Four of the five Canadian Forces personnel who said they were members of the group the Proud Boys and disrupted a Mi'kmaq ceremony in Halifax on July 1 have been allowed to return to their regular duties.
Rear-Admiral John Newton said following the military police's investigation no charges would be laid against the members, who served in both the army and navy.
He said one of the five members has since left the military of his own accord, a process that started before the Canada Day incident and was unrelated to it.
But then I was tempered.
Newton said the four remaining members are now being monitored and are on probation, which they must pass to continue with the military.
He wouldn't spell out the exact disciplinary measures the members have faced but said they were removed from their workplaces and weren't allowed to handle classified material. He said they are experiencing professional setbacks and personal consequences in their units and the community.
None of the men received demotions or were moved as a result of the harassing behaviour. Newton said being on probation limits what they can accomplish professionally.
Speaking to reporters, Newton defended the military's actions, saying "this is not lightweight punishment. These non-commission members who are early in their career, have remorse."
"This is a permanent mark on a member's record," he said Thursday afternoon. "Any trespass against those conditions, any repeat leads to their release from the Canadian Armed Forces, or it's good potential depending on those circumstances, will lead to their release."
And then I kinda saw their point of view, I guess.
Newton said he interviewed the men personally and "saw their acknowledgement, their desire, their intent to adhere to the conditions."
He also said the four are expected to learn from their "monumentally poor judgment."
"I don't have a huge surplus of people in the Canadian Armed Forces who we've already spent million of dollars training, who in their mistake and in this learning ... will work to restore the trust between them and the chain of command. They will be a good investment in the long term."
I mean, I hate these right-wing monsters and I feel they have no place in our military or our society. But if they are genuine in their remorse and their acknowledgement this was a mistake, then we shouldn't cast them out and isolate them since that will only accelerate their radicalization, we should help them grow and become better people while keeping our eyes open in case this is just a ruse. Which it sounds like exactly what the military is doing. And the utilitarian argument does hold water - if we spend millions of taxpayer money training the few volunteers we get and then cast them out the moment they make a (admittedly major) mistake, then we'll have a very expensive and understaffed military.
What they did was not a "mistake", or a "youthful indescretion", it was a hate crime. Why shouldn't they have been given big chicken dinners all around?
its cause the power companies are or used to be called "Ontario Hydro" or "BC Hydro" so it kinda makes sense to say hydro bill. Because Hydro is who you are paying.
Of course these days in Ontario its mostly a legacy thing, but there is still Hydro One and Toronto Hydro, possibly some others. But generally you are paying some company that doesn't have "hydro" in its name anymore.
Four of the five Canadian Forces personnel who said they were members of the group the Proud Boys and disrupted a Mi'kmaq ceremony in Halifax on July 1 have been allowed to return to their regular duties.
Rear-Admiral John Newton said following the military police's investigation no charges would be laid against the members, who served in both the army and navy.
He said one of the five members has since left the military of his own accord, a process that started before the Canada Day incident and was unrelated to it.
But then I was tempered.
Newton said the four remaining members are now being monitored and are on probation, which they must pass to continue with the military.
He wouldn't spell out the exact disciplinary measures the members have faced but said they were removed from their workplaces and weren't allowed to handle classified material. He said they are experiencing professional setbacks and personal consequences in their units and the community.
None of the men received demotions or were moved as a result of the harassing behaviour. Newton said being on probation limits what they can accomplish professionally.
Speaking to reporters, Newton defended the military's actions, saying "this is not lightweight punishment. These non-commission members who are early in their career, have remorse."
"This is a permanent mark on a member's record," he said Thursday afternoon. "Any trespass against those conditions, any repeat leads to their release from the Canadian Armed Forces, or it's good potential depending on those circumstances, will lead to their release."
And then I kinda saw their point of view, I guess.
Newton said he interviewed the men personally and "saw their acknowledgement, their desire, their intent to adhere to the conditions."
He also said the four are expected to learn from their "monumentally poor judgment."
"I don't have a huge surplus of people in the Canadian Armed Forces who we've already spent million of dollars training, who in their mistake and in this learning ... will work to restore the trust between them and the chain of command. They will be a good investment in the long term."
