# Understanding the Left



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I have trouble understanding the left. For a long time but especially since arguing here and hearing the media I have trouble understanding the left. 

The right and even extreme right are easy to understand even if I don't agree or totally disagree with their message. The right is usually straight forward and don't hide what they are up to.

The left on the other hand are always mixing their message and hard to understand. On one hand they will go nuts because someone said something they don't like. A good example was Trump and his stupid locker talk and I agree with their dislike of the message. Then however they are willing to import real sexual predators into the country with open arms. They always seem most outraged with talk but not the actions.

Then there is the mainstream media who are very bias and have been exposed many times. The mainstream is owned by a few corporations that have a lockdown on what they can and cannot report. I know the alt media has many of its own problems and I have no problem saying that. I also do not trust the alt media and do not take what they say at face value unless I can fact check it. Sometimes I will post it anyway to see what people say about a story. On the other hand many on the left religiously follow the mainstream and will never admit they spread propaganda or edit live reports by cutting feeds, even when produced with the evidence. 

Then there is war, many on the left say they hate war but when the left says we need to fight and kill they are all for it.

There are many other issues at well that some may think of here. 

So what is the left really I just don't get it. Of course I will vote left sometimes because it is the right thing to do I figure but I don't fall into the trap.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

new dog said:


> The left on the other hand are always mixing their message and hard to understand . . . A good example was Trump and his stupid locker talk and I agree with their dislike of the message. Then however *they are willing to import real sexual predators into the country with open arms*.


My first reaction is: that's not factually correct. So my answer to why me (as a left-leaning guy) doesn't see eye-to-eye with you here is that I do not agree with the bolded text, and I don't think other left-leaning people agree with this either.

I am NOT in favour of allowing sexual predators into Canada. And as far as I know, Canada does not allow this as a policy either. Immigrants cannot have criminal pasts, and even non-immigrant visitors with serious criminal offenses are turned away at the border and told to go home, as described here: http://www.temporaryresidentpermitcanada.com/criminal-record.php

Immigrants are also screened. The first page of this doc describes how CSIS does a complete background check and visas are not issued until the check is clear. The next paragraph describes that all immigrants have a criminal record check through RCMP. http://fas.org/asmp/campaigns/control/Canadianexemptionsfoia/FOIA_4_22_05/P5HX.pdf

And those are some reasons I believe what I said above, that Canada does not permit sexual predators into the country.

*Who* is willing to allow sexual predators into Canada? *What evidence* do you have that this is occurring?


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I should clarify I was talking about the refugees when they came in large numbers like in Europe and then commit sex crimes. I am not trying to argue whether or not we should bring in refugees or not but I don't understand risking this but being really upset by stupid talk as an example.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

How can the government conduct a "thorough screening" of thousands of people coming from territories where there is no semblance of law and order and no paperwork exists, except for that produced by ISIS and the like? 

Also, after the war both Canadian and US governments imported Nazi war criminals (both deliberately and through negligence) while - also deliberately - covering it over. What would be the reason to assume that this isn't happening now?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

So if I understand correctly, mordko and new dog, you are saying that despite Canada's policies which say that criminals are not allowed, that you believe that criminals are getting through immigration/refugee processes, due to

* war-torn countries without governments (Syria) that can't provide documentation
* possible Canadian government negligence and failure to follow screening procedures

As a starting point I want to make sure I understood you correctly. Have I said it right, here?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

new dog, you wrote accepting sexual predators "with open arms". I presume this is a reference to how many left-leaning Canadians are accepting refugees with open arms.

The answer to your question is: people are open to refugees, which is not the same as saying they're open to refugees who have criminality. Because we know that criminal checks and screening is a part of the refugee screening process, we trust that our government does this screening.

For example, "I welcome visitors to Canada with open arms". Saying that does not mean that I also welcome gang members or criminals. The government has a screening process that tries its best to keep those people out.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Yes these are some of the risks of course the greater risk is what some of these people believe in. So it is hard for me to understand this risk being acceptable but not some stupid locker talk or whatever. Again not to argue muslims or whatever it is all part of my confusion of the left.

Again this is only one topic about the left but I mentioned others as well.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I think it's good to discuss this.

For me anyway, I trust the Canadian government, RCMP, and intelligence departments which do all of this screening. There's a lot they are doing behind the scenes and I trust that they are doing it well. One of the reasons that I trust them is that immigrants to Canada have historically shown very low rates of criminality. That is, rates of crime among Canadians with immigrant roots are below the national average.

Based on that, I dismiss the concern of refugee crimes. Statistically speaking, you are more likely to suffer a crime at the hands of a non-immigrant. I have no fear of immigrants or refugees.

I don't see ANY evidence that immigrants into Canada pose a threat. And the Canadian immigrant process is not directly comparable to Europe's situation. They have close geography to the war zones, while we have oceans separating us. We also have the luxury of carefully picking and screening them, whereas Europe does not.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I should add, I am relying a lot on past history, when I say that immigrants do not cause crime in Canada. There have been studies on this, see: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/how-to-keep-canada-s-crime-rate-low-1.1333559 And it's actually the same in the USA, where crime rates are lower among immigrants.

My lack of concern about refugees & crime rests on the assumption that our current screening of immigrants is as good as it was in 1960-2000.

new dog, I dislike Trump's comments regarding women because I see him as somewhat of a threat to women. When it comes to immigrants, I do not see them as a criminal threat at all.

Between those two things, only one of them (in my eyes) is a tangible threat to women: Trump. I realize that you may not come to the same conclusion as me, but I am trying to explain my thought process and what leads me to my position on this.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

In the US however their has been much terrorist action that is far more dangerous then stupid talk. The left seems to hold so much weight in talk but doesn't worry much about actual actions that have taken place.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Then there is the media who can do and say almost anything and are never questioned even when exposed.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The question you raise is, US incidents of terrorism carried out by immigrants. Isn't this reason to be wary of immigrants?

Here is my thought process on that.

For me to be concerned about immigrants being terrorists, I'd first look at a survey of all the terrorist incidents in the USA, including Christian extremist attacks domestically. Remember; terrorism is also carried out by non-immigrants. And then based on that, I'd look to see whether immigrants are responsible for the majority of terrorist activity in the USA (especially incidents causing death).

The last time I looked at those numbers, immigrants were not causing the majority of the terrorist attacks and death in the USA. Even the 9/11 hijackers were not immigrants, they were temporary US visitors - http://www.fairus.org/issue/identity-and-immigration-status-of-9-11-terrorists

Part of our disagreement on this point is going to be definitions. Perhaps you can give a more precise statement of your belief? These are all different things:

* visitors to the USA are responsible for most of the terrorism
* immigrants to the USA are responsible for most of the terrorism
* muslim immigrants to the USA are responsible for most of the terrorism
* muslim immigrants and 1st generation in USA are responsible for most of the terrorism

For example it is absolutely *false* that immigrants in the USA (or Canada) have caused most of the terrorism. But other variations of that statement might be true.

I know it seems like I'm getting caught up on terminology, but these are really important. Fear of "these guys" is an emotional thing. You have to put some accurate wording on it so that we even know we're talking about the same thing. Are you afraid of immigrants? Muslim immigrants? Remember that 9/11 hijackers were not immigrants.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Then there is the protests yelling, screaming, breaking stuff, hurting people and they do it on propaganda. 

The left also wants everyone to hold to their views but want other views censored but yet say they are in favour of free speech.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

Let's see... 

1. Canada is a known heaven for Nazi war criminals who will never face justice. Like mass murderers Antanas Kenstavicius and Wasyl Odynsky.

2. US - ditto. Mass murdering Nazi doctors like Walter Schreiber who tortured prisoners to death enjoyed great post-war careers in the US and have been honored in every imaginable way. 

3. This time it's totally different. The government is bringing in people with similar backgrounds and ideologies to terrorists and there is absolutely no way to screen people above baby age, but the government is absolutely trustworthy; their main concern isn't publicity and they know exactly what they are doing. 

Add to this that this government has worked very hard to ensure that terrorists like Qayyum Abdul Jamal regained Canadian citizenship and can walk the streets here again. He was my local school-bus driver in the time he managed to spare from mass-murdering plots. 

