so what do all of the "India was another disastrous trip for JT" folks say now?
I don’t really see the two as linked necessarily, though it does explain Trudeau’s undiplomatic behaviour throughout the trip (but doesn’t excuse it).
It is a bit interesting contrasting how the Trudeau government is handling this compared to Chinese interference in our society. In both cases many, many questions linger, for instance was the man India is alleged to have assassinated indeed a terrorist that the Canadian government was turning a blind eye to?
This allegation adds fuel to my paranoid suggestion that the plane didn’t break down, it was broken, lol.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I will agree with Trudeau here: I don’t believe he’s trying to provoke the Indian government but rather I believe he’s trying to alleviate the pressures his government is facing domestically (groceries and housing are off the front page right now, aren’t they?).
so what do all of the "India was another disastrous trip for JT" folks say now?
Honest question, how would you have described the trip to India prior to yesterday's announcement?
Edit: Hell, how do you describe the trip now as well, in light of the announcement?
1. All I knew was that he and Modi had what the media described as a "cold" reception to each other, and that JT's plane needed servicing, and that was somehow embarrassing. 2. Concerning.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
so what do all of the "India was another disastrous trip for JT" folks say now?
Honest question, how would you have described the trip to India prior to yesterday's announcement?
Edit: Hell, how do you describe the trip now as well, in light of the announcement?
1. All I knew was that he and Modi had what the media described as a "cold" reception to each other, and that JT's plane needed servicing, and that was somehow embarrassing. 2. Concerning.
He also skipped the leader's dinner with no explanation, which made no sense. Trade negotiations canceled without explanation at the time. There was no way to describe the trip as successful and the announcement yesterday doesn't change that assessment for me. Was anything accomplished by Canada at the G20? I remain open to proof as always.
Could you maybe elaborate what you mean by concerning? Many different (and opposing) inferences can be drawn from a single word.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
accusing a nuclear country of something like that shouldn't be taken lightly. by anyone. and I just looked up our bilateral trade, and it's significant.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
so one has to wonder, as always with JT, if the announcement was self serving politically or actually in the interests of the public and international community.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
so one has to wonder, as always with JT, if the announcement was self serving politically or actually in the interests of the public and international community.
I guess it all depends which side of the aisle one sits on. I don't see anything that could describe the trip as going anything but poorly.
One upside of yesterday's announcement for Trudeau is it has bought him a brief moment of solidarity with the opposition parties.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
"Over the past, you know, 30 or 40 years, Canadians as well as Manitobans have become less connected to their political party," he said
I mean, I've felt like Canada has been like that for a while. Americans seem to live or die by whether their a Democrat or Republican. In Canada I think a lot of us think all the parties suck. Just because one sucks doesn't mean the other ones don't suck too.. lol.
"Over the past, you know, 30 or 40 years, Canadians as well as Manitobans have become less connected to their political party," he said
I mean, I've felt like Canada has been like that for a while. Americans seem to live or die by whether their a Democrat or Republican. In Canada I think a lot of us think all the parties suck. Just because one sucks doesn't mean the other ones don't suck too.. lol.
I actually thought lately it was the opposite, mostly on the right though. the MAGA Canada Crowd (convoy). But I don't see the left as entrenched. We know JT isn't the best, but we also know we don't want MAGA light here.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
"Over the past, you know, 30 or 40 years, Canadians as well as Manitobans have become less connected to their political party," he said
I mean, I've felt like Canada has been like that for a while. Americans seem to live or die by whether their a Democrat or Republican. In Canada I think a lot of us think all the parties suck. Just because one sucks doesn't mean the other ones don't suck too.. lol.
I actually thought lately it was the opposite, mostly on the right though. the MAGA Canada Crowd (convoy). But I don't see the left as entrenched. We know JT isn't the best, but we also know we don't want MAGA light here.
Definitely, but I feel our version of the MAGA crowd isn't that big and it's biggest support is concentrated in northern BC and the prairie provinces. It does seem like as a whole Canada has less of the my party is better than your party thing.
