Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
0
Comments
2012
Joined
12 mo. ago

  • Why the fuck would anyone agree to any of this fuck's demands...especially after he started the whole conflict that he's using to extort them? This is absolutely insane.

  • When I was a teenager, I took a lifeguard training course at the local swimming pool. This was explained to us, as being far more common than you might imagine. Full grown adults can and do, drown in the shallow end of the kiddie pool, all the time. It happens so often, that they make a point of telling young lifeguards how often it happens, so they don't overlook the shallow end of the kiddie pool, just because there are nothing but adults there at the moment.

  • It's actually both branches, since law enforcement falls under the executive. Canadian law has been directly aligned with international law for decades. This means that if Netanyahu ever set foot on Canadian soil, the RCMP would be obligated to arrest him.

    However, I would assume they would probably hand him over to the Hague for prosecution, rather than try him in Canada...even though they have the legal authority to do so.

  • My point was that this is not a decision that Carney can make, unilaterally. By law, Canada is obligated to arrest him if he comes to Canada. Which means "Carney being Carney" has nothing to do with it. Canada would have to not only change its domestic laws...they would have to redefine their alignment with international laws.

  • It isn't an option. Canada would have to withdraw their support for the ICC, if they were to ignore one of their rulings. Carney can't just decide to do that on his own. It would need to be legislated.

  • I think you're adding context that wouldn't exist in a real world situation.

    If a crazy guy attacks you on the street, would you just stand there and let him kill you because of all those societal consequences that are working against him? If you just stand there and let him kill you, do those things go away?

    Because unless you defending yourself is somehow the reason all those things happen to him, then none of those.things should have any impact on your choice to either live or die. Your choice is still binary.

    I get what you're saying about trying to do something preventative to stop the violence from occurring, and that is a valid point. But it also completely ignores the violence itself. When you are faced with an imminent threat to your physical safety, that you can't run from...doing nothing is the worst thing you can do.

    If your relative decided to actually do something to you or your family...would you have just stood there watching as he hurt them? Would you have just let him hurt you, all because rehab was a possible option?

    That's the most extreme example of one-on-one violence. Them, or the ones you love. Them, or you.

    As for fascists...even scaled up to the level of a country, it's the same choice. When the Nazis invaded a country, everyone living there was in one of two possible positions....you were either standing there watching your neighbors get rounded up, or you were the one getting rounded up.

    If someone asks you to fight back to save yourself and your neighbors...no...they aren't the ones doing you harm. The invading force that's threatening your life, and the lives of those around you, is. You can either stand there and watch it happen, hoping it doesn't happen to you...or you can try to stop them before it does.

    That's the threat of fascism.

  • Technically, when it comes to violence, it is that simple. There is the side attacking you...and you.

    When it comes to fascism, it's also that simple. You are either "with them" or you are on their list of eventual targets. Unless you do something to stop them, it's really just a matter of time before they get around to attacking you too.

  • This executive order states otherwise.

    Marco Rubio is being completely disingenuous about the US blockade. The US is conditioning oil sales to private entities only. Meaning, no oil can be provided for any public sector infrastructure. They are doing this to try and force Cuba to privatize all of its essential infrastructure...effectively undermining any "Socialist" programs in the country. This includes hospitals, schools, water and sewage management, electricity...everything.

    This is how he can say, with a straight face, that it's the Cuban government's fault that people there are without fuel. Technically, all they have to do to let the oil through...is to sell off all of their public assets to private entities. Easy peasy.

    It's like putting a gun to someone's head and telling them they have a choice. Either do what I say, or die.

    But, sure. It's totally the Cuban government's fault that this is happening.

  • me_irl

    Jump
  • ADHD.

  • Ew.

  • The universe must really love me. I know, because it's always trying to fuck me.

  • Aah. I missed this part on my first reading...

    Once a judge approves surveillance, police have carte blanche on methods.

    This would be used on suspects that they have a warrant to investigate.

  • That type of investigation would still require a warrant or exigent circumstances at the minimum. Otherwise it's just fishing...which is a violation of Canada's privacy laws. They can't just go rooting through someone's phone looking for a reason to pursue further investigation.

  • Good luck making that stand up in court. They may as well be handing out "get-out-of-jail-free" cards.

  • Don't worry, folks...AIPAC had a chance to go through the data first, and they found nothing wrong with the conclusions made in this report.

    10/10 AIPAC approved.

  • It's way past time to move the UN headquarters to a more hospitable country.

  • I mean, this case could be used to set the precedent that killing foreign civilians without due process should land the entire chain of command in prison for murder. Right?

    I mean, if that's the outcome they're really trying to achieve in court, then maybe that also applies to Trump and Hegseth and half a dozen other US officials responsible for the recent boat strikes in the Caribbean? Right?

    I mean, Castro might be guilty of four(?) counts? But, Trump and his administration would be guilty of hundreds. Right?

  • Yeah. If I had one of those ugly pieces of crap, I'd drive it into a lake too.

  • They're just butt-hurt that Canada isn't spending the extra money on US weapons. This whole "military spending" thing is nothing but a shakedown to get allies to increase weapons purchases from US manufacturers.