Yep, I trust this government 100%.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

How many wars on terrorism has been fought in the middle east over 9/11. If much is from the US then why go fight over there.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I don't know if this is true mordko but what about nazis being used to start the CIA. Or bringing in Nazi's to learn the art of propaganda. Again this may be false so I am just seeing what you have to say about this since you do seem knowledgable on this subject.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

They were either brought in as "refugees" or to work on various military programs. For example Nazi scientists were behind the production of $ billions worth of chemical weapons which the taxpayers subsequently had to spend $ billions to destroy. They worked on other programs, like psychological warfare. CIA predecessors were involved in bringing them in. 

And by the way, Liberal MP and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs is from Saudi Arabia and just happens to be on record supporting terrorists. His name is Omar Alghabra. 

This government can be so trusted on any security related issue.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Didn't know about Omar Alghabra and I just read he has openly stated he favours Sharia Law for Ontario and doesn't think HAMAS or Islamic Jihad were terrorists groups. I don't know if what I read is really true but if so this is shocking and people on the left voted for this.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Both liberals and conservatives are broad coalitions and have fringe groups loosely attached to each.

I would suggest a person need look no further than factual history of each to discern what they have advocated for and accomplished.

Compile a list of accomplishments in economics and society for each side and see how they compare with each other.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

He is also criticized the Tories On Anti-Ilamophobia Motion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/1...phobia-motion-liberals-tories_n_12388594.html


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Sags except where the right turns to far to the left to get votes or whatever their message usually is clear and easier to understand whether you disagree or not.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

james4beach said:


> I should add, I am relying a lot on past history, when I say that immigrants do not cause crime in Canada. There have been studies on this, see: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/how-to-keep-canada-s-crime-rate-low-1.1333559 And it's actually the same in the USA, where crime rates are lower among immigrants.
> 
> My lack of concern about refugees & crime rests on the assumption that our current screening of immigrants is as good as it was in 1960-2000.
> 
> ...


 James have you watched some of the you tube videos showing how the immigrant Muslims are acting in Europe ? Europeans are either going to have to kick the Moslems out or kill them. If they don't do it soon the Europeans will be out numbered & they will be under Sharia law or simply dead.

Canada is not doing a good job screening why is so much money needed to support refugees when they get here. Are the rules in place that the money is a loan or a hand out. Canada giving out hand outs it is not making people independent but dependents.

The screening should be screening out all Moslems if they cant give up their religion to come here they don't want to come here bad enough to bad. Have them stay in their own country & rape their own women who fail to dress to their liking. Have them kill the infidels in their own country. Islam or any religion that promotes killing of none believers should be banned from Canada.

The leaders of the country should be warning it citizens The Quran contains @ least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with the none believers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic with command to chop of heads & fingers & kill infidels where ever they be hiding. Moslems who don't join the fight are called hypocrites & are warned that Allah will send them to hell if they do not join the slaughter.

If your thinking they all cant be that bad. In Europe I have heard over 40% of Muslims want Sharia law. What people fail to understand is the Alpha males that want to dominate in favour of Sharia law will influence others that might not want Sharia law. Test have shown humiliation produces the strongest emotions in people. People will go along with herd to feel part of it. The herd is dumber then the dumbest person in it. When you base your life on some backward anti life book (Quran) & the herd becomes bigger the results are not life promoting look @ Sweden, Denmark, Germany as more Radicals entered the higher the rapes. A single person with in a very large group that has different believes then the group is usually not going to say anything to disagree with the group if they know they will be humiliated.. If the single person increases the number of people that has the same believes it will increase the odds they will try to force those believes on others esp if it is part of their religion.

After seeing what happened in Europe there is no reason why Canada should chance it happening here. If you cant give up your religion to bad we don't want you.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

If you want to be a leftist you have to watch nothing but mainstream media, you have to believe everything they say uncritically even when it makes no sense and in fact, contradicts itself. You must refuse to look at any other viewpoint. It helps to be incapable of rational thought.

Here is a test. If you can read this essay from start to finish without your head exploding you are not a leftist.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

new dog said:


> Sags except where the right turns to far to the left to get votes or whatever their message usually is clear and easier to understand whether you disagree or not.


Base your opinion on what politicians and parties do and have done.......not on what they say they will do.

Hillary Clinton lost the State of Wisconsin to Donald Trump. The Democrats were so confident they would win Wisconsin that Clinton never stepped foot in the State during the entire election campaign.

The State of Wisconsin is known as the "Show Me" State and people looked at what Democrats had done for them.....and voted for Trump.

If Trump doesn't deliver on his campaign promises, Wisconsin will likely flip back to the Democrats.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I agree with this lonewolf, so why does the left feel the risk is not as bad as hearing someone say stupid things like locker talk? Are you also confused by the left in this and other subjects I mentioned or it is only on this subject?


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

james4beach said:


> I should add, I am relying a lot on past history, when I say that immigrants do not cause crime in Canada.


Ottawa shooting: A day of chaos leaves soldier, gunman dead



> Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in an evening address that Canada would not be intimidated by Wednesday's "brutal and violent attack" in Ottawa, in which an armed attacker shot and fatally wounded a Canadian Forces member at the National War Memorial before being shot dead in Parliament's Centre Block.
> 
> .........
> 
> ...


The shooter was a convert to Islam.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

sags said:


> Base your opinion on what politicians do and have done.......not on what they say they will do.



Actually that is what I do when I actually vote. If the people in power are not doing what I thought they would I would vote for someone else. However the messages put out are most confusing on the left.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> If you want to be a leftist you have to watch nothing but mainstream media, you have to believe everything they say uncritically even when it makes no sense and in fact, contradicts itself. You must refuse to look at any other viewpoint. It helps to be incapable of rational thought.
> 
> Here is a test. If you can read this essay from start to finish without your head exploding you are not a leftist.
> 
> http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/


This is the one on the top of my list from what I have experienced.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The election of Trump was purely about economics. The rest is all noise.

Middle class Americans watched their jobs disappear and saw Democrats supporting more free trade.

Trump promised to cancel all the free trade deals and spend $1,000,000,000,000 to create jobs. (which the US will have to borrow)

Trump said he will repeal Obamacare and replace it with an equal and more affordable plan. (we will see)

That was enough to get him elected.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

wraphter said:


> Ottawa shooting: A day of chaos leaves soldier, gunman dead
> 
> The shooter was a convert to Islam.



this segment of the thread is about immigrants.

zehaf-bibeau was a born-in-canada canadian citizen.

so was martin couture-rouleau, the murderer of canadian forces warrant officer Patrice Vincent only two days previously, near CMR St-Jean. 

repeat, both assassins were canadian-born citizens. Immigration was not an issue. The histories in both cases point to disturbed personalities. In both cases, religiosity overlay severe mental illness. 

.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

How religious can criminal drug users with mental issues actually be ?

The nurse charged in Woodstock of killing numerous elderly patients in a nursing home was a criminal drug user with mental issues.

She was also a devout Baptist, earning a bachelor’s degree in religious education counselling from the London Baptist Bible College, now known as Heritage Baptist College.

Should Canada ban all immigration of Baptists ?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

And Aaron Driver, the guy on his way to bomb a London mall, was also Canadian-born. Not an immigrant.

This is why precision is very important. Are you sure that it's immigrants that you're against?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

new dog said:


> Didn't know about Omar Alghabra and I just read he has openly stated he favours Sharia Law for Ontario and doesn't think HAMAS or Islamic Jihad were terrorists groups. I don't know if what I read is really true but if so this is shocking and people on the left voted for this.




what i found in quick google search is a blizzard of ultra-rightwing libellous attack on omar alghabra from the likes of ezra levant & other neocons, dating back more than a decade. Through all the intervening years, alghabra has had to engage lawyers in a never-ending struggle to keep the libel & the defamation down to a dull roar.

what i did *not* find was any source showing, in alghabra's own words & date-stamped to a reliable background, that alghabra endorses Sharia law. So i am very curious to know, what is the proof for this accusation? all i found were gossipy references referring to other gossipy references. I did not find any concrete proof whatsoever.

if anyone has such indelible proof as to when & where & in which exact words omar alghabra did recommend sharia law for ontario or anywhere else in canada, it would be an excellent service to post that evidence here. Please do not post vague, abstract, gossipy links to other vague, abstract gossipy sources.

it does appear to be true that alghabra recognizes Hamas as the duly elected leadership of Gaza. So does the liberal government.