"Over the past, you know, 30 or 40 years, Canadians as well as Manitobans have become less connected to their political party," he said
I mean, I've felt like Canada has been like that for a while. Americans seem to live or die by whether their a Democrat or Republican. In Canada I think a lot of us think all the parties suck. Just because one sucks doesn't mean the other ones don't suck too.. lol.
I actually thought lately it was the opposite, mostly on the right though. the MAGA Canada Crowd (convoy). But I don't see the left as entrenched. We know JT isn't the best, but we also know we don't want MAGA light here.
Definitely, but I feel our version of the MAGA crowd isn't that big and it's biggest support is concentrated in northern BC and the prairie provinces. It does seem like as a whole Canada has less of the my party is better than your party thing.
so far...
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
Pierre intrigued me with his question to Trudeau where he pointed out inflation is reaccelerating under the Liberals, and do they have plans to balance the budget to try and get inflation under control. Trudeau takes credit for reducing inflation as much as they have, but that wasn't his government, that was our central bank raising rates.. ugh.
So Justin continues to tell us to trust him on the India allegations without having a record deserving of trust (“The story in the Globe & Mail is false.”, Blackface and so on). I caught some of his press conference at the UN and he offered nothing convincing in what I saw.
The claims against India are extremely serious (I’ve described this as our Khashoggi(sp?) moment), however there’s more proof available publicly to support India’s counter-claims and there’s a serious credibility issue with our own leader (this is not a partisan statement but based on his own words and actions).
The possibility also credibly exists that this is all being done to appease the NDP and Jagmeet specifically.
Now, to be fair, if there is truth behind these claims then the Trudeau government is showing improvement in how they handle the issue in a more timely manner compared to how Chinese interference has been handled until now. I don’t necessarily agree with how this is playing out and remain unconvinced that this wasn’t announced moreso due to low polling numbers than it was because of any (questionable) commitment to the rule of law.
Seriously, what makes this investigation different from other ongoing investigations on which Trudeau refused comment, other than the federal Liberals’ current lack of support?
Just watching another Pierre speech... And with the purpose in mind of giving him the benefit of the doubt here, I'm hoping some good people on here who might be knowledgeable can help me out.
His hammer has been pounding on housing from the day he was made leader of the opposition. Trudeau announces a plan to generate housing in London and immediately following, Pierre has his speech rebutting that announcement.
In his speech he lays out his plan (Hey! Awesome!) to generate affordable housing. He claims that the liberal government have been ballooning bureaucracies and making it difficult to build houses with regulation (gatekeepers). Same ole story. So as part of his plan he says that he will penalize those municipalities who do not speed up the process of building and he will reward those municipalities that do.
In particular with regards to the CHMC he said and I quote:
'But do you know who won't be getting bonuses? CMHC bureaucracies that delay approval for housing financing. The Trudeau government has ballooned the bureaucracy at the CMHC paying out millions of dollars in bonuses for the very bureaucrats who have doubled the cost of housing. I will be slashing their bonuses and they will be getting pay cuts unless they meet the target of approving financing for affordable housing in under 60 days."
Now in complete fairness to Pierre, he's not wrong in my opinion about the CMHC bonuses. That's remarkable. All CMHC bonuses should have been frozen in the past 4 years for sure.
The kicker to me though in all this rhetoric .. quite possibly from Trudeau as well.... but in this instance with Pierre in his fight for affordable housing. When he says he will reward those in the CMHC who hit their targets for approving financing for affordable housing.... how exactly do they determine if housing is affordable?
For example... I believe he's talking about developers who submit applications to CMHC for financing and approval to build housing (correct me if I'm wrong). If that's the case, what metric is used in determining if housing is affordable or not? This question has been on my mind for months now with regards to the housing 'crisis'.
It also makes me ponder the dynamic between public and private sector. The 'gatekeepers' (public) set out where units can be built and I'm assuming set taxes, and safety regulations. But at what point is 'affordability' even a consideration with this? Is there some sort of process by which a developer must indicate before they build how much they will charge for a house or a unit? My understanding is that it fluctuates with the market?
Any input is appreciated.
