rstrong wrote:... They pointed out that Jews have private religious-based courts recognized by the Ontario government. Canadians went "Wait.... what?" and those courts were shut down.
... for more than 13 years the Jewish Beit Din as well as Ismaili tribunals had been arbitrating family matters under the 1991 Arbitration Act, with hardly a peep from anyone in the community.
For these leaders, it looked suspiciously like Islamophobia when everyone suddenly sprang to arms as soon as Muslims tried to establish Islamic tribunals under the act....
Ironically, because religious arbitration now takes place mainly outside the scrutiny of the Ontario courts, there is no way to tell whether women are being treated well or badly in informal religious arbitrations conducted by imams, rabbis or, indeed, any other arbitrator chosen by the parties involved.
Five years on, there is simply no way to pass judgment on the premier’s fateful decision.
rstrong wrote:Seriously, you don't think that when America is having people tortured with electrical cables and having their balls sliced open with razor blades - before clearing them wrongdoing - that a bit of whining is justified? You got proof of that? . . . or is that just a pacifist whine?
(And yes, America had people tortured with electrical cables and by having their balls sliced open with razor blades. It's not in the uncensored report, but both practices have been confirmed in court by government officials. This was done to people who were later cleared of wrongdoing.) (Don't worry; no-one expects you to have the proof that they're had their balls sliced open)
When it became clear that America had become a torture state, it was a BIG DEAL in other countries when it was found that CIA kidnappings had happened in their countries, or overflight and refueling stops of the "rendition" flights. Where it was a REALLY BIG DEAL, was when it became known that British intelligence officials were present for at least one torture session. It led to those officials testifying in court.
The 25 lines edited out of the court papers contained details of how Mr Mohamed's genitals were sliced with a scalpel and other torture methods so extreme that waterboarding, the controversial technique of simulated drowning, "is very far down the list of things they did," the official said.
Almost seven years after his arrest, Mohamed was repatriated from Guantánamo to the UK, where he was released after questioning.
Seth Milner wrote:
rstrong wrote:And before you call that a cheap shot, think about it: If you go out into the rural areas in the Christian old world, and women aren't treated much differently. There too, the treatment is backed by the Christian holy book. Even in North America you only have to go back a century to find that women are chattel, with no voting rights. So? who gives a damn about ancient history? I don't, nor do I dwell on anything that happened in the past.
You do for Muslims. Again, the refugees showing up tend to be living in the present, no more conservative religious-right than many on America's conservative religious right.
rstrong wrote:And before you call that a cheap shot, think about it: If you go out into the rural areas in the Christian old world, and women aren't treated much differently. There too, the treatment is backed by the Christian holy book. Even in North America you only have to go back a century to find that women are chattel, with no voting rights.
So? who gives a damn about ancient history? I don't, nor do I dwell on anything that happened in the past.
Ummm, only rstrong's final sentence was about not so "ancient history". Seth Milner fails English, again.
There's a video on the right side that shows Trump/Romney endorsing each other back in 2012 and basically circle-jerkin' one another. Then clips of 2016 of them dogging one another and totally contradicting what they said back in '12.
The GOP is imploding and freaking the f' out.
The 2012 GOP nominee's advisers are examining what a fight at the convention might look like and what rules might need revising.
"It sounds like the plan is to lock the convention," said the source.
Romney is focused on suppressing Trump's delegate count to prevent him from accumulating the 1,237 delegates he needs to secure the nomination.
But implicit in Romney's request to his team to explore the possibility of a convention fight is his willingness to step in and carry the party's banner into the fall general election as the Republican nominee.
HAHAHA! You frauds! So much for that democracy thing!
