Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

mowich

Members
  • Content Count

    393
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by mowich


  1. 15 hours ago, jacee said:

    So ... you're suggesting taking away constitutional rights of freedom of expression, association and assembly? 

    Or that are they only for white people? 

    Clarify ... ?

    I find it very interesting that you intentionally misread another person's post.  Why is it so hard for you to understand exactly what is written instead of making lame claims about taking away constitutional rights where none was suggested. 

    I realize from having read your posts that you have an agenda that excludes comments which do not fall within your limited guidelines but please dear use your brain when replying lest you be thought uneducated and unable to discern what is really being stated.

    • Like 1

  2. 1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

    There were protestors objecting to the activities of antifa, BLM, and the looters. I saw video of one old lady screaming at antifa to stop the vandalism because it might help Trump get re-elected.

    It's apples and oranges comparing cops to protestors though. Cops have to be there. Citizens don't have to attend a riot. They can choose not to attend.

    Right you are, Infidel Dog.  I watched/listened to the Mayor of Seattle yesterday stating quite firmly that there would be a curfew at 5PM and that EVERYONE should go home.  Hours later I am watching as the covidiots still wandering about the streets in large groups in spite of that.  Once you are told to make tracks, it is on you if you are caught up in an ensuing riot. 


  3. 6 hours ago, Independent1986 said:

    You are insulting minorities and immigrants in my case that succeeded in life through hard work and struggle.

    Some of us experienced racism, some of us experienced homelessness to get personal through bad luck and other factors. Thank God I did not meet people like you or some socialist on the other side to keep repeating the big lie that the reason I am not succeeding is because of the system. I was lucky in that aspect and it never once crossed my mind to steal or do something illegal for my benefit. Is funny what happens when you put your mind to being productive. My first job was as a dishwasher in a pizza place now I can walk anytime I want and buy a take out meal without worrying for the cost.

    This arrogance comes from people from both the left and right, people that got everything handed to them on a silver plate, never struggled for a dime and they feel so superior lecturing everyone else on what their problems is. It might work for people that are too afraid and they buy your big lie. Many more however will get up today and look for opportunities to become successful. That is the beauty of our western system, it gives opportunity to everyone. Is up to the individual if they want to take it.

    Very well stated, Independent. 


  4. On 4/24/2020 at 1:16 PM, Goddess said:

    Agree.  To say that every white person has only succeeded because of their skin colour, is asinine.  All that does is tell some in minority categories that they are "owed" success no matter what they do and if they don't get it, they get to blame it on racism.

    Is there racism?  Ya.

    Do some minorities get shut out because of their skin colour?  Of course.

    Should I feel bad because I have a good job, which I worked hard for - pulled myself out of a poverty-stricken, stuck in a religious cult childhood, got an education and hustled and moved to where jobs were and created my own job - Sorry but I don't.  I earned my place.  Skin colour may not have been what held me back, but other things were, and they were just as hard to overcome.  Everybody has things to overcome in life.

    Another great post, Goddess.

    • Like 1

  5. On 4/24/2020 at 9:01 AM, Goddess said:

    We do.  Again, no one has said there is NO racism in Canada.  But anyone who is truly concerned about racism, does not START with Canada unless they have an agenda.

    That's like the climate emergency people who focus on Canada, while having nothing to say about China.

    It's easy to bully Canada on things like climate and racism because we take those accusations to heart and actually do something about them.  Not so easy to bully China - China doesn't give a rip what anyone says about it.

    Well put, Goddess.


  6. 3 hours ago, jacee said:

    1 This is a normal course of law-making in Canada: Legislation can be challenged in a court that rules on its constitutionality. If legislation survives the challenge, it makes it stronger. 

    2 What the banned 'hunting' guns have in common is that regardless of legal functioning, they are dressed up to look like something illegal - military assault rifles - which they are not, as you yourself pointed out earlier. Thanks for that clarification, btw. Don't lose sight of it, as it is significant and it will be significant in the court challenge. The banned ones are, in a sense, replica guns. I'll just remind people that any criminal using a replica or toy gun in committing (eg) a robbery can be charged, convicted and sentenced for 'armed' robbery. It's addressed according to what it is perceived as by victims, and its resulting control of their actions, not whether or not it can actually kill. In that context, I can understand why police, in particular, would want to get these pimped up replica assault rifles off the street, so they can tell what they are really dealing with. 

    They are nothing more than trendy fashion items for the small-weenies of the far-right hate groups to intimidate people with, imo. Do any real hunters actually need, or use these penis-extender fakes? I think not. 

