CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 27860
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 12:00 am
 


Title: UN watchdog rightly condemns Canada for siding with Cuba
Category: Political
Posted By: Freakinoldguy
Date: 2018-11-28 22:54:36
Canadian


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12511
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 12:00 am
 


Well Trudeau the lesser finally grew a pair and stood up to the UN. 8O

Unfortunately he did it in support of a Communist Dictatorship that even the corrupt woglodytes in UN know needs to be shut down. I guess it must have been a real conundrum for him. Vote with his masters in the UN or vote for his fathers legacy.

Decisions decisions. :wink:


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 372
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:04 am
 


You can hardly blame Justin on account of Castro being his father.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22294
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 5:52 pm
 


I like that the article doesn't say who voted yes on the measures.

But it does spin it like many more countries voted yes than did. Excellent news article you found there. What an absolute load of shit. It also ignores the fact that these were part of the UN condemnation of the embargo of Cuba.

But why include that? Good to know the Sun is a rag still.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12511
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 7:01 pm
 


Tricks wrote:
I like that the article doesn't say who voted yes on the measures.

But it does spin it like many more countries voted yes than did. Excellent news article you found there. What an absolute load of shit. It also ignores the fact that these were part of the UN condemnation of the embargo of Cuba.

But why include that? Good to know the Sun is a rag still.


Is that fact important?


I don't know about you but I don't give shit how Zimbabwe or Uzbekistan voted on the issue because, what I do care about is that our PM has once again shown his true colours.

Not only does he openly admire the communist regime in China but he also seems to be quite content with voting ‘no’ on eight separate measures that sought to hold Cuba accountable for widespread human rights violations.

Of course for him to have done otherwise would have lessened the legacy of Fidel Castro who, Trudeau once publicly called a remarkable leader who was beloved by the Cuban people which if even an organization as corrupt as the UN noticed the abuses is likely a fabrication.

But, maybe this is what really rankles. Today the PM had the gall to go out of his way to claim in a video from the G20 meeting that "Canada will "always stand up strongly and clearly for human rights."[/quote]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudea ... -1.4928996

ROTFL

Wouldn't you consider it more than a little hypocritical to laud Castro and Xi while they continue to commit human rights abuses but, then publicly go after the Saudi's and Russians?

And yet it's the Sun that's misrepresenting here.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22294
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 7:27 pm
 


Freakinoldguy wrote:
Is that fact important?
Yes. The only countries that voted Yes were the USA, Israel, and the Ukraine. That's it.

Quote:
Not only does he openly admire the communist regime in China
So did Trump when he applauded xi making himself president for life, but you're sure as shit silent on that one aren't you?

Quote:
but he also seems to be quite content with voting ‘no’ on eight separate measures that sought to hold Cuba accountable for widespread human rights violations.
Measures that they were attempting to use to sideline the condemnation of the USA embargo. Kind of like when a bill is introduced and a bunch of random shit gets tacked on to try and destroy it. It's a classic for American Politicians.
Quote:
Of course for him to have done otherwise would have lessened the legacy of Fidel Castro who, Trudeau once publicly called a remarkable leader who was beloved by the Cuban people. Maybe the ones in power loved Fidel. But, if the UN has finally noticed the blatant human rights violations in Cuba and have decided to do something about it, there's likely gonna be alot of Cubans who unlike Trudeau aren't so enamored with the Castro's leadership.

But, maybe this is what really rankles. Today the PM had the gall to go out of his way to claim in a video from the G20 meeting that "Canada will "always stand up strongly and clearly for human rights."

You know that part of the horrible conditions in Cuba is specifically because of the USA's embargo right?

Quote:
Wouldn't you consider it more than a little hypocritical to laud Castro and Xi while they continue to commit human rights abuses but, then publicly go after the Saudi's and Russians?

And it's the Sun that's misrepresenting here.

You mean like it is to publically laud the saudi's, russians, and xi and then condemn castro when you lead the country that's been the chief cause of economic destruction for several decades? Tell me, why isn't there an embargo on Saudi Arabia if the plights of people are so important to the USA? Trump has the gall to criticize anyone on human rights violations while he bends over for some of the worst destroyers of it in our time.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12511
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 11:35 pm
 


Tricks wrote:
Freakinoldguy wrote:
Is that fact important?
Yes. The only countries that voted Yes were the USA, Israel, and the Ukraine. That's it.