.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> this segment of the thread is about immigrants.
> 
> zehaf-bibeau was a born-in-canada canadian citizen.
> 
> ...


I am well aware of what this segment is about. Of course immigration was an issue. The people he associated with were Muslims.
He went to a mosque. The person who converted him was a Muslim. If he wasn't indoctrinated by a Muslim he wouldn't have done the crime. 

If a convert can be influenced to do such crimes so can someone who was born a Muslim.

Quick quick, change the subject to the KKK. Look how terrible they are. Bannon! Bannon! Bannon is a racist!


----------



## indexxx (Oct 31, 2011)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> If you want to be a leftist you have to watch nothing but mainstream media, you have to believe everything they say uncritically even when it makes no sense and in fact, contradicts itself. You must refuse to look at any other viewpoint. It helps to be incapable of rational thought.
> [/url]


H.O.R.S.E.S.H.I.T. 
I don't watch mainstream media (or any TV at all).
I don't believe anything until I have reasonably considered all sides.
It's the right that refuses to look objectively at other viewpoints (science, for instance).
The final statement is vulgar, prejudicial, divisive, and insulting.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

When you play the markets it doesn't take long to realize the main stream media is not your friend in regards to making money in the markets. I have found more useful info on the internet. Clinton News Network was biased through the election there has to be a money trail somewhere for this to happen


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

I think everyone here is over analyzing things...in my experience there is very little difference between the left and the right when it comes to government. They both say whatever it takes to get elected, then do whatever it takes to stay in power.

Both think they are extremely better than the other, but in actions tend to resort to the same tantrums when they don't get their way (just look at the "higher road" being taken by Hillary supporters down south for example).

Many politicians have "crossed the floor" over the years, in fact a woman who just dropped out of the race for leadership of the PC party of Alberta last week just made national headlines for joining the NDP party this week. Does anyone question how strong her beliefs really are? I haven't heard any fallout from it.

I'm not sure why anyone would want to label themselves either way personally, as if there is only one way to behave.

I'm not one to fit in a single box, I'm fiscally conservative for example but that comes from having to run a business (not to mention having some common sense) and making sure I can actually pay for things, not from denying science. I'm a big believer in the scientific method, which also implies I question everything, not just scientific issues. 

I'm saddened by the people on both sides who believe the rhetoric being spewed out, and I'm amazed at how quickly the spin doctors twist what others say. I spend a lot of time showing my kids how things get twisted, spun and then believed and regurgitated as if it was true. 

People are so quick to take offence in this day and age that they seldom pause to clarify with the person who offended them whether or not their interpretation was actually what was meant. Often times, I've found most arguements often are between two people who actually agree, but refuse to see it because they are focused on little details which were misinterpreted.

The world isn't black and white, its shades of grey. Everyone has their faults and strengths, time to get off the high horses and start opening ears and minds. I'm saddened by the fact that people feel the need to even argue about which side is better. They both have good, they both have bad, they both are filled with idiots. As a supposedly intelligent species we seem to have a hard time grasping that idea.

Just my two cents.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

What do world and business leaders watch and read to get the news ?

I doubt they are tuning in to InfoWars and Zerohedge.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

Just a Guy said:


> I think everyone here is over analyzing things...in my experience there is very little difference between the left and the right when it comes to government. They both say whatever it takes to get elected, then do whatever it takes to stay in power.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

With regards to the lack of large scale Islamist terrorist attacks in Canada....

They have happened multiple times in France, US, Spain, Belgium, UK, Indonesia, Argentina, Russia, Germany, Macedonia, India and many other countries. Countries and their economies have been literally devastated. Liberties in places like France and England had to be taken away to provide a bit more security. 

Attacks have been attempted in Canada on at least four different occasions, not to mention many small scale attacks and Canadian involvement in terror abroad, e.g in Algeria. 

Are we saying Canada is so special that it can't happen here? Is this the Canadian left talking of Canadian exceptionalism just as Americans love to talk about US exceptionalism?


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Lonewolf this applies to the market dropping out the bottom and gold going to the moon once Trump is elected. It started out this way and then these players money was quickly turned the other way and the true direction was shown in quick order.

These sites you mentioned sags do scream loud and try to force in their opinion or read to much into an event that happens. One thing they do well though is find the propaganda and holes in the mainstream media reporting. 

In Canada before Trudeau I did find the left didn't just follow into war but made up its own mind on it. However this was during a republican presidency. The left and right except Trump were hungry for war before this election and many on the left except Bernie supporters were all for it. The left was blindly willing to fight all over the world for whatever reason the media and their leaders wanted to spin. As long as it is over there and they aren't the ones fighting they don't question it.

As well what about the cast of Hamilton lecturing Pence and the audience booing him. The left should be better then this and leave him alone to enjoy the play. Afterwards people and cast could say they hope that Pence gets the message of the play if that is what they wished. 

http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/19/mike-pence-lectured-by-hamilton-cast/


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Mordko we have been extremely lucky in Canada and I think our intelligence and security has probably done a good job in finding these people before it is to late. Hopefully it will keep up for us and we never really see a bigger scale attack.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

Never is meaningless here. It's a matter of probabilitiy which is a function of how many Islamists are in the country and time.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

We now see the appearance of a conservative politician,Kellie Leitch who proposes a value test for immigrants to Canada. 



> ‘Values’ test proposal makes Kellie Leitch a favourite for Conservative party leadership: poll
> Support and name recognition for Tory leadership candidate Kellie Leitch has spiked on the heels of her proposing a “values” test for immigrants, according to a new poll that shows the issue seems to have traction with Conservative party supporters.
> 
> Leitch’s controversial proposal to screen immigrants, refugees and visitors for “anti-Canadian values” has dramatically improved her profile and popularity among Conservative voters, says a new Mainstreet Research poll conducted exclusively for Postmedia.
> ...


She is a highly accomplished paediatric orthopedic surgeon.



> Leitch was born in Winnipeg, Manitoba, the daughter of Eleanor Lynne (Conway) and Kelburne "Kit" McNabb Leitch, who owned and operated a construction company.[2][3][4] She was raised a Catholic, and still practises the religion.[5] She graduated from Queen's University in 1991 with an undergraduate degree.[6] She earned her MD from the University of Toronto in 1994, MBA from Dalhousie University in 1998, and completed the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program in 2001 at the University of Toronto. She became a fellow of clinical paediatric orthopaedics at the Children's Hospital of Los Angeles/University of Southern California in 2002.[7]
> Leitch used to teach at the University of Western Ontario, where she served as the assistant dean of external affairs at the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, and the chair of paediatric surgery at the Children's Hospital of Western Ontario.
> She is an orthopaedic pediatric surgeon at SickKids Hospital. Leitch is also an associate professor at the University of Toronto.[7]


The times they are a changin, as the poet sang.
Something has to be done. 
We have to control our own destiny and defend ourselves.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

Momin Khawaja



> Mohammad Momin Khawaja (born April 14, 1979, Ottawa) is a Canadian found guilty of involvement in a plot to plant fertilizer bombs in the United Kingdom; while working as a software engineer under contract to the Foreign Affairs department in 2004 became the first person charged and found guilty under the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act following the proof that he communicated with British Islamists plotting a bomb attack.[1] On March 12, 2009, Khawaja was sentenced to 10.5 years in prison and was eligible for parole five years into the prison term.[2]* On December 17, 2010, Khawaja's sentence was increased to life imprisonment by the Ontario Court of Appeals.[3]*
> 
> ...........
> 
> ...


To some ,this is an acceptable cost of multiculturalism. To others, it is not.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

Worth noting that it's not just the far right that tend to despise reputable news organizations and fall for conspiracy drivel that has been spreading on the internet. The left are just as guilty.

And I am not saying that CNN, CBC and Fox don't have biases. Nor is true that there are no good blogs. In fact blogs have helped to keep the media straight and a few provide excellent quality of commentary, investigative journalism and information. 

Yet there is also a trend of the far right and left as well as Islamists, etc... clustering around sites generating fabrications and conspiracies and losing touch with the real world while successfully recruiting more and more naive morons to their causes.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

sags said:


> What do world and business leaders watch and read to get the news ?
> 
> I doubt they are tuning in to InfoWars and Zerohedge.


