Though the article does go on to point out that, in earlier disputes of a similar nature with European nations, Canada didn't bother to butt in either, because of course there would be no benefit to doing so.
Still, if this is an issue we have to stand alone on (and one that has minimal financial impact on either country, given our meager trade relationship in the first place), I'm okay with that.
Basically, nothing about them has changed on our side so there's nothing we can do about them.
It seems up in the air over whether they're being required to go home because their scholarships are being revoked, or being required to go home because the monarchy demands it. Since all Saudi students have to leave Canada within the next two weeks it really sounds like the latter.
If that's the case, Ottawa providing them options to let them stay around if they so choose would be the sort of statement that wouldn't exactly upset me.
Basically, nothing about them has changed on our side so there's nothing we can do about them.
It seems up in the air over whether they're being required to go home because their scholarships are being revoked, or being required to go home because the monarchy demands it. Since all Saudi students have to leave Canada within the next two weeks it really sounds like the latter.
If that's the case, Ottawa providing them options to let them stay around if they so choose would be the sort of statement that wouldn't exactly upset me.
Bluntly, they would be putting their families at risk by staying in Canada.
Basically, nothing about them has changed on our side so there's nothing we can do about them.
It seems up in the air over whether they're being required to go home because their scholarships are being revoked, or being required to go home because the monarchy demands it. Since all Saudi students have to leave Canada within the next two weeks it really sounds like the latter.
If that's the case, Ottawa providing them options to let them stay around if they so choose would be the sort of statement that wouldn't exactly upset me.
Bluntly, they would be putting their families at risk by staying in Canada.
That's the unknown as far as I know. Nobody's sure exactly what the Saudi government has planned.
Basically, nothing about them has changed on our side so there's nothing we can do about them.
It seems up in the air over whether they're being required to go home because their scholarships are being revoked, or being required to go home because the monarchy demands it. Since all Saudi students have to leave Canada within the next two weeks it really sounds like the latter.
If that's the case, Ottawa providing them options to let them stay around if they so choose would be the sort of statement that wouldn't exactly upset me.
Bluntly, they would be putting their families at risk by staying in Canada.
Meh. That's a common (and kind of tired) argument against accepting refugees ever, "they" are sixteen thousand people who aren't all in the same circumstances, and mentioning the fact that people are at risk there is what started the whole mess. I don't see a reason we shouldn't at least present the option for those who want to take it, given the general insanity of the government they'd be avoiding.
Basically, nothing about them has changed on our side so there's nothing we can do about them.
It seems up in the air over whether they're being required to go home because their scholarships are being revoked, or being required to go home because the monarchy demands it. Since all Saudi students have to leave Canada within the next two weeks it really sounds like the latter.
If that's the case, Ottawa providing them options to let them stay around if they so choose would be the sort of statement that wouldn't exactly upset me.
Bluntly, they would be putting their families at risk by staying in Canada.
Meh. That's a common (and kind of tired) argument against accepting refugees ever, "they" are sixteen thousand people who aren't all in the same circumstances, and mentioning the fact that people are at risk there is what started the whole mess. I don't see a reason we shouldn't at least present the option for those who want to take it, given the general insanity of the government they'd be avoiding.
It is not the government of Canada who is preventing them from staying in Canada.
The problems are 100% caused by Saudi Arabia, and since a big chunk of the problem is that they jail dissidents and their family...
Still not seeing why the option shouldn't be put on the table, especially with the alternative of shrugging and letting an awful regime drag people back into a system that went ballistic because we pointed out that kind of issue in the first place.
(I'm totally uninterested in "not our fault, not our problem" reactions to it.)
Still not seeing why the option shouldn't be put on the table, especially with the alternative of shrugging and letting an awful regime drag people back into a system that went ballistic because we pointed out that kind of issue in the first place.
(I'm totally uninterested in "not our fault, not our problem" reactions to it.)
They already have a fucking visa and legal right to stay in Canada!
Where, in anything I've said, did it look like I was talking about something as incredibly volatile, temporary, and situationally-dependent as a student visa?
Zibblsnrt on
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
edited August 2018
I think, and I may be wrong, but I think you two are not arguing over the same thing. At least not directly.