Quote:
Not only does he openly admire the communist regime in China
So did Trump when he applauded xi making himself president for life, but you're sure as shit silent on that one aren't you?

Quote:
but he also seems to be quite content with voting ‘no’ on eight separate measures that sought to hold Cuba accountable for widespread human rights violations.
Measures that they were attempting to use to sideline the condemnation of the USA embargo. Kind of like when a bill is introduced and a bunch of random shit gets tacked on to try and destroy it. It's a classic for American Politicians.
Quote:
Of course for him to have done otherwise would have lessened the legacy of Fidel Castro who, Trudeau once publicly called a remarkable leader who was beloved by the Cuban people. Maybe the ones in power loved Fidel. But, if the UN has finally noticed the blatant human rights violations in Cuba and have decided to do something about it, there's likely gonna be alot of Cubans who unlike Trudeau aren't so enamored with the Castro's leadership.

But, maybe this is what really rankles. Today the PM had the gall to go out of his way to claim in a video from the G20 meeting that "Canada will "always stand up strongly and clearly for human rights."

You know that part of the horrible conditions in Cuba is specifically because of the USA's embargo right?

Quote:
Wouldn't you consider it more than a little hypocritical to laud Castro and Xi while they continue to commit human rights abuses but, then publicly go after the Saudi's and Russians?

And it's the Sun that's misrepresenting here.

You mean like it is to publically laud the saudi's, russians, and xi and then condemn castro when you lead the country that's been the chief cause of economic destruction for several decades? Tell me, why isn't there an embargo on Saudi Arabia if the plights of people are so important to the USA? Trump has the gall to criticize anyone on human rights violations while he bends over for some of the worst destroyers of it in our time.


So let me get this straight. When it comes to lauding Communist dictators it's okay because Trump did it. Okay fair enough but then please explain why Trudeau vetoed having Cuba give their people some basic human rights not once but eight times?

BTW if Trump's your excuse it's a pretty lame one because Trump is not our Prime Minister and Trump doesn't go around claiming he represents all Canadians. So using him to try and validate Trudeau's hypocrisy is nothing but a red herring.

As for the crappy economic conditions in Cuba being the US's fault, allow me to point out that numerous countries that were embargoed by the US have become vibrant economies. Just not Cuba but hey, that can likely be attributed to them picking the wrong side in the cold war and then along with their Soviet Union benefactors threatening the US and us by extension with nuclear destruction back in 62. Threatening the complete nuclear destruction of your neighbours by a couple of communist dictators tends to piss democratic leaders off to no end and they aren't likely to help you grow your economy and international presence.

So, when you think about it, the Cubans current condition has less to do with the US than the Castro's policies and alliances. All they had to do was give their people some basic human rights and open up a free market economy. But hey, it's still the US's fault. If Vietnam and China could do it why couldn't the Castro's.

Cuba quite obviously still doesn't understand that to get people to give you things, you have to do something in return because nothing in life is free. If they had listened to a myriad of other countries during the last 60 years there would have been no need for the twits in the UN to have to initiated a motion to have them give their people some basic rights and we wouldn't be talking about how big a hypocrite our PM really is.

And, you still haven't explained why which or how many countries voted for the UN proposal is a factor in Trudeau not doing the right thing? Unless of course you, like Trudeau think that basic freedoms and human rights aren't necessary when it's a friend of the family running the show.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26054
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:36 am
 


The Cuban dictatorship doesn't even come close in terms of awfulness to the scum that the US under Trump now regards as it's best friends - Russia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia. Trump also thinks the lunatic in Pyongyang is a heck of a great guy too, and the North Korean antics are so blood-soaked on any given day that he puts the entire harsh history of Cuban communism look amateurish in comparison.

These things need to be said - the United States is no longer a moral leader, thanks entirely to the utterly putrid nature and innate evil of their current president, so it's now irrelevant what they have to say about any of the other alleged bad actors out there.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 22294
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 7:38 am
 


Freakinoldguy wrote:
So let me get this straight. When it comes to lauding Communist dictators it's okay because Trump did it. Okay fair enough but then please explain why Trudeau vetoed having Cuba give their people some basic human rights not once but eight times?
He didn't veto anything. He voted against the amendments, again, that were being tacked onto the resolution to condemn the Embargo of Cuba. Something that has been voted on for almost 30 years, and gets almost 100% voting against the U.S. They were added on in an attempt to stop being from voting to condemn the embargo, that's why almost no one voted to have them included. It wasn't a vote of whether or not they supported whats in the amendment, but whether it should be included in the embargo resolution vote. If you can't separate that then that's your problem.
Quote:
BTW if Trump's your excuse it's a pretty lame one because Trump is not our Prime Minister and Trump doesn't go around claiming he represents all Canadians. So using him to try and validate Trudeau's hypocrisy is nothing but a red herring.