I know they don't go by the mainstream media - they are the ones telling them what to say. It helps to look up original information. For example, if you look up Donald Trump's actual speeches and the policies on his web site, then compare to the MSM interpretation it is like they are from different planets.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

Interesting. Mass media regularly lays into their own political leaders while supporting opponents, no holds barred. Apparently it was Stephen Harper who told CBC to promote his opponents around the clock during the election time.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

mordko said:


> Interesting. Mass media regularly lays into their own political leaders while supporting opponents, no holds barred. Apparently it was Stephen Harper who told CBC to promote his opponents around the clock during the election time.


If true, that makes sense as a political strategy. The Conservative party was big on saying how biased the media was against them and that CBC was just a left wing propoganda machine.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

...and of course would have nothing to do with conservatives reining in taxpayer funding while the liberals throwing piles of taxpayers money on the organization. CBC employees with election time billboards to defend them against conservatives must have been smoke and mirrors.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

mordko said:


> Interesting. Mass media regularly lays into their own political leaders while supporting opponents, no holds barred. Apparently it was Stephen Harper who told CBC to promote his opponents around the clock during the election time.


So you think whatever political party is not in power, suddenly is not part of the establishment? The Conservatives still have considerable influence. But the media and academia can be depended on to have a (small l) liberal bias.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

I think the word "establishment" has been misused by morons. There are people, some of them do well and others don't. Some have more influence than others, which has been and will always be the case. There is nothing that spells "establishment" more than someone who was born into money, has lived in New York, owns a bunch of palaces, never came off TV screens and had close ties to both Democrats and Republicans, including being friends with Clintons.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Mordko you already admitted you are an ignorant bigot who refuses to look at anything that does not confirm his limited world view, so why should anyone care what you think about anything?


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

I am thinking words like "bigot" and "ignorant" are more appropriately applied to those who promote Holocaust deniers and those who claim that Jews were behind 9/11. Lack of interest in this kind of material is the exact opposite.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

On the original topic. It is no more difficult to understand the left than it is to understand the right. 

The insistence that alt-right websites are more credible than professional journalistic organizations is a disturbing trend. It goes beyond susceptibility to fake FB stories - to active seeking out and celebrating it.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Oxford Dictionary, definition of "Bigot" -noun. A person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.

Full Definition of bigot. : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Definition of a leftist. Rioting, burning cars, smashing windows is ok if we do it. Beating up people for voting wrong is ok if we do it. Condemning people as inferior because of their race or religion is ok if we do it. Rigging elections is ok if we do it. Using power politics to push our agenda is ok if we do it.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

> one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance


Indeed. And spreading vile antisemitic theories qualifies you 100%.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Definition of a leftist. Rioting, burning cars, smashing windows is ok if we do it. Beating up people for voting wrong is ok if we do it. Condemning people as inferior because of their race or religion is ok if we do it. Rigging elections is ok if we do it. Using power politics to push our agenda is ok if we do it.


Those cars aren't going to burn themselves.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

mordko said:


> Indeed. And spreading vile antisemitic theories qualifies you 100%.


Mordko's definition of an antisemite: someone who does not agree with him. Sorry junior, your bullshit doesn't work on me.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Right or left really depends on your perspective....and where you are on the spectrum.

Here in Alberta some of the far right wing folks in Wildrose and CPA believe that Rachel Notley's NDP party is far left.

Actually, her Government is acting very slightly left of centre. More like Peter Lougheed Conservatives than anything else. Heck, she is very much at odds with the federal NDP party. And there are many federal Liberal supporters who support her and have been actively involved in her administration.

Take a look at the federal Conservative Party....there are right wings and then the 'red Tories' who lean much further (in comparision) to the left.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Definition of a leftist. Rioting, burning cars, smashing windows is ok if we do it. Beating up people for voting wrong is ok if we do it. Condemning people as inferior because of their race or religion is ok if we do it. Rigging elections is ok if we do it. Using power politics to push our agenda is ok if we do it.


Maybe it is okay with those doing it, as many criminals attempt to justify their actions by aligning themselves loosely with some group.

But the protesters committing these acts don't represent liberals any more than cross burning ******** represent conservatives.

Extremists are like lit gunpowder. A big whoosh and they are gone.....leaving behind a stain.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

People who oppose something have the right to disagree and say so. Those who speak against the tide are brave souls.

Skulking around in the dark wearing masks, committing criminal acts when they think they won't be revealed........is cowardice.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

CNN (Clinton News Network) links Trump wanting to eat dinner with his family to Reagan assassination attempt - from 1981!

Is this a new low for the MSM? See the 1981 video of Reagan being shot , with "Trump faces backlash after ditching reporters". Hear the announcer ask "do you think the people sitting here want the American people to be angry at him?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRibZpPsz60

While playing a video feed of Ronald Reagan being shot by Hinkley, CNN was displaying text below that reads “TRUMP FACES BACKLASH…” Blunt. Crude. Effective.

Now, by this time it hopefully does not take a genius to see what sort of message is being sold here. What exactly the Reagan assassination attempt has to do with Trump ditching reporters is entirely unclear from the image and text placement. Heck, it’s not even clear once they try and explain it. But the inference is crystal clear: assassination might just be 'fair game' as a form of backlash?

A traumatic event is being used to reinforce a message. That’s a covert-traumatic ploy that’s a proven winner. If it didn’t work, then it wouldn’t be used. But here it is, and you need to be aware that such scripts are running nearly all the time in the marketplace not just of products, but of ideas.

Now this isn’t some tin-foil hat wearing theory. It's the very essence of advertising and propaganda. Once you notice it, you’ll see it everywhere and if you are like me, it will annoy you with its brazen obviousness. “How can this work?” you will wonder.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Mordko's definition of an antisemite: someone who does not agree with him. Sorry junior, your bullshit doesn't work on me.


No, it is someone who is spreading paleoconservative and Holocaust denial authors. Nothing will work on you, it's rarely curable.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

sags said:


> Maybe it is okay with those doing it, as many criminals attempt to justify their actions by aligning themselves loosely with some group.
> 
> But the protesters committing these acts don't represent liberals any more than cross burning ******** represent conservatives.
> 
> Extremists are like lit gunpowder. A big whoosh and they are gone.....leaving behind a stain.


The "protesters" are calling themselves Democrats and Hillary supporters. Hillary, Obama, none of the Democratic party leaders have disavowed them or tried to call them off. If anything, their remarks could be construed as encouragement.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It looked like a pretty balanced discussion to me.

The Reagan assassination was only referenced to the fact that it provided important information to security forces in the aftermath.

CNN pretty much always has a couple of advocates from both sides and have since the primaries began.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

"The Reagan assassination was only referenced to the fact that it provided important information to security forces in the aftermath."

So you noticed that too? I guess they felt they had to jimmy up some connection no matter how lame to justify showing a 35 year old Presidential assassination attempt and link it to Trump.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Mordko the antisemite, Mordko the holocaust denier,


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

Protestors are Democrats and Hillary supporters. 

Rioters appear to be anarchists. A different group entirely. 

A few Trump and Republican supporters painted swastikas on synagogues and churches. Only a fool would consider them to be representative of the right.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

NYC has been in chaos since Trump was elected. Roads and areas have been shut down or cordoned off quite a few times.

Trump should move to Washington. A densely packed urban area like NYC is difficult for security to manage.

Trump also has to get used to how his life has changed.

There are multiple levels of protocols and security procedures in place to protect the President and first family.

They just can't dash off to have a family dinner in a public nightclub anymore.

Long before the President arrives anywhere the area is swept, security clearances are checked, nearby buildings are checked, snipers are posted, routes are checked,...........and that occurs days before the President arrives.

Imagine the hell that would be raised if something happened to Trump at the restaurant or along the route.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> "The Reagan assassination was only referenced to the fact that it provided important information to security forces in the aftermath."
> 
> So you noticed that too? I guess they felt they had to jimmy up some connection no matter how lame to justify showing a 35 year old Presidential assassination attempt and link it to Trump.


If people actually listened to Trump advocates on thousands of CNN shows, they would realize the Trump advocates were right.

It isn't CNN's fault if people listened with only their left ear.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

sags said:


> Maybe it is okay with those doing it, as many criminals attempt to justify their actions by aligning themselves loosely with some group.
> 
> But the protesters committing these acts don't represent liberals any more than cross burning ******** represent conservatives.
> 
> Extremists are like lit gunpowder. A big whoosh and they are gone.....leaving behind a stain.