What I find really "interesting" is the fact that, since the Conservative passed the responsibility of housing over to the provinces in the '80s, something that the Libs did not support, Pierre acts like Trudeau is so totally responsible for the housing crisis. I also find it hilarious that anyone would believe that frozen salaries for CMHC employees would somehow put a dent in the housing market. Pierre fans seem really dumb TBH.
What Trudeau should do is restore what Canada had going on with building affordable housing before Mulroney ruined it.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So Justin continues to tell us to trust him on the India allegations without having a record deserving of trust (“The story in the Globe & Mail is false.”, Blackface and so on). I caught some of his press conference at the UN and he offered nothing convincing in what I saw.
The claims against India are extremely serious (I’ve described this as our Khashoggi(sp?) moment), however there’s more proof available publicly to support India’s counter-claims and there’s a serious credibility issue with our own leader (this is not a partisan statement but based on his own words and actions).
The possibility also credibly exists that this is all being done to appease the NDP and Jagmeet specifically.
Now, to be fair, if there is truth behind these claims then the Trudeau government is showing improvement in how they handle the issue in a more timely manner compared to how Chinese interference has been handled until now. I don’t necessarily agree with how this is playing out and remain unconvinced that this wasn’t announced moreso due to low polling numbers than it was because of any (questionable) commitment to the rule of law.
Edit: It is a bit rich asking/telling the alleged wrongdoers that they have to help investigate themselves.
FWIW, I have now spoken to 5 different people from India about this, and they ALL support Trudeau in this, and all spoke about how fucking corrupt the Indian government is.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So Justin continues to tell us to trust him on the India allegations without having a record deserving of trust (“The story in the Globe & Mail is false.”, Blackface and so on). I caught some of his press conference at the UN and he offered nothing convincing in what I saw.
The claims against India are extremely serious (I’ve described this as our Khashoggi(sp?) moment), however there’s more proof available publicly to support India’s counter-claims and there’s a serious credibility issue with our own leader (this is not a partisan statement but based on his own words and actions).
The possibility also credibly exists that this is all being done to appease the NDP and Jagmeet specifically.
Now, to be fair, if there is truth behind these claims then the Trudeau government is showing improvement in how they handle the issue in a more timely manner compared to how Chinese interference has been handled until now. I don’t necessarily agree with how this is playing out and remain unconvinced that this wasn’t announced moreso due to low polling numbers than it was because of any (questionable) commitment to the rule of law.
Edit: It is a bit rich asking/telling the alleged wrongdoers that they have to help investigate themselves.
FWIW, I have now spoken to 5 different people from India about this, and they ALL support Trudeau in this, and all spoke about how fucking corrupt the Indian government is.
Let’s just hope that Trudeau’s accusations (against his record of credibility) haven’t put any (more) Canadian lives at risk, here or abroad.
This article shows far more effective (and less inflammatory) ways this could have been handled, using several examples.
To be clear, the allegations are highly troubling, however the man who’s telling us to trust him has given us no reason to do so and there are very serious questions about how and when this was disclosed to the public. I don’t really trust either the Indian government or Trudeau on this, but only one of those two is ultimately accountable to me (and you, and you, and you…).
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I have no issue with how it was expressed to the public. Bluntly is the way I want it done. I also have no reason to think that Trudeau would casually make such an accusation, which is SO serious, for no reason. And if I'm going to choose a government to trust over the other, you can be sure that I'm trusting ours over India's!! And I think this kind of thing is EXACTLY they kind of thing India would do right now over the "Sikh issue", so I find the accusation extremely believable. Until I hear otherwise, I'm trusting Trudeau and our intelligence services on this one.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Just watching another Pierre speech... And with the purpose in mind of giving him the benefit of the doubt here, I'm hoping some good people on here who might be knowledgeable can help me out.
His hammer has been pounding on housing from the day he was made leader of the opposition. Trudeau announces a plan to generate housing in London and immediately following, Pierre has his speech rebutting that announcement.
In his speech he lays out his plan (Hey! Awesome!) to generate affordable housing. He claims that the liberal government have been ballooning bureaucracies and making it difficult to build houses with regulation (gatekeepers). Same ole story. So as part of his plan he says that he will penalize those municipalities who do not speed up the process of building and he will reward those municipalities that do.
