News   Jun 28, 2024
Streetsville Centre Plaza Redevelopment Proposed North of GO Station in Mississauga
 2.7K     3 
News   Jun 28, 2024
GALA Developments Unveils Danny Danforth in Toronto's East End
 1.6K     1 
News   Jun 28, 2024
News Roundup for June 28, 2024
 600     1 

G-20 Summit in Toronto

If a child molester told me that I shouldn't molest children, I think I might be inclined to take his advice. If they were to give me advice on to how I could achieve this, even better.
 
Second_in_pie said:
If a child molester told me that I shouldn't molest children, I think I might be inclined to take his advice. If they were to give me advice on to how I could achieve this, even better.
Click to expand...

Oh good greif this thread is turning into a 3 ring circus...

If a child molester said you treat children poorly (oh hell if he said you molested children) how much validity would that statement have? Jeez with the doublespeak.
 
I think that statement would have a fair bit of validity. If he had a written list of things that I do wrong in regards to children, I really don't see why I wouldn't at least take a look at it.
 
Second_in_pie said:
I think that statement would have a fair bit of validity. If he had a written list of things that I do wrong in regards to children, I really don't see why I wouldn't at least take a look at it.
Click to expand...

No. You clearly don't get it.

You're advocating being open to taking advice and critisms from a country where a dictator and his people totally oppress a population and make them live in horriic conditions. And I made the analogy that you wouldn't take advice from a child molestor, even if they were offering what they said was sound advice on handling children because they have zero credibility.

Zero credibility. A sane person knowing their history, would never have suggested ever listening to such people.
 
Last edited:
Second_in_pie said:
I think that statement would have a fair bit of validity. If he had a written list of things that I do wrong in regards to children, I really don't see why I wouldn't at least take a look at it.
Click to expand...

The point is that neither Iran nor North Korea have demonstrated that they have any understanding of what proper actions should be in response to public protest. Given that lack of knowledge, one can't really give much credibility to any criticisms they might have.

Just because what they are saying happens to parrot that of more legitimate countries doesn't mean they have a good understanding of human rights. It just means they are capable of mindlessly repeating statements from others.

Why not skip the middle man and just worry about what countries with a credible history have to say?
 
Second_in_pie, i don't think you understand what is going on here. whether the criticism & advice of group "A" is valid or not pertaining to issue "1" with group "B" is besides the point. group "A" doesn't really give a shit about issue "1 " and is being hypocritical. group "A" is using issue "1" against group "B" for purely political reasons, regardless of the fact that they look like idiots in the process. group "A" doesn't really give a crap how group "B" treats their population. pertaining issue "1", group "A" is far worse than group "B". group "A" should really take a look at themselves.


if you're speeding down the highway at 150km/h over the speed limit, in a stolen car, with a hostage you just raped, should you really pull out your cell phone (which you murdered someone for) and call the police on your neighbour because you saw them parked illegally (one hour over the limit) on the street before you left home? or should you be calling the cops on yourself?
 
Last edited:
Whether it's being hypocritical or not, I call it immature to just laugh at what could be criticism that could contain constructive advice, or at least reiterating the fact that a lot of the international community is asking for answers to some of the stronger allegations of what occurred during the G20.

Are they being hypocrites? Sure. But would you want them to just laugh at our criticism when we give it to them?
 
Second_in_pie said:
Whether it's being hypocritical or not, I call it immature to just laugh at what could be criticism that could contain constructive advice, or at least reiterating the fact that a lot of the international community is asking for answers to some of the stronger allegations of what occurred during the G20.

Are they being hypocrites? Sure. But would you want them to just laugh at our criticism when we give it to them?
Click to expand...

it's not laughing at "criticism that could contain constructive advice". it's laughing at who it is coming from. nazi criticism of america for unfair race relations pertaining to blacks may be valid but they're doing this as they slaughter those who they see as racially inferior by the millions. it's frigging ridiculous!
 
Second_in_pie said:
Whether it's being hypocritical or not, I call it immature to just laugh at what could be criticism that could contain constructive advice, or at least reiterating the fact that a lot of the international community is asking for answers to some of the stronger allegations of what occurred during the G20.
Click to expand...

That's the thing, there is very little credibility to the suggestion that any Iranian criticism could "contain constructive advice" given they have not demonstrated they have any real knowledge of basic human rights as we understand them in the Western world.

When it comes to comments from the 'international community', it is worthwhile noting who it comes from and whether they know what they are talking about. If it is obvious they are just speaking out because they like the sound of their own voice or to distract attention from themselves, then how much of our time and effort should we be giving to acknowledging their harangues?

As much as it may not be kosher with the UN, not all countries are created equal.
 
If they told us what they think we specifically did wrong, then take a look at it and tick it off. The feeling I got from everyone else when that article was posted was that why bother even reading it.
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Arrests are being made and publicized:

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/836674--police-arrest-2-on-g20-most-wanted-lists

Now what other grievances can we turn to while we cling to our claims of conspiracy???
Click to expand...


This brings the grand total to THREE arrests nearly three weeks after the event! Hundreds of vandals SHOULD have been arrested IN THE ACT of committing crimes but NOT ONE cop tried to stop them because orders were given to them to NOT engage. I notice in this latest arrest the guy is charged with threatening a police officer. Why didn't the cop arrest him on the spot? Is the cop a coward?
 
Last edited:
I'm no christian, but this talk of Iran makes me think of the bible quote "judge not lest ye be judged"

Granted, I could name some christians (particularly down in the bible belt) who don't follow that piece of wisdom...but anyways...

Iran is criticizing Canada because we criticized them. It's like a childish bicker going on. Iran's goal is to make themselves look better by making us look worse (and therefore hurting our credibility when criticizing them). It doesn't really matter though - most of the world, and particularly most of our allies, would view us as the more credible source. So this little mud-slinging likely won't have more effect than causing 2+ pages of petty bickering on internet forums.
 
What I'm getting from what Second_in_pie is saying is that regardless of the source you must look at the content on its own merit. Whether it's Iran criticizing Canada is not the point, it's the validity of the criticism that's important.

Otherwise the danger is that one can attribute a criticism to a source of questionable character and then deem it worthless just like W.K. Lis did to start this discussion, it's an ad hominem. Or it can get people to side with a negative opinion of the criticism because it's associated with a questionable source. The thing is Iran's criticism regardless of their history has possibility. Imo Second_in_pie is right.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top