Pompeo says Canada's claim to the Northwest Passage is 'illegitimate'


coldstream
-1
#61
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

And how is heterosexual promiscuity any less harmful?

So why do you single out homosexual acts and ignore heterosexual promiscuity?

The median number of lifetime sexual partners for a male heterosexual in the West is 4. Half have more, half that or less. The median number for a practicing homosexual male is around 400. Many of those are transient and anonymous. You must realize this represents a completely different category of emotional character and commitment.

It's the difference between sowing some wild oats and completely losing your identity in futile promiscuity. Although, in fairness, extremes exist in both.
Last edited by coldstream; 2 weeks ago at 12:53 PM..
 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
Gilgamesh
+1
#62
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

Andrew Scheer has the answer for this.

More bag licking.

What a stupid post.
 
Hoid
#63
Not really

He just came out with yet another conservative plan to buy American support by buying American weapons.

No costing of course

It would be too much to ask a conservative to put numbers to anything.
 
White_Unifier
#64
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstream View Post

It can be just as destructive. It seems to be a more transient condition for most young people who sew their wild oats and go on to create monogamous, traditional families with children. Not many committed homosexuals do that.

Which is more likely to lead to abortions?
 
White_Unifier
+2
#65
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstream View Post

The median number of lifetime sexual partners for a male heterosexual in the West is 4. Half have more, half that or less. The median number for a practicing homosexual male is around 400. Many of those are transient and anonymous. You must realize this represents a completely different category of emotional character and commitment.
It's the difference between sowing some wild oats and completely losing your identity in futile promiscuity. Although, in fairness, extremes exist in both.

Do you have a link for that? Putting married people aside, I would bet that heterosexual singles are just as promiscuous as homosexual singles and pose just as much of a danger to public health.
 
petros
+1
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by Johnnny View Post

A North West Passage path will be found and it will be international. Sucks but that's the most likely scenario

Transit fees based on who puts in the most for military/coast guard or by the KM?

By the time that ever passed environmental stupidity the Russian Navy would already have a base in Churchill.
 
captain morgan
+1
#67
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Transit fees based on who puts in the most for military/coast guard or by the KM?

By the time that ever passed environmental stupidity the Russian Navy would already have a base in Churchill.


Factor in the historical costs and even Trump will piss his pants
 
Curious Cdn
#68
We were headed to having a Naval Base in the Arctic but the Liberals pared it back to a re-fueling dump. It makes lots of geopolitical sense to base the 6 AOPS ships in Nanisivik and somewhere on the Western approaches to the Northwest Passage than down in Halifax and Esquimalt.

Use it or lose it.
 
taxslave
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by Gilgamesh View Post

What a stupid post.

Look at the source.
 
Curious Cdn
#70
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

Nope.
Looking at more production

Fan-fracking fantastic!
 
spilledthebeer
#71
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

Not really

He just came out with yet another conservative plan to buy American support by buying American weapons.

No costing of course

It would be too much to ask a conservative to put numbers to anything.






HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And yet NO LIE-beral will tell us what it will cost to surrender to RED CHINA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!


No LIE-beral will discuss PIERRE TRUDEAU and his book "Two Innocents in Red China"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And in his book Pierre heaped fawning praise on Chinese Chairman Mao for what Pierre called Mao`s "genius in rushing 30 million Chinese to the gallows"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!


What price do LIE-berals put onto craven surrender to a Communist hard line regime that thinks MURDERING MILLIONS of its own



citizens for reasons of political expediency........................................ .................


is GOOD GOVT POLICY??????????????????????????????????
 
Gilgamesh
+1
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

Link?

Psychology is certainly not a hard science. In fact it isn't a scence at all. If 'they' predict a break up of the USA, that almost guarantees it ain'ta gonna happen.

Unlike our shabby 4th rate Charter, the U.S Constitution has strength and resilience. Hate to break the news to all you pathetic America haters, but they are doing just fine. Certainly better than at many other times in their history.
 