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.
billy.pilgrim wrote:given that roger ailes is one of the smartest and dirtiest players on the political scene
given that he created fox as an info channel for repugs
given that there was a internal fight between Murdock and ailes over trumpet.
given that ailes won the fight to promote trumpet on fox
could the ailes v trumpet fight have been concocted by ailes
possibly
to show trumpet as his own man
strong enough to take on fox
or, maybe something akin to coke cancelling coke for new coke - just another publicity stunt
the tweet from ailes to trumpet about putin didn't seem smart at all and ailes is very smart,
just look at what he has gotten the fox watchers to swallow
racist pig Megan was alfull sweet to Donald last night
was the cat fight a planned distraction
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
JTA wrote:... HAHAHA! You frauds! So much for that democracy thing!
Not really, either Trump gets enough delegates or he doesn't. Most delegates ain't good enough and that lets the players play, within the rules. Why shouldn't the reps for most GOP voters be able to defeat Trump if they can agree on how?
Yes, a free for all vote after the first round is "in the rules." But it's a lot bigger mess with several ummmm, "candidates" than if there had been just a couple of really big delegate-winners and maybe one other guy getting just enough to keep the others from getting a majority. In this situation, though, it looks like Trump will have way more delegates than anyone else, even if he doesn't make the majority. The leftovers will argue that in total there are more delegates that didn't vote for Trump than did, but Trump can say that he thoroughly thumped everybody else and that "ganging up" on him wouldn't be treating him "fairly" so he's taking his millions of voters and going Third Party. Heck, he'd probably trademark "Republican" and leave the GOP with nothing to call themselves and sue them for infringement as well as libel.
O Really wrote:Yes, a free for all vote after the first round is "in the rules." But it's a lot bigger mess with several ummmm, "candidates" than if there had been just a couple of really big delegate-winners and maybe one other guy getting just enough to keep the others from getting a majority. In this situation, though, it looks like Trump will have way more delegates than anyone else, even if he doesn't make the majority. The leftovers will argue that in total there are more delegates that didn't vote for Trump than did, but Trump can say that he thoroughly thumped everybody else and that "ganging up" on him wouldn't be treating him "fairly" so he's taking his millions of voters and going Third Party. Heck, he'd probably trademark "Republican" and leave the GOP with nothing to call themselves and sue them for infringement as well as libel.
Yeah, at this point I think it's either Trump or no GOP presidency. Word on the tubes is that the GOP will probably be willing to take a hit this presidential election in hopes of saving the party and the nation from the Trump train wreck should he not get enough delegates by choosing someone else. I don't know though. That's just some speculation I've read. Interesting though.
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.
Unless Hillary is in jail - and maybe even then if Bernie is still alive - I don't see much of a path for a Republican presidential winner. If you see what Trump's fellow Republicans say about him, you can only imagine what the non-hardcore independent or Dem voter is going to think. There will be noses held but votes for the Dem. And it's the same for Cruz, who is even crazier than Trump and liked a lot less. Rubio could have been mass-marketed only because he could be wrapped in a package somewhat acceptable to the middle while still offering wink-wink to the loons. But he's rapidly dying and it turns out he's not quite the package they thought he'd be anyway. What the GOP is trying to do is cut their losses downstream in Senate and House. I'd agree they've probably already thrown in the towel on the White House, and some are close to admitting it.
The problem is that if Trump is forced out, he'll start his own party. With Christie, Palin and others following. He'll probably brand it the Tea Party to get that crowd. He'll get their support, too. Ideology be damned, it's Trump vs. the Establishment.
He'll keep getting all the press, and soon other Republicans will follow. By 2020 his party will be the party of the right. And it'll absorb the remnants of the Republican Party. It'll be a repeat Canada's conservative wingnuts splitting off to form the Reform Party, then absorbing the remnants of the Conservative Party.
I agree with O Really and am not 100% sure that if Trump somehow gets beaten at the convention that he'll do an independent run. He might out of spite, but even he's not so megalomaniacal as to think that it would end any other way than with a Dem win. I even wonder a bit if he really wants the nomination. The drudgery of actually being POTUS can't be as attractive as this reality how he's putting on. rstrong's prediction would make more sense to me if Trump was 10 or more years younger. Running at Bernie's age is a rare thing.