I mean, I hate these right-wing monsters and I feel they have no place in our military or our society. But if they are genuine in their remorse and their acknowledgement this was a mistake, then we shouldn't cast them out and isolate them since that will only accelerate their radicalization, we should help them grow and become better people while keeping our eyes open in case this is just a ruse. Which it sounds like exactly what the military is doing. And the utilitarian argument does hold water - if we spend millions of taxpayer money training the few volunteers we get and then cast them out the moment they make a (admittedly major) mistake, then we'll have a very expensive and understaffed military.
What they did was not a "mistake", or a "youthful indescretion", it was a hate crime. Why shouldn't they have been given big chicken dinners all around?
Which part of what they did was a hate crime? I'm not aware of anything they did that was a crime at all, much less a hate crime. I thought they showed up to an event with their goofy uniforms and flags, exchanged some words with the people at the event, and then left. I suppose it's possible that some of the words exchanged could constitute hate speech. I haven't seen any reporting to that effect, maybe I just missed it.
0
Options
BouwsTWanna come to a super soft birthday party?Registered Userregular
I've never heard the term bunnyhug before, which is odd, because I know people from Saskatchewan, and I've spent most of my life in southern Alberta. You'd think proximity would be a factor.
Well we can see them doing their thing over there, but the sound doesn't travel that far.
It's muffled by too much Vi-Co consumption.
I don't know what a 40- or 60-pounder is and I live a lot closer to Alberta than Ontario. What are they? Seems like it might have to do with 40 and 66 oz bottles of liquor?
Ding ding, you're right. I think it's a prairie thing, but I've heard the term in parts of BC too.
I'm not sure but I always figured it was co-opted from the military, as they used to measure artillery munitions in poundage (example). I just assumed it was due to the vague shape of the bottles being shell-like.
Between you and me, Peggy, I smoked this Juul and it did UNTHINKABLE things to my mind and body...
Four of the five Canadian Forces personnel who said they were members of the group the Proud Boys and disrupted a Mi'kmaq ceremony in Halifax on July 1 have been allowed to return to their regular duties.
Rear-Admiral John Newton said following the military police's investigation no charges would be laid against the members, who served in both the army and navy.
He said one of the five members has since left the military of his own accord, a process that started before the Canada Day incident and was unrelated to it.
But then I was tempered.
Newton said the four remaining members are now being monitored and are on probation, which they must pass to continue with the military.
He wouldn't spell out the exact disciplinary measures the members have faced but said they were removed from their workplaces and weren't allowed to handle classified material. He said they are experiencing professional setbacks and personal consequences in their units and the community.
None of the men received demotions or were moved as a result of the harassing behaviour. Newton said being on probation limits what they can accomplish professionally.
Speaking to reporters, Newton defended the military's actions, saying "this is not lightweight punishment. These non-commission members who are early in their career, have remorse."
"This is a permanent mark on a member's record," he said Thursday afternoon. "Any trespass against those conditions, any repeat leads to their release from the Canadian Armed Forces, or it's good potential depending on those circumstances, will lead to their release."
And then I kinda saw their point of view, I guess.
Newton said he interviewed the men personally and "saw their acknowledgement, their desire, their intent to adhere to the conditions."
He also said the four are expected to learn from their "monumentally poor judgment."
"I don't have a huge surplus of people in the Canadian Armed Forces who we've already spent million of dollars training, who in their mistake and in this learning ... will work to restore the trust between them and the chain of command. They will be a good investment in the long term."
I mean, I hate these right-wing monsters and I feel they have no place in our military or our society. But if they are genuine in their remorse and their acknowledgement this was a mistake, then we shouldn't cast them out and isolate them since that will only accelerate their radicalization, we should help them grow and become better people while keeping our eyes open in case this is just a ruse. Which it sounds like exactly what the military is doing. And the utilitarian argument does hold water - if we spend millions of taxpayer money training the few volunteers we get and then cast them out the moment they make a (admittedly major) mistake, then we'll have a very expensive and understaffed military.
What they did was not a "mistake", or a "youthful indescretion", it was a hate crime. Why shouldn't they have been given big chicken dinners all around?
Which part of what they did was a hate crime? I'm not aware of anything they did that was a crime at all, much less a hate crime. I thought they showed up to an event with their goofy uniforms and flags, exchanged some words with the people at the event, and then left. I suppose it's possible that some of the words exchanged could constitute hate speech. I haven't seen any reporting to that effect, maybe I just missed it.
