Conspiracies, What Are They ?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Ritafee

ONANOFFANONAGIN
Messages
6,244
Reaction score
1,640
By trained military in a designated war zone, largely outside of one's country.
Makes sense that if you are pro war you would be pro gun ... as long as you are killing people in another country right.
 

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Messages
16,424
Reaction score
7,968
Yes, and 1,5, 6 more tightly controlled than 2,3,4, basically long guns. That's supposed to be the way it works, anyway.

(P.S. I am not "pro war", Rita, but if you have a country with a military force, of any kind, you're going to expect something a little better than a rifle and a canoe, lol...)
 

Ritafee

ONANOFFANONAGIN
Messages
6,244
Reaction score
1,640
Yes, and 1,5, 6 more tightly controlled than 2,3,4, basically long guns. That's supposed to be the way it works, anyway.

(P.S. I am not "pro war", Rita, but if you have a country with a military force, of any kind, you're going to expect something a little better than a rifle and a canoe, lol...)
I am perpetually amazed at how so many people say they are not pro war but then go ahead and justify military force. If you support the military having better weapons for war ... how is that not being pro war?
 

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Messages
16,424
Reaction score
7,968
It is impossible to be part of any sort of world military alliance without a military org of some sort. Canada is a little large to be Tobago, lol.
 
Messages
25,788
Reaction score
3,690
It is impossible to be part of any sort of world military alliance without a military org of some sort. Canada is a little large to be Tobago, lol.
Which, I thought you were against. You were years ago, regarding sending troops to the Middle East. You schooled me because I felt that some defence of innocent lives was required and that some of the montersously violent behaving perpetrators - including young Canadian men joining them - were not going to just clear out if asked nicely...I was pondering whether military was necessary or not, and you told me to use my Christian imagination for thinking of peaceful solutions.
 
Last edited:

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Messages
16,424
Reaction score
7,968
But, you can't have "no military". We can't have a voice in a bunch of different "western" alliances without something representative. Until it got out of fashion, the usual Canadian motto was peacekeeping. Now it seems to be a bit more, "help-giving"It is actually terribly beautiful that their most recent use was eldercare.
 
Messages
25,788
Reaction score
3,690
It's possible that some human generation out of our lifetime and quantum universe could have a military free world. That's not us. We may or may not live to see the day, in this lifetime and/ or quantum universe.
 

BetteTheRed

Resident Heretic
Messages
16,424
Reaction score
7,968
I wish you'd really 'seen' the military in ON and PQ. It's been unobtrusive, compassionate/helpful, but "in your face" full of suggestions.
 

Ritafee

ONANOFFANONAGIN
Messages
6,244
Reaction score
1,640
Some people think it was
Until it got out of fashion, the usual Canadian motto was peacekeeping. Now it seems to be a bit more, "help-giving"It is actually terribly beautiful that their most recent use was eldercare.
What you call help giving others are calling ...

Undermining Peace and Security

The findings of the September 2019 UN Group of Eminent Expert on Yemen Report, observes that “the continued supply of weapons to parties involved in Yemen perpetuates the conflict and the suffering of the population”. This observation makes absolutely clear that all military exports to all parties to the conflict contribute to the peace and security problem.

Canada cannot have it both ways. There is a clear incoherence in supporting the UN Secretary-General’s call for a global ceasefire during the pandemic, while at the same time actively impeding that goal by continuing to arm a party to the deadly conflict in Yemen.

In spite of a substantial record affirming that Saudi Arabia has committed serious violations of international humanitarian law in Yemen, and the abysmal human rights record domestically ... Canada in their final report does not cite a single report from a non-governmental organization that has documented such violations.

For example, while the Final Report indicates that it will adopt European Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP when evaluating the risk of international human rights law (IHRL) violations, it fails to note that the European Parliament has adopted multiple resolutions condemning weapons transfers to Saudi Arabia as violations of the very same policy.

Moreover, with respect to its analysis of sniper rifles, the Final Report suggests that these types of weapons are used for precision targeting and thus unlikely to be used to commit violations of international humanitarian law (IHL). This demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of foundational IHL concepts by confounding the means of warfare (ie. the sniper rifle is a permitted weapon under IHL) and the methods of warfare (the weapon must be used within the confines of IHL).

