Canadian Politics Redux

HughFreakingDillon

if I seem dismissive, it's because I'm sick and tired of people consistently defending Israel. Their government is a fucking abomination of war criminals. And like I said before, the only reason they have allies is because they are the only white people in the region that the US wants to keep as allies. There is no ethical reason to keep defending their actions. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

and I never said we shouldn't be having rational discussion. I was laughing at your criticism of dismissal of religion as not being a part of rational discussion. there's nothing rational about a god who impregnates a woman to birth himself so he can be sacrificed to himself to shield himself from the sins of the people he created and wants to save. 

I can only therefore trust that you shit on all religions equally? What do you say to the First Nations that believe in a Spirit Moose, do you mock them too?

You can not accept someone’s faith and beliefs and refrain from condescension and ridicule. But your way seems to be to further dig in the jab, and that’s your choice. U B U and I B I.

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

So when did it start? And phrasing it like you have is dangerously close to condoning October 7.

Obviously I don’t think a printed policy statement is necessary, but what you claim, that Israel is actively engaged in a genocide, has some quite high bars of proof, and the only thing you ever point at is the fact of civilian deaths, with the ratio of deaths somehow being deemed relevant (I used to think it was too but don’t anymore, well before October 7).

At the end of the day only one party in the conflict has openly stated genocidal intent, with actions that clearly back that up.

Show me proof of deliberate targeting of civilians by Israel, so no Hamas clearly in the vicinity of the strike, and I’ll reevaluate my position. I think I’ve proven I’m not above being proven wrong or eating some crow.

Parksy’s suggested above that the world community should be involved here, and that isn’t unreasonable, but did the world (the UN specifically) rally to Israel in the wake of October 7? Hardly. And I don’t care that you (Hugh) don’t think that’s when it started, the fact stands that a ceasefire was in place the night of October 6.

Parksy

Generally speaking... most genocides don't come with a written label on them. 

Parksy

To Darth... with regards to Pierre and conservatives and right wing media etc.  I was thinking about the Maple Leafs today and drew a bit of a comparison. 

Trudeau is basically Sheldon Keefe. I do believe that he needs to go as PM for a handful of reason (much like Keefe)  I do.

HOWEVER.... 

Canada itself is like the Maple Leafs. It's failures simply cannot fall onto one person and one person alone. There are too many factors involved... the players themselves, the opposing teams, the referees, salary cap, etc. 

What drives me crazy about Pierre and the right wingers of this country (and the USA) is the constant blaming of Trudeau. For literally everything. To me it's the same as blaming the coach.... for literally everything.  Can't score goals? It's the coach. Can't stop the puck? It's the coach. Uneven penalties being called? Coach. Goal called back? Coach. Player breaks his ankle? Coach.   

It's this asinine mentality that drives me nuts and makes me loath Pierre and the F*ck Trudeau crowd.  FWIW.  

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

So when did it start? And phrasing it like you have is dangerously close to condoning October 7.

Obviously I don’t think a printed policy statement is necessary, but what you claim, that Israel is actively engaged in a genocide, has some quite high bars of proof, and the only thing you ever point at is the fact of civilian deaths, with the ratio of deaths somehow being deemed relevant (I used to think it was too but don’t anymore, well before October 7).

At the end of the day only one party in the conflict has openly stated genocidal intent, with actions that clearly back that up.

Show me proof of deliberate targeting of civilians by Israel, so no Hamas clearly in the vicinity of the strike, and I’ll reevaluate my position. I think I’ve proven I’m not above being proven wrong or eating some crow.

Parksy’s suggested above that the world community should be involved here, and that isn’t unreasonable, but did the world (the UN specifically) rally to Israel in the wake of October 7? Hardly. And I don’t care that you (Hugh) don’t think that’s when it started, the fact stands that a ceasefire was in place the night of October 6.

I see your point...  but it's honestly too simplistic. 