Curious Cdn
#73
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

I doubt she even touches him

Maybe, she's seen his tax returns.
 
taxslave
#74
Is Pompeo ligitimate?
 
Curious Cdn
+1
#75
Quote: Originally Posted by Gilgamesh View Post

Psychology is certainly not a hard science. In fact it isn't a scence at all. If 'they' predict a break up of the USA, that almost guarantees it ain'ta gonna happen.
Unlike our shabby 4th rate Charter, the U.S Constitution has strength and resilience. Hate to break the news to all you pathetic America haters, but they are doing just fine. Certainly better than at many other times in their history.

The Great Constitution isn't doing s very good job of preventing a fascist demagogue from seizing power, there.
 
taxslave
#76
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

The Great Constitution isn't doing s very good job of preventing a fascist demagogue from seizing power, there.

Clintions are still on the outside looking in so it must be working.
 
Hoid
#77
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

The Great Constitution isn't doing s very good job of preventing a fascist demagogue from seizing power, there.

in fact the checks and balances seem to add up to nothing.
 
spilledthebeer
#78
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

The Great Constitution isn't doing s very good job of preventing a fascist demagogue from seizing power, there.




Oh Comrade Curious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I suppose you are now carefully studying the Hilary Clinton version of FAILED DEMOCRACY...............................


in a VAIN hope of tuning it up enough to get Joe Clark.......................WHO??????????????????


Back into power????????????????????????????????????



As for FASCISTS in Canada............................................


maybe I better REMIND YOU of the cabal of Brave New World CENSORS operating at our Vaunted CBC/ Communist Broadcasting Corp..............................................


as they SYSTEMATICALLY LIE about so called "fair use" policy in a ruthless effort to SILENCE any view they disapprove of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The TRUE FASCISTS are Loonie Leftist LIE-beral loving Cdn News media Censors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!








Here is an older article illustrating civil service union Hog greed and just how much support they are prepared to give to LIE-berals in exchange for gravy. With some comments of my own in brackets):

Hubert Lacroix, the president of the CBC, recently placed the future of the Canada’s national public broadcaster on the electoral map with comments aimed at sparking a renewed debate on future funding models. Lacroix disputed claims that low ratings are to blame for the CBC’s financial struggles, instead pointing to the need to consider alternative fee schemes, including new levies on Internet providers or supplementary charges on television purchases.

(So greedy CBC Hogs want to pick the pockets of other businesses in order to salvage their own suddenly shaky place on the LIE-beral gravy train! Why should internet providers be made to pay because their viewers and users have chosen to TURN OFF CBC tv and radio? And considering how widely and rapidly the CBC article mocking the LIE-beral MyDemocracy website as “a box of doughnuts” circulated- it is entirely CLEAR that Cdns will listen to CBC IF it ever finds anything else relevant to say! And that is the trouble- CBC is so busy spouting LIE-beral propaganda that it as NOTHING REAL to say!)

While disagreement over CBC funding is as old as the broadcaster itself, the more uncomfortable discussion for the CBC is its coverage of the 2015 election campaign — particularly its approach to national debates and political party advertising — which raises troubling questions about its relevance in the current media environment.

(Meaning the 2015 federal election that brought Our idiot Boy Justin to power- which featured regular media efforts to smear Conservatives and aid Our idiot Boy and his moronic minons!)

Most would agree that the CBC features an excellent group of reporters and boasts insightful analysts for its panel discussions. However, rather than working to make itself an invaluable resource for the election, the CBC has been unnecessarily restrictive in its broadcasting choices and in the use of its content.

The problem is obvious- CBC DOES NOT WANT informed voters- it wants LIE-beral voters! It jumped on the MyDemocracy website as a one off chance to temporarily show its faux impartiality- about a subject that other media was so scornful of that CBC felt compelled to jump on the band wagon in an effort to cover its own ass!)