One must not minimize the potential for leftist violence. 
There absolutely is a tradition of leftist protests both peaceful and not. This was the anti-war movement protesting the Vietnam War. They had a great political effect.

There was the  Weather Underground which bombed various buildings.



> The Weather Underground Organization (WUO), commonly known as the Weather Underground, was an American militant radical left-wing organization founded on the Ann Arbor campus of the University of Michigan. Originally called Weatherman, the group became known colloquially as the Weathermen. Weatherman organized in 1969 as a faction of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)[2] composed for the most part of the national office leadership of SDS and their supporters. Their goal was to create a clandestine revolutionary party for the overthrow of the U.S. government.[3]
> With revolutionary positions characterized by black power and opposition to the Vietnam War,[2] the group conducted a campaign of bombings through the mid-1970s and took part in actions such as the jailbreak of Dr. Timothy Leary. The "Days of Rage", their first public demonstration on October 8, 1969, was a riot in Chicago timed to coincide with the trial of the Chicago Seven. In 1970 the group issued a "Declaration of a State of War" against the United States government, under the name "Weather Underground Organization".[4]
> The bombing campaign targeted mostly government buildings, along with several banks. The group stated that the government had been exploiting other nations by waging war as a means of solidifying America as a greater nation. Most were preceded by evacuation warnings, along with communiqués identifying the particular matter that the attack was intended to protest. No people were killed in any of their acts of property destruction, although three members of the group were killed in the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion.


Bill Ayers,Obama's mentor and associate,who helped start his political career in Chicago,was a leader of the Underground



> Prairie Fire[edit]
> With the help from Clayton Van Lydegraf, the Weather Underground sought a more Marxist–Leninist ideological approach to the post-Vietnam reality.[91] *The leading members of the Weather Underground (Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Jeff Jones, and Celia Sojourn) collaborated on ideas and published a manifesto: Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism.*[17][92] The name came from a quote by Mao Zedong, "a single spark can set a prairie fire." By the summer of 1974, 5,000 copies had surfaced in coffee houses, bookstores and public libraries across the U.S. Leftist newspapers praised the manifesto


In Europe the Palestinian terrorists were aided by Communist Eastern European governments and Communist individuals
like Carlos the Jackel and also the Bader Meinhof gang.

The potential for radical left violence is very real.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

"A few Trump and Republican supporters painted swastikas on synagogues and churches. Only a fool would consider them to be representative of the right."

Actually it was Hillary supporters attempting to discredit Trump.

http://usherald.com/breaking-two-li...tika-graffiti-church-mainstream-media-silent/


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I believe I pointed out to this swastika thing in another thread as being a possibility because it made sense for the left to do it. Anything to discredit the other side. Also notice how CNN must dig up any dirt they can on anybody Trump hires. Then they use that information to go to town in trying to discredit them. The thing is you will probably find dirt on anybody whether they are on the left or the right.

To the left everywhere and on this forum have you thought about why there is such a rise in the right and even extreme right in the last few years? Also how come the likes of Alex Jones and such can get the polls right on Trump and Brexit and the mainstream media got it wrong in poll after poll? Some of it was to manipulate voters into thinking Hillary can't lose and keep voters from bothering to vote in a sure loss election. 

Some on the left here and lovers of the mainstream media, how come white supremacists and racists around the world are suddenly so strong and have a voice? The left have ruled for years and yet these guys are rising. I warned you that the fastest path to the extreme right is on the left. 

The reason is the left and even on here ignore everything and anything coming from the right even when evidence is presented. The left says they are the smart ones they know how to talk, write and what is best for everyone. They also claim white people are the racists and have to feel bad for everything that has gone on since slavery. Inner-city minorities are told nice things that will never happen by the left. The media constantly over bashes the side that isn't on the left for everyone to see.

No one trusts the media and their ratings are very low. 

In Europe they are learning the lesson of being nice and tolerant that the left has taught them. In Europe I read that people against the EU was at 15 percent in 2015 and has risen to 54 percent today.

I saw today Dems on CNN backing the actors of the Hamilton play who lectured Pence with his family. This was not the place to do this when he was out enjoying a play with his family. If Trump supporting actors did this to Obama CNN would never let him live it down.

To james who had the racist post thread, these are the reasons your fears are rising and it is the left who is to blame. Luckily most people and Trump are not supporting the extreme right but the left has sure helped the extreme right out. Also the left calling everyone on the right a bigot and a racist among many other things with the help of CNN are really turning people off to them.

By the way Rusty good post above about the left and the media.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> "A few Trump and Republican supporters painted swastikas on synagogues and churches. Only a fool would consider them to be representative of the right."
> 
> Actually it was Hillary supporters attempting to discredit Trump.
> 
> http://usherald.com/breaking-two-li...tika-graffiti-church-mainstream-media-silent/


Perhaps you missed the point. Only a fool would consider neo-Nazis to be representative of the right. Only a fool would consider anarchist rioters to be representative of the left. 

The majority on both sides are decent folks.

ETA: US Herald doesn't appear to be a recognized news organization. Is it an alt-right or amateur site? The story relies too heavily on opinion to have been written by a professional journalist so it is difficult to determine if it is true or fake. I'd suggest remaining skeptical unless the story is picked up by legitimate news organizations.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

The blog advertises itself as follows: "get the TRUTH delivered to your email for free!". 

These days the word "truth" is used almost exclusively by liars and/or slightly deranged people.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

^ain't that the _truth_?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I perused a couple of "alternative news" websites and was impressed at how much more "news" they have on them, that for no doubt nefarious reason isn't being repeated by the main stream media. 

I learned.......

Aliens are living among us. Perfect replicas of human beings, they are biding their time until the mother ship arrives and they enslave and eat us. The author of the story is a trained emergency room surgeon....so it must be true.

Noises heard around the world are caused by government technology that controls our brain waves.

There is a Bush/Clinton crime syndicate, that travels the world knocking off people that make them angry.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I wonder why people especially on the left would fear such sites. The more silly they are the more people will eventually shun them like they do the mainstream media.

Still no one even mentioning the Pence at the play thing which means people on the left can't defend it.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

new dog said:


> I wonder why people especially on the left would fear such sites.



no one "fears" the fake news sites. People either laugh at them or else they despise them. 

.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

new dog said:


> I wonder why people especially on the left would fear such sites. The more silly they are the more people will eventually shun them like they do the mainstream media.
> 
> Still no one even mentioning the Pence at the play thing which means people on the left can't defend it.


I think it was an inappropriate time and place to discuss politics, and acknowledge that Pence handled it gracefully and well.

Meanwhile, his boss was in a rage in Trump Tower firing out tweets.

Trump's flash temper on display once again.

I don't know why Trump supporters don't recognize how dangerous he will be as President.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

olivaw said:


> Perhaps you missed the point. Only a fool would consider neo-Nazis to be representative of the right. Only a fool would consider anarchist rioters to be representative of the left.
> 
> The majority on both sides are decent folks.
> 
> ETA: US Herald doesn't appear to be a recognized news organization. Is it an alt-right or amateur site? The story relies too heavily on opinion to have been written by a professional journalist so it is difficult to determine if it is true or fake. I'd suggest remaining skeptical unless the story is picked up by legitimate news organizations.


Don't you get it yet? Stories like that will NEVER be seen on CNN or other mainstream sites or if they are, will be brushed off in a few seconds and deleted from their server within hours. It was reported on many sites, if you don't like that one do a Google search and satisfy yourself that it was legit, or that it was phony.

Later.... saved you the trouble. Here is the same story from the Chicago Tribune which seems to be where the others got it.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...cused-of-chapel-vandalism-20160312-story.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...cused-of-chapel-vandalism-20160312-story.html


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

sags said:


> I think it was an inappropriate time and place to discuss politics, and acknowledge that Pence handled it gracefully and well.
> 
> Meanwhile, his boss was in a rage in Trump Tower firing out tweets.
> 
> ...


Buck up, Trump isn't as dangerous as you think. Remember, he has NO support from Congress, the Senate, the bureaucracy, the media or anyone else. They will all be watching him like a hawk, ready to jump on him for any reason or no reason at all.

Meanwhile we dodged Hillary who was threatening nuclear war with Russia.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

More reasons not to worry about the Trump Presidency, courtesy Scott Adams

I’m hearing lots of after-the-fact explanations for why Trump won the election. The most common interpretation of events is that many citizens had a view of the country that pundits, pollsters, and the Clinton campaign missed. But somehow Trump accurately identified the mood of the people – especially in the Great Lakes region – and crafted a message to fit their emotions.