I'm not validating his voting decision, I'm pointing out the classic right wingers blinders to it's own sides actions, even when they are the same or worse as who they're shitting on. I don't think Trudeau should have voted against the amendments, I think he should have abstained like the rest of NATO did. Serves the same function without the political fallout.
Quote:
As for the crappy economic conditions in Cuba being the US's fault, allow me to point out that numerous countries that were embargoed by the US have become vibrant economies.

Really? Lets look at a list.

Iran. Has oil.
North Korea. Destitute
Syria. Not exactly an economic hotbed.
Sudan. Definitely a thriving economy in Sudan right?
Cuba.
Venezuela. Started this year.
Quote:
Just not Cuba but hey, that can likely be attributed to them picking the wrong side in the cold war and then along with their Soviet Union benefactors threatening the US and us by extension with nuclear destruction back in 62. Threatening the complete nuclear destruction of your neighbours by a couple of communist dictators tends to piss democratic leaders off to no end and they aren't likely to help you grow your economy and international presence.
Then why did the embargo start in 58? It had nothing to do with the Cuban Missile Crisis. It had to do with the current regime, who was deposed. It was expanded when they nationalized the american own refineries.
Quote:
So, when you think about it, the Cubans current condition has less to do with the US than the Castro's policies and alliances. All they had to do was give their people some basic human rights and open up a free market economy. But hey, it's still the US's fault. If Vietnam and China could do it why couldn't the Castro's.

Vietnam and China did what? China is still one of the worst human rights abusers on the planet. And I agree, Cuba needs to change how they treat their people, but that reasoning doesn't fly when they condemn Cuba a week after siding with a government that just brutally murdered a journalist for criticizing them. That's not how this works. Also, America doesn't get to decide if Cuba should or should not have a free market. Americans would flip their shit if anyone tried to do that to them, so why do they get to do it to another country?
Quote:
Cuba quite obviously still doesn't understand that to get people to give you things, you have to do something in return because nothing in life is free. If they had listened to a myriad of other countries during the last 60 years there would have been no need for the twits in the UN to have to initiated a motion to have them give their people some basic rights and we wouldn't be talking about how big a hypocrite our PM really is.
You really have a fundamental lack of knowledge on what the resolution is or the amendments that were attempted to be tacked on don't you? You also apparently don't have a clue what the voting record on them means.
Quote:
And, you still haven't explained why which or how many countries voted for the UN proposal is a factor in Trudeau not doing the right thing? Unless of course you, like Trudeau think that basic freedoms and human rights aren't necessary when it's a friend of the family running the show.

I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. The amendments were voted against because the point of their introduction was to try and stop the near universal condemnation of the embargo by the UN. The vote against them is not a vote to reflect the validity of their claim, I think if the U.S. were to introduce a motion separate of the embargo issue with these same statements, there would be a very different outcome. And if not, I would be right there with you condemning Trudeau for voting how he did. This was not a vote to support or not to support human rights in cuba, but a vote to support or not to support it being tacked on to the yearly criticizing of the embargo. That's what was voted against.

It would be like this. Extreme example, not entirely reflective of the current situation. If legislation was introduced that legalized murder, but in it, there was a section that reinforced freedom of speech. Voting against that bill is not a vote against freedom of speech, it's a vote against legalizing murder. In this case, voting against it is not a vote against human rights, but a vote against side-lining the embargo resolution.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7837
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:29 am
 


Tricks wrote:
Freakinoldguy wrote:
So let me get this straight. When it comes to lauding Communist dictators it's okay because Trump did it. Okay fair enough but then please explain why Trudeau vetoed having Cuba give their people some basic human rights not once but eight times?
He didn't veto anything. He voted against the amendments, again, that were being tacked onto the resolution to condemn the Embargo of Cuba. Something that has been voted on for almost 30 years, and gets almost 100% voting against the U.S. They were added on in an attempt to stop being from voting to condemn the embargo, that's why almost no one voted to have them included. It wasn't a vote of whether or not they supported whats in the amendment, but whether it should be included in the embargo resolution vote. If you can't separate that then that's your problem.
Quote:
BTW if Trump's your excuse it's a pretty lame one because Trump is not our Prime Minister and Trump doesn't go around claiming he represents all Canadians. So using him to try and validate Trudeau's hypocrisy is nothing but a red herring.