The most puzzling decision has been its refusal to broadcast debates hosted by other organizations. The CBC may be disappointed with the debate approach adopted by the political parties in this campaign, but that does not change the sense that if the national public broadcaster does not air programs in the national public interest, it calls into question the very need for a public broadcaster. Indeed, the CBC seems to have cut its nose off to spite its face by doing its best to prove its critics right.

(CBC is being typically Hoggish in refusing to accept debate programing that it did not produce and does not approve of because it does not contain LIE-beral bias! LIE-berals consider suitable debate to be a series of easy questions lobbed gently at them so they can knock it out of the park! Real debate with actually facts is something LIE-berals increasingly SHUN! CBC recognizes- as all Hogs do- that LIE-beral victory- meaning MORE GRAVY- is also a win for CBC- thus CBC DOES NOT WANT any critical examination of LIE-beral policy- for fear of discovering the ROT at its heart!)

The CBC’s odd coverage choices are not limited to the missing debates. Its use of video clips from the debates has also been unnecessarily restrictive. For example, before analyzing the recent Munk debates on the “At Issue” panel, host Peter Mansbridge warned viewers that “we are limited with the excerpts with the amount we are allowed to show.” A similar warning preceded the discussion at other debates.

Yet the reality is that there was no need to be restrictive in the use of video clips. Canadian copyright law permits the use of copyrighted works without permission as part of the fair dealing clause. News reporting is one of the enumerated purposes and even expanded clips would easily qualify under a fair dealing analysis.

(So CBC lied about its policy of deliberately limiting public debate!)

(HEY THERE JAMES BONDO- I DO HOPE YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD about using news clips and such AS THIS DOES MAKE YOU LOOK A FOOL!!!!! And it works for print media as well so long as the real author is given full credit as I always DO! And there is a further issue I am careful with- and that is NOT to put words into the mouth of another writer- it is for this reason that I always make it known that my comments are in brackets when I add words to an article!)

All news organizations are free to use as much of the video from debates as necessary to highlight key moments and positions of each leader. To suggest that the law creates significant limits on the ability to show debate clips is inaccurate.

In fact, the CBC’s misreading of the law is not limited to the use of clips within its news broadcasts.

Just prior to the election call, it asked YouTube and Facebook to remove a Conservative campaign advertisement that used clips from a CBC interview with Liberal leader Justin Trudeau. To support its takedown claim, the CBC argued that “no one – no individual candidate or political party, and no government, corporation or NGO – may re-use our creative and copyrighted property without our permission. This includes our brands, our talent and our content.”

That too is wrong.

(OH? MORE CBC/LIE-beral censorship and deliberate mis-representation of law and facts? And it relates to CBC being wrong about its crap on a paying site! Copyright law covering political comment on a FREE/NON profit site like this is even LOOSER! You have made yourself look foolish as usual!)

The law features important limitations on the rights of all copyright holders and all media organizations regularly rely on them in their reporting. The limits of copyright extend to campaign commercials and there is little that the CBC- or anyone else- can do about it.

With its rejection of the national debates, its limited use of debate clips and its attempts to limit re-use of its broadcast content, Canada’s national public broadcaster has marginalized itself during the election campaign at the very time that it could be demonstrating its relevance to the national political coverage.

(Worse- CBC has been caught deliberately trying to stack voter choice! Just as Our idiot Boy is trying to take over and paralyze our parliament with his idiot electoral reform!)

Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law.

(Geist has done us a favour by illustrating the ugly bias that CBC is trying to hide!)
 
Curious Cdn
#79
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

in fact the checks and balances seem to add up to nothing.

It is a failed ideal.
 
Hoid
#80
or was just fake news all along
 
Jinentonix
+1
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by Hoid View Post

Not really
He just came out with yet another conservative plan to buy American support by buying American weapons.
No costing of course
It would be too much to ask a conservative to put numbers to anything.

