some of the more violent cells  exist, they are not going to  expose their safe houses. It is no secret that the  North African ghettos in Montreal North are no go zones, similar to some districts of Paris.

 

Canada changed long ago because of clueless twits who assumed that letting violent  people without vetting them wouldn't be a problem.

 

The only clown is you because you make false statements. The Canadian population doesn't rely on the biased media outlets of CBC and Toronto Star for its news anymore.

Oh my lord! I believe I'm getting the vapours reading all of this TERRIBLE news about those evil Muslims!

I'm just so grateful I don't live in such a place, beset by hordes of bloodthirsty Muslims just waiting (for what reason I don't know) to blow things up REAL GOOD! Think Big Jamal McBomb and Bilal Sul Hurock!

Oh, wait, I actually live in Toronto. And it's a peaceful multi-cultural city with little if any tension between the religious communities. My daughter lives in Montreal. No real worries there either. Now Calgary! I knew there must have been a hotbed of Sharia Law in Canada. How clever of them to hide it in the Capital of Redneck Canada.

A larger problem are the Canadian Incels who can't get laid because of their toxic personalities and take it out on women because they're "nice guys". I think there have been two mass murders by those guys already. Way more than Muslims. Shall we have a crackdown on losers? I understand your fears.

Actually, no, I don't. You're just another precious snowflake of a Conservative whining about a past that you'll never be able to return to. Sad!

6 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Hasn't that been Trump's excuse for all the mass gun shootings in the US?

No, just the ones done by White guys. Which of course covers most of them...

9 hours ago, Trouble said:

In the end this will not happen and everyone knows that.  This is just part of the news cycle.

 

What this whole thing shows, however, is just how much each side attempts to interfere in the other's business. Surely Russia suspects US individuals of attempting to cause trouble in their internal affairs. What is so unexpected to me is that anyone in America is surprised that the Russians would do what they did in hacking the emails of the DNC, etc.  It's known that they also attempted to do so to the RNC as well.  In reading the indictment it also seems that in some ways the Russians were kind of sloppy in not concealing the trail better.  It also makes one wonder just how the Mueller team (FBI, etc.) was able to track all this without hacking into computers outside the USA such at the one in Malaysia.  If they obtain all the information lawfully fine but it makes one wonder how they followed the trail all the way back to specific GRU units it a totally "lawful" manner.  It shouldn't be any surprise that the NSA, DIA, CIA are hacking into computers in other countries, listening to communications and reading emails of foreign governments, banking, business. They will call it defensive in nature but they are also offensively obtaining information anyway they can get it. The bigger issue seems to be that the GRU leaked their information through DCLeaks website causing havoc in DNC.  The American people should be happy to see what really goes on behind closed doors in the political parties.  It's the Bernie Sanders supporters that should be outraged. I think the Democrats' outrage is about the fact that it happened to the DNC and not the RNC.  I find the reaction on the left somewhat humorous.  The Chinese hack into computers of the Office of Personnel Management and steal information relating to over 20 million Americans and after a couple of weeks the news cycle drops the story.  So where is the continued outrage against the Chinese government.  Nowhere to be seen. The Dems loose an election and need to blame it on somebody so the Russian hack has become a major story for 1 1/2 years.  Get over it and move on.  The main focus should be on preventing future hacking.  The intelligence community readily admits there are numerous attempted hacks everyday from around the world.  It's going to happen again and the US intelligence agencies are doing it too.  There is no righteousness for anybody regarding this issue.   There is nothing put into electronic media, stored on a computer or the "cloud" that can't be hacked. It seems to be a fact of life in the 21st Century.  Might as well get used to it.

There are some useful points in this summary, but overall you miss the main point. Does the USA also interfere in other countries' elections? Both openly and surreptitiously, yes, of course they do and have done for longer than a Century. Do other countries try to interfere in the USA elections? Yes, both openly (Israel for example) and surreptitiously (Russia in this case). So there is no news there, it's old hat and long known, that's true. And of course there needs to be serious and urgent measures put in place to prevent a repeat in the mid-terms, although those who stand to benefit would have been pleased to let it (and specifically prevented allowing Americans to know about the Russian meddling prior to the presidential election). 

What's new is that in this case it appears there may well have been both open solicitation of assistance from abroad by one of the candidates (not normal and not kosher) and a dedicated and effective foreign team put in place that responded directly in ways that mirrored the interests and entreaties of the same benefiting parties. That's a line that previously hasn't been crossed, and is at the core of the Mueller investigation. There certainly was a remarkable amount of contact between known Russian operatives and senior members of the Trump campaign team and family. And there are already a lot of indictments that demonstrate that the prosecutors have enough evidence to begin charging these people. So that's the heart of the matter, not "sour grapes" over a lost election. In the past, conservatives would have been apoplectic about Russians being so close to the President. 

I remain unconvinced that there was a "plan" or explicit agreement among the parties to collude, it was more of a "nudge nudge, wink wink" type agreement. Trump knows this kind of business very well, how to make things happen without explicitly saying so, he's worked with the Mob for years. And he's clearly not one for carefully laid plans. I expect the investigation to uncover a wide-ranging Russian effort using all the usual Cold War methods  to influence the election at numerous levels (blackmail, sparrows like Butina, dirty money, hacking computers and election machines, social media propaganda) such that there won't be any lingering doubt that it happened and that there were numerous and extensive contacts between the different parties. The question will be whether any of them were stupid enough to leave voice or text messages that explicitly demonstrated or acknowledged cooperation. Clearly some were, we need to find out how high up it went.

Very disappointing and disappointed. I guess we should always be cautious when someone or something appears to be too good to be true, regardless of whether we like/agree with them or their mission or not. 

I've said this before, but when you get people who actually are selfless and genuinely working for the benefit of others, they will NEVER voluntarily tell you about it. If they do, you should be suspicious, because this goes very much against the same instinct that makes these people unselfish. Any aid worker claiming great works almost inevitably turns out to be a shameless self-promoter or conman, whereas you'll never hear about the ones who just keep their heads down and grind. Mother Theresa, Greg Mortensen, Lance Armstrong are the most high profile examples of this. Musk can be given more latitude for self-promotion as his enterprise is capitalist, but it is cracks in the facade like this that reveal the true person inside to be just another rich guy whose ego is so large it can't take any criticism.