I think what mrondeau is saying is that the students that are here, can currently stay if they don't want to leave.
I think what Zibblsnrt is saying is that the government should provide the students with more permanent arrangements than they currently have, if they want to stay.
Also, people on student visas can't stay if their money's pulled back by Riyadh to the point where they can't afford to pay tuition next month, especially since those visas often come with substantial work restrictions. Canada's entirely willing to throw students out of the country over things like that.
That's assuming they're all finishing their studies this year. Plenty of people don't and have to jump through visa paperwork year after year or term after term.
So today CBC News had a report on the protest and counter-protest in Washington DC. They noted there were hundreds of protesters from various left-wing groups, and that while hundreds of alt-right protesters were expected only about 20 showed up.
Then they gave one protester the mike to speak his mind. With no filter or analysis or comment. Just an unrestricted access to have his message be broadcast from coast to coast to coast.
Guess which side they gave a voice to. Go ahead, guess.
In Aus, on the public broadcaster, this got broadcast as:
- There's a handful of protestors here.
- They're all hiding their faces because they're worried about suffering abuse
- They don't want to talk or have been told not to talk to the media
- Oh look, their leader is up on stage anndd We can't hear him because of the counter protesting.
It was some nicely uplifting stuff.
Good job guys.
So today CBC News had a report on the protest and counter-protest in Washington DC. They noted there were hundreds of protesters from various left-wing groups, and that while hundreds of alt-right protesters were expected only about 20 showed up.
Then they gave one protester the mike to speak his mind. With no filter or analysis or comment. Just an unrestricted access to have his message be broadcast from coast to coast to coast.
Guess which side they gave a voice to. Go ahead, guess.
Yea, CBC does some weird shit from time to time, was listening to CBC radio yesterday during the afternoon (was Cross Country Checkup) and they were discussing the Saudi Arabia thing, and the one talking head they had on was all (blah blah blah jobs, economic impact, job jobs, Saudi Arabia is doing the best they can and are making change) and I just sort of tuned out mentally then turned it off completely, maybe I missed a different perspective earlier but the person before was rambling about the government being hypocrites . Not that I have a horse in this race or anything but I think the PC persepctive is "hey, who cares if a regime is shit, we got money to make. "
I think I will stick to Ideas, As it Happens, Doc Project, Spark, and of course the Debaters.
So today CBC News had a report on the protest and counter-protest in Washington DC. They noted there were hundreds of protesters from various left-wing groups, and that while hundreds of alt-right protesters were expected only about 20 showed up.
Then they gave one protester the mike to speak his mind. With no filter or analysis or comment. Just an unrestricted access to have his message be broadcast from coast to coast to coast.
Guess which side they gave a voice to. Go ahead, guess.
Link?
The only two stories I see on the CBC.ca website are pretty one sided but not in the direction you're implying:
So today CBC News had a report on the protest and counter-protest in Washington DC. They noted there were hundreds of protesters from various left-wing groups, and that while hundreds of alt-right protesters were expected only about 20 showed up.
Then they gave one protester the mike to speak his mind. With no filter or analysis or comment. Just an unrestricted access to have his message be broadcast from coast to coast to coast.
Guess which side they gave a voice to. Go ahead, guess.
Yea, CBC does some weird shit from time to time, was listening to CBC radio yesterday during the afternoon (was Cross Country Checkup) and they were discussing the Saudi Arabia thing, and the one talking head they had on was all (blah blah blah jobs, economic impact, job jobs, Saudi Arabia is doing the best they can and are making change) and I just sort of tuned out mentally then turned it off completely, maybe I missed a different perspective earlier but the person before was rambling about the government being hypocrites . Not that I have a horse in this race or anything but I think the PC persepctive is "hey, who cares if a regime is shit, we got money to make. "
I think I will stick to Ideas, As it Happens, Doc Project, Spark, and of course the Debaters.
Cross country checkup has forever been horrible. It's a call-in show, those are always horrible. They are the only thing that can get me to yell at the radio
Call-in shows are the worst not matter what station. Current events, news, hobbies, sports, whatever.