I thought that their disruption was more physical than it was. But beyond that, it's grating whenever gooseshit like this gets called a "mistake", because of all the framing around that word, and how it winds up removing responsibility from the people involved. Walking up to a group of Native people who are engaging in their own form of free speech and protest and attacking them verbally because you don't like that they're pointing out that the notable figures of history had a dark side is not a fucking mistake, and we should not use that word to describe it.
I've never heard the term bunnyhug before, which is odd, because I know people from Saskatchewan, and I've spent most of my life in southern Alberta. You'd think proximity would be a factor.
Well we can see them doing their thing over there, but the sound doesn't travel that far.
It's muffled by too much Vi-Co consumption.
I don't know what a 40- or 60-pounder is and I live a lot closer to Alberta than Ontario. What are they? Seems like it might have to do with 40 and 66 oz bottles of liquor?
Ding ding, you're right. I think it's a prairie thing, but I've heard the term in parts of BC too.
I'm not sure but I always figured it was co-opted from the military, as they used to measure artillery munitions in poundage (example). I just assumed it was due to the vague shape of the bottles being shell-like.
Hunh never heard that theory before. I always thought it was some vague relation to pounding back 40 ounces.
Four of the five Canadian Forces personnel who said they were members of the group the Proud Boys and disrupted a Mi'kmaq ceremony in Halifax on July 1 have been allowed to return to their regular duties.
Rear-Admiral John Newton said following the military police's investigation no charges would be laid against the members, who served in both the army and navy.
He said one of the five members has since left the military of his own accord, a process that started before the Canada Day incident and was unrelated to it.
But then I was tempered.
Newton said the four remaining members are now being monitored and are on probation, which they must pass to continue with the military.
He wouldn't spell out the exact disciplinary measures the members have faced but said they were removed from their workplaces and weren't allowed to handle classified material. He said they are experiencing professional setbacks and personal consequences in their units and the community.
None of the men received demotions or were moved as a result of the harassing behaviour. Newton said being on probation limits what they can accomplish professionally.
Speaking to reporters, Newton defended the military's actions, saying "this is not lightweight punishment. These non-commission members who are early in their career, have remorse."
"This is a permanent mark on a member's record," he said Thursday afternoon. "Any trespass against those conditions, any repeat leads to their release from the Canadian Armed Forces, or it's good potential depending on those circumstances, will lead to their release."
And then I kinda saw their point of view, I guess.
Newton said he interviewed the men personally and "saw their acknowledgement, their desire, their intent to adhere to the conditions."
He also said the four are expected to learn from their "monumentally poor judgment."
"I don't have a huge surplus of people in the Canadian Armed Forces who we've already spent million of dollars training, who in their mistake and in this learning ... will work to restore the trust between them and the chain of command. They will be a good investment in the long term."
I mean, I hate these right-wing monsters and I feel they have no place in our military or our society. But if they are genuine in their remorse and their acknowledgement this was a mistake, then we shouldn't cast them out and isolate them since that will only accelerate their radicalization, we should help them grow and become better people while keeping our eyes open in case this is just a ruse. Which it sounds like exactly what the military is doing. And the utilitarian argument does hold water - if we spend millions of taxpayer money training the few volunteers we get and then cast them out the moment they make a (admittedly major) mistake, then we'll have a very expensive and understaffed military.
What they did was not a "mistake", or a "youthful indescretion", it was a hate crime. Why shouldn't they have been given big chicken dinners all around?
I'd reckon they're going to be doing push-ups until they love everything they currently hate.
Decius on
I never finish anyth
0
Options
BouwsTWanna come to a super soft birthday party?Registered Userregular
I've never heard the term bunnyhug before, which is odd, because I know people from Saskatchewan, and I've spent most of my life in southern Alberta. You'd think proximity would be a factor.
Well we can see them doing their thing over there, but the sound doesn't travel that far.
It's muffled by too much Vi-Co consumption.
I don't know what a 40- or 60-pounder is and I live a lot closer to Alberta than Ontario. What are they? Seems like it might have to do with 40 and 66 oz bottles of liquor?
Ding ding, you're right. I think it's a prairie thing, but I've heard the term in parts of BC too.
I'm not sure but I always figured it was co-opted from the military, as they used to measure artillery munitions in poundage (example). I just assumed it was due to the vague shape of the bottles being shell-like.
