The liberals are the friendly-face nanny-state fascists, the conservatives are the scary-face anti-everything fascists, they’re two sides of the same coin. They’re both starting to swing fascist authoritarian, don’t be deceived because they wear different costumes.
The same direction? … and which direction is that?
…please tell me it’s not AI… please tell me it’s not AI… please tell me it’s not AI…
<reads article> OF COURSE it’s AI
Well… I guess MAYBE some of it might not be AI…
I mean, I guess it was my mistake for assuming literally everything that Trump says is a lie, but we obviously should’ve listened when he said he really likes Carney. Every day it’s becoming even clearer why.
The advantage of reducing us to a two-party system like the US is that once that’s done, the corruption can simply take over both options and now the corruption is in full control. People still feel like they have a choice, that maybe one is more or less corrupt than the other, but it’s Kang and Kodos. Their differences are cosmetic. Their actions are the same. Neither option is the right choice. Meanwhile, the NDP stomp their hat like Ross Perot, and people fear throwing their vote away, while actually throwing their vote away to either of the two most corrupt parties in “strategic voting”. Yeah, it’s a “strategy” alright. Just not yours.
I lived in Regina for a few years and it’s everything a public service should be. We should probably have more public services, and we shouldn’t let the government sabotage them on behalf of private interests so that the private sector can pretend they’re saving the day. Don’t let the private interests and their government lackies scam you. A government is perfectly capable of running an extraordinarily effective public service. The governments we vote for aren’t interested in doing that, though.
Probably, we’ve been functionally the 51st state for a long time, it’s only Trump’s clumsy attempts to close the deal that is finally making people aware of the fact. And our politicians lie straight to our faces about it, they do it while saying they aren’t, while saying they won’t, and they’ve done so for decades. Because they know we really don’t want to be so attached to the US, but they do it anyway and if challenged just say it is necessary. Necessary for the US, maybe. Necessary for the politicians, maybe. Nice to see Canadians fight back and prove it is not necessary.
4 hours seems a bit much, I’ll agree that seems out of line. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable that some questions were asked and he was ultimately approved to enter Canada so it seems like the system, in this case, worked mostly as intended aside from the amount of time it took to reach that conclusion. Canada has had several recent high profile incidents of not adequately vetting extremists entering this country to speak at conferences, and I am not surprised they are carefully screening people in this situation now. While it is tempting to jump to the conclusion that this guy was singled out for supporting Palestine, one isolated incident is not evidence of bias or profiling on any particular issue, there would need to be a consistent pattern established. Maybe there is one and I just haven’t seen it yet, but as far as I know this is an isolated incident so far.
it is a shame that Israel/Palestine has become such a sharply polarizing and divisive issue that we can almost automatically assume that anyone questioning anyone else on the topic is not doing so in good faith and is pushing their own agenda on it, but that’s actually not necessarily the case. Someone can say they’re a Princeton professor and have worked for the UN, but might take some time to actually verify if you’re not traveling with UN and Princeton travel documents, and even that doesn’t prove good intentions anyway. People can have solid credentials in their past, but have changed into something more extreme since then. Unless the person is well-known and already on a list somewhere, you don’t know where the person stands now unless you ask questions and verify answers. Should that have taken 4 hours? Again, probably not, but I don’t think it’s the asking of some of those questions that is the problem here.
That said, if there is going to be a pattern of this, I plan to be watching out for it now. I expect the same process to happen for people coming here to speak in support of the genocide, and I expect them to be refused entry. Will this happen? I don’t know. We’ll see.
He’s not dumb. He’s cancer. He’s aggressive. And he intends on metastasizing to the entire world. Strongmen only respect strength. We need to show him how nasty we can be. Watch what he does with targets he perceives as weaker than us (if there are any). If he goes after Panama first, or Greenland, you can be certain that we are next.
This is not empty rhetoric folks. I’ve been saying it since before the election and I’m going to keep saying it, he’s actually coming for us. His first term was full of empty threats. This one hasn’t been. He has followed through, and he will follow through. He will continue to bully us and come at us sideways for awhile, take what he can by hook or by crook, but eventually he will get impatient and greedy. He is coming. Prepare to be another Ukraine, another Afghanistan. The latter is a tiny, technologically backwards nation that is called the “Graveyard of empires” for good reason. We can be that, and we will need to be that. I say this to reassure you that it is absolutely possible to defend our sovereignty against a much larger aggressor. This is anything but a lost cause, but we need to take it very seriously, because he is deadly serious.
Banker Daddy serves corporate elites? You don’t say? If anyone thinks this feels a little bit “Conservative” from our “Liberal” premier: the overton window sends its regards. Doesn’t matter if you refuse to elect a right-wing conservative when you’ve only got two parties and they’re both right-wing conservatives.
Get ready to ride the orange wave into the future, or next time it will get even worse.