In particular with regards to the CHMC he said and I quote:
'But do you know who won't be getting bonuses? CMHC bureaucracies that delay approval for housing financing. The Trudeau government has ballooned the bureaucracy at the CMHC paying out millions of dollars in bonuses for the very bureaucrats who have doubled the cost of housing. I will be slashing their bonuses and they will be getting pay cuts unless they meet the target of approving financing for affordable housing in under 60 days."
Now in complete fairness to Pierre, he's not wrong in my opinion about the CMHC bonuses. That's remarkable. All CMHC bonuses should have been frozen in the past 4 years for sure.
The kicker to me though in all this rhetoric .. quite possibly from Trudeau as well.... but in this instance with Pierre in his fight for affordable housing. When he says he will reward those in the CMHC who hit their targets for approving financing for affordable housing.... how exactly do they determine if housing is affordable?
For example... I believe he's talking about developers who submit applications to CMHC for financing and approval to build housing (correct me if I'm wrong). If that's the case, what metric is used in determining if housing is affordable or not? This question has been on my mind for months now with regards to the housing 'crisis'.
It also makes me ponder the dynamic between public and private sector. The 'gatekeepers' (public) set out where units can be built and I'm assuming set taxes, and safety regulations. But at what point is 'affordability' even a consideration with this? Is there some sort of process by which a developer must indicate before they build how much they will charge for a house or a unit? My understanding is that it fluctuates with the market?
Any input is appreciated.
What I find really "interesting" is the fact that, since the Conservative passed the responsibility of housing over to the provinces in the '80s, something that the Libs did not support, Pierre acts like Trudeau is so totally responsible for the housing crisis. I also find it hilarious that anyone would believe that frozen salaries for CMHC employees would somehow put a dent in the housing market. Pierre fans seem really dumb TBH.
What Trudeau should do is restore what Canada had going on with building affordable housing before Mulroney ruined it.
my provincial Cons are blaming Trudeau for the housing crisis, yet taking credit for the $10 a day child care program. There were literally billboards EVERYWHERE around the city. it's like "let's just outright lie and hopefully it works" is the Con campaign slogan.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
Just watching another Pierre speech... And with the purpose in mind of giving him the benefit of the doubt here, I'm hoping some good people on here who might be knowledgeable can help me out.
His hammer has been pounding on housing from the day he was made leader of the opposition. Trudeau announces a plan to generate housing in London and immediately following, Pierre has his speech rebutting that announcement.
In his speech he lays out his plan (Hey! Awesome!) to generate affordable housing. He claims that the liberal government have been ballooning bureaucracies and making it difficult to build houses with regulation (gatekeepers). Same ole story. So as part of his plan he says that he will penalize those municipalities who do not speed up the process of building and he will reward those municipalities that do.
In particular with regards to the CHMC he said and I quote:
'But do you know who won't be getting bonuses? CMHC bureaucracies that delay approval for housing financing. The Trudeau government has ballooned the bureaucracy at the CMHC paying out millions of dollars in bonuses for the very bureaucrats who have doubled the cost of housing. I will be slashing their bonuses and they will be getting pay cuts unless they meet the target of approving financing for affordable housing in under 60 days."
Now in complete fairness to Pierre, he's not wrong in my opinion about the CMHC bonuses. That's remarkable. All CMHC bonuses should have been frozen in the past 4 years for sure.
The kicker to me though in all this rhetoric .. quite possibly from Trudeau as well.... but in this instance with Pierre in his fight for affordable housing. When he says he will reward those in the CMHC who hit their targets for approving financing for affordable housing.... how exactly do they determine if housing is affordable?
For example... I believe he's talking about developers who submit applications to CMHC for financing and approval to build housing (correct me if I'm wrong). If that's the case, what metric is used in determining if housing is affordable or not? This question has been on my mind for months now with regards to the housing 'crisis'.
It also makes me ponder the dynamic between public and private sector. The 'gatekeepers' (public) set out where units can be built and I'm assuming set taxes, and safety regulations. But at what point is 'affordability' even a consideration with this? Is there some sort of process by which a developer must indicate before they build how much they will charge for a house or a unit? My understanding is that it fluctuates with the market?
