News   Nov 08, 2024
 452     0 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 894     3 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 479     0 

Canada and the World

Honestly, I think this will be the end of the Liberals in much the same way that Paul Martin was tossed. The Liberals for some reason have it in their head that they are doing an amazing job. In reality, our global standing has diminished while domestically we are faced with a ton of Liberal caused problems.
I think you are right, but not for those reasons. The average Canadian voter is pretty parochial, and is less engaged let alone interested in aspect such as global affairs, international trade, defence, etc. Our history of letting just about every government since the 1970s gut the military tells me this is a voter/taxpayer/citizen issue rather than a party one. When I hear the Conservatives say that they are going to lower interest rates, I know that they know that the average voter isn't engaged with matters like the global economy and trade.
 
Being excluded from emerging groupings is clickbait now?
Yes, an article about a conservative donor being concerned about emerging groupings that offer "no tariff cuts or market access" in a conservative paper is entirely partisan clickbait.

Ian McKay, Canada’s ambassador to Japan and this country’s special envoy to the Indo Pacific, played down Canada’s absence from the IPEF talks, noting that Ottawa is part of another pact: the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) trade deal.
Carlo Dade, director of the trade and investment centre at the Canada West Foundation, said the U.S.-led IPEF talks don’t match or surpass the market access Ottawa gained through the CPTPP deal that took effect in 2018.


We both know what you'd say, if this was happening with a CPC government.
Apparently we "both" don't. Because I wouldn't care.
 
Apparently we "both" don't. Because I wouldn't care.

Apparently, you're the only one who doesn't see your own partisanship.

Or maybe, you don't care at all about foreign policy, in which case why are you in this thread?
 
She should be expelled.

If a TFW/IS, deport. If my non-citizen backside made such a rant I’d expect nothing less.

1) Free speech.

2) Nobody should be deported unless they've committed a crime.

If her speech has crossed the threshold into incitement or hate speech than maybe she should face consequences. Otherwise, advocating for penalties to intimidate someone against saying something unpopular is fundamentally anti-democratic. It's just cancel culture of another form.

@AlvinofDiaspar Please consider moving these posts to the Trudeau Liberals thread. Not immediately relevant to foreign policy.
 
1) Free speech.

2) Nobody should be deported unless they've committed a crime.

If her speech has crossed the threshold into incitement or hate speech than maybe she should face consequences. Otherwise, advocating for penalties to intimidate someone against saying something unpopular is fundamentally anti-democratic. It's just cancel culture of another form.

Free speech has limits. Supporting a terrorist organization is over those limits.

I can go on an anti-semetic tirade here and claim that certain ethnic groups are not pulling their weight but that's just not ok.

Just because you believe in something doesn't mean there aren't consequences if you shoot your mouth off.
 
Free speech has limits. Supporting a terrorist organization is over those limits.

I can go on an anti-semetic tirade here and claim that certain ethnic groups are not pulling their weight but that's just not ok.

Just because you believe in something doesn't mean there aren't consequences if you shoot your mouth off.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Unless they have broken some law(s), there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to deport them.

I would go as far as to say that anyone advocating for such is anti-democratic.
 
Freedom of speech is a fundamental right.

Yes.

Unless they have broken some law(s), there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to deport them.

This is the key quote:

1700599481297.png


By not merely endorsing the pre-existing attack, but explicitly endorsing future attacks (acts of violence/terrorism), I would think that does indeed cross the line of hate speech.

Now I'm leery of hate laws......and a defender of free speech; but if advocating for mass killings doesn't cross the line, we definitely need to repeal the law.

***

In terms of penalty; for a non-citizen, deportation might seem more apt and less costly than jail.
 
As distasteful as I find her statement, I'm not sure it crosses the line regarding our terrorism and hate speech laws. Whether those laws should be changed (in a manner consistent with our Charter, of course) is another discussion. Saying she "would love if they did it again" doesn't strike me as anything more than a cheerleading opinion. It doesn't offer support as defined in the Criminal Code and it would be difficult/impossible to prove that the comments are 'inciting'.

We are all allowed to stand and fall on our opinions, stupid or otherwise. I'm unclear on both her status in the country and with Durham College. If she is on a student visa, her continued presence is obviously more vulnerable. than a citizen or PR. If she has publicly linked her post or online presence to the college or merely to the fact that she is a student there, there is much legal precedence that allows it to take action against acts and statements that reflect on its reputation.

Our speech on this site, for example, is not only governed by legislation but the policies of the site owners. We can be disciplined for all sorts of activity and comments that don't offend the law but run counter to the rules of the site
 

Back
Top