Hunh never heard that theory before. I always thought it was some vague relation to pounding back 40 ounces.
Ya, definitely the number they say denotes the volume in US fl oz, but as a kid I could not think of any other reason to use the word "pounder" to identify a bottle. I fell upon the artillery explanation in my head, it made enough sense that I never gave it a second thought after, lol.
Between you and me, Peggy, I smoked this Juul and it did UNTHINKABLE things to my mind and body...
Is there some reason Norway would be involved?
Do they have some innovative ideas vis a vis rubber balls that merits their name being attached to this schoolyard sport?
What's interesting is that this action is Kadyrov-approved: "This is nonsense. We don't have those kinds of people here. We don't have any gays. If there are any, take them to Canada,"
I literally have no idea what soccer baseball/kickball even is.
Streets were used for hockey in the winter, and street hockey in the summer.
Soccer baseball is pretty much what it says on the tin - you play it on a baseball diamond, but instead of hitting a ball with a bat the pitcher rolls a soccer ball to a kicker. We played it at recess all the time in elementary school.
Kickball is what very wrong heathens call it.
Same, that's the game of my childhood school lunchtimes.
Except in Québec, we called it "ballon canadien" for some reason.
We call it that because the original game was "Ballon Chasseur" ("hunting ball", basically), then there was a variation on that game invented, and it was called "Ballon Chinois" (Chinese ball"), probably because it alliterated with "Chasseur", and then there were a whole bunch of variations on that game named after various Asian countries ("Ballon japonais", "Ballon vietnamien", etc). So I guess the "Ballon" + nationality stuck somehow, and now they call different ball games by different nationalities.
We also played soccer baseball, and we tried coming up with different names for it, but nothing besides "soccer baseball" stuck.
When I saw that picture, I thought it was just referring to the standard soccer/football game. I was wondering what fucking world I live in where that game is called here "soccer baseball". Then reading all the posts and... Oh, California kickball!
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
Is there some reason Norway would be involved?
Do they have some innovative ideas vis a vis rubber balls that merits their name being attached to this schoolyard sport?
i do not know
0
Options
JeanHeartbroken papa bearGatineau, QuébecRegistered Userregular
I literally have no idea what soccer baseball/kickball even is.
Streets were used for hockey in the winter, and street hockey in the summer.
Soccer baseball is pretty much what it says on the tin - you play it on a baseball diamond, but instead of hitting a ball with a bat the pitcher rolls a soccer ball to a kicker. We played it at recess all the time in elementary school.
Kickball is what very wrong heathens call it.
Same, that's the game of my childhood school lunchtimes.
Except in Québec, we called it "ballon canadien" for some reason.
We call it that because the original game was "Ballon Chasseur" ("hunting ball", basically), then there was a variation on that game invented, and it was called "Ballon Chinois" (Chinese ball"), probably because it alliterated with "Chasseur", and then there were a whole bunch of variations on that game named after various Asian countries ("Ballon japonais", "Ballon vietnamien", etc). So I guess the "Ballon" + nationality stuck somehow, and now they call different ball games by different nationalities.
We also played soccer baseball, and we tried coming up with different names for it, but nothing besides "soccer baseball" stuck.
This was 15-20 years ago, mind.
I played lot of ballon chasseur as a kid but I never heard of balon japonais or any ballon ''insert random country here''.
"You won't destroy us, You won't destroy our democracy. We are a small but proud nation. No one can bomb us to silence. No one can scare us from being Norway. This evening and tonight, we'll take care of each other. That's what we do best when attacked'' - Jens Stoltenberg
Sez the party that wildly celebrated their adopting support for gay marriage in (read: removing their opposition to gay marriage from) their official party platform last year... with an exception carved out for religious objectors to gay marriage.
"Look at us! We're not homophobic bigots* any more!"
Sez the party that wildly celebrated their adopting support for gay marriage in (read: removing their opposition to gay marriage from) their official party platform last year... with an exception carved out for religious objectors to gay marriage.
"Look at us! We're not homophobic bigots* any more!"
* Some exceptions may apply.
The CPC: proudly not officially raging homophobes since 2016.
