I am old enough to remember G7/G8/G20 being huge opportunities for massive protests.

So they want to disincentive direct foreign investment now? Can someone explain to me under what set of assumptions this makes economic sense?

Good on the mayor. We have a housing crisis.

Good point. The province should tax oil and gas companies to fund the construction of good public transit.

It’s why we need anti-car advocacy at all levels of government. Otherwise only the grumps get a say.

If you look at our discussion you might notice that at no point have I singled out Israel as the only possible perpetrator. We are literally discussing this in the thread below an article about the American government making genocidal plans. Between Trumpist USA and the far right current Israeli government, an escalation is not inconceivable. It is true however that thankfully there are multiple actors, from the Europeans to the Egyptians and Jordanians for example, who would not easily allow something like this to happen. But then again, if the world order is blown up in WW3, anything is possible and these kinds of plans would become much less unworkable… Which is why calling them out and not letting them be normalized now is very important.

I am not making prophecies. I am not predicting the future. I am specifically writing:

When people defend or downplay proposals to forcibly remove an entire population […] the comparison isn’t extreme. It’s cautionary.

Do you understand what that phrase means? Do you understand what the word “cautionary” means?

In a few years, perplexed Israelis will be trying to explain the next round of violence with “they hate us because we’re Jewish”.

You’re not engaging with what I’m actually saying, so this is the last you hear from me.

You said: “Nazis wanted to kill them all, not move them further away.” I pointed out that’s historically inaccurate. They started by trying to move them. They ended by killing them. That evolution of intent matters. Genocide isn’t a light switch, it’s a dimmer. And it always starts with the “just move them away” stage.

This isn’t about scoring points. It’s about understanding how atrocities actually unfold.

You keep insisting I’m making “extreme” comparisons. But all I’ve done is point to a well-documented historical pattern: the Nazis didn’t begin with gas chambers. They started with deportation plans, ghettos, and forced removals. That’s not hyperbole: it’s basic historiography.

You’re also still conflating intent with outcome. You said the Nazis “wanted to kill them all,” as if that was the plan from the outset. It wasn’t. The policy evolved over time. That’s the entire point — and it’s exactly why early-stage actions do matter.

When people defend or downplay proposals to forcibly remove an entire population (not in the chaos of war, but as formal policy) the comparison isn’t extreme. It’s cautionary.

You can roll your eyes if you want. But history doesn’t start at Wannsee. And it doesn’t repeat itself with a neon sign saying “genocide incoming.” It creeps.

And that “weed is a gateway drug” analogy? It’s off. A better one would be: “Heroin addiction doesn’t start with heroin — it starts with normalized misuse of something seemingly minor.” That’s the progression I’m talking about.

Anyway. I’ve said my piece. History’s just not on your side here, buddy.

It might take some time, but the perpetrators of this genocide will be brought to justice.

deleted by creator

This is also false. The mass killings started in the middle of 1941 after the invasion of the Soviet Union. The systematic policy of extermination was decided in January 1942 in the Wannsee Conference.

There was quite a lot of thinking before doing. And there was quite a lot of doing smaller steps before doing bigger steps. Just like there was quite a lot of thinking smaller steps before thinking bigger steps.

Give it a rest buddy, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

I responded to what you actually wrote:

Nazis wanted to kill them all, not move them further away. […]

You described intent, i.e., “thinking”.

🙄

PS. Genocide is not a single event in time, it’s a process. An easy way to educate yourself on the matter is by searching YouTube for interviews of Omer Bartov, world renowned Israeli scholar on Genocide and the Holocaust, prof at Brown.

Oh I hadn’t realized it’s the guy who got his ass handed to him from Dutch journalists. Our journalists should take the clue and we’ll have four years of hilarity.

This is quite literally genocidal intent. The US is a rogue state at this point.

This is false. The Nazis originally planned to deport the Jews. They changed to extermination once their deportation plans stopped being practical. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan#Plan_abandoned

Quote:

Once planning for Operation Barbarossa commenced, Hitler asked Himmler to draft a new plan for the elimination of the Jews of Europe, and Himmler passed along the task to Heydrich. His draft proposed the deportation of the Jews to the Soviet Union via Poland.[36] The later Generalplan Ost (General Plan for the East), prepared by Professor Konrad Meyer and others, called for deporting the entire population of occupied Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union to Siberia, either for use as slave labour or to be murdered after the Soviet defeat. The plan hinged on the rapid defeat of the Soviet forces.[37] Once it became apparent that the war against the Soviet Union would drag on much longer than expected, Heydrich revised his plans to concentrate on the Jewish population then under Nazi control. Since transporting masses of people into a combat zone would be impossible, Heydrich decided that the Jews would be killed in extermination camps set up in occupied areas of Poland.[38] The total number of Jews murdered during the resulting Holocaust is estimated at 5.5 to 6 million people.[39]

In other words, by focusing on the end point of the Holocaust and ignoring its starting point YOU are normalizing nazi-like plans that have every potential to escalate.

Montreal has been building pretty good stuff lately.

• For example, on island: https://technopoleangus.com/
• For example, off island: https://solaruniquartier.com/en/

Yes but have you considered that they can throw this at him any time they want?

Here is what they are actually asking for:

https://polysesouvient.ca/Documents_2025/MAIL_25_05_09_Letter_Carney_PostElections.pdf

That’s true, rentals are important. So how about instead mom and pop landlords can rent a couple/small number of units, but anything above that you must register as a corporation and the tenants union gets to be on the board, and there are strong incentives to turn you into a housing cooperative. Let’s throw in some more tenant protection legislation for good measure.

Basically, treat housing as a right, not as a financial asset, an investment, or a profit-driven enterprise.