Any input is appreciated.
What I find really "interesting" is the fact that, since the Conservative passed the responsibility of housing over to the provinces in the '80s, something that the Libs did not support, Pierre acts like Trudeau is so totally responsible for the housing crisis. I also find it hilarious that anyone would believe that frozen salaries for CMHC employees would somehow put a dent in the housing market. Pierre fans seem really dumb TBH.
What Trudeau should do is restore what Canada had going on with building affordable housing before Mulroney ruined it.
my provincial Cons are blaming Trudeau for the housing crisis, yet taking credit for the $10 a day child care program. There were literally billboards EVERYWHERE around the city. it's like "let's just outright lie and hopefully it works" is the Con campaign slogan.
It's worked very well for Trudeau these last 8 years.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I have no issue with how it was expressed to the public. Bluntly is the way I want it done. I also have no reason to think that Trudeau would casually make such an accusation, which is SO serious, for no reason. And if I'm going to choose a government to trust over the other, you can be sure that I'm trusting ours over India's!! And I think this kind of thing is EXACTLY they kind of thing India would do right now over the "Sikh issue", so I find the accusation extremely believable. Until I hear otherwise, I'm trusting Trudeau and our intelligence services on this one.
Please read the article I posted for more...responsible ways this could have been handled.
Justin Trudeau has zero credibility with many, a factor that should not be ignored with so serious an accusation. If I called Trudeau a murderer I would be expected to prove my case, correct? Or would you trust my claim? I guess slander and liable don't really apply to nation-states though, lol.
I'm glad we do seem to be in agreement about the seriousness of the charges Trudeau is leveling, however.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Just watching another Pierre speech... And with the purpose in mind of giving him the benefit of the doubt here, I'm hoping some good people on here who might be knowledgeable can help me out.
His hammer has been pounding on housing from the day he was made leader of the opposition. Trudeau announces a plan to generate housing in London and immediately following, Pierre has his speech rebutting that announcement.
In his speech he lays out his plan (Hey! Awesome!) to generate affordable housing. He claims that the liberal government have been ballooning bureaucracies and making it difficult to build houses with regulation (gatekeepers). Same ole story. So as part of his plan he says that he will penalize those municipalities who do not speed up the process of building and he will reward those municipalities that do.
In particular with regards to the CHMC he said and I quote:
'But do you know who won't be getting bonuses? CMHC bureaucracies that delay approval for housing financing. The Trudeau government has ballooned the bureaucracy at the CMHC paying out millions of dollars in bonuses for the very bureaucrats who have doubled the cost of housing. I will be slashing their bonuses and they will be getting pay cuts unless they meet the target of approving financing for affordable housing in under 60 days."
Now in complete fairness to Pierre, he's not wrong in my opinion about the CMHC bonuses. That's remarkable. All CMHC bonuses should have been frozen in the past 4 years for sure.
The kicker to me though in all this rhetoric .. quite possibly from Trudeau as well.... but in this instance with Pierre in his fight for affordable housing. When he says he will reward those in the CMHC who hit their targets for approving financing for affordable housing.... how exactly do they determine if housing is affordable?
For example... I believe he's talking about developers who submit applications to CMHC for financing and approval to build housing (correct me if I'm wrong). If that's the case, what metric is used in determining if housing is affordable or not? This question has been on my mind for months now with regards to the housing 'crisis'.
It also makes me ponder the dynamic between public and private sector. The 'gatekeepers' (public) set out where units can be built and I'm assuming set taxes, and safety regulations. But at what point is 'affordability' even a consideration with this? Is there some sort of process by which a developer must indicate before they build how much they will charge for a house or a unit? My understanding is that it fluctuates with the market?
Any input is appreciated.
What I find really "interesting" is the fact that, since the Conservative passed the responsibility of housing over to the provinces in the '80s, something that the Libs did not support, Pierre acts like Trudeau is so totally responsible for the housing crisis. I also find it hilarious that anyone would believe that frozen salaries for CMHC employees would somehow put a dent in the housing market. Pierre fans seem really dumb TBH.