    This is an example of who values and uses such replica assault rifles: Hate groups.

      https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-tuesday-edition-1.5253191/how-an-undercover-reporter-exposed-an-alleged-neo-nazi-in-the-canadian-military-1.5253800

    At the same meeting, he was, you know, using homophobic and racist epithets. He openly mulled over the possibility of, like, sabotaging a rail line and things. So, you know, this was clearly an individual with ... a potential propensity for violence.
    Patrik [Mathews], in that first meeting, you know, said ... he wanted to engage in paramilitary training. He didn't use those terms, but that's what it was. And that's consistent with what The Base is up to right now across North America. They're hosting paramilitary training events called Hate Camps.
    They're really influenced by this very obscure neo-Nazi from the United States named James Mason who kind of pioneered this bizarre blend of, like, the world views of Adolf Hitler and Charles Manson. They idolize serial killers and mass murderers.

     

     

    I actually look forward to this court challenge of the new gun ban, REALLY interested to see how the hate groups try to defend their 'rights', and how the court responds to that aspect of this case. 

     

    3 There is a significant study out of Toronto that looked at firearms injuries and deaths in children and youth. Airsoft guns were included because they are frequently the cause of injuries, damage to eyes, teeth, soft tissues, etc., some permanently disabling. That may be the rationale for the ban.   

    4 It's clear to me that the Liberals consulted with a variety of  relevant lobby groups and their 'experts', including law enforcement and medical researchers as well as the gun rights lobbiers. We will likely see all of these relevant experts testify in court, and we can then evaluate the info for ourselves, and/or leave it up to the legal expertise of the judge, as we choose. 

    Most Canadians do not want to interfere with the rights and capabilities of people to hunt for food, nor to legitimately defend themselves/their families. That isn't the purpose of these bans. 

    I think clarifying reasons publicly through the court challenge will make that clearer to people, and I welcome that process. 

    https://firearmrights.ca/en/we-are-going-to-court/


  7. On 5/3/2020 at 4:17 PM, dialamah said:

    Why not?  Isn't it a problem in this country and even more so in the States that people aren't "allowed" to disagree?  Isn't that a major sticking point for many on the right,  who claim that the left demands everyone agree with them?  Isn't it better to have a civil discussion, present our thoughts, agree to disagree and move on?

    Nothing wrong at all with disagreeing on a subject as long as one is willing to backup their thoughts, comments with facts and proof to support their claims - if they don't they leave themselves open to just criticism.

    • Like 1

  8. On 5/3/2020 at 3:03 PM, Argus said:

    Maybe because not everyone is peaceful and the police can be a long way away?

    Well, I don't know about rams and elk, but bears definitely do. So do wolves. And like them, we're predators.

    Actually all male animals fight for the right to breed and some die doing so.  Bears will also eat the young of others - Old Split Lip in Banff just killed his second cub this year.  So much for animals not fighting and killing. 


  9. On 5/3/2020 at 9:10 AM, Argus said:

    You don't know one single t hing about gun sports. And yes, some of them do indeed require you to shoot lots of bullets easily and quickly.

    If their primary purpose is killing people they're doing a piss-poor job of it as virtually none of them are or have been used for that purpose in Canada.

    It's also interesting your whole argument is based on "I don't approve of this so it should be banned and I don't care what that costs" as opposed to "This will save many lives." or something similar.

    There are some folks who are simply opposed to something because it is the PC thing to do, Argus.  In this person's case that seems to be the guiding rule - not facts, not proof - just PC feelings.


  10. On 5/2/2020 at 10:02 PM, ProudConservative said:

    I'm not in favor of banning military style assault weapons. I'm in favor very strong background checks. The government should have the right to take firearms away from anyone who has mental health issues, just as long as the majority of Canadians still have access to firearms, so there can be a deterrent against tyranny.

    Proper background checks, should be able to reduce gun violence by 90%

    If a husband beats up his wife, he loses his firearm

    If a guy threatens to kill people online, he loses his firearm

    If a guy commits assault, he loses his firearm

    Responsible citizens, who use common sense and logic.... shouldn't have their guns taken away.

    Agree in full.


  11. On 5/2/2020 at 7:36 PM, dialamah said:

    This may well be true, and it applies to other issues as well.   Nonetheless, Canadians as a whole support this legislation, including almost half of current gun owners.  Dismissing the majority of Canadians as "anti-gun nuts" just because you disagree with the legislation is extreme partisanship in action.

    It would behoove you to post a link that supports your comments because I do believe you are blowing smoke out your butt.

    • Like 1

  12. On 4/25/2020 at 9:33 AM, jacee said:

    https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-friday-edition-1.5543921/alerting-people-about-gunman-s-fake-police-car-sooner-may-have-saved-lives-rcmp-commissioner-says-1.5544407

    So that there was a possibility that the public could have been alerted earlier.

    Yes, there's a possibility.

    Six people were killed in the intervening time. 

    Hindsight is 20-20, but I would say an Alert should have gone out after the initial attack, as soon as the RCMP realized that the shooter was not in the area they had locked down, but still on the loose, armed and dangerous, whereabouts unknown at that time.  