Causality is a huge factor. See if you notice the difference between these two things: 

1)  A bee is in a yard, minding it's own business pollinating as he goes.  A human comes around and traps the bee in an container. He gives the bee a small amount of water and food to eat, but just enough to keep it alive. The human pokes the bee with a stick, and pulls off some of it's wing. It keeps the bee in the container for a year... continuing the same torment.  The bee gets free and stings the human. 

2) A bee is in a yard, sees a human and aggressively flies to the human and stings it for no reason whatsoever. 

One things is constant.. the bee stung the human.  The factors that played a role in why and how the bee stung is important. 

Looking at Oct 7th as one event that took place which sparked a war is excluding a lot of history and a lot of rationale. The reason we're seeing so much dissent and arguing is because we have powers right now that are trying to dismiss the history and focus solely on the sting. 

I could be wrong here... but I'm not sure Israel has come out and stated that their treatment of Palestinians over the last few decades has been wrong. 

When you look at the UN vote... and now the 3 European countries (Spain, Norway, and Ireland) that are recognizing Palestine as a state.... you have to admit something is amiss here. 

cincybearcat

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

When a large part of the discussion is the proportionality of a response and numbers have been used, when those numbers change significantly, then I do see that as absolutely germane to the discussion.

It’s sad that I seemingly need to point everyone back to the last line of my post introducing the revised numbers. The line where I clearly acknowledge that civilian deaths in a war zone have always been and will always be a tragedy.

However, until warfare becomes so targeted that it all occurs via nanobots, there WILL be civilians killed in war.

Is there an equal cry to make us (Canada) face justice for the civilian deaths we caused in Afghanistan? Why not?

there absolutely fucking should be. I have always maintained that our participation in any activity in the mid east that directly caused civilian deaths should be investigated, and prosecuted if applicable. 

Israel has been actively engaged in genocide for decades. But it's somehow ok because you aren't allowed to criticize anything linked to Israel without being called a bigot. 

this conflict did not start on Oct 7. 

So was October 7th a legitimate military operation?  Did it break an existing ceasefire? What would you have Israel do?

And how would you have seen Canada react to 9/11?

I believe these are fair and reasonable questions.

I don't think anyone's called anyone a bigot in this thread thus far so I don't see any relevance in the suggestion. 

it's funny what some people consider terrorism, others consider legitimate military operations. all depends which side you're on. 

the entire reason this occupation is allowed to stand is because of so-called anti-semitism and the west's need for a powerful ally in the mid east. that's it. everyone says how complicated it is (for those not Israeli/Palestinian). it's not. it's those two reasons. if israel were in africa, not surrounded by countries rich in resources, no one would give a flying fuck about them. zero. nada. zilch. 

With no clarification I have to read your first statement here as legitimizing the October 7th attack. Legitimate military operations do not target civilians intentionally,  full stop. 

Your second statement seems to be saying that the establishment of the state of Israel (more or less in line with its biblical borders) had little to nothing to do with the slaughter of 6 million Jews but was rather a cynical ploy to further destabilize the region? And we've only helped deter the genocide of Israel by its neighbours only because of the access it gives us to oil? Seriously,  please clarify what you mean. 

I'm not legitimizing anything. it's all action/reaction. so was 9/11. was the slaughter of thousands of american citizens justified? nope. but I understand why it happened. 

I give no credence to anything that uses the bible as a reference. 

No one is stopping Israel from peacefully being its own state except Israel. the continued genocide of the Palestinian people is what keeps all progress at zero. 

When you say one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter I believe you have misquoted. I'm thought it was one person's rebel is another's freedom fighter.  They stop being freedom fighters or rebels when they intentionally target civilians. Then they are terrorists no matter how just (or understandable) the cause may seem. 

You seem to be ignoring quite a bit on the other side of this conflict and only condemning one side here (you're hardly the only one). Which side has openly called for the genocide of the other?  Hint, it's not Israel. 