I'm not validating his voting decision, I'm pointing out the classic right wingers blinders to it's own sides actions, even when they are the same or worse as who they're shitting on. I don't think Trudeau should have voted against the amendments, I think he should have abstained like the rest of NATO did. Serves the same function without the political fallout.
Quote:
As for the crappy economic conditions in Cuba being the US's fault, allow me to point out that numerous countries that were embargoed by the US have become vibrant economies.

Really? Lets look at a list.

Iran. Has oil.
North Korea. Destitute
Syria. Not exactly an economic hotbed.
Sudan. Definitely a thriving economy in Sudan right?
Cuba.
Venezuela. Started this year.
Quote:
Just not Cuba but hey, that can likely be attributed to them picking the wrong side in the cold war and then along with their Soviet Union benefactors threatening the US and us by extension with nuclear destruction back in 62. Threatening the complete nuclear destruction of your neighbours by a couple of communist dictators tends to piss democratic leaders off to no end and they aren't likely to help you grow your economy and international presence.
Then why did the embargo start in 58? It had nothing to do with the Cuban Missile Crisis. It had to do with the current regime, who was deposed. It was expanded when they nationalized the american own refineries.
Quote:
So, when you think about it, the Cubans current condition has less to do with the US than the Castro's policies and alliances. All they had to do was give their people some basic human rights and open up a free market economy. But hey, it's still the US's fault. If Vietnam and China could do it why couldn't the Castro's.

Vietnam and China did what? China is still one of the worst human rights abusers on the planet. And I agree, Cuba needs to change how they treat their people, but that reasoning doesn't fly when they condemn Cuba a week after siding with a government that just brutally murdered a journalist for criticizing them. That's not how this works. Also, America doesn't get to decide if Cuba should or should not have a free market. Americans would flip their shit if anyone tried to do that to them, so why do they get to do it to another country?
Quote:
Cuba quite obviously still doesn't understand that to get people to give you things, you have to do something in return because nothing in life is free. If they had listened to a myriad of other countries during the last 60 years there would have been no need for the twits in the UN to have to initiated a motion to have them give their people some basic rights and we wouldn't be talking about how big a hypocrite our PM really is.
You really have a fundamental lack of knowledge on what the resolution is or the amendments that were attempted to be tacked on don't you? You also apparently don't have a clue what the voting record on them means.
Quote:
And, you still haven't explained why which or how many countries voted for the UN proposal is a factor in Trudeau not doing the right thing? Unless of course you, like Trudeau think that basic freedoms and human rights aren't necessary when it's a friend of the family running the show.

I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. The amendments were voted against because the point of their introduction was to try and stop the near universal condemnation of the embargo by the UN. The vote against them is not a vote to reflect the validity of their claim, I think if the U.S. were to introduce a motion separate of the embargo issue with these same statements, there would be a very different outcome. And if not, I would be right there with you condemning Trudeau for voting how he did. This was not a vote to support or not to support human rights in cuba, but a vote to support or not to support it being tacked on to the yearly criticizing of the embargo. That's what was voted against.

It would be like this. Extreme example, not entirely reflective of the current situation. If legislation was introduced that legalized murder, but in it, there was a section that reinforced freedom of speech. Voting against that bill is not a vote against freedom of speech, it's a vote against legalizing murder. In this case, voting against it is not a vote against human rights, but a vote against side-lining the embargo resolution.


