🇨🇦 At Davos, Prime Minister
-
I’ve been suspicious of Yog throwing shit into an LLM a few times now. The changing writing style between posts definitely feels like multiple people, but it could be one person throwing a conversation into an LLM whenever they feel the need to pretend to win an Internet argument. There are quick, poorly articulated insults coming out, and then suddenly you’ll get these random, long-winded tirades of the exact same thought and language patterns over and over again.
It certainly doesn’t help that they’ve explicitly said “I should start throwing your responses into deepspeak to see if I can leave you arguing with a bot” to me once.
Absolutely love how you trolls start braying about LLMs when you can’t actually put together a counter point to what’s being said to you. The fact that you can’t process humor, really shows who’s acting like a chat bot though. You are a very persistent troll, but it’s ok, I’ve dealt with your kind before.
-
I explained, very clearly and repeatedly why Carney is applying double standard in his stance on Russia and Israel. Also, if you’re going to use terms like ad hominem, at least learn what they mean. Ad hominem would be me saying you’re wrong because you’re an imbecile. I’ve explained why you’re wrong on its own terms, and I also happen to think you are an imbecile.
You continue to accuse me of lying, but here we see the height of intellectual dishonesty with you pretending that Carney has a different stance on Russia than Trudeau. Since you’re the one making this fantastical claim, the burden of proof is on you. Please demonstrate any evidence at all that Carney has a different stance on Russia. Which of Trudeau’s policies has Carney changed on Russia. Has he lifted any sanctions, has he changed any rhetoric, please provide evidence to support your claims. Or is your argument genuinely this purely vibes based take of “well it came to me in a dream”?
Meanwhile, I can easily point to what Carney and his cabinet have said in public regarding Russia, no such rhetoric exists regarding Israel
- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-20/russia-is-without-question-a-threat-in-the-arctic-carney-says
- https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/russias-information-war-against-canada-increasingly-successful-top-security-official
- https://halifax.citynews.ca/2026/01/09/canada-condemns-russias-use-of-hypersonic-missile-as-escalation-in-ukraine-war
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW8M_3nhpaU
- https://globalnews.ca/news/11406786/russia-incursion-poland-mark-carney-condemnation
But let’s be clear here, your only purpose is to lie and clutch your pearls like the shameless liberal that you are. I’ll wait for you to provide any actual evidence to back up your fantastical story there.
Oh look, a handful of the exact vibes-based “he said mean things about Russia” content that I pre-empted. Wonderful. Admittedly, I opened two and decided you’re not worth any more of my time, so maybe your super secret point regarding air-space legislation that you swear you’ve repeated up and down is hidden halfway through the third article. But even giving you 15 minutes today was more than you deserve, so it’s time to move on.
Reversing my points isn’t clever. And probably look up the word “fantastical” before you start using it, particularly when I’m not the one who’s weaving a tale.
EDIT - See, this is a real argument. Using, you know, consistent logic and relevant points, rather than ad hominem attacks and tangential gibberish.
-
The PM is just the leader of our government for a time, but the government has continuity. We are not under the rule of the whims of PMs. Policies are formed that have continuity with government and extend beyond whoever happens to be leader of the party with the most seats at a given time. The NOTAM for Russia is still in effect. It is a total and indefinite ban by the Canadian government, not a PM.
There is no NOTAM for Israel. The Carney government should act to correct this. The fact that Netanyahu is not under domestic sanctions in Canada and can freely traverse our airspace, as can any Israeli flight, should be corrected.
It is an obvious double standard that Canada’s government is responsible for. It’s made even more jarring in that Canadian airlines have been banned from the massive airspace of Russia, which is a substantial consequence, but the potential of being banned from Israeli airspace is trivial, and yet we haven’t done it.
If you want to say “the ban in 2022 wasn’t on Carney’s watch and maybe this issue hadn’t come to his attention before, so cut him some slack,” okay, sure. But, now that Netanyahu has flown through Canadian airspace under his watch, what’s he going to do?
See, this is actually a good argument.
Aren’t NOTAMs specific per-flight? I’ve heard the term from two pilots in my life, but I’m not personally familiar with them. I was under the impression that they do not function as standing orders, meaning the specific 2022 incident was, well, specific to that incident. If there’s a continuous no-fly rule for all Russian aircraft in effect, that’d have been a much more useful point than calling the one specific event.
And, for the record, I’d love to see the policy regarding Israel’s flights in Canadian airspace changed. I just fail to see the hypocrisy in one event 4 years ago under a different government. If there has been a standing no-fly order since, well, that does in fact change things.
-
Oh look, a handful of the exact vibes-based “he said mean things about Russia” content that I pre-empted. Wonderful. Admittedly, I opened two and decided you’re not worth any more of my time, so maybe your super secret point regarding air-space legislation that you swear you’ve repeated up and down is hidden halfway through the third article. But even giving you 15 minutes today was more than you deserve, so it’s time to move on.
Reversing my points isn’t clever. And probably look up the word “fantastical” before you start using it, particularly when I’m not the one who’s weaving a tale.
EDIT - See, this is a real argument. Using, you know, consistent logic and relevant points, rather than ad hominem attacks and tangential gibberish.