If you can't accept a reference that includes the Bible that's irrelevant,  what is relevant in this case was the beliefs of the Jewish people.  With the benefit of hindsight,  what was appropriate way to compensate the Jewish people for the extreme suffering that was inflicted on them by the Nazis and their allies? Cash settlement? The establishment of a Jewish homeland doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or is the better question where would you have put Israel? 

What's stopping Israel from existing peacefully is exactly the several calls for their obliteration in my opinion. 

I see many references to Israel's genocide,  yet no one's really made the case. 

Where are the equally loud calls for Hamas to face justice for their numerous war crimes?  As the legitimate government of Gaza, they should be being held to the same standards as the other government involved,  regardless how our own government has labeled them. 

my issue (and the issue of many others) is that israel's actions keep getting excused no matter what atrocities they perform. "Israel has a right to defend itself". do you consider bombing hospitals and intentionally murdering palenstinian civilians defending itself? bulldozing private property? stealing land and evicting the owners? it's preposterous to me that not only in the face of PROOF of war crimes, and crimes prior to Oct 7 that go against international agreements, people not only excuse it, but celebrate it. it's disgusting. 

defending Palestinians does not equal defense of hamas. Yes, they elected hamas in a free election. So did american of GWB Jr.  who just so happened to be the murderer of a million iraqi civilians. do I blame all americans for not immediately removing him from office? of course not. that's impossible and absurd. people blaming the murder of Palestinians on their own vote is abhorrent. 

Hey Hugh....I know I'm kinda jumping in here, but do you not believe that Hamas builds military installations above, in and under schools, hospitals etc?  Do you not believe that they fire rockets from "safe zones"?

I'm very torn on this whole thing...but if you enemy is fighting by using human shields etc....I am really unsure what I expect the other side to do.  It feels like the difference between guerilla warfare and traditional line warfare...if you don't change, you have no shot.

So none of this speaks to the political nature of this issue nor the history, etc.  But just in the retaliation attacks by Israel against Hamas.  Hamas attacked civilians.  Hamas killed, raped, tortured and captured civilians.  They aren't freedom fighters by any stretch of that definition.  How is Israel to respond?

yes, hamas do that. they are fucking evil pieces of shit. but sorry, when your enemy uses an innocent life as a shield, you don't fire. PERIOD. I do, believe, however, that this is a convenient excuse for the Israeli government. I think they'd be blowing up hospitals even if hamas wasn't there. they've proven the last 30 years they have no issue with indiscriminately murdering innocents. 

I totally agree with all of that.

I understand that point of view for sure. I honestly have no idea what I would do if I was the one calling the shots though. 

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

To Darth... with regards to Pierre and conservatives and right wing media etc.  I was thinking about the Maple Leafs today and drew a bit of a comparison. 

Trudeau is basically Sheldon Keefe. I do believe that he needs to go as PM for a handful of reason (much like Keefe)  I do.

HOWEVER.... 

Canada itself is like the Maple Leafs. It's failures simply cannot fall onto one person and one person alone. There are too many factors involved... the players themselves, the opposing teams, the referees, salary cap, etc. 

What drives me crazy about Pierre and the right wingers of this country (and the USA) is the constant blaming of Trudeau. For literally everything. To me it's the same as blaming the coach.... for literally everything.  Can't score goals? It's the coach. Can't stop the puck? It's the coach. Uneven penalties being called? Coach. Goal called back? Coach. Player breaks his ankle? Coach.   

It's this asinine mentality that drives me nuts and makes me loath Pierre and the F*ck Trudeau crowd.  FWIW.  

The problem I see with your analysis/comparison is that it's been (to me at least) clearly shown that Trudeau runs a his-way-or-the-highway government.  So in that sense it is one person's doing.  Hell, it's not like Trudeau wasn't blaming Harper for everything he perceived as wrong with the country back in 2015.

That's actually one of the main reasons I can't support the Trudeau Liberals,  they are not the party of freedom of belief,  as evidenced by Trudeau’s first act as leader: anyone that didn't support 100% unlimited abortion was told to leave. Zero allowance made for discussion. 