R=UP R=UP


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12511
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:25 pm
 


Tricks wrote:
Freakinoldguy wrote:
So let me get this straight. When it comes to lauding Communist dictators it's okay because Trump did it. Okay fair enough but then please explain why Trudeau vetoed having Cuba give their people some basic human rights not once but eight times?
He didn't veto anything. He voted against the amendments, again, that were being tacked onto the resolution to condemn the Embargo of Cuba. Something that has been voted on for almost 30 years, and gets almost 100% voting against the U.S. They were added on in an attempt to stop being from voting to condemn the embargo, that's why almost no one voted to have them included. It wasn't a vote of whether or not they supported whats in the amendment, but whether it should be included in the embargo resolution vote. If you can't separate that then that's your problem.
Quote:
BTW if Trump's your excuse it's a pretty lame one because Trump is not our Prime Minister and Trump doesn't go around claiming he represents all Canadians. So using him to try and validate Trudeau's hypocrisy is nothing but a red herring.

I'm not validating his voting decision, I'm pointing out the classic right wingers blinders to it's own sides actions, even when they are the same or worse as who they're shitting on. I don't think Trudeau should have voted against the amendments, I think he should have abstained like the rest of NATO did. Serves the same function without the political fallout.
Quote:
As for the crappy economic conditions in Cuba being the US's fault, allow me to point out that numerous countries that were embargoed by the US have become vibrant economies.

Really? Lets look at a list.

Iran. Has oil.
North Korea. Destitute
Syria. Not exactly an economic hotbed.
Sudan. Definitely a thriving economy in Sudan right?
Cuba.
Venezuela. Started this year.
Quote:
Just not Cuba but hey, that can likely be attributed to them picking the wrong side in the cold war and then along with their Soviet Union benefactors threatening the US and us by extension with nuclear destruction back in 62. Threatening the complete nuclear destruction of your neighbours by a couple of communist dictators tends to piss democratic leaders off to no end and they aren't likely to help you grow your economy and international presence.
Then why did the embargo start in 58? It had nothing to do with the Cuban Missile Crisis. It had to do with the current regime, who was deposed. It was expanded when they nationalized the american own refineries.
Quote:
So, when you think about it, the Cubans current condition has less to do with the US than the Castro's policies and alliances. All they had to do was give their people some basic human rights and open up a free market economy. But hey, it's still the US's fault. If Vietnam and China could do it why couldn't the Castro's.

Vietnam and China did what? China is still one of the worst human rights abusers on the planet. And I agree, Cuba needs to change how they treat their people, but that reasoning doesn't fly when they condemn Cuba a week after siding with a government that just brutally murdered a journalist for criticizing them. That's not how this works. Also, America doesn't get to decide if Cuba should or should not have a free market. Americans would flip their shit if anyone tried to do that to them, so why do they get to do it to another country?
Quote:
Cuba quite obviously still doesn't understand that to get people to give you things, you have to do something in return because nothing in life is free. If they had listened to a myriad of other countries during the last 60 years there would have been no need for the twits in the UN to have to initiated a motion to have them give their people some basic rights and we wouldn't be talking about how big a hypocrite our PM really is.
You really have a fundamental lack of knowledge on what the resolution is or the amendments that were attempted to be tacked on don't you? You also apparently don't have a clue what the voting record on them means.
Quote:
And, you still haven't explained why which or how many countries voted for the UN proposal is a factor in Trudeau not doing the right thing? Unless of course you, like Trudeau think that basic freedoms and human rights aren't necessary when it's a friend of the family running the show.

I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. The amendments were voted against because the point of their introduction was to try and stop the near universal condemnation of the embargo by the UN. The vote against them is not a vote to reflect the validity of their claim, I think if the U.S. were to introduce a motion separate of the embargo issue with these same statements, there would be a very different outcome. And if not, I would be right there with you condemning Trudeau for voting how he did. This was not a vote to support or not to support human rights in cuba, but a vote to support or not to support it being tacked on to the yearly criticizing of the embargo. That's what was voted against.

It would be like this. Extreme example, not entirely reflective of the current situation. If legislation was introduced that legalized murder, but in it, there was a section that reinforced freedom of speech. Voting against that bill is not a vote against freedom of speech, it's a vote against legalizing murder. In this case, voting against it is not a vote against human rights, but a vote against side-lining the embargo resolution.


Right wing blinders. ROTFL Thankfully you people on the left are always so insightful.

But remember, we're talking hypocrisy here. So what you're saying is that Trudeau voted against the US embargo of Cuba because he, like the Cubans wanted the removal of that"unfair" embargo without concessions which allow the Cuban Gov't to continue with the abuses of their citizens without consequence.