Last edited by Vrede too on Sat Mar 05, 2016 2:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Vrede too wrote:I agree with O Really and am not 100% sure that if Trump somehow gets beaten at the convention that he'll do an independent run. He might out of spite, but even he's not so megalomaniacal as to think that it would end any other way than with a Dem win. I even wonder a bit if he really wants the nomination. The drudgery of actually being POTUS can't be a attractive as this reality how he's putting on. rstrong's prediction would make more sense to me if Trump was 10 or more years younger. Running at Bernie's age is a rare thing.
If he's *fairly* beaten, I don't think he'll do an independent run.
But if the party resorts to shenanigans to block him, I think he will. And I think he'd have his own party running Tea Party and other candidates for 2018. His party would get all the press. With the vote split, the Republicans are decimated in Congress. In 2020 most of the them cross over to Trump's party as their only hope to keep their careers going. Trump doesn't necessarily run in 2020, but his party will have its own primaries with multiple candidates including Chris Christie. And yes, even Ted Cruz.
What if Trump throws the wild card and chooses Bernie Sanders as his running mate? A confused electorate votes in the third party Trump/Sanders ticket. On inauguration day Trump takes the podium to give his speech, grabs the mic and says "I can't believe you idiots actually voted for me. Unbelievable! I quit suckers enjoy president Sanders." Drops the mic and just walks off stage.
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.
JTA wrote:What if Trump throws the wild card and chooses Bernie Sanders as his running mate?
Chris Christie landed the killing blow against establishment candidate Marco Rubio's campaign.... and then dropped out. And then endorsed Trump. There's a good chance he'll be Trump's running mate.
And then there's Sarah Palin. Sure, it's doubtful that Trump think's she's anything more than a dingbat. But the impeachment process has almost certainly already started in BOTH parties. Would they impeach Trump if it handed the White House to Palin?
JTA wrote:What if Trump throws the wild card and chooses Bernie Sanders as his running mate?
Chris Christie landed the killing blow against establishment candidate Marco Rubio's campaign.... and then dropped out. And then endorsed Trump. There's a good chance he'll be Trump's running mate.
And then there's Sarah Palin. Sure, it's doubtful that Trump think's she's anything more than a dingbat. But the impeachment process has almost certainly already started in BOTH parties. Would they impeach Trump if it handed the White House to Palin?
We have already seen trumpet's displeasure at palin running her ignorant mouth overtime during her endorsement.
We have also seen fat boy's short and humble endorsement followed trumpet telling him to run along home
There is no way trump allow her to upstage him again
the obedient fat boy has already been promised vp or AG.
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
JTA wrote:What if Trump throws the wild card and chooses Bernie Sanders as his running mate?
Chris Christie landed the killing blow against establishment candidate Marco Rubio's campaign.... and then dropped out. And then endorsed Trump. There's a good chance he'll be Trump's running mate.
And then there's Sarah Palin. Sure, it's doubtful that Trump think's she's anything more than a dingbat. But the impeachment process has almost certainly already started in BOTH parties. Would they impeach Trump if it handed the White House to Palin?
That's kind of funny - Trump chooses Sarah Palin as an insurance policy against impeachment and assassination.
You aren't doing it wrong if no one knows what you are doing.
Seth Milner wrote:(Guy in an American stadium in a really bad Halloween costume)
Nonsense. We'd cheerfully accept those from either party fleeing a Trump presidency. Yes, including Republicans; filtering out Trump supporters means we'd be getting the more educated ones.
We all know people with grand plans to improve their lives. They're going to move to the west coast. (Or to Canada if the Republicans or Democrats win.) They're going to save up, quit their jobs and go back to school. They're going to run for office and fix things. But most never do. They're stuck in the inertia of their own lives, unable to drop or stop making new commitments even in the long term. Or unable to save, or put in the extra effort. Or just too nervous about taking a leap into a new life.
Immigration acts as a filter. You get only the people who DO the things they said. Who got over their fears. Who put in the extra effort.
These are the kind of people you want as citizens. The kind who ALSO tend to start businesses and create jobs. It's one reason why for immigration is a good deal for the countries they head for.
