Canadian Politics Thread

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

44 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

I won't go into a more detailed post I made at the time this happened but to say the biggest regret is the lost opportunity for people to better understand the times that Ukrainians were faced with as they tried to defend themselves from Russian genocide. The options Hunka had were limited. No one on here has any idea of who he is and what he did or did not do. He has never been accused of war crimes.

 

I suspect that Rota's constituency experience did not warm him of Hunka's life. Somewhat surprised that an invitation to a reception would not have required a security check. The invitation to a reception was probably automatic since Rota introduced him to the House.

 

Other than the lost education opportunity this whole event appears pretty innocent on Rota's and the PMO's account. Lots to be upset about with Trudeau but not this.  

When this happened a number of people were trying to explain what things were like for Ukrainians in that region during the war but they were shot down by the "OMG TRUDEAU INVITED A NAZI!!!" crowd. Why let history and facts get in the way of some good faux outrage?

[Ricky Ravioli]

4 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

It means they're going to use words and opinions that are meant to sway people towards the right. Sure, they will provide facts, but their use of facts are likely to take out some context that would go against what they're saying.

 

I always look for sources that are least biased. That way I'm not getting the right or left (note that I'm saying both) sway and just getting a balanced idea on what's happening.

Do you bring this same energy for every CBC article posted in this thread?

 

 

Like I don't disagree with your premise but picking and choosing where you apply it is a choice 

[Gurn]

There was no lie, and Pierre is foolish to have said there was.

1 Rota invited the guy to parliament.

2 the PMO invited the guy to the gala after.-likely an automatic thing after a parliamentary appearance.- or was until now.

both events should have had better scrutiny.

 

 

[The Lock]

@Ricky Ravioli

 

Here's an example actually of how facts and accuracy isn't always going to give you the actual story.

 

Let's say I come into your house when you're sleeping at night and I drag you out on the street. That doesn't sound good, right? All of this could be fact and sound bad.

 

Now, let's say we add a little more context: I'm a firefighter and your house is on fire. Suddenly, adding 2 more facts changes the entire message.

 

All of this involved facts, but the 1st example omitted facts. BOTH examples could be deemed as factual.

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

6 minutes ago, DSVII said:

 

This site I find is a good resource for that, seeing which way an article is leaning.

 

Or see how an issue is reported on both ends of the aisle.

 

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/national-post-media-bias

 

 

Allsides rating is based on pre-2022 reporting. Imo the national post has taken an even harder right turn since then. Straight up propaganda in many articles I've seen.

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Do you bring this same energy for every CBC article posted in this thread?

 

 

Like I don't disagree with your premise but picking and choosing where you apply it is a choice 

 

Yes. I do. I also question the left. There's even someone on Youtube I'll sometimes watch on the left and then hear something get taken out of context there. Then I'll start questioning that.

 

Neither the left nor the right is "safe" from me questioning things.

Edited February 7 by The Lock

[RupertKBD]

1 minute ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Allsides rating is based on pre-2022 reporting. Imo the national post has taken an even harder right turn since then. Straight up propaganda in many articles I've seen.

 

The fact that the entire premise of the article is based off a report from Rebel News appears to bear this out.

[The Lock]

14 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

For me it's more about the fake stuff PP puts out. He has no good ideas, just spin.

 

Well that's why I'm always looking for context.

 

For example, the housing plan the Conservatives have apparently involves removing the "power from gatekeepers". Yet, it says nothing about who the gatekeepers are; nor does it say how they plan to remove those gatekeepers. I also question if those gatekeepers are actually doing bad things or if there's a necessity not being talked about with this. Basically, the plan is a bunch of broad statements that almost feel like it's creating an "enemy" with these so-called gatekeepers who may or may not be bad.

 

By the way, if there's anyone more versed in this stuff than me who'd be willing to bring in more context, I'm all ears. I'm just using this as an example as to where and how I look for more context.