Awww, don't sweat it cupcake. Budgets balance themselves.
 
Serryah
#82
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstream View Post

This should come as no real surprise to any guys here. Because virtually all young men at some point in their lives will be the target of an unsolicited homosexual advance. That is the state of the condition. The first thing that goes with the practicing homosexual is any respect for the borders, the ethics or the personal space of others.


Oh my Gods...


Those poor Heterosexual MEN! Having to deal with UNWANTED ADVANCES for intimacy? For having people check them out like they're meat! Oh the tragedy...


Maybe they should look at themselves and how they treat women the same way, then call us when they figure it out that it's all disgusting and needs to stop, and will even work towards stopping such BS.


BTW, the 'lowest' of the GLBT+ sphere is sometimes not gays or lesbians, but Bi's. Cause, you know, they can't make up their minds'.
 
taxslave
#83
Quote: Originally Posted by Serryah View Post

Oh my Gods...
Those poor Heterosexual MEN! Having to deal with UNWANTED ADVANCES for intimacy? For having people check them out like they're meat! Oh the tragedy...
Maybe they should look at themselves and how they treat women the same way, then call us when they figure it out that it's all disgusting and needs to stop, and will even work towards stopping such BS.
BTW, the 'lowest' of the GLBT+ sphere is sometimes not gays or lesbians, but Bi's. Cause, you know, they can't make up their minds'.

Bis have the most fun in a clump hump.
 
spilledthebeer
#84
Quote: Originally Posted by Serryah View Post

Oh my Gods...


Those poor Heterosexual MEN! Having to deal with UNWANTED ADVANCES for intimacy? For having people check them out like they're meat! Oh the tragedy...


Maybe they should look at themselves and how they treat women the same way, then call us when they figure it out that it's all disgusting and needs to stop, and will even work towards stopping such BS.


BTW, the 'lowest' of the GLBT+ sphere is sometimes not gays or lesbians, but Bi's. Cause, you know, they can't make up their minds'.




HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I am reminded of the club announcer in the old movie "kinky boots'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!


"Ladies and gentlemen......................................... ....


boys and girls............................................. ........


and those of you who have YET to make up your minds"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


What a wonderful summary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!

 
Curious Cdn
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

Bis have the most fun in a clump hump.

What's that?

The Seminary?
 
coldstream
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by Serryah View Post

BTW, the 'lowest' of the GLBT+ sphere is sometimes not gays or lesbians, but Bi's. Cause, you know, they can't make up their minds'.

You're behind the times, Serryah. They keep adding to the acronym. The latest is LGBTQIA, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual & allied. Good grief couldn't they have come up with something simpler like FDD fags, dykes, degenerates that would encompass all. I'm all for that type of 'inclusion'.
Last edited by coldstream; 6 days ago at 01:27 PM..
 
MHz
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstream View Post

You're behind the times,Serryah. They keep adding to the acronym. The latest is LGBTQIA, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual & allied. Good grief couldn't they have come up with something simpler like FDD fags, dykes, degenerates that would encompass all. I'm all for that type of 'inclusion'.

'Loser' was already taken by a group that wishes to remain anonymous for obvious reasons.
 
taxslave
#88
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

What's that?
The Seminary?

Ask your mother.
 
Curious Cdn
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

Ask your mother.

My now long dead mother was the last of the prudish Victorians.
 
spilledthebeer
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstream View Post

You're behind the times, Serryah. They keep adding to the acronym. The latest is LGBTQIA, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual & allied. Good grief couldn't they have come up with something simpler like FDD fags, dykes, degenerates that would encompass all. I'm all for that type of 'inclusion'.






"Ladies and gentlemen......................................... ...


boys and girls.......................................


and those of you........................................


who have yet to make up your minds"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Welcoming speech from the MC at a very "eclectic" sort of club in the old movie "Kinky Boots"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!