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Thank you, Trudeau Liberals.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-government-reject-toronot-decriminalization-1.7208335

If you read the article that you posted... I don't see how on earth you blame (or thank) Trudeau for this. Read the article. Call me crazy, but I don't think you read it... I think you just follow or subscribe to conservative talking points. Pierre Polievre's in particular. Please fully read the article. I hate to seem judgmental but I cannot see how one correlates the article you posted to having anything to do with 'Trudeau liberals.'  They followed the advice of health departments, health ministers, doctors, and the Toronto Police Service. 

Pierre is (once again) using this as a political talking point and making it seem like Trudeau is a monster for this which is the furthest thing from the truth. Be skeptical of someone or something who is desperately trying to sell you bull shit. 

Those who do their homework understand that the only feasible solution to the opioid crisis is funding. I'm not saying (at all) that Trudeau or the liberals are taking any wins here. It's fucked.  But I also understand that Conservative governments and public funding generally don't go hand in hand. 

Pierre may want to steer clear of this as an election issue. 

I went back to reread the article because these days articles are updated constantly so sometimes it might not resemble what was initially posted.  I honestly can't tell how different the article became,  and there's not really anything in there that I dispute. 

I honestly wasn't aware that Poilievre was using it as a talking point because I don't follow him outside of what gets reported in the media,  lol.

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

Parksy said:

To Darth... with regards to Pierre and conservatives and right wing media etc.  I was thinking about the Maple Leafs today and drew a bit of a comparison. 

Trudeau is basically Sheldon Keefe. I do believe that he needs to go as PM for a handful of reason (much like Keefe)  I do.

HOWEVER.... 

Canada itself is like the Maple Leafs. It's failures simply cannot fall onto one person and one person alone. There are too many factors involved... the players themselves, the opposing teams, the referees, salary cap, etc. 

What drives me crazy about Pierre and the right wingers of this country (and the USA) is the constant blaming of Trudeau. For literally everything. To me it's the same as blaming the coach.... for literally everything.  Can't score goals? It's the coach. Can't stop the puck? It's the coach. Uneven penalties being called? Coach. Goal called back? Coach. Player breaks his ankle? Coach.   

It's this asinine mentality that drives me nuts and makes me loath Pierre and the F*ck Trudeau crowd.  FWIW.  

The problem I see with your analysis/comparison is that it's been (to me at least) clearly shown that Trudeau runs a his-way-or-the-highway government.  So in that sense it is one person's doing.  Hell, it's not like Trudeau wasn't blaming Harper for everything he perceived as wrong with the country back in 2015.

That's actually one of the main reasons I can't support the Trudeau Liberals,  they are not the party of freedom of belief,  as evidenced by Trudeau’s first act as leader: anyone that didn't support 100% unlimited abortion was told to leave. Zero allowance made for discussion. 

This is what I find odd.  "His way or the highway"  He has very little power, especially now. I think the Liberals only had a majority government from 15-19... past that, minority. 

Without Singh, there is a very good chance he isn't PM right now. 

So how can one man be claimed to be acting like a dictator... when he actually holds so little power to do anything? 

Parksy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmCiH_zAk4s

This is good article digging into why the amendment was passed... what the purpose was... why it failed... and where we go now. 

My takeaways are this: 

1) Yes.. it failed. 
2) It was not... and this is important... not implemented by the federal government alone. (This is what Pierre is trying to scare Canadians into thinking)  The BC government wanted it. The BC police wanted it. BC Health wanted it. The Liberals granted it... that's it. 
3) The problem was... and continues to be... public spending. 
4) It is being hyper-politicized.   If you look at the way Pierre points the finger at the Liberals "What were you thinking!?!" the omission here is that this was not part of the Liberal government's plan. 

The evidence here is pretty clear... in BC, everyone who was for decriminalization is now against.. and the government listened.  In Ontario, the jury is still out amongst those involved. 