You are literally the only one trying to weave a tale of Carney having some break with the Trudeau government on policy. Which is in fact a fantastical idea Still waiting for you to provide a shred of evidence for the claims you made.
p.s. I love how it’s immediately time for you to move on when asked to back up your claims. Couldn’t be more transparent.
-
Absolutely love how you trolls start braying about LLMs when you can’t actually put together a counter point to what’s being said to you. The fact that you can’t process humor, really shows who’s acting like a chat bot though. You are a very persistent troll, but it’s ok, I’ve dealt with your kind before.
I mean, you literally said before that you were going to turn to Deepseek to deal with me, so, something about “crying wolf,” I guess.
And, real question, what humor? Like, genuinely, political shit slinging aside, what has been said that’s supposed to be funny? Surely you don’t mean your tirade of childish insults. You’re not actually trying to make a “this is just a joke to me” point, are you? Even I think you’re better than that.
-
You are literally the only one trying to weave a tale of Carney having some break with the Trudeau government on policy. Which is in fact a fantastical idea Still waiting for you to provide a shred of evidence for the claims you made.
p.s. I love how it’s immediately time for you to move on when asked to back up your claims. Couldn’t be more transparent.
Evidence of what? That 4 years and a government change is evidence of things changing? The other guy made the claim that there has been a standing policy since the 2022 incident, which is something you’ve never claimed. If they’re right, then they’re right, and that’s a different conversation altogether. With regards to you, all I’ve done is point out that nothing you’ve claimed is evidence of anything. I don’t need to prove whatever straw man you’ve built for me, because you have presented no argument other than “Canada is hypocritical because it’s mean to Russia and let Nathanyahu fly through its airspace” which, again, is a non-starter. It’s a completely invalid logical progression, and doesn’t even meet the starting point for an argument.
Sure, man. Think what you want. Unfortunately for you, I genuinely have better things to do than continue to engage with your bad faith nonsense. Tell yourself that means you “win,” or whatever helps you feel smug, I guess.
-
I mean, you literally said before that you were going to turn to Deepseek to deal with me, so, something about “crying wolf,” I guess.
And, real question, what humor? Like, genuinely, political shit slinging aside, what has been said that’s supposed to be funny? Surely you don’t mean your tirade of childish insults. You’re not actually trying to make a “this is just a joke to me” point, are you? Even I think you’re better than that.
Yeah, that was me literally making a joke about you communicating in a way of a chat bot and perhaps deserving to talk to one instead of an actual human. Given that you’re not able to tell obvious sarcasm, might want to get yourself checked, could be serious https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2011/04/98290/inability-detect-sarcasm-lies-may-be-early-sign-dementia-ucsf-study-shows
-
Yeah, that was me literally making a joke about you communicating in a way of a chat bot and perhaps deserving to talk to one instead of an actual human. Given that you’re not able to tell obvious sarcasm, might want to get yourself checked, could be serious https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2011/04/98290/inability-detect-sarcasm-lies-may-be-early-sign-dementia-ucsf-study-shows
Oof. The retroactive “it was just a joke, bro” defense. Nevermind, I guess. Even I thought too highly of you. Honestly, that’s just too sad.
-
Evidence of what? That 4 years and a government change is evidence of things changing? The other guy made the claim that there has been a standing policy since the 2022 incident, which is something you’ve never claimed. If they’re right, then they’re right, and that’s a different conversation altogether. With regards to you, all I’ve done is point out that nothing you’ve claimed is evidence of anything. I don’t need to prove whatever straw man you’ve built for me, because you have presented no argument other than “Canada is hypocritical because it’s mean to Russia and let Nathanyahu fly through its airspace” which, again, is a non-starter. It’s a completely invalid logical progression, and doesn’t even meet the starting point for an argument.
Sure, man. Think what you want. Unfortunately for you, I genuinely have better things to do than continue to engage with your bad faith nonsense. Tell yourself that means you “win,” or whatever helps you feel smug, I guess.
Oh I thought you were emphatically done making a clown of yourself here. I guess not. Evidence for your claim in literally your last comment:
If you want to make some argument that Carney is playing favorites with Israel - which, again, fuck Nathanyahu and the politics of the state of Israel - you’re going to have to demonstrate that Carney has been tough on Russia while being kind to Israel.
I’ve provided you links with official statements from Carney and his cabinet clearly stating that the policy has not changed. You’re claiming there is some change, it is on you to back that idea up. What you did here was to literally make up a point out of thin air that Craney has not been tough on Russia as Trudeau has. What is your evidence?
Please, provide links to show what policies Carney changed. I asked you earlier, did he remove sanctions on Russia, did he change trade policies, or restore relations. What change has there been. You are the one making the claim that there is no continuation of policy. It is on you to substantiate that.
I have presented exactly the same argument as the other thread you’re referring to, but since you lack even a shred of intellectual integrity you continue to pretend that this is somehow different.
You very clearly have nothing better to do. You’ve exposed yourself as a liar, and multiple people called you out. Now you’re doing the whole ‘I have better things to do’ jig when asked for evidence. Pathetic!
-
Oof. The retroactive “it was just a joke, bro” defense. Nevermind, I guess. Even I thought too highly of you. Honestly, that’s just too sad.
If you genuinely cannot tell I was making fun of you in that thread then I really am worried for you. Do get yourself checked ASAP.