What Trudeau should do is restore what Canada had going on with building affordable housing before Mulroney ruined it.
my provincial Cons are blaming Trudeau for the housing crisis, yet taking credit for the $10 a day child care program. There were literally billboards EVERYWHERE around the city. it's like "let's just outright lie and hopefully it works" is the Con campaign slogan.
It's worked very well for Trudeau these last 8 years.
*eye roll*
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
I have no issue with how it was expressed to the public. Bluntly is the way I want it done. I also have no reason to think that Trudeau would casually make such an accusation, which is SO serious, for no reason. And if I'm going to choose a government to trust over the other, you can be sure that I'm trusting ours over India's!! And I think this kind of thing is EXACTLY they kind of thing India would do right now over the "Sikh issue", so I find the accusation extremely believable. Until I hear otherwise, I'm trusting Trudeau and our intelligence services on this one.
agreed 100%
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
I have no issue with how it was expressed to the public. Bluntly is the way I want it done. I also have no reason to think that Trudeau would casually make such an accusation, which is SO serious, for no reason. And if I'm going to choose a government to trust over the other, you can be sure that I'm trusting ours over India's!! And I think this kind of thing is EXACTLY they kind of thing India would do right now over the "Sikh issue", so I find the accusation extremely believable. Until I hear otherwise, I'm trusting Trudeau and our intelligence services on this one.
Please read the article I posted for more...responsible ways this could have been handled.
Justin Trudeau has zero credibility with many, a factor that should not be ignored with so serious an accusation. If I called Trudeau a murderer I would be expected to prove my case, correct? Or would you trust my claim? I guess slander and liable don't really apply to nation-states though, lol.
I'm glad we do seem to be in agreement about the seriousness of the charges Trudeau is leveling, however.
I did, and still stand by what I said - evidence now or later doesn't bother me, and even circumstantial evidence will do it, because I'm sure India covered it up well (and if India did it, it's not like they need evidence for us to prove it to them, haha). But hey man, for sure, if it turns out that Trudeau just made it all up, or said this because he heard a rumour, or whatever you think might have happened, I'll be really fucking furious. For now, there is no reason for me to be mad about this, besides being mad at the idea that India might have assassinated a Canadian on Canadian soil.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I have no issue with how it was expressed to the public. Bluntly is the way I want it done. I also have no reason to think that Trudeau would casually make such an accusation, which is SO serious, for no reason. And if I'm going to choose a government to trust over the other, you can be sure that I'm trusting ours over India's!! And I think this kind of thing is EXACTLY they kind of thing India would do right now over the "Sikh issue", so I find the accusation extremely believable. Until I hear otherwise, I'm trusting Trudeau and our intelligence services on this one.
Please read the article I posted for more...responsible ways this could have been handled.
Justin Trudeau has zero credibility with many, a factor that should not be ignored with so serious an accusation. If I called Trudeau a murderer I would be expected to prove my case, correct? Or would you trust my claim? I guess slander and liable don't really apply to nation-states though, lol.
I'm glad we do seem to be in agreement about the seriousness of the charges Trudeau is leveling, however.
I really don't care if he "lacks credibility with some" in terms of him making an announcement. He doesn't care how it's going to come off to people that hate him.
this is a really poor line to draw. he's the leader of Canada. of COURSE his accusations are going to hold more weight than some guy on a message board. quite a different standard. I know you think he's very stupid or at least very irresponsible, but do you really honestly believe he would make this announcement to the planet without hard evidence, whether you see it or not?
if he's proven a liar or just incompetent in this instance, it would be the gaffe of the century.
Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall
@PJ_SOUL I do need some clarification on the people you say you talked with. What ethnicity were they, since views on this will tend to depend on which faction they identify with, Sikh or Hindu?
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
@PJ_SOUL I do need some clarification on the people you say you talked with. What ethnicity were they, since views on this will tend to depend on which faction they identify with, Sikh or Hindu?