    An intriguing/horrifying possibility exists in a single report that "a car" exited that initial attack site through a field. It may have looked like a police car, thus not drawn attention among the cruisers on site at that time. 

    An alert may very well have prevented some deaths but as I mentioned that was up to the RCMP command - not the officers of the ground who did as best they could in awful circumstances. 


  13. 15 hours ago, Boges said:

    But the US Ex-Pats were warned. The only warning the public at large got would have been if they were on Twitter. 

    He was killing people all night. I've gotten amber alerts for a missing person an hour away from where I live while I'm sleeping. How can this not justify a notice that there's an armed and dangerous person posing as a police officer killing people. Sure it would cause panic, but panic was warranted.

    Maybe I'd call 911 if a cop came to my door instead of answering it like I would normally. 

    The RCMP on the ground did not know the killer was posing as a member nor that he was driving a fake police cruiser until just after 8AM in the morning - hours after the killings began and shortly before he killed Constable Stevenson, burned his vehicle and hers, shot a passerby and stole his vehicle. 

    Issuing an Emergency Alert is a decision made by command not by the officers involved in the chase who were doing their level best in a rural area with many back roads over a widespread area under very trying and confusing circumstances.  I for one am not about to question nor reprove them. 

    Bless the people of Nova Scotia.  My thoughts are with them in their time of mourning.

    • Thanks 1

  14. 21 hours ago, Marocc said:

    If the system works and it has been made known I see no reason why anyone would need to go to the grocery. At the same time that kind of systems always have problems. Such deliveries, unless they are a new system due to the situation, are not planned to be made to that many people. Some of the employees are bound to stop working when they can't show up sick or they can afford to not work at this time. Then they need to make sure they have a ton of stuff in their storages or the groceries the delivery people get the stuff from. Assuming they don't just go to any grocery. The individuals can go to any grocery.

    People are still likely to not have the virus when they return. There is no reason to over dramatise it.

    Over dramatize the fact that rural communities are not equipped to take care of their own RESIDENTS during this crisis.  What about sheltering in place don't these people get.  What about over-burdened health facilities don't they get.  It is beyond belief that some part-time cottagers can't check their privilege during this time.


  15. On 3/29/2020 at 1:12 PM, eyeball said:

    Aside from people venturing out for supplies or to work I wonder how many are simply just trying to get back home to where they feel safest? Kids and grandkids, maybe they're scared or maybe their financial resources have dwindled. It's getting complicated and some are undoubtedly returning to their roots because they don't know what else to do.  

    Home is where they should be staying, eyeball.  They were told to shelter in place.  That does not mean traveling to your part-time cottage in a rural area. 

    • Like 1

  16. On 3/28/2020 at 8:49 AM, Rue said:

    I kind of sympathize. If I had a nice cottage why not go tyere to die. I threw the  last two words in. I am a tad melodramatic. Too much sugar in my coffee. Some of this I think though makes sense. Why not if you have the cottage. You got some beautiful places there Mo. When  I grew up in Montreal it was easy to have and drive to your cottage. I miss it in Trunteh. It's so expensive in Toronto to also have a cottage. 

    "Why not if you have a cottage?"  As symptoms don't show up right away, it is easy for people to think..........'oh I'll just go up to the cottage and get away from heavily infected areas'.  Trouble is if they do come down with the virus, we DO NOT have the facilities to manage our own, let alone those from away.  It is really just that simple.  Don't further burden a system that is barely able to take care of it's own citizens at the best of times.


  17. 21 hours ago, Marocc said:

    Are they supposed to starve? Maybe they go to the grocery in order to self-isolate.

    They are supposed to go straight home and arrange to have groceries etc delivered.  There are agencies equipped to take care of those who don't have family or friends to do that for them. 


  18. 4 hours ago, -TSS- said:

    Here in Finland the southern part of the country in which I live also has been separated from the rest of the country because the virus is more prevalent here and such a measure is taken to protect the rest of the country.

    In the past few days many people here have escaped to their second homes in the rest of the country because they think they are safer there, which is the ultimate show of selfishness as those more remote areas don't have the health resources to cope with a large amount of people falling ill.

    Sounds familiar, TSS.  I live in a rural area in northern BC and our health resources are minimal at best.  The population of our specific area is 20,000 souls and we have but 64 acute care beds in our small hospital.  Other communities don't even have a hospital.  Lately we've seen many people from the Lower Mainland coming up early to open their cottages.  The CRD (a local form of government) had to enact regulations that will force these people to a 14-day quarantine and they are to come prepared for the duration - no stopping to shop or visit.  Straight to your cabin and stay their until the self-isolation period is up.  We are all hoping that they will do just that. 