Another troubling affirmation of the Final Report is that it “found no credible evidence linking Canadian-made military goods or technology to gender-based violence by KSA personnel in relation to the conflict in Yemen and no evidence of repeated use of such equipment for such acts”.

There is evidence that Saudi-led forces have committed acts of GBV during the conflict in Yemen that was left unexposed in the Final Report. For example, as documented in the Oxfam report Gendered Impacts of the Use of Explosive Weapons in Yemen, armoured vehicles attacked Al Thawra hospital in late 2018, during the battle for Hodeidah. The maternity ward and paediatric intensive care unit of the hospital were badly affected. Women were unable to reach the hospital to give birth, increasing the risk of maternal and infant mortality. This is a serious violation of IHL and an example of GBV through the use of armoured vehicles.

In its review, the Final Report ought to have considered whether there is a substantial risk that Saudi forces may be involved in similar acts in Yemen. It should have also asked itself whether such vehicles might be used to control the civilian population and facilitate GBV in a war where rape and other sexual violence have alarmingly increased by 70% since 2015 as documented in UN reports.

The ATT is the first legally binding global instrument to recognize and create obligations around the connection between arms transfers and GBV. Therefore, the ATT plays a critical role and contribution to global efforts to address GBV and is a further step in extensive UN efforts. If Canada wants to be consistent with its Feminist Foreign Aid Policy and its future Feminist Foreign Policy, it must contribute to international efforts and ensure that GBV is systematically and thoroughly considered in arms export assessments.

As a state party to the ATT, Canada is obligated to assess the risk of diversion through its national control system. The substantial risk test is the instrument used by Canadian officials to determine the likelihood exports may be misused and, in turn, establishes eligibility for authorization. Excluding diversion from the substantial risk test is a significant oversight that must be remedied.

This glaring omission is especially troubling considering Saudi Arabia’s persistent track record of diverting weapons from its suppliers, including Canada. Despite the government’s claims to the contrary, there remains persuasive and growing evidence that Canadian weapons have been diverted for illicit end-use and to illicit end-users in the war in Yemen. This includes images of Canadian Light Armoured Vehicles reportedly used within Yemen’s borders, and PGW Defence Technologies sniper rifles brandished by Yemeni forces and allied militias. Unless Canada includes diversion under its risk assessment protocol – as is obligated under the ATT – the Minister will not have all the information he is required by law to consider before approving a permit.

Canada's efforts lack credibility among civil society organizations, members of the international community, and the victims of war and conflict if Canada does not start with faithful adherence to its own obligations under the treaty.

That begins with Canadian exports to Saudi Arabia

Conspiracy Theorists that I agree with on this:

Amnesty International Canada (English branch)
Amnistie internationale Canada francophone
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East
Oxfam Canada
Oxfam-Québec
Project Ploughshares
Rideau Institute
 

Luce NDs

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,793
Reaction score
3,609
How does the humble defend against aggressive authoritarianism?

A question that can knock down the best of eM for a decent answer ... when the question was unprepared for --- some scout behind the lines!
 

Ritafee

ONANOFFANONAGIN
Messages
6,244
Reaction score
1,640
“The Covid virus knows no political affiliation,” Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told the New York Times.

I would respectfully disagree with the good doctor. In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that the medical community is aware that deadly little viruses can make moralistic judgment calls – very much like liberals today – with regards to what groups deserve to be attacked and which do not.

Indeed, it seems this incredibly adroit, liberal friendly bug understands the difference between a morally outstanding protest, aimed at “white supremacy”, and a political rally headed by the most loathed US leader to enter the White House in many years – in the most consequential elections to come along in many decades.

Nothing else can explain the medical authorities’ inconsistency on the matter. Perhaps, under the microscope, it is even possible to observe that the coronavirus is a card-carrying member of the Democratic Party.

Reprinted with permission from RT.
 