In short... what I find puzzling is that everyone seemed to know right off the bat what could have been a problem eventually was... and now 2 years later they're trying to resolve it. Next level dumb.... on all accounts... Trudeau, Liberals, BC, BC Health... the whole she-bang.. they all failed.  The cherry picking at who gets the blame bugs me. 

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Parksy said:

To Darth... with regards to Pierre and conservatives and right wing media etc.  I was thinking about the Maple Leafs today and drew a bit of a comparison. 

Trudeau is basically Sheldon Keefe. I do believe that he needs to go as PM for a handful of reason (much like Keefe)  I do.

HOWEVER.... 

Canada itself is like the Maple Leafs. It's failures simply cannot fall onto one person and one person alone. There are too many factors involved... the players themselves, the opposing teams, the referees, salary cap, etc. 

What drives me crazy about Pierre and the right wingers of this country (and the USA) is the constant blaming of Trudeau. For literally everything. To me it's the same as blaming the coach.... for literally everything.  Can't score goals? It's the coach. Can't stop the puck? It's the coach. Uneven penalties being called? Coach. Goal called back? Coach. Player breaks his ankle? Coach.   

It's this asinine mentality that drives me nuts and makes me loath Pierre and the F*ck Trudeau crowd.  FWIW.  

The problem I see with your analysis/comparison is that it's been (to me at least) clearly shown that Trudeau runs a his-way-or-the-highway government.  So in that sense it is one person's doing.  Hell, it's not like Trudeau wasn't blaming Harper for everything he perceived as wrong with the country back in 2015.

That's actually one of the main reasons I can't support the Trudeau Liberals,  they are not the party of freedom of belief,  as evidenced by Trudeau’s first act as leader: anyone that didn't support 100% unlimited abortion was told to leave. Zero allowance made for discussion. 

This is what I find odd.  "His way or the highway"  He has very little power, especially now. I think the Liberals only had a majority government from 15-19... past that, minority. 

Without Singh, there is a very good chance he isn't PM right now. 

So how can one man be claimed to be acting like a dictator... when he actually holds so little power to do anything? 

I agree with what you say there, though at the end of the day it's the Liberal government that sets the agenda. There are opportunities for opposition parties and backbench MPs to present legislation but most of the bills come from the governing party I think (as I would think it should be). It doesn't appear that the NDP are generally in the room when legislation is written up initially,  but the party hasn't shown any major dissension about their support of Trudeau and his agenda (which I don't deny is their prerogative).

Besides, I was moreso referring to the party's internal running and values under Trudeau. That does inform his style of governing to be sure, and that's where during an election a party leader's running of the party is a factor I consider (and try to observe between elections. Everyone votes based on different criteria,  and I personally know people that look more at the local candidates than they do the leaders and that's absolutely their right and choice. 

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

and I never said we shouldn't be having rational discussion. I was laughing at your criticism of dismissal of religion as not being a part of rational discussion. there's nothing rational about a god who impregnates a woman to birth himself so he can be sacrificed to himself to shield himself from the sins of the people he created and wants to save. 

I can only therefore trust that you shit on all religions equally? What do you say to the First Nations that believe in a Spirit Moose, do you mock them too?

You can not accept someone’s faith and beliefs and refrain from condescension and ridicule. But your way seems to be to further dig in the jab, and that’s your choice. U B U and I B I.

organized religion and spirituality are NOT the same (I'm actually a very spiritual person, so yes, I B I lol). I mock xtianity in particular because of the inherent hypocrisy (and absurdity) in literally all of it. last I checked, FN spirituality hasn't been used for evil and global power, as far as I know. 

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

So when did it start? And phrasing it like you have is dangerously close to condoning October 7.

Obviously I don’t think a printed policy statement is necessary, but what you claim, that Israel is actively engaged in a genocide, has some quite high bars of proof, and the only thing you ever point at is the fact of civilian deaths, with the ratio of deaths somehow being deemed relevant (I used to think it was too but don’t anymore, well before October 7).