Kellie Leitch, Michael Chong and Maxime Bernier will join members of LGBTory Canada, an advocacy group that championed overturning the party's traditional definition of marriage. That change to the party's constitution, enacted at the party's convention in Vancouver, is just part of a recent Tory shift on gay rights.
"I think the leadership candidates want to send a message that they're turning the page on these divisive social issues," Eric Lorenzen, an executive member of LGBTory, said in an interview with CBC News. "I think that the party is trying to portray a more inclusive, tolerant and diverse face to the public. We don't have to be quiet about these issues anymore. It's OK to march."
Lorenzen said there's a markedly different tone on LGBT issues since the party's defeat last October, and the same-sex marriage vote in May, calling this year a turning point.
A motion to reopen the same-sex marriage debate was easily defeated in Parliament on Thursday, as expected.
MPs voted 175-123 against the controversial motion tabled by the ruling Conservatives.
...
Since Prime Minister Stephen Harper said a free vote— promised during January's general election campaign— would settle the matter, the vote should put an end to parliamentary wrangling about same-sex marriage.
...
Liberals called this most recent motion hollow because, even if it had passed, it would not have struck down the right of gays to marry.
Most constitutional lawyers have said the only way the Tories could change the law would be to invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, something Harper has said he would not do.
The Conservative Party of Canada: We're good people, but only minimally as good as we are forced to be!
Great pride weekend here in cowtown. Got to watch a fun parade with a procession of rainbow storm troupers and rainbow jawas, gave blood, had rainbow pancakes, had a great discussion with two off duty lesbian police officers about the whole pride/police issues (they are confident it will be solved next year leadership on both ends are working together) and got to speak with premier Notley for a minute as the parade was held up. The first time I got to speak to a premier and she was wearing rainbow boa's/ crazy rainbow fuzzy leggings and was accompanied by two giant leather daddies... I wish every interaction with politicians could be that joyful.
Gender and Indigenous issues are not really trade issue and in this case are nothing more than a photo-op. Environmental issues, sure, but I don't know if the other parties are going to play dice.
Gender and Indigenous issues are not really trade issue and in this case are nothing more than a photo-op. Environmental issues, sure, but I don't know if the other parties are going to play dice.
Gender equality affects working condition and spending. That's a trade issue.
Indigenous issues affect working condition and spending too, and land right have a slight impact on economic activity. Those are also trade issues.
Edit:
Also, I'm somewhat amused that the only government in North America that want to improve working conditions in the US is the Canadian government.
One of the many advantages of not having a conservative government, I guess.
I don't know enough about Mexican politics to really comment on them.
Gender and Indigenous issues are not really trade issue and in this case are nothing more than a photo-op. Environmental issues, sure, but I don't know if the other parties are going to play dice.
Gender and Indigenous issues not being trade issues will really come as a shock to all of Canada, Europe and our First Nations, what with us having a gender equality chapter in CETA and treaties to exploit the resources on First Nations land.
Gender and Indigenous issues won't be solved by a trade treaty. But these issues have economic components and consequences, and our economy is tied to trade and especially to our international free trade deals. Trying to build a wall between these issues and economic trade so we can refuse to talk about one while discussing the other is both working against these issues and hindering trade.
Its also insulting as fuck to First Nations, a good deal of what they are negotiating for springs from economic opportunity on a local scale that doesn't damn them to being shut out while being footed with the bill for the fallout, something the long term sustainability of many primarily non-native communities would also benefit from - I don't think the rest of us are enjoying our growing wealth disparity either and they've experienced that even more acutely.
"Insulting as fuck to First Nations" might as well be on the Tories' official platform, so...
+9
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
edited September 2017
Be fair. "Insulting as fuck to First Nations" has been a core Canadian value since we were called British North America. We don't get to push this off on other people just because they're particularly shitty on the issue.
Its also insulting as fuck to First Nations, a good deal of what they are negotiating for springs from economic opportunity on a local scale that doesn't damn them to being shut out while being footed with the bill for the fallout, something the long term sustainability of many primarily non-native communities would also benefit from - I don't think the rest of us are enjoying our growing wealth disparity either and they've experienced that even more acutely.
If we have been shitty to the First Nations, then who are we to preach to other people? First Nation rights are an internal issue that we haven't solved. "We don't treat our own native population all that well, but trust us!", seems hypocritical.