  19. On 3/26/2020 at 1:24 PM, Moonbox said:

    I'm not so sure that it was a deliberate power-grab, but rather just something they wanted to do to avoid delays on further action down the road.  It was a poor decision and even poorer attempt regardless, and the government ought to be embarrassed that they even tried.  

    If it was just something that they wanted to do to avoid delays then why weren't they upfront with the Opposition parties and provincial premiers from the beginning?   Why wait until the very day they were to read the bill in the HoC before releasing their final draft?  

    I can well understand that the government needs the ability to move quickly to respond to new developments during this crisis but that does not give them the right to forgo Parliamentary approval which as has just been demonstrated, can take place in a a day or two. 

    • Like 1

  20. 10 hours ago, Iceni warrior said:

    I mean, come on. Extinction Rebellion, they're not even hiding their intentions.

    They want to make the boomers extinct.

    "Climate group Extinction Rebellion (XR) say they are investigating a series of “dangerous” coronavirus posts by an account using their name.

    An account named XR East Midlands (@xr_east) have caused outrage after tweeting “abhorrent” messaging stating coronavirus is a “cure”.

    The account posted a series of covid19 messages over the last 24 hours suggesting the deadly virus was a "cure" for the "disease" caused to the environment by humans.

    One post reads: "The undeniable truth is, the Earth is recovering, thanks to Corona."

    Another previous Tweet said: "Earth is healing. The air and water is clearing. Corona is the cure. Humans are the disease!"

    The posts were accompanied by photoshopped images of street posters stating "Corona is the cure. Humans are the disease" and branded with the Extinction Rebellion logo.

    Young Greens (@YoungGreenParty) branded the posts "absolutely abhorrent"

    When the rogue account was confronted about the messages by outraged critics they doubled down on their stance.

    They stated: "The point of activism is to shock people, out of their complacency.

    "Like art, it is meant to provide a different point of view to that we are accustomed.

    "We are pointing out that from the perspective of the Earth, humans behave like a disease. The idea is not to be."

    www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/extinction-rebellion-investigate-offensive-tweets-21754561


  21. On 3/23/2020 at 10:35 PM, ProudConservative said:

    Look at our communist government acting like a bunch of despotic dictators.

    "Liberal bill on coronavirus would give feds power to spend, tax without parliamentary approval"

    https://globalnews.ca/news/6720551/justin-trudeau-coronavirus-support-bill

    So, in a National Health Crisis, the minority liberal government got together with the Opposition parties and provincial premiers to strike a deal for a financial bail-out package that is much needed to help Canadians and Canadian businesses in these trying times.

    Everyone agreed that it was necessary and supported the bill as it was then presented to them.

    All federal parties agree to send a set number of MPs to the HoC for an extraordinary recall of Parliament.

    And yesterday they gathered expecting that this would be passed in the House and sent to the Senate at the end of the day.

    Done deal, right?

    Wrong.

    Unbeknownst to ALL opposition members the underhanded hubristic MINORITY liberal government saw this Health crisis as a great opportunity to sneak a few little extras into the bill without informing the opposition  - in a bid to give themselves almost unlimited powers over any financial dealings. 

    Specifically,  "It allowed the finance minister to tax, spend and borrow with impunity, but without parliamentary approval, until the end of next year." (https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-liberals-cant-help-being-opportunistic-with-their-covid-19-aid-bill)

    Until DECEMBER 2021 no less.

    Rightfully and thankfully for Canadians, Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition united in furor over this unprecedented grab for power. 

    Instead of the much vaunted ease of the bill flying through the HoC by the PM, chaos ensued resulting in the suspension of the House until such a time as all parties could agree on a final draft.

    Consensus was reached around midnight last night.

    The Opposition parties held strong and the final bill deals ONLY with financial aid and the measures necessary to see the money distributed. 

    With all my heart, I thank each and every single member of the Opposition for standing strong for Canadian democracy. 

     

    • Like 1

  22. On 3/22/2020 at 9:31 AM, bcsapper said:

    Yeah, me too.  I didn't skip a beat when I was told to self isolate. 

     

    Add me to the list.  My friends don't call me a hermit for no reason.  Got my pup and my cat for company and oodles of great books to read.  Stocked up on groceries long ago and have a neighbor with lots of TP he bought months ago from Costco - good to go, I am.


  23. On 3/22/2020 at 8:32 AM, betsy said:

    There's the keyword there.  Look at the students celebrating March break on a beach!  Didn't we all feel invincible at a certain age?

    Mind you....it's their parents or, most likely their grandparents, or anyone with underlying conditions  who are vulnerable.  Maybe, a lot of young ones can afford to celebrate and disregard the warning (as long as they don't carry them back to their vulnerable kins).

    I felt invincible when I was much younger but I also knew that if I broke the rules there were consequences. 

    So I guess the kids should just set up house on the beach?  Because home is exactly where they would be headed at the end of the day.  Every single one a possible vector for the virus. 

×
×
  • Create New...