At the end of the day only one party in the conflict has openly stated genocidal intent, with actions that clearly back that up.

Show me proof of deliberate targeting of civilians by Israel, so no Hamas clearly in the vicinity of the strike, and I’ll reevaluate my position. I think I’ve proven I’m not above being proven wrong or eating some crow.

Parksy’s suggested above that the world community should be involved here, and that isn’t unreasonable, but did the world (the UN specifically) rally to Israel in the wake of October 7? Hardly. And I don’t care that you (Hugh) don’t think that’s when it started, the fact stands that a ceasefire was in place the night of October 6.

go back and read. I unequivocally condemned hamas and called them evil pieces of shit. how is that not clear?

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

and I never said we shouldn't be having rational discussion. I was laughing at your criticism of dismissal of religion as not being a part of rational discussion. there's nothing rational about a god who impregnates a woman to birth himself so he can be sacrificed to himself to shield himself from the sins of the people he created and wants to save. 

I can only therefore trust that you shit on all religions equally? What do you say to the First Nations that believe in a Spirit Moose, do you mock them too?

You can not accept someone’s faith and beliefs and refrain from condescension and ridicule. But your way seems to be to further dig in the jab, and that’s your choice. U B U and I B I.

organized religion and spirituality are NOT the same (I'm actually a very spiritual person, so yes, I B I lol). I mock xtianity in particular because of the inherent hypocrisy (and absurdity) in literally all of it. last I checked, FN spirituality hasn't been used for evil and global power, as far as I know. 

I agree with you about a difference between religion and spirituality (faith), but most of the time the two are also intertwined.  Where is someone to find their faith but a church (religion)?

Are you certain spiritual beliefs of First Nations were never used to justify brutalities against other First Nations?  My understanding is it wasn't all peace and love and happiness before the evil European colonists showed up. But scale matters to you here, clearly. 

So you do pick and choose who you mock, fair enough,  except it's not fair.

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

So when did it start? And phrasing it like you have is dangerously close to condoning October 7.

Obviously I don’t think a printed policy statement is necessary, but what you claim, that Israel is actively engaged in a genocide, has some quite high bars of proof, and the only thing you ever point at is the fact of civilian deaths, with the ratio of deaths somehow being deemed relevant (I used to think it was too but don’t anymore, well before October 7).

At the end of the day only one party in the conflict has openly stated genocidal intent, with actions that clearly back that up.

Show me proof of deliberate targeting of civilians by Israel, so no Hamas clearly in the vicinity of the strike, and I’ll reevaluate my position. I think I’ve proven I’m not above being proven wrong or eating some crow.

Parksy’s suggested above that the world community should be involved here, and that isn’t unreasonable, but did the world (the UN specifically) rally to Israel in the wake of October 7? Hardly. And I don’t care that you (Hugh) don’t think that’s when it started, the fact stands that a ceasefire was in place the night of October 6.

go back and read. I unequivocally condemned hamas and called them evil pieces of shit. how is that not clear?

Yes,  you eventually did, but it took a while.  Fine, you're not condoning October 7, just downplaying the savagery of that day, in my opinion. 

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

So when did it start? And phrasing it like you have is dangerously close to condoning October 7.

Obviously I don’t think a printed policy statement is necessary, but what you claim, that Israel is actively engaged in a genocide, has some quite high bars of proof, and the only thing you ever point at is the fact of civilian deaths, with the ratio of deaths somehow being deemed relevant (I used to think it was too but don’t anymore, well before October 7).

At the end of the day only one party in the conflict has openly stated genocidal intent, with actions that clearly back that up.

Show me proof of deliberate targeting of civilians by Israel, so no Hamas clearly in the vicinity of the strike, and I’ll reevaluate my position. I think I’ve proven I’m not above being proven wrong or eating some crow.

Parksy’s suggested above that the world community should be involved here, and that isn’t unreasonable, but did the world (the UN specifically) rally to Israel in the wake of October 7? Hardly. And I don’t care that you (Hugh) don’t think that’s when it started, the fact stands that a ceasefire was in place the night of October 6.

go back and read. I unequivocally condemned hamas and called them evil pieces of shit. how is that not clear?