Edited February 7 by The Lock

[King Heffy]

7 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

The fact that the entire premise of the article is based off a report from Rebel News appears to bear this out.

And the reading comprehension issues when I specifically called that out and the defense was of the National Post, not Rebel.  Must be hard for print media to succeed when your target audience has these kind of difficulties.

[Ricky Ravioli]

8 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

And the reading comprehension issues when I specifically called that out and the defense was of the National Post, not Rebel.  Must be hard for print media to succeed when your target audience has these kind of difficulties.

Jesus Christ you actually are that thick aren't you. I made that point because the national post wouldn't risk their reputation and be wrong without doing their due diligence. 

[King Heffy]

2 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Jesus Christ you actually are that thick aren't you. I made that point because the national post wouldn't risk their reputation and be wrong without doing their due diligence. 

Clearly they would if they're talking this filth seriously, as they'd be able to cite something else legitimate as a source instead if what you're saying was correct, minus the personal attack.

Edited February 7 by King Heffy

[Optimist Prime]

[Wiggums]

Just now, King Heffy said:

Clearly they would if they're talking this filth seriously, as they'd be able to cite something else legitimate as a source instead.

 

Trudeau literally invited a Nazi into our house and you'll still sit here and call PP a Nazi for no good reason

 

 

Trudeau is a national embarrassment 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7105610

 

An invitation obtained through an access to information request, and first reported by Rebel News, was sent to Hunka to attend a rally in Toronto on the day that Zelenskyy addressed Parliament.

 

The invitation was sent on behalf of Trudeau through the Office of Protocol of Canada.

 

 

[Ricky Ravioli]

15 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Clearly they would if they're talking this filth seriously, as they'd be able to cite something else legitimate as a source instead if what you're saying was correct, minus the personal attack.

 

So do you believe this invitation doesn't exist? That the rebel is lying and the national post just said "roll with it, it's a great headline"? 

 

Personal attack? Like sarcastically calling into question my reading comprehension? Grow up and talk like an adult and I'll afford you the same respect 

Edited February 7 by Ricky Ravioli

[Bob Long]

19 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

Well that's why I'm always looking for context.

 

For example, the housing plan the Conservatives have apparently involves removing the "power from gatekeepers". Yet, it says nothing about who the gatekeepers are; nor does it say how they plan to remove those gatekeepers. I also question if those gatekeepers are actually doing bad things or if there's a necessity not being talked about with this. Basically, the plan is a bunch of broad statements that almost feel like it's creating an "enemy" with these so-called gatekeepers who may or may not be bad.

 

By the way, if there's anyone more versed in this stuff than me who'd be willing to bring in more context, I'm all ears. I'm just using this as an example as to where and how I look for more context.

 

It's fun and easy to blame fictional gatekeepers tho. Plus - and this is the kicker - pp doesn't have anything he has to really deliver. He's a bullshit artist of the highest order.

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Wiggums said:

 

Trudeau literally invited a Nazi into our house and you'll still sit here and call PP a Nazi for no good reason

 

 

Trudeau is a national embarrassment 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7105610

 

An invitation obtained through an access to information request, and first reported by Rebel News, was sent to Hunka to attend a rally in Toronto on the day that Zelenskyy addressed Parliament.

 

The invitation was sent on behalf of Trudeau through the Office of Protocol of Canada.

 

 

 

He literally didn't but cool rage story.

[Wiggums]

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

He literally didn't but cool rage story.

 

How do you figure?   

 

[King Heffy]

39 minutes ago, Wiggums said:

 

Trudeau literally invited a Nazi into our house and you'll still sit here and call PP a Nazi for no good reason

 

 

Trudeau is a national embarrassment 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7105610

 

An invitation obtained through an access to information request, and first reported by Rebel News, was sent to Hunka to attend a rally in Toronto on the day that Zelenskyy addressed Parliament.

 

The invitation was sent on behalf of Trudeau through the Office of Protocol of Canada.