Messages
25,788
Reaction score
3,690
“The Covid virus knows no political affiliation,” Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told the New York Times.

I would respectfully disagree with the good doctor. In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that the medical community is aware that deadly little viruses can make moralistic judgment calls – very much like liberals today – with regards to what groups deserve to be attacked and which do not.

Indeed, it seems this incredibly adroit, liberal friendly bug understands the difference between a morally outstanding protest, aimed at “white supremacy”, and a political rally headed by the most loathed US leader to enter the White House in many years – in the most consequential elections to come along in many decades.

Nothing else can explain the medical authorities’ inconsistency on the matter. Perhaps, under the microscope, it is even possible to observe that the coronavirus is a card-carrying member of the Democratic Party.

Reprinted with permission from RT.
This is a joke thread. That’s not even trying to be funny. Maybe you have the wrong thread?

(And you’re all over the place again. Whose side are you on? An anti-racist should understand the difference between taking a risk for a human rights protest outdoors, and attending a rally for a fascist, with a confederate “history” steeped white supremacist base of supporters, inside an arena - in Tulsa, at the site of a massacre of about 300 people which happened in 1921. And the a**hole wanted to have it on Juneteenth until he got pushback. That was deliberately offensive optics. And considering people in black communities are dying disproportionately because of Trump’s failure to acknowledge even basic human need - there is no other moment but now.)

I see RT - Russian Television - is stumping for Trump again.
 
Last edited:

Ritafee

ONANOFFANONAGIN
Messages
6,244
Reaction score
1,640
Moved both posts to a (I hope) more appropriate thread.
;)Conspiracies, What are They? Rita's idea of a joke it seems.
An anti-racist should understand the difference between taking a risk for a human rights protest outdoors, and attending a rally for a ...
I won't bother to quote the rest of your propagandized script.

Seriously ... the alleged 'deadly little viruses can make moralistic judgment calls with regards to what groups deserve to be attacked and which do not.' ?

That has got to be a joke!
 
Messages
25,788
Reaction score
3,690
;)Conspiracies, What are They? Rita's idea of a joke it seems.

I won't bother to quote the rest of your propagandized script.

Seriously ... the alleged 'deadly little viruses can make moralistic judgment calls with regards to what groups deserve to be attacked and which do not.' ?

That has got to be a joke!
It was sarcasm from the writer, who was defending Trump's fascist rally and putting down the blm protests. You didn't pick that up? It's not funny. It's also propaganda for Trump, in the state owned Russian media that gets picked up on here. It's Russian media specifically for appealing to Western audiences. It's Putin's Fox News channel that he uses when he wants to, to manipulate Americans.
 
Last edited:

Ritafee

ONANOFFANONAGIN
Messages
6,244
Reaction score
1,640
It was sarcasm from the writer, who was defending Trump's fascist rally and putting down the blm protests. You didn't pick that up? It's not funny. It's also propaganda for Trump, in the state owned Russian media that gets picked up on here. It's Russian media specifically for appealing to Western audiences. It's Putin's Fox News channel that he uses when he wants to, to manipulate Americans.
And you call me a conspiracy nut :LOL:
 
Messages
25,788
Reaction score
3,690
It was sarcasm from the writer, who was defending Trump's fascist rally and putting down the blm protests. You didn't pick that up? It's not funny. It's also propaganda for Trump, in the state owned Russian media that gets picked up on here. It's Russian media specifically for appealing to Western audiences. It's Putin's Fox News channel that he uses when he wants to, to manipulate Americans.
Who owns RT @Ritafee? And can’t you see the anti-liberal bias that’s clearly articulated in the article? Why would a Russian state owned media organization want to present an anti-liberal/ dem bias @Ritafee? It’s not hidden knowledge that they are state owned or that they have an anti-dem bias. It’s not made up. So, right before an election one has to ask “why”? It may be wrong that US media companies have political biases - but in a country that has always been extra polarized it makes sense that each side in a US election would be fighting for their turf in the media. But why is Russian media (the two countries have long been rivals for ideological and economic power even after the Cold War supposedly ended - and both are corrupt) getting so involved?
 
Last edited:
Top