Its also insulting as fuck to First Nations, a good deal of what they are negotiating for springs from economic opportunity on a local scale that doesn't damn them to being shut out while being footed with the bill for the fallout, something the long term sustainability of many primarily non-native communities would also benefit from - I don't think the rest of us are enjoying our growing wealth disparity either and they've experienced that even more acutely.
If we have been shitty to the First Nations, then who are we to preach to other people? First Nation rights are an internal issue that we haven't solved. "We don't treat our own native population all that well, but trust us!", seems hypocritical.
It's not about preaching you silly goose, it's about actually giving a shit about First Nations when negotiating a trade deal. That's part of actually solving the issue, you silly, silly goose.
I remember listening to a radio program from Australia, talking about the appalling condition the Aussie Indigenous population was living in. One expert said "We need to look at how other countries have changed. Like Canada, they have good policies"
I remember listening to a radio program from Australia, talking about the appalling condition the Aussie Indigenous population was living in. One expert said "We need to look at how other countries have changed. Like Canada, they have good policies"
I choked on whatever I was eating at the moment.
The sad truth is that, while we do treat our First Nation people horribly, we're still well ahead of the rest of the world in respecting them and affirming their rights.
Which is not to say that we're doing well, but that the rest of the world is complete shit towards them.
Out of curiosity, what exactly are the bargaining goals for gender and indigenous issues?
I haven't seen the details of the Canadian proposal (and from what I understand, no one else has this early in the negotiating process). But my understanding is that, for gender, it would be a recognition that women and men are impacted and benefit differently from trade and economic activity, and that treaties like NAFTA have been shown to disproportionately benefit men. So I guess we would need to make special provisions to foster economic growth in areas that benefit women to even things out. For First Nations, it's about protecting their culture (which can easily get swamped by opening the borders to cultural imports from a much larger and wealthier nation), improving their access to economic activity, and freedom of movement. Canadian First Nation leaders have been more vocal and involved in the negotiations, so there's more material to read about them than about women issues: http://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/chapter-of-nafta-focused-on-indigenous-rights-critical-bellegarde
Posts
What they did was not a "mistake", or a "youthful indescretion", it was a hate crime. Why shouldn't they have been given big chicken dinners all around?
Nope, still chesterfield here!
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Of course these days in Ontario its mostly a legacy thing, but there is still Hydro One and Toronto Hydro, possibly some others. But generally you are paying some company that doesn't have "hydro" in its name anymore.
Which part of what they did was a hate crime? I'm not aware of anything they did that was a crime at all, much less a hate crime. I thought they showed up to an event with their goofy uniforms and flags, exchanged some words with the people at the event, and then left. I suppose it's possible that some of the words exchanged could constitute hate speech. I haven't seen any reporting to that effect, maybe I just missed it.
I'm not sure but I always figured it was co-opted from the military, as they used to measure artillery munitions in poundage (example). I just assumed it was due to the vague shape of the bottles being shell-like.
I thought that their disruption was more physical than it was. But beyond that, it's grating whenever gooseshit like this gets called a "mistake", because of all the framing around that word, and how it winds up removing responsibility from the people involved. Walking up to a group of Native people who are engaging in their own form of free speech and protest and attacking them verbally because you don't like that they're pointing out that the notable figures of history had a dark side is not a fucking mistake, and we should not use that word to describe it.
Hunh never heard that theory before. I always thought it was some vague relation to pounding back 40 ounces.
I'd reckon they're going to be doing push-ups until they love everything they currently hate.
I never finish anyth
Ya, definitely the number they say denotes the volume in US fl oz, but as a kid I could not think of any other reason to use the word "pounder" to identify a bottle. I fell upon the artillery explanation in my head, it made enough sense that I never gave it a second thought after, lol.
I don't use it but I know what it is when people say it.
I called it a half-quarter too back in my day. But as a more casual user, I did ask "Why don't we call this an eighth?"
My pothead friends had no good answer for me.
The Trudeau government just officially won my support.
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/canada-chechnya-gay-asylum/article36145997/
For any Kelly Leitch type folks watching, THESE are Canadian values.
Good news on a Friday, thanks SwashbucklerXX.
I think you'll find the actual proper term for it is Norwegian baseball.
You fuckin' heard me. That's what they actually called it at my elementary school.
This is so obscure a term that when you google it all you get are results about baseball teams from Norway.
