Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by timun

The revelation that the Indian government was involved in the Nijjar assassination plot came after three alleged perpetrators were charged, not while the investigation was ongoing. Surely you understand the difference in how releasing that information beforehand would have affected the process?

You are being an outright dunce for the sake of being a dunce here. Reread your statement, reread the timeline of the Nijjar assassination, as well as the revelation, reread what you highlighted and maybe you will see a major problem. Hopefully you are not doing this on a partisan basis and you just had a bad recollection of events but this clear jumping to the defense seems like the former.

This about that particular case - "Sources told CBC News the men arrived in Canada on temporary visas after 2021, some of them student visas. None are believed to have pursued education while in Canada." also doesn't help.

[timun]

Did I #### up the timeline of the Nijjar assassination? I thought he was killed last summer, and arrests were in the fall...?

[Firebot]

Wouldn't you want to make sure you fact check something so high profile with a clear timeline before underlining after and charged? I'd have Pepsifree have post 10 memes lined up in a row if I did something this bad.

On 18 June 2023, Nijjar was shot and killed in the parking lot of a Sikh temple (Gurdwara) in British Columbia.[10][11] On 18 September 2023, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that Canadian intelligence agencies were "pursuing credible allegations of a potential link" between Indian government agents and the assassination of Nijjar.[12] After the killing, Canada expelled an Indian diplomat from the country. India's foreign ministry denied involvement in the killing, and expelled a top Canadian diplomat as a retaliatory measure.[13][14][15]

In May 2024, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) arrested three Indian nationals, who were charged with killing Nijjar.[16][17] The Canadian investigations are ongoing, including into possible connections between the killing and the Indian government

There's a reason I mentioned it as Trudeau didn't need to make the revelation at the time considering no proof was provided and investigation was still ongoing with no arrests made, and makes the other instances like foreign interference and today's example when it was revealed that the suspect was here on a student visa given last year raise some eyebrows.

He did it to get ahead of the media that was about to write a story on the assassination being foreign sponsored (and we know how the previous foreign interference story went).

This was talked about in length at the time, I mean I broke the India news when it came out...

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Firebot

You are being an outright dunce for the sake of being a dunce here.

Glad to see you’re keeping things civil.

Hopefully you are not doing this on a partisan basis and you just had a bad recollection of events but this clear jumping to the defense seems like the former.

Do you think it’s possible that there are times where someone disagrees with you on something without it being for partisan reasons? You seem to resort to accusing people of being partisan on a regular basis when there’s a strong argument to be made that many of your posts have a partisan bias. Maybe you’re just not good at handling disagreements or engaging in discussion with people who have different opinions. I’ll be honest sometimes you make decent points but this constant crying foul and accusing posters of acting in bad faith is getting old.

Originally Posted by Firebot

Wouldn't you want to make sure you fact check something so high profile with a clear timeline before underlining after and charged? I'd have Pepsifree have post 10 memes lined up in a row if I did something this bad.

Playing the victim is getting old too. Also most people don’t take anonymous online message boards as seriously as you seem to. Chill out, you’ve posted some pretty questionable posts yourself, nobody is perfect here.

This was talked about in length at the time, I mean I broke the India news when it came out...

I don’t know if sharing a link to a news story or tweet should be considered as “breaking the news”, unless you’re saying that you’re the actual journalist who reported, in which case feel free to pm me and I’ll be happy to delete this.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Wouldn't you want to make sure you fact check something so high profile with a clear timeline before underlining after and charged? I'd have Pepsifree have post 10 memes lined up in a row if I did something this bad.

Nah, I'm lazy today. I'll take the 'L' on ####ing that timeline up. I don't take interacting with you very seriously.

Hopefully PepsiFree has some good memes for me.

There's a reason I mentioned it as Trudeau didn't need to make the revelation at the time considering no proof was provided and investigation was still ongoing with no arrests made,

So... you agree with my overarching point, then? That it's inappropriate for politicians to be commenting on ongoing criminal investigations?

This was talked about in length at the time, I mean I broke the India news when it came out...

Whoa whoa whoa, hol up.








Do you think that people get their news from you?

[timun]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Do you think it’s possible that there are times where someone disagrees with you on something without it being for partisan reasons? You seem to resort to accusing people of being partisan on a regular basis when there’s a strong argument to be made that many of your posts have a partisan bias.