I don't want to hear Gary from Mississauga or Mike from Medicine Hat opine on either world events, or whether or not the Leafs have a chance to take the Cup this year.
I want to hear informed and well researched back and forth from a panel of experts in the field on various sides of an issue. Not dumb-fuck joe-schmos spouting off.
I remember listening to some sort of question and answer show on the CBC and they had a national parks dude on who was extremely mild mannered until some lady called in asking the best way to get rid of coyotes because she was afraid for her cats and the parks dude flipped out and genteel style told her off and to keep her stupid cats inside
Call-in shows are the worst not matter what station. Current events, news, hobbies, sports, whatever.
I don't want to hear Gary from Mississauga or Mike from Medicine Hat opine on either world events, or whether or not the Leafs have a chance to take the Cup this year.
I want to hear informed and well researched back and forth from a panel of experts in the field on various sides of an issue. Not dumb-fuck joe-schmos spouting off.
Call-in shows are the worst not matter what station. Current events, news, hobbies, sports, whatever.
I don't want to hear Gary from Mississauga or Mike from Medicine Hat opine on either world events, or whether or not the Leafs have a chance to take the Cup this year.
I want to hear informed and well researched back and forth from a panel of experts in the field on various sides of an issue. Not dumb-fuck joe-schmos spouting off.
This is elitism to a lot of their viewers. They want to hear common sense wisdom from the regular folk who make this country great etc.
Or they're just interested in giggling at dumb opinions, either way
Call-in shows are the worst not matter what station. Current events, news, hobbies, sports, whatever.
I don't want to hear Gary from Mississauga or Mike from Medicine Hat opine on either world events, or whether or not the Leafs have a chance to take the Cup this year.
I want to hear informed and well researched back and forth from a panel of experts in the field on various sides of an issue. Not dumb-fuck joe-schmos spouting off.
This is elitism to a lot of their viewers. They want to hear common sense wisdom from the regular folk who make this country great etc.
Or they're just interested in giggling at dumb opinions, either way
Fair enough. But there is other programming available to those who want that. Not a proper News program.
I don't think its treated as news though, its like the Letters To The Editors section in a newspaper ... only when you call in (and I have called into these kinds of shows before), your blood gets pumping excitedly if you are allowed to go on air according to the behind the scenes person who tells you you are on in so many seconds and once you actually start to have something to say, you might fumble your words a bit and instantly get cut off by the host and the guest speaker and I do mean cut off, like blink "Oh, they hung up on me before I could explain anything or give any more details..." and you wonder how the rest of the show went in response because you turned off your radio so there wouldn't be any feedback loop.
Its not a terribly fun experience and I don't know why anyone would do it, though some people are really good at sound biting their way onto talk radio shows though.
The chance to learn more about your political opinion and possibly change it with new information exists better in spaces like these, at least when you're being dismissed and misdirected *shrugs*
0
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Call-in shows are the worst not matter what station. Current events, news, hobbies, sports, whatever.
I don't want to hear Gary from Mississauga or Mike from Medicine Hat opine on either world events, or whether or not the Leafs have a chance to take the Cup this year.
I want to hear informed and well researched back and forth from a panel of experts in the field on various sides of an issue. Not dumb-fuck joe-schmos spouting off.
Call-in shows are the worst not matter what station. Current events, news, hobbies, sports, whatever.
I don't want to hear Gary from Mississauga or Mike from Medicine Hat opine on either world events, or whether or not the Leafs have a chance to take the Cup this year.
I want to hear informed and well researched back and forth from a panel of experts in the field on various sides of an issue. Not dumb-fuck joe-schmos spouting off.
I only listen to podcasts for this reason.
Podcasts vetted by people whose tastes I trust
Yeah for sure.
To be fair I mostly listen to movie stuff and Hardcore History.
It's easy to fall into a echo chamber when all you are doing is following podcasts and other sources that mirror your own opinions.
At least broadcast media pretends to provide both sides of a story.
Eh, who cares? I used to read/listen to/watch conservative news and websites to "see what the other side is thinking" and "avoid the echo chamber". It turns out that eliminating rampant hatred for anyone who's poor or nonwhite or non-queer from my world really improved it. And I don't think I've missed any big stories or information that I should've had, nor have I missed important debate.