Now, all we have to do is figure out why he turned into a hypocrite because it can only be one of two reasons. The first reason is just to piss the Americans off which is the most logical or, it might be that he chose the totalitarian Castro's who are friends of the family and much admired, over the human rights of the Cuban people. So which is it?

But, it's good to know that he's shown his true colours and was willing to leave the Cuban gov't free to continue with their human right abuses while having the gall to go on TV at the G20 summit and claim that Canada "Canada will "always stand up strongly and clearly for human rights." while choosing to ignore those same rights in Cuba.

And for that, the whole world can see that when it comes to doing the right thing he won't especially if it means there's a chance he won't get his seat at the UN head table. Here's a list of Cuba's most current human rights violations that quite obviously don't matter to our current Gov't:

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/c ... pters/cuba


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26054
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 5:58 pm
 


Just as a reminder the embargo should be called the "Trump/right-wing extremist" embargo. Obama was going to get rid of the original embargo because it's obsolete and irrelevant, and has been since the mid-1990's at least. And he did it with the vocal support of a lot of the old Cold War conservatives who kind of figured out on their own that an embargo against a pissant country like Cuba is the height of hypocrisy when the United States considers even worse players to be their best of pals.

As for the original article it seems much more like it was written by someone at the SUN doing their designated task of nailing Trudeau whenever and however they can, no matter how irrelevant or out of context or just plain stupid it is (e.g. Lorrie Goldstein taking a cheap shot at Justin for the unmanly display of crying at his own father's funeral). As such the tempest in this particular teapot is even more pointless than usual.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12511
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:28 pm
 


Thanos wrote:
Just as a reminder the embargo should be called the "Trump/right-wing extremist" embargo. Obama was going to get rid of the original embargo because it's obsolete and irrelevant, and has been since the mid-1990's at least. And he did it with the vocal support of a lot of the old Cold War conservatives who kind of figured out on their own that an embargo against a pissant country like Cuba is the height of hypocrisy when the United States considers even worse players to be their best of pals.

As for the original article it seems much more like it was written by someone at the SUN doing their designated task of nailing Trudeau whenever and however they can, no matter how irrelevant or out of context or just plain stupid it is (e.g. Lorrie Goldstein taking a cheap shot at Justin for the unmanly display of crying at his own father's funeral). As such the tempest in this particular teapot is even more pointless than usual.


Obama wasn't going to lift the embargo. He was working on normalizing relations with Cuba as a first step to the eventual lifting of the embargo. As far as he got was allowing Cuban Rum and Cigars being allowed into the US which is kind of silly considering that the US was already the 5th largest trading partner with Cuba anyway.


Quote:
Mr. Obama on Friday also made what aides said were likely his final major modifications to loosen United States sanctions on Cuba before leaving office, including lifting the $100 limit on bringing Cuban rum and cigars into the United States.


https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/15/worl ... bargo.html

So all Cuba has to do to get the US embargo lifted is to grant their people some actual rights and freedoms. Nothing more nothing less and all the comparing of them to North Korea, Saudi Arabia or Russia doesn't change the fact that they're still a totalitarian dictatorship that has for the last 60 years been denying their people basic human rights.


As for the Sun taking pot shots at Trudeau, tough. If you're so arrogant that you think that the rest of the world can't see just how hypocritical you are when it comes to things like this then, you get what you deserve. And, if you don't want to be called out on your less than honest policies towards dictatorships, stop talking the talk while refusing to walking the walk.

Sorry but, Trudeau is nothing more than a dictator loving, limousine Liberal and like it or not the Sun article has shown his true character which is what's upsetting his followers.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26054
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:35 pm
 


I doubt that Trudeau's followers read the SUN at all so right now they're probably not upset about any of this in the slightest.

Maybe Cuba should just let them build a Trump condo in Havana. After that bit of strategic ass-kissing of the Great Man the embargo would probably end so quickly it would make Tailgunner Joe spin in his grave.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12511
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:40 pm
 


Thanos wrote:
I doubt that Trudeau's followers read the SUN at all so right now they're probably not upset about any of this in the slightest.

Maybe Cuba should just let them build a Trump condo in Havana. After that bit of strategic ass-kissing of the Great Man the embargo would probably end so quickly it would make Tailgunner Joe spin in his grave.



And if they did it'd show just how hypocritical Big Don really is. But as it stands now the only one who's being outed because of hypocrisy over Cuba just happens to be our PM. [B-o]


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  1  2  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Robair and 17 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.