"Strong argument to be made" is an understatement. He disagrees with others because he's a Conservative partisan; I'm sure he can't fathom how anyone could disagree with his posts, unless they were Liberal partisans. You're either with him or against him; absurd position, in my opinion, but whatevs. He caught me out for not double-checking something; I've been a total ####### to people for doing the same, it's fine, I'm a big boy, he can revel in his victory all he wants.

[timun]

All this said, it's 11:15 pm; by noon tomorrow I'm gonna be ####ing choked if PepsiFree doesn't roast me with "10 memes lined up in a row".

They better be good! I don't want some 4Chan Pepe the frog kinda ####, I want only the best.

[PepsiFree]

Sorry. No time for memes. Too busy searching news feeds and social media sites collecting a list of news articles for me to break tomorrow.

This is serious work for serious people. Memes are for children and the infirm!

[timun]

*sniffle* Okay...

[Fuzz]

"Jagmeet Singh claims that he's torn up the supply-and-confidence agreement," Poilievre said. "That means he has to vote non-confidence."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poi...319948?cmp=rss


Why does Pierre think Canadians are this dumb? It means nothing of the sort.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Why does Pierre think Canadians are this dumb?

I mean, I'm sure he's taken stock of what his voter base is like...

[Firebot]

Breaking News

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bus...nada-1.7320108

Leading business groups ask Liberals to send Air Canada pilot dispute to binding arbitration
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre rejects idea of binding arbitration, backs pilots

In Ottawa on Wednesday, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said he would not support sending the Air Canada contract talks to binding arbitration and urged the company to bargain in good faith.

"U.S. pilots make a lot more money and pay a lot less taxes and pilots at Air Canada are simply trying to make up for the ground they lost as the result of the government-caused inflation," he said.

"We're not going to support pre-empting those negotiations. We stand with the pilots and their right to fight for a fair deal."

Well there you have it, an actual (in my opinion very strong pro-union) statement and position from Poilievre on binding arbitration at least in this case. Though at this time it remains to be seen if the Liberals are planning to use binding arbitration again, especially considering they did with Westjet and the rail workers.

It appears they are taking advantage of the break up and promote itself as not just the working class party but supportive of workers and union rights to take away from traditional NDP supporters. Could that be a sign of a shift of stance on their future platform? I don't quite see it and see it more as opportunistic, but he smells blood in the water right now due to the atrocious NDP leadership.

[Fuzz]

LOL, sucker. Pierre knows any PM will be forced to send them to arbitration eventually. This is just Pierre taking up ground that Trudeau can't occupy, because PP isn't PM. It's vapid nothingness, and you are falling for it.

[timun]

If Skippy was PM he probably would have already sent them to binding arbitration, haha.

[Paulie Walnuts]

I wonder when we hear about pets being eaten in Canada from PP.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

I wonder when we hear about pets being eaten in Canada from PP.

Springhill, Nova Scotia is about to be in the news...

[Azure]

Originally Posted by timun

"Strong argument to be made" is an understatement. He disagrees with others because he's a Conservative partisan; I'm sure he can't fathom how anyone could disagree with his posts, unless they were Liberal partisans. You're either with him or against him; absurd position, in my opinion, but whatevs. He caught me out for not double-checking something; I've been a total ####### to people for doing the same, it's fine, I'm a big boy, he can revel in his victory all he wants.

Hilarious coming from the probably the biggest Liberal hack on here.

But of course you want everyone to know you've never voted Liberal.

People like you are the reason we have a giant ####dump of a government in power with no end in sight.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

LOL, sucker. Pierre knows any PM will be forced to send them to arbitration eventually. This is just Pierre taking up ground that Trudeau can't occupy, because PP isn't PM. It's vapid nothingness, and you are falling for it.

I’m not gonna debate whether or not it’s just empty words or that the party wouldn’t force them to arbitration because even though one could make strong arguments in either case it’d all just be speculation so it’s not worth the effort.

But I disagree with the statement that any PM would eventually force the parties to arbitration because if the businesses don’t have a strong sense that the government will do so it will give those businesses an incentive to bargain in good faith and get a deal done which would likely avoid a dispute and/or government intervention altogether.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Azure

Hilarious coming from the probably the biggest Liberal hack on here.

But of course you want everyone to know you've never voted Liberal.

Man you really showed him.

People like you are the reason we have a giant ####dump of a government in power with no end in sight.

No end in sight? Pretty sure they’re going to be out of power in about a year’s time.

[timun]

iggy_oi, please, there's no good reason to pollute this thread by interacting with Azure.