I don't particularly need to read an article about how muslim immigrants are coming to Canada and doing crimes (they're not) or how teachers are all overpayed and lazy (they're not), or any of the dumb conservative shit that has just become a bile-production machine.
It's easy to fall into a echo chamber when all you are doing is following podcasts and other sources that mirror your own opinions.
At least broadcast media pretends to provide both sides of a story.
Eh, who cares? I used to read/listen to/watch conservative news and websites to "see what the other side is thinking" and "avoid the echo chamber". It turns out that eliminating rampant hatred for anyone who's poor or nonwhite or non-queer from my world really improved it. And I don't think I've missed any big stories or information that I should've had, nor have I missed important debate.
I don't particularly need to read an article about how muslim immigrants are coming to Canada and doing crimes (they're not) or how teachers are all overpayed and lazy (they're not), or any of the dumb conservative shit that has just become a bile-production machine.
The "both sides" debate is only valid when both sides are full of reasonable people.
Liberal vs NDP is about as "both sides" as I can handle. Conservatives will never, ever, get my vote again and by proxy anything, they stand for I tend to stand against.
It's easy to fall into a echo chamber when all you are doing is following podcasts and other sources that mirror your own opinions.
At least broadcast media pretends to provide both sides of a story.
Eh, who cares?
Now these are some examples of elitist bullshit. I mean, I get why we're OK with it... its our flavour of elitist bullshit. But it is still an elitist mindset .
Racists and Nazi's and other bullshit that the Right wing shelters should not get the time of day, but an actual conservative idea should not be dismissed out of hand but considered and debated...and then dismissed on its lack of merit.
It's easy to fall into a echo chamber when all you are doing is following podcasts and other sources that mirror your own opinions.
At least broadcast media pretends to provide both sides of a story.
Eh, who cares?
Now these are some examples of elitist bullshit. I mean, I get why we're OK with it... its our flavour of elitist bullshit. But it is still an elitist mindset .
Racists and Nazi's and other bullshit that the Right wing shelters should not get the time of day, but an actual conservative idea should not be dismissed out of hand but considered and debated...and then dismissed on its lack of merit.
Two things.
1: "Elitist" in this case just means "Listening to things like actual science, and the people who know what they're talking about. And having read a book", in which case, yeah, fuckin' a let's all be elitist.
2: Sure, I'm absolutely up to hear a conservative idea that is actually conservative, as soon as anybody knows what that even looks like or sounds like when not couched in dog whistles from here to the moon or just an excuse to hate brown people. That doesn't exist and some douchewaffle calling into the CBC to complain that there's no point in funding community engagement because they'll just use it on drugs is not that.
It's easy to fall into a echo chamber when all you are doing is following podcasts and other sources that mirror your own opinions.
At least broadcast media pretends to provide both sides of a story.
Eh, who cares?
Now these are some examples of elitist bullshit. I mean, I get why we're OK with it... its our flavour of elitist bullshit. But it is still an elitist mindset .
Racists and Nazi's and other bullshit that the Right wing shelters should not get the time of day, but an actual conservative idea should not be dismissed out of hand but considered and debated...and then dismissed on its lack of merit.
Two things.
1: "Elitist" in this case just means "Listening to things like actual science, and the people who know what they're talking about. And having read a book", in which case, yeah, fuckin' a let's all be elitist.
2: Sure, I'm absolutely up to hear a conservative idea that is actually conservative, as soon as anybody knows what that even looks like or sounds like when not couched in dog whistles from here to the moon or just an excuse to hate brown people. That doesn't exist and some douchewaffle calling into the CBC to complain that there's no point in funding community engagement because they'll just use it on drugs is not that.
These must be the same conservatives that point to Harper as a great money manager and a proponent for small government!
Not listening to the morons that constitute most of the callers for a call-in politics show is not elitism, except in the sense that not getting your news from Alex Jones fans is elitism. At which point we might want to seriously consider what we are doing to the definition of the word and whether or not it violates the Geneva Convention like it's trying to outdo Saudi Arabia.