That explanation of events fits the observed data. Trump’s priorities do seem to match what polls tell us people are thinking and feeling. Or at least enough people feel that way to give Trump the Electoral College win. In this view of the world, Trump is a populist who has good instincts about what people want to hear.

But as I have been teaching you for the past year, people can be living in different movies while physically inhabiting the same spacetime. In your movie, Trump might be a populist as the experts are saying. But in my movie, Trump is a Master Persuader. And the script for my movie fits the observed facts just as well as yours. Maybe better.

The Master Persuader filter says Trump didn’t identify and match the preferences of the people so much as cause them to think the way they are thinking. My filter on the election says that Trump’s skill for persuasion could have given him the victory with DIFFERENT policies than the ones he championed – such as Bernie Sanders policies. And Trump would look like a populist in that case too.

Keep in mind that most voters are handcuffed to their party’s candidate. That guarantees that most elections will be close, no matter who runs. The winner is the candidate who can move perhaps 5% of voters from column A to B. And the Master Persuader had a year-long election cycle and total media exposure to get that minor task accomplished. This is why I predicted Trump’s win a year before it happened. 

I don’t believe reality is something the human brain can understand. We didn’t evolve with the ability to see reality for what it is. Evolution only cares if we survive and procreate. In this case, people who think Trump is a populist can have babies, and so can the people who think we elected Hitler, and so can the people who think Trump is a well-meaning Master Persuader. That’s three different movies. Evolution doesn’t care which worldview is right, if any. It only cares that we can make more babies. And we can.

Still, it might matter who has the most “useful” movie among us. The Master Persuader movie did a good job in predicting Trump’s success. It also predicts Trump moving to the middle, persuading Pence to be more LGBTQ-friendly, and good relations with other countries. That’s the movie plot I see coming.

But some of you are in a movie that is dark and dangerous. Perhaps you see a world in which the next Hitler just came to power. Some of you see a clown with no skill coming to power because his populist message was effective. Those are scary movies compared to my feel-good film. If you could switch to my movie, and lose nothing but your anxiety for the future, wouldn’t you want to do it? In my movie, we have lots of Trump success ahead and none of the dark possibilities will come to pass.

So how can you tell whether or not you are in the wrong movie? I’ll give you a few clues.

Consider…

If Trump didn’t win because of his persuasion skills, which other Republican candidate can you imagine beating Clinton?

You might be thinking that Clinton’s email problems and the Comey announcements made her an unusually weak candidate, and that means any sane Republican could have beaten her. But you’d be wrong. The reason that the emails, the Comey decisions, and Wikileaks were so effective is that Trump had been labelling Clinton “Crooked Hillary” for months. That created the confirmation bias trap that made everything Clinton ever did sound suspicious. None of the other candidates would have crafted such a perfect persuasion trap.

I also have a hard time imagining any other candidate going after Bill Clinton so hard that it took him out of the game. Was Jeb going to do that?

If you believe Trump’s skill for persuasion wasn’t the key variable in his win, you have to imagine some other candidate beating Clinton with the same set of policies as Trump. Personally, I can’t imagine it.

If you think Trump is the next Hitler, or a clown who got lucky with his populist message, you have to ask yourself why the stock market and the dollar are both up following the election. The smartest money-managers in the world have already abandoned their old movies and jumped over to movies they see as more useful for making money, apparently.

If you think Trump is the next Hitler, you have to ask yourself why every major world power has already said they think they can work with him, no problem.

If you think Trump is a lucky incompetent who inherited money from his father, you have to explain why he has succeeded in real estate, reality TV, and now politics. Can incompetent people win that bigly in three different arenas while everyone is watching?

If you think Trump has anti-semite advisors, you have to wonder why his son-in-law Jared Kushner hasn’t noticed any of that and is working hard for Trump.

If you think Trump is a racist, you have to wonder how he learned to act so well that he could be in this picture looking as non-racist as a person can look.

And if you think Trump is any or all of the things you heard from the mainstream media, you have to wonder why they were so thoroughly wrong about the one thing that can be measured objectively – the election results.

You might also wonder why the anti-Trump protests are petering out. If a real Hitler came to power, would people get tired of walking around outside to protest? 

The biggest demographic group opposing Trump – including the ones on the street – are young people. Objectively speaking, young people are the dumbest people within every demographic group. I was dumber when I was younger. So were you. So is everyone else. Ask yourself if it is a coincidence that the dumbest people within every demographic group lean in the same direction.

The Master Persuader filter says that young people have not yet experienced multiple situations in which the media scares the public over nothing. To them, the fear of Trump is real because the Internet and the media says it is real. To people my age, we have seen one fake media scare after another. We don’t believe in fake scares the same way that that young people do because we’ve been through it so many times.

As the election season fog begins to clear, most people will start to see Trump as an unconventional president whose policies conform to the preferences of the governed. But that simple movie is boring. I invite you to join my movie, in which each of us has a small role in making America Great Again. You just have to find your part.

It’s a good movie. I think you’ll like it.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Don't you get it yet? Stories like that will NEVER be seen on CNN or other mainstream sites or if they are, will be brushed off in a few seconds and deleted from their server within hours. It was reported on many sites, if you don't like that one do a Google search and satisfy yourself that it was legit, or that it was phony.
> 
> Later.... saved you the trouble. Here is the same story from the Chicago Tribune which seems to be where the others got it.
> 
> ...


It was not the same story. 

In March the Chicago Tribune reported that young men were arrested for painting swastikas and hate speech on a church. Their political leanings were unreported but their love of swastikas might lead a reasonable person to conclude that they occupy the alt-right.

The US Herald lifted the Tribune story in November. The blogger twisted it into a false news report that he headlined "BREAKING: Two Liberals BUSTED For HOAX Of Trump-Swastika Graffiti On Church- Mainstream Media SILENT!"

So we can dismiss US Herald as a fake news site, and we an dismiss your claim that Democrats are behind all the swastikas.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

olivaw said:


> The US Herald stole the pictures from the Tribune in November. It made up a false news report and headlined it "BREAKING: Two Liberals BUSTED For HOAX Of Trump-Swastika Graffiti On Church- Mainstream Media SILENT!"
> 
> So we can dismiss US Herald as a fake news site.



it's a wreck of a fake news site. ultra christian. ultra military. sort of a christian crucifix/black boots cross.

like all the fake news & post-truth news sites, it steals or makes up its material.

recently in cmf forum, argonaut posted a zerohedge piece that purported to be a report about hedge fund manager Ray Dalio's post-election investment views. The truth was that Dalio had published his original text early that same morning on LinkedIn. Within a few hours, Bloomberg followed with a good wrapup news story on Dalio's latest, along with a valuable link to the full Dalio text on LinkedIn. By 11 am, i had read both.

so far, the above describes a sparkling, first-rate news service provided by mainstream media.

many hours later, in the late afternoon, zerohedge managed to steal a part of the Dalio story, evidently from Bloomberg. The ZH version was a truncated, partial version.

later still, argonaut would breathlessly report the same botched zerohedge version as if it were real news. This is a terrible disservice to readers.

readers who depend upon fake websites & fringe media are missing the importance of timely news that is accurately conveyed by mainstream media, with its farflung networks of professional reporters & editors who work to deadline & comb every detail.

.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Buck up, Trump isn't as dangerous as you think. Remember, he has NO support from Congress, the Senate, the bureaucracy, the media or anyone else. They will all be watching him like a hawk, ready to jump on him for any reason or no reason at all.
> 
> Meanwhile we dodged Hillary who was threatening nuclear war with Russia.


My fear isn't based on economic or social issues. It is with security and military issues. As the Commander in chief, the military must follow Trump's orders. There is a well articulated chain of command.

I have read well written articles on the subject from credible sources, and have yet to find any information that provide assurance a President has any restrictions placed upon them militarily. The US Constitution was crafted when the weapons were muskets......not the weapons in today's military arsenal. The US Constitution was written when it would take months of planning to attack another country. In today's world it would only take a secure scripted message almost instantaneously.

Short of a mutiny, there would be no way to stop Trump from creating the worst kind of problems.