Yes,  you eventually did, but it took a while.  Fine, you're not condoning October 7, just downplaying the savagery of that day, in my opinion. 

pretty sure you could have just logically assumed I condemned a horrific attack on civilians like that. not downplaying it at all. but you can keep on making wild assumptions that have no basis in reality. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

So when did it start? And phrasing it like you have is dangerously close to condoning October 7.

Obviously I don’t think a printed policy statement is necessary, but what you claim, that Israel is actively engaged in a genocide, has some quite high bars of proof, and the only thing you ever point at is the fact of civilian deaths, with the ratio of deaths somehow being deemed relevant (I used to think it was too but don’t anymore, well before October 7).

At the end of the day only one party in the conflict has openly stated genocidal intent, with actions that clearly back that up.

Show me proof of deliberate targeting of civilians by Israel, so no Hamas clearly in the vicinity of the strike, and I’ll reevaluate my position. I think I’ve proven I’m not above being proven wrong or eating some crow.

Parksy’s suggested above that the world community should be involved here, and that isn’t unreasonable, but did the world (the UN specifically) rally to Israel in the wake of October 7? Hardly. And I don’t care that you (Hugh) don’t think that’s when it started, the fact stands that a ceasefire was in place the night of October 6.

go back and read. I unequivocally condemned hamas and called them evil pieces of shit. how is that not clear?

Yes,  you eventually did, but it took a while.  Fine, you're not condoning October 7, just downplaying the savagery of that day, in my opinion. 

pretty sure you could have just logically assumed I condemned a horrific attack on civilians like that. not downplaying it at all. but you can keep on making wild assumptions that have no basis in reality. 

Makes two of us then.

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

So when did it start? And phrasing it like you have is dangerously close to condoning October 7.

Obviously I don’t think a printed policy statement is necessary, but what you claim, that Israel is actively engaged in a genocide, has some quite high bars of proof, and the only thing you ever point at is the fact of civilian deaths, with the ratio of deaths somehow being deemed relevant (I used to think it was too but don’t anymore, well before October 7).

At the end of the day only one party in the conflict has openly stated genocidal intent, with actions that clearly back that up.

Show me proof of deliberate targeting of civilians by Israel, so no Hamas clearly in the vicinity of the strike, and I’ll reevaluate my position. I think I’ve proven I’m not above being proven wrong or eating some crow.

Parksy’s suggested above that the world community should be involved here, and that isn’t unreasonable, but did the world (the UN specifically) rally to Israel in the wake of October 7? Hardly. And I don’t care that you (Hugh) don’t think that’s when it started, the fact stands that a ceasefire was in place the night of October 6.

go back and read. I unequivocally condemned hamas and called them evil pieces of shit. how is that not clear?

Yes,  you eventually did, but it took a while.  Fine, you're not condoning October 7, just downplaying the savagery of that day, in my opinion. 

pretty sure you could have just logically assumed I condemned a horrific attack on civilians like that. not downplaying it at all. but you can keep on making wild assumptions that have no basis in reality. 

Makes two of us then.

BWAHAHAHA. did you just REALLY "I know you are, but what am I" me? you've officially jumped the shark. hahaha

I'm gonna put this thread on mute now. It's become absurd. 

DarthMaeglin

Now it’s going to be the Ontario court’s turn to weigh in on whether protest rights trump property rights. The Quebec court seemingly sided with the protesters a couple weeks ago.

I honestly think this is a fair question, where is the outrage over the current national movement of occupation for political purposes? Are these protesters out of the way enough to get a pass, or is it because they’re on private property? Why no derision poured on them like the vitriol flung at the Ottawa protesters? It really feels like there’s different standards for different sides, based entirely on where someone stands on the issue of the moment.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/university-of-toronto-latest-offer-students-encampment-1.7213010