I honestly have no fuckin idea what actual conservatives are, like is the Economist actual conservative? Because that magazines alright, though I've never read anything in it that's so fuckin repugnant it literally makes me sick so maybe it's a lefty rag
+5
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Steelhawk, I highly recommend learning the difference between “elitism” and “not wanting bullshit opinions passed off as news”
I honestly have no fuckin idea what actual conservatives are, like is the Economist actual conservative? Because that magazines alright, though I've never read anything in it that's so fuckin repugnant it literally makes me sick so maybe it's a lefty rag
I consider myself an economic conservative. Trust me, I have no home currently on the Canadian political landscape.
PSN: Canadian_llama
0
Options
El SkidThe frozen white northRegistered Userregular
I honestly have no fuckin idea what actual conservatives are, like is the Economist actual conservative? Because that magazines alright, though I've never read anything in it that's so fuckin repugnant it literally makes me sick so maybe it's a lefty rag
I consider myself an economic conservative. Trust me, I have no home currently on the Canadian political landscape.
I am honestly curious here. What does an economic conservative want, exactly? Lower taxes? Less spending?
I honestly have no fuckin idea what actual conservatives are, like is the Economist actual conservative? Because that magazines alright, though I've never read anything in it that's so fuckin repugnant it literally makes me sick so maybe it's a lefty rag
I consider myself an economic conservative. Trust me, I have no home currently on the Canadian political landscape.
I am honestly curious here. What does an economic conservative want, exactly? Lower taxes? Less spending?
I've talked about it before but it's more of a priority/cost-benefit analysis and changing the way we spend money as a government. Our bidding system is fundamentally broken and how we run "budgets" leads to inefficiencies that can't be calculated.
I am socially pretty far left but no government in my lifetime has taken the long view on anything spending related and it's going to screw us all in the end.
Posts
Though the article does go on to point out that, in earlier disputes of a similar nature with European nations, Canada didn't bother to butt in either, because of course there would be no benefit to doing so.
Still, if this is an issue we have to stand alone on (and one that has minimal financial impact on either country, given our meager trade relationship in the first place), I'm okay with that.
It seems up in the air over whether they're being required to go home because their scholarships are being revoked, or being required to go home because the monarchy demands it. Since all Saudi students have to leave Canada within the next two weeks it really sounds like the latter.
If that's the case, Ottawa providing them options to let them stay around if they so choose would be the sort of statement that wouldn't exactly upset me.
That's the unknown as far as I know. Nobody's sure exactly what the Saudi government has planned.
Meh. That's a common (and kind of tired) argument against accepting refugees ever, "they" are sixteen thousand people who aren't all in the same circumstances, and mentioning the fact that people are at risk there is what started the whole mess. I don't see a reason we shouldn't at least present the option for those who want to take it, given the general insanity of the government they'd be avoiding.
The problems are 100% caused by Saudi Arabia, and since a big chunk of the problem is that they jail dissidents and their family...
Still not seeing why the option shouldn't be put on the table, especially with the alternative of shrugging and letting an awful regime drag people back into a system that went ballistic because we pointed out that kind of issue in the first place.
(I'm totally uninterested in "not our fault, not our problem" reactions to it.)
They already have a fucking visa and legal right to stay in Canada!
I think what mrondeau is saying is that the students that are here, can currently stay if they don't want to leave.
I think what Zibblsnrt is saying is that the government should provide the students with more permanent arrangements than they currently have, if they want to stay.
Then they gave one protester the mike to speak his mind. With no filter or analysis or comment. Just an unrestricted access to have his message be broadcast from coast to coast to coast.
Guess which side they gave a voice to. Go ahead, guess.
- There's a handful of protestors here.
- They're all hiding their faces because they're worried about suffering abuse
- They don't want to talk or have been told not to talk to the media
- Oh look, their leader is up on stage anndd We can't hear him because of the counter protesting.
It was some nicely uplifting stuff.
Good job guys.
... And this isn't an America thread..