Do they have some innovative ideas vis a vis rubber balls that merits their name being attached to this schoolyard sport?
What's interesting is that this action is Kadyrov-approved: "This is nonsense. We don't have those kinds of people here. We don't have any gays. If there are any, take them to Canada,"
We call it that because the original game was "Ballon Chasseur" ("hunting ball", basically), then there was a variation on that game invented, and it was called "Ballon Chinois" (Chinese ball"), probably because it alliterated with "Chasseur", and then there were a whole bunch of variations on that game named after various Asian countries ("Ballon japonais", "Ballon vietnamien", etc). So I guess the "Ballon" + nationality stuck somehow, and now they call different ball games by different nationalities.
We also played soccer baseball, and we tried coming up with different names for it, but nothing besides "soccer baseball" stuck.
This was 15-20 years ago, mind.
i do not know
I played lot of ballon chasseur as a kid but I never heard of balon japonais or any ballon ''insert random country here''.
nope certainly didn't forget. Shocker Erin O'Toole is being a tool..
Sez the party that wildly celebrated their adopting support for gay marriage in (read: removing their opposition to gay marriage from) their official party platform last year... with an exception carved out for religious objectors to gay marriage.
"Look at us! We're not homophobic bigots* any more!"
* Some exceptions may apply.
The CPC: proudly not officially raging homophobes since 2016.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-contenders-gay-pride-1.3659699
But if we WERE virtue-signalling, we're VERY CONFUSED about what virtue we're trying to signal! (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/mps-defeat-bid-to-reopen-same-sex-marriage-debate-1.599856):
The Conservative Party of Canada: We're good people, but only minimally as good as we are forced to be!
Great pride weekend here in cowtown. Got to watch a fun parade with a procession of rainbow storm troupers and rainbow jawas, gave blood, had rainbow pancakes, had a great discussion with two off duty lesbian police officers about the whole pride/police issues (they are confident it will be solved next year leadership on both ends are working together) and got to speak with premier Notley for a minute as the parade was held up. The first time I got to speak to a premier and she was wearing rainbow boa's/ crazy rainbow fuzzy leggings and was accompanied by two giant leather daddies... I wish every interaction with politicians could be that joyful.
Gender and Indigenous issues are not really trade issue and in this case are nothing more than a photo-op. Environmental issues, sure, but I don't know if the other parties are going to play dice.
Gender equality affects working condition and spending. That's a trade issue.
Indigenous issues affect working condition and spending too, and land right have a slight impact on economic activity. Those are also trade issues.
Edit:
Also, I'm somewhat amused that the only government in North America that want to improve working conditions in the US is the Canadian government.
One of the many advantages of not having a conservative government, I guess.
I don't know enough about Mexican politics to really comment on them.
Gender and Indigenous issues not being trade issues will really come as a shock to all of Canada, Europe and our First Nations, what with us having a gender equality chapter in CETA and treaties to exploit the resources on First Nations land.
Gender and Indigenous issues won't be solved by a trade treaty. But these issues have economic components and consequences, and our economy is tied to trade and especially to our international free trade deals. Trying to build a wall between these issues and economic trade so we can refuse to talk about one while discussing the other is both working against these issues and hindering trade.
It's not about preaching you silly goose, it's about actually giving a shit about First Nations when negotiating a trade deal. That's part of actually solving the issue, you silly, silly goose.
I choked on whatever I was eating at the moment.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
The sad truth is that, while we do treat our First Nation people horribly, we're still well ahead of the rest of the world in respecting them and affirming their rights.
Which is not to say that we're doing well, but that the rest of the world is complete shit towards them.
I haven't seen the details of the Canadian proposal (and from what I understand, no one else has this early in the negotiating process). But my understanding is that, for gender, it would be a recognition that women and men are impacted and benefit differently from trade and economic activity, and that treaties like NAFTA have been shown to disproportionately benefit men. So I guess we would need to make special provisions to foster economic growth in areas that benefit women to even things out. For First Nations, it's about protecting their culture (which can easily get swamped by opening the borders to cultural imports from a much larger and wealthier nation), improving their access to economic activity, and freedom of movement. Canadian First Nation leaders have been more vocal and involved in the negotiations, so there's more material to read about them than about women issues: http://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/chapter-of-nafta-focused-on-indigenous-rights-critical-bellegarde