3 Sikh, 2 Hindu, but they all identified as Canadians, so there's that! Anyone who cares about their Canadian citizenship really should be falling on the same side of the argument. If they don't, then they're pretty shitty Canadians.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Comments
It is a bit interesting contrasting how the Trudeau government is handling this compared to Chinese interference in our society. In both cases many, many questions linger, for instance was the man India is alleged to have assassinated indeed a terrorist that the Canadian government was turning a blind eye to?
This allegation adds fuel to my paranoid suggestion that the plane didn’t break down, it was broken, lol.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-nijjar-india-1.6971206
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Edit: Hell, how do you describe the trip now as well, in light of the announcement?
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
2. Concerning.
Could you maybe elaborate what you mean by concerning? Many different (and opposing) inferences can be drawn from a single word.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
One upside of yesterday's announcement for Trudeau is it has bought him a brief moment of solidarity with the opposition parties.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/2023-election-rural-voters-probe-focus-group-1.6968466
"Over the past, you know, 30 or 40 years, Canadians as well as Manitobans have become less connected to their political party," he said
I mean, I've felt like Canada has been like that for a while. Americans seem to live or die by whether their a Democrat or Republican. In Canada I think a lot of us think all the parties suck. Just because one sucks doesn't mean the other ones don't suck too.. lol.
Definitely, but I feel our version of the MAGA crowd isn't that big and it's biggest support is concentrated in northern BC and the prairie provinces. It does seem like as a whole Canada has less of the my party is better than your party thing.
The claims against India are extremely serious (I’ve described this as our Khashoggi(sp?) moment), however there’s more proof available publicly to support India’s counter-claims and there’s a serious credibility issue with our own leader (this is not a partisan statement but based on his own words and actions).
The possibility also credibly exists that this is all being done to appease the NDP and Jagmeet specifically.
Now, to be fair, if there is truth behind these claims then the Trudeau government is showing improvement in how they handle the issue in a more timely manner compared to how Chinese interference has been handled until now. I don’t necessarily agree with how this is playing out and remain unconvinced that this wasn’t announced moreso due to low polling numbers than it was because of any (questionable) commitment to the rule of law.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/india-visa-services-suspend-canadian-1.6973665
Edit: It is a bit rich asking/telling the alleged wrongdoers that they have to help investigate themselves.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/trudeau-declines-more-evidence-indian-accusations
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
FWIW, I have now spoken to 5 different people from India about this, and they ALL support Trudeau in this, and all spoke about how fucking corrupt the Indian government is.
This article shows far more effective (and less inflammatory) ways this could have been handled, using several examples.
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/canadas-remarkably-slapdash-assassination-accusation
To be clear, the allegations are highly troubling, however the man who’s telling us to trust him has given us no reason to do so and there are very serious questions about how and when this was disclosed to the public. I don’t really trust either the Indian government or Trudeau on this, but only one of those two is ultimately accountable to me (and you, and you, and you…).
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Justin Trudeau has zero credibility with many, a factor that should not be ignored with so serious an accusation. If I called Trudeau a murderer I would be expected to prove my case, correct? Or would you trust my claim? I guess slander and liable don't really apply to nation-states though, lol.
I'm glad we do seem to be in agreement about the seriousness of the charges Trudeau is leveling, however.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I did, and still stand by what I said - evidence now or later doesn't bother me, and even circumstantial evidence will do it, because I'm sure India covered it up well (and if India did it, it's not like they need evidence for us to prove it to them, haha). But hey man, for sure, if it turns out that Trudeau just made it all up, or said this because he heard a rumour, or whatever you think might have happened, I'll be really fucking furious. For now, there is no reason for me to be mad about this, besides being mad at the idea that India might have assassinated a Canadian on Canadian soil.
this is a really poor line to draw. he's the leader of Canada. of COURSE his accusations are going to hold more weight than some guy on a message board. quite a different standard. I know you think he's very stupid or at least very irresponsible, but do you really honestly believe he would make this announcement to the planet without hard evidence, whether you see it or not?
if he's proven a liar or just incompetent in this instance, it would be the gaffe of the century.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
3 Sikh, 2 Hindu, but they all identified as Canadians, so there's that! Anyone who cares about their Canadian citizenship really should be falling on the same side of the argument. If they don't, then they're pretty shitty Canadians.