Yea, CBC does some weird shit from time to time, was listening to CBC radio yesterday during the afternoon (was Cross Country Checkup) and they were discussing the Saudi Arabia thing, and the one talking head they had on was all (blah blah blah jobs, economic impact, job jobs, Saudi Arabia is doing the best they can and are making change) and I just sort of tuned out mentally then turned it off completely, maybe I missed a different perspective earlier but the person before was rambling about the government being hypocrites . Not that I have a horse in this race or anything but I think the PC persepctive is "hey, who cares if a regime is shit, we got money to make. "
I think I will stick to Ideas, As it Happens, Doc Project, Spark, and of course the Debaters.
Link?
The only two stories I see on the CBC.ca website are pretty one sided but not in the direction you're implying:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/charlottesville-year-later-washington-1.4782450
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/charlottesville-year-later-1.4781346
Have you ever tried making a formal complaint about their journalistic practices? I think there's a link on their website somewhere.
Cross country checkup has forever been horrible. It's a call-in show, those are always horrible. They are the only thing that can get me to yell at the radio
I don't want to hear Gary from Mississauga or Mike from Medicine Hat opine on either world events, or whether or not the Leafs have a chance to take the Cup this year.
I want to hear informed and well researched back and forth from a panel of experts in the field on various sides of an issue. Not dumb-fuck joe-schmos spouting off.
I only listen to podcasts for this reason.
This is elitism to a lot of their viewers. They want to hear common sense wisdom from the regular folk who make this country great etc.
Or they're just interested in giggling at dumb opinions, either way
Fair enough. But there is other programming available to those who want that. Not a proper News program.
Its not a terribly fun experience and I don't know why anyone would do it, though some people are really good at sound biting their way onto talk radio shows though.
The chance to learn more about your political opinion and possibly change it with new information exists better in spaces like these, at least when you're being dismissed and misdirected *shrugs*
Podcasts vetted by people whose tastes I trust
Yeah for sure.
To be fair I mostly listen to movie stuff and Hardcore History.
At least broadcast media pretends to provide both sides of a story.
The problem is when there’s really only one viable side, and the other is either made up of cranks or neonazis, but they’re still treated as equal.
Eh, who cares? I used to read/listen to/watch conservative news and websites to "see what the other side is thinking" and "avoid the echo chamber". It turns out that eliminating rampant hatred for anyone who's poor or nonwhite or non-queer from my world really improved it. And I don't think I've missed any big stories or information that I should've had, nor have I missed important debate.
I don't particularly need to read an article about how muslim immigrants are coming to Canada and doing crimes (they're not) or how teachers are all overpayed and lazy (they're not), or any of the dumb conservative shit that has just become a bile-production machine.
The "both sides" debate is only valid when both sides are full of reasonable people.
Liberal vs NDP is about as "both sides" as I can handle. Conservatives will never, ever, get my vote again and by proxy anything, they stand for I tend to stand against.
Now these are some examples of elitist bullshit. I mean, I get why we're OK with it... its our flavour of elitist bullshit. But it is still an elitist mindset .
Racists and Nazi's and other bullshit that the Right wing shelters should not get the time of day, but an actual conservative idea should not be dismissed out of hand but considered and debated...and then dismissed on its lack of merit.
Two things.
1: "Elitist" in this case just means "Listening to things like actual science, and the people who know what they're talking about. And having read a book", in which case, yeah, fuckin' a let's all be elitist.
2: Sure, I'm absolutely up to hear a conservative idea that is actually conservative, as soon as anybody knows what that even looks like or sounds like when not couched in dog whistles from here to the moon or just an excuse to hate brown people. That doesn't exist and some douchewaffle calling into the CBC to complain that there's no point in funding community engagement because they'll just use it on drugs is not that.
These must be the same conservatives that point to Harper as a great money manager and a proponent for small government!
I consider myself an economic conservative. Trust me, I have no home currently on the Canadian political landscape.
I am honestly curious here. What does an economic conservative want, exactly? Lower taxes? Less spending?
I've talked about it before but it's more of a priority/cost-benefit analysis and changing the way we spend money as a government. Our bidding system is fundamentally broken and how we run "budgets" leads to inefficiencies that can't be calculated.
I am socially pretty far left but no government in my lifetime has taken the long view on anything spending related and it's going to screw us all in the end.