 

 

I suspect it was issued automatically at the same time as his speech was approved.  PP has earned his designated due to his history of hate speech and the barbaric policies he wants to inflict on minorities.  You defend that evil lunatic for no good reason.

Edited February 7 by King Heffy

[Satchmo]

37 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

When this happened a number of people were trying to explain what things were like for Ukrainians in that region during the war but they were shot down by the "OMG TRUDEAU INVITED A NAZI!!!" crowd. Why let history and facts get in the way of some good faux outrage?

Many Ukrainians were fighting against Russia more than they were fighting with Germany.   Finland had a similar story.

[4petesake]

5 minutes ago, Wiggums said:

 

How do you figure?   

 

 

Because it says that in the story you linked. Do you think that Trudeau personally invited each of the “over 1000 people invited” or just Hunka?

 

"Last September, there was a community event with the President of Ukraine in Toronto with over 1,000 people invited. Hundreds of Canadians were invited," a statement from the PMO said.

"The individual in question's name was submitted by the Ukrainian Canadian Congress. The individual did not attend. Knowing what is known now — the individual shouldn't have been invited."

 

Edited February 7 by 4petesake
Sp

[Optimist Prime]

6 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

"The individual in question's name was submitted by the Ukrainian Canadian Congress. The individual did not attend. Knowing what is known now — the individual shouldn't have been invited."

This. Trudeau doesn't sit around making a thousand person guest list and pondering if any of them may have been nazi's in 1944, which is literally 80 years ago. 

It is embarrasing that he was invited, absolutely, but I wonder what the 'less government is better government' crowd would think of an entire new branch of intelligence agencies devoted to investigating people about to attend events...and the associated costs and Big Brother overtones that would carry with it? 
it was a mistake, it isn't that big a deal. OMG a Nazi about to die of old age got a shrimp cocktail and a round of applause: stop the presses. 

The endless finger waging about nonessential things actually works against the conservatives in that after 100 nothing burgers, when something is important, very few people who arent already conservatives care to even listen when its all sizzle and no steak issues day after day after day. 

[Wiggums]

5 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

Because it says that in the story you linked. Do you think that Trudeau personally invited each of the “over 1000 people invited” or just Hunka?

 

"Last September, there was a community event with the President of Ukraine in Toronto with over 1,000 people invited. Hundreds of Canadians were invited," a statement from the PMO said.

"The individual in question's name was submitted by the Ukrainian Canadian Congress. The individual did not attend. Knowing what is known now — the individual shouldn't have been invited."

 

 

It says in the story I linked?  It the story I linked it literally says he was invited on behalf of Justin Trudeau and yes, you shouldn't just randomly be sending out invitations to WW2 vets without doing a background check 

[Spur1]

7 minutes ago, Wiggums said:

 

It says in the story I linked?  It the story I linked it literally says he was invited on behalf of Justin Trudeau and yes, you shouldn't just randomly be sending out invitations to WW2 vets without doing a background check 

Yes but that still doesn’t mean that JT personally invited him. There is a difference. 

[112]

7 minutes ago, Wiggums said:

 

It says in the story I linked?  It the story I linked it literally says he was invited on behalf of Justin Trudeau and yes, you shouldn't just randomly be sending out invitations to WW2 vets without doing a background check 

"on behalf of" does not equate to "personally invited".

 

it should not have happened; it was a major mistake. but to put this solely on Trudeau is probably overestimating how involved he was with those invitations.

[Optimist Prime]

That endless constant political attacking of the Prime Minister also has its own 'toxic waste' in that the spillover to the 'man on the street' getting riled up by the outrage farmer, Pierre Poilievre, then go on to ruin their own lives: like the guy who crashed the gate at the Governor General's grounds and went out hunting for Trudeau with a long rifle in his hands...and now this guy too. These crazy folks are the tailings pond of Poilievre's attack rhetoric and frankly it isn't very Canadian. Much more Southern USA feel to it, like shooting abortion doctors:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/paul-clarissou-charged-uttering-threats-1.7107440