An intrusion into US air space, or an Iranian boat approaching a US naval vessel are the kinds of incidents where cool heads prevail, and they happen more frequently than people realize.

One wrong word or action by President Trump can raise world military alert levels to the highest categories.

THAT is what troubles me.......and a whole lot of military and intelligence experts...... about Trump.

Would people with guns trust someone with Trump's impulsive and vindictive personality with the keys to their gun locker ?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The voters elected Trump and the Republicans.........fair enough. It was the choice of the people.

But I would sleep much better if VP Mike Pence was the President than Trump, and I think a lot of Republicans would as well.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

+1


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

...double post.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I also think Trump is treating the solemnity and responsibilities of the office of President rather flippantly.

The centre of power is in the White House in Washington. Trump's cabinet and likely the VP will be located in Washington.

The situation room is located in the White House. There are underground bunkers located in the White House and preparations are well established to move the President and VP to secure locations from the White House.

Trump wanting to commute from Trump Tower in New York would cause great problems with all of the above.

What if there was an immediate emergency and Trump was in New York, while all of his national advisers were in Washington ?

Does the world wait while Trump flies to Washington to respond to a "3 a.m. phone call" ?


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

Although President Obama *suggests*  that we don't worrying about the apocalypse, it's telling that a sitting president has to reassure people in the West Wing about the president-elect. 


> “This is not the apocalypse,” Obama said. History does not move in straight lines; sometimes it goes sideways, sometimes it goes backward. A couple of days later, when I asked the President about that consolation, he offered this: “I don’t believe in apocalyptic—until the apocalypse comes. I think nothing is the end of the world until the end of the world.”


There are many valid concerns about a Trump presidency. His access to the military is but one of them and it is shared at the highest levels.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

olivaw said:


> It was not the same story.
> 
> In March the Chicago Tribune reported that young men were arrested for painting swastikas and hate speech on a church. Their political leanings were unreported but their love of swastikas might lead a reasonable person to conclude that they occupy the alt-right.
> 
> ...


There are 2 possibilities

1) Donald Trump supporters believe they can enhance support for their hero by painting swastikas

2) Hillary Clinton supporters believe they can reduce support for Trump by painting swastikas

I know which seems more logical. And considering the Clintonites have been enjoying their own Krystalnacht I don't see why they would draw the line at a few swastikas.

Keep in mind we are talking about 2 students at Northwestern University, not Bubba and Billy Bob from the University of Bugtussle.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

There is a third possibility, that perhaps is more likely.

In a population of over 300 million people there are some people who don't function properly mentally. They could identify themselves as Republicans, Democrats or Hari Krishna..........and it wouldn't matter, because basically they are people with a loose screws rattling around in their head.

We had local yokels painting swastikas on the cenotaph and turning over gravestones. 

Nobody asked them if they were Liberal or Conservative.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

No, that would be the far right, the neo-nazis, the paleoconservatives, which these days go under the name "alt-right". They have swastikas all over their twitter accounts and are actively promoted by the incoming president's strategist.


----------



## bass player (Jan 27, 2016)

mordko said:


> No, that would be the far right, the neo-nazis, the paleoconservatives, which these days go under the name "alt-right". They have swastikas all over their twitter accounts and are actively promoted by the incoming president's strategist.


Yup, it's all Trump's fault. But, when black racist murderers from the "alt-left" execute white cops, no one on the left will blame Obama or Hillary.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

My point was, and is: rioters are no more representative of the left than swastika painters are of the right.

Now we seem to be entertaining Rusty's theory that the swastikas are a plot by the Clinton camp to discredit Trump. 

Believe me Rusty. Nobody needs to discredit Trump. He's doing a fine job on his own.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Olivaw is good at debunking stuff I have to give Olivaw credit for this.

Still however as Rusty suggests the mainstream is still not a good source of unbiased news. Often the mainstream will take real news and only nail one side like Trump but not the other. Look at my Pence Hamilton story, the mainstream has made it all about Trump like he is the bad guy. The mainstream should be scolding the cast for what they did. Trust me if it was Hillary involved CNN would want the cast to apologize and would have panels discussing why they should apologize.

Not only the mainstream but we have entertainers showing solidarity for what the cast did. Again this is why people are getting sick of the left because tails they win and heads you lose.

However I will say Trump should not be criticizing SNL because the more he does the better the comedy is for them. If I was on SNL I would go right after him because he is gold for comedy.

This from KXAN a NBC affiliate. Electoral college members being threatened even with death threats to change votes. This is apparently going on in the US by many of the nice left. Another reason people are getting sick of the lefts actions.

http://kxan.com/2016/11/18/texas-electoral-college-member-harassed-for-backing-trump/

I am sure CNN will try to stay clear of this or pay it little attention unless Trump was doing it.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

bass player said:


> Yup, it's all Trump's fault. But, when black racist murderers from the "alt-left" execute white cops, no one on the left will blame Obama or Hillary.


You're back. I thought you had pledged your life to the Church of the Donald and had taken a vow of silence. (and celibacy, though in your case, no change )


----------



## bass player (Jan 27, 2016)

olivaw said:


> You're back. I thought you had pledged your life to the Church of the Donald and had taken a vow of silence. (and celibacy, though in your case, no change )


I knew you missed me...


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

bass player said:


> I knew you missed me...


Sure, we try make each other feel bad - it's called making memories.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Look even the left is sick of the left. E. Street guitarist Steven Van Zandt has called out on Hamilton to apologize. The left is really losing touch with people.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/n...s-hamilton-to-apologize-to-mike-pence-w451539

CNN where are you, please stand up.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I also find when the left here and everywhere is in trouble they mock or try to deflect instead of facing it. They also blame everyone but themselves and are always the victims.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

new dog said:


> Still however as Rusty suggests the mainstream is still not a good source of unbiased news. Often the mainstream will take real news and only nail one side like Trump but not the other. Look at my Pence Hamilton story, the mainstream has made it all about Trump like he is the bad guy. The mainstream should be scolding the cast for what they did. Trust me if it was Hillary involved CNN would want the cast to apologize and would have panels discussing why they should apologize.


Actually the media is reporting on Trump's decision to take it personally and start tweeting about it. Pence handled it with grace and dignity. Trump did not. 

They would have criticized Barack Obama if he tweeted his displeasure at every perceived insult. 

The presidency is a huge job. The president needs to focus on the big issues of the day. Leave the personal bickering to TV talking heads and forum contributors.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

They may have slightly criticized Obama for this but they would still devote most of their time going after the cast and wondering why Trump isn't joining in. Everyone can see this bias on the mainstream, I see it everyday on CNN.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> The voters elected Trump and the Republicans.........fair enough. It was the choice of the people.
> 
> But I would sleep much better if VP Mike Pence was the President than Trump, and I think a lot of Republicans would as well.


The people chose Hillary, the electoral college chose Trump.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

It would be terrible if Pence was president, he probably would start WW3 faster then Hillary would have.

Here is fake news list sourced from Ron Paul.

http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com/archives/revealed-the-real-fake-news-list


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Trump tunes in media leaders at summit meeting this afternoon. Hope they feel better after they get The Donald's boot out of their *** ha ha ha.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/21/donald-trumps-media-summit-was-a-f-ing-firing-squad/

More detailed report with pictures

http://www.thewrap.com/donald-trump-tower-media-summit/


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Trump tunes in media leaders at summit meeting this afternoon. Hope they feel better after they get The Donald's boot out of their *** ha ha ha.
> 
> http://nypost.com/2016/11/21/donald-trumps-media-summit-was-a-f-ing-firing-squad/
> 
> ...




what boot? the Post killed the donald with truth & kindness. 30 or 40 topnotch professional reporters from several media respectfully attended, all hoping to work out details about the access they could establish to the new prez elect.

instead they got - & gleefully recorded - a vintage stream of trademark ess aitch eye tee straight from the frothing mouth itself. 

ouf. this was the donaldski at his impulse-ridden worst. Read the Post for a good laugh.

the Wrap has some photos of journos coming & going in the trump tower elevator lobby. Sad. Hair & jeans look like yesteryear.


https://twitter.com/HowardMortman/status/800761766745473025/photo/1

.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The media angle is a very interesting one. It will probably be 4 years of intense propaganda from the Trump-linked media... remember, for the first time in history the president's office will have its very own media control... truly a *propaganda* arm of the president's office (Breitbart and associated alt-right media). The alt-right news outlets, as batshit-insane as they are, will become the mouthpiece for the Trump administration.

We saw how effective this organization of wacko tabloids were. Now imagine them joined at the hip to the President of the United States of America.

By controlling that message, and by dismissing and locking out main stream media, Trump will be able to shape the narrative. Similar to how Putin (and other dictators) shape their messages: here is big strong man, has stamina, loves country, is always right, etc.

Canadians have to become more vigilant about this. Trump's propaganda arm is going to affect a lot of people here too, as we've seen even on these forums. We're going to get a surge in this kind of irrationality north of the border, and Canadian politicians may also come along and exploit this fervour.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

new dog said:


> I also find when the left here and everywhere is in trouble they mock or try to deflect instead of facing it.


I agree. The American left has to get more organized, and more strategic on this. My leftish American coworkers were very complacent during the whole election.

The Canadian left similarly has to understand this movement in Europe & US, and strategize *now* about what to do once it's here.

The left made the (incorrect) assumption that when you present people with arguments and evidence, that they will come to their own, rational conclusions. That's not what happened. The left has to become more persuasive and do a better job getting their message into society.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

You can't really blame Trump for going to his own media route, after the extremely unfair way the MSM covered him and his opponents.

The left forcing their message and opinions and ignoring all others is the problem. They tell and preach but don't listen, leaving many people out. Their message is also bizarre, on the one hand they are preaching tolerance, non- violent, peace loving but have been conducting and pushing for war everywhere. The Bernie crowd heard and saw this and wanted to stop all the wars and fighting but Hillary cheated him out.


----------



## Haligonian (Nov 3, 2012)

Trump said some crazy stuff during the election process. If any political candidate said the stuff he did, MSM would be seriously criticizing him/her (no matter what political party they represent).


----------



## bass player (Jan 27, 2016)

Haligonian said:


> Trump said some crazy stuff during the election process. If any political candidate said the stuff he did, MSM would be seriously criticizing him/her (no matter what political party they represent).


True. Also, if any other non-Democrat candidate was under FBI investigation, there would also be serious criticism. On Hillary, they were mostly silent.

Today, CNN has played a hidden video of 200 white supremacists praising Trump several times...a shallow attempt to link those disgusting people to Trump. Yet they never once played the hidden video where Democrat campaign people explained how they incited violence at Trump riots, and they never play footage of black people beating up white people.

Fair is fair, but the media is far from fair. Their goal is to promote a message, not report the news.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

bass player said:


> True. Also, if any other non-Democrat candidate was under FBI investigation, there would also be serious criticism. On Hillary, they were mostly silent.


The media that I followed had relentless coverage of the Email server and the Clinton Foundation. My wife barely pays attention to American politics but she was aware of those investigations and allegations.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Right now CNN is on the racism rant like it is some huge issue and will find any sound bite they can as long as it is against Trump or his gang. You can pull up anything on anyone as I said before. If you go to any year from the last hundred plus the KKK and white supremacists were there. All of a sudden it is a big issue like regime change in the middle east to a sudden onslaught of refugees. Then you have the sudden terrible race relations and cops shooting and getting shot everywhere. All this with Obama in the White house.

The left has completely lost it as far as I can see.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I will be impressed with the white supremacy movement when they load up a bus and have a night protest in downtown Detroit.


----------



## s123 (May 3, 2015)

https://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/

Google translate to English
- A brave democrat urges Donald Trump to end the US wars:
German Economic News | Released: 23.11.16 

Donald Trump is obviously looking for solutions to the Syrian war. He welcomed Democratic Congressman Tulsi Gabbard in New York on Tuesday.
Tulsi Gabbard comes from Hawaii and has supported Bernie Sanders. It has long been fighting the US policy of "regime change". 

...In Syria, numerous mercenary troops are fighting with support from Saudi Arabia, other Gulf States and the CIA. 

President Barack Obama had some time ago explained in a remarkable 60 minute interview that he considered the model of the hidden mercenary wars to have failed. 
He has tried in the past months to cooperate with the Russian President Vladimir Putin in Syria, but could not push through the secret services and parts of the general staff. 
Trump wants to bring peace with Syria for Syria.
In a conversation with the New York Times Trump expressed a very positive opinion about Obama.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> I will be impressed with the white supremacy movement when they load up a bus and have a night protest in downtown Detroit.


Exactly. Black Americans won't put up with this garbage. If you wonder why there's aggression in movements like Black Panthers and Black Lives Matter, it's exactly because these "***********" guys have continuously threatened the lives of black Americans for the past 400 years.

It's another reason I'm very unhappy about these alt-right people and support from the Trump camp. These people are *destabilizing* America... nothing good will come from any of this.

NOTE: I do not support any of these groups and I hope they all stay away from me


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

The full transcript of the New York Times interview with President-elect Trump is up: 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/us/politics/trump-new-york-times-interview-transcript.html


----------



## bass player (Jan 27, 2016)

james4beach said:


> Exactly. Black Americans won't put up with this garbage. If you wonder why there's aggression in movements like Black Panthers and Black Lives Matter, it's exactly because these "***********" guys have continuously threatened the lives of black Americans for the past 400 years.


Black Lies Matter thrive because race baiter Obama gave them permission. He publicly supports them, and invites criminal BLM thugs to the Whitehouse, but not the spouses of murdered white cops. Much of the racial harmony won over the last few decades was deliberately destroyed by Obama.



james4beach said:


> It's another reason I'm very unhappy about these alt-right people and support from the Trump camp. These people are *destabilizing* America... nothing good will come from any of this.


No one has done more to destroy America than Obama and the left who choose to view every single issue though a racial or gender filter. The same people who elected a black president twice in a row are now all called racist clan members. Meanwhile, BLM thugs can chant "kill the cops" and "white people must die" and the leftist media remains silent. But, a couple hundred white supremacists hold a meeting and CNN runs the clip all day long.

People voted against Democrat hypocrisy, Democrat lies, and a morally corrupt candidate. The longer that people continue to blame it on racism, the more support they will lose.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

+1 Bass this is what I have been saying all along. In 2005, 2012 or pick a year when white supremacists probably had a meeting no one cared. Suddenly when it seems useful they paste it all over CNN and try to attach it to Trump.


----------



## bass player (Jan 27, 2016)

new dog said:


> +1 Bass this is what I have been saying all along. In 2005, 2012 or pick a year when white supremacists probably had a meeting no one cared. Suddenly when it seems useful they paste it all over CNN and try to attach it to Trump.


Yup. David Duke says he supports Trump and rather than ignore him, the left gives him air time in order to inflame racial tension.

Meanwhile, Robert Byrd who used to recruit for the KKK and voted against every single bill that promoted equality was somehow elected a Democrat senator AFTER this was public knowledge. Bill Clinton praised him at his funeral and Hillary called him one of her mentors. 

But, Trump is the racist...??


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Trump is just the start, even if he wants nothing to do with it and condemns it, remember the racists are coming for everybody.

Obama can sing songs with the BLM and hate white people but that is ok because it comes from the left where racism doesn't exist. 

Meanwhile the left can bring in thousands of people into the country who do hate everyone and will carry their hate plans out. Again however these people are coming under the banner of the left so all crimes can be dismissed.


----------



## SMK (Dec 10, 2015)

bass player said:


> ...the left who choose to view every single issue though a racial or gender filter.* The same people who elected a black president twice in a row are now all called racist clan members.* People voted against Democrat hypocrisy, Democrat lies, and a morally corrupt candidate. The longer that people continue to blame it on racism, the more support they will lose.


+1. Some of these very same people who voted for Obama gave their support to Trump not Hillary Clinton. I guess they became misogynists, too. Trump won with about 7 million votes less than Obama did in 2012. How does that explain racism as David Frum noted? 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/upshot/how-did-trump-win-over-so-many-obama-voters.html


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^ It means Democratic voters stayed home.


----------



## bass player (Jan 27, 2016)

andrewf said:


> ^ It means Democratic voters stayed home.


According to Democrat reasoning, if those people who voted for a person of a certain race in the last 2 elections but didn't vote for a person of a different race this time, then the only possible answer is that they are racist. And since less black people turned out this election, then that proves that black people are racist.

See what happens when progressive reasoning and talking points are used to explain progressive actions?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^That's great. I'm not a Democrat or progressive.


----------

