Leaderboard

No. In Canada, you are free to practice whatever beliefs your religion imposes on you, within the framework of our laws. If you want to treat your wife like crap and force her to stay home, with a blanket over her head and force your daughters to wear covers everywhere they go, that is your choice. But NO....I do not HAVE TO respect that. This makes me very angry. Because you are the one who said that all Israeli children are future murderers and criminals. You insult and denigrate everything Canadian. You only want respect and free speech for yourself, not for all.

Apparently Donald has raised his daughter to be just as hypocritical as is he. "We're gonna bring jobs back". Ha, frickin ha. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/ivanka-trumps-best-selling-fashion-line-is-manufactured-in-china-and-vietnam-a7153376.html

At website Immigration Watch Canada, there was a story written on how a resident in a condo complex in Richmond, BC. was told that all AGM's(annual general meetings)will be conducted in Mandarin only. This was voted in by the majority of Asians who own most of the condos in the complex. Is this what Canadian multiculturalism is all about and has been telling these Asians all along that they can totally ignore one of the main official languages in their meetings? I can understand if all the owners in this complex of condos were Asian and all of them spoke Mandarin but this is not the case. So, just what the hell is going on here? Is this Canada or is this China? How dare these Asians tell other condo owners where no doubt some are Caucasian and speak English only that all meetings will be held in Mandarin only. One of the condo owners who is being affected by this is now taking this to the Human Rights Commission(whom I would never trust for fairness). This is a multicultural case for the HRC and I don't believe that this woman will win with them. It is my belief from seeing other HRC decisions believes that they will support the Asians. But we will wait and see for now. So, for those of you who believe that multiculturalism is suppose to be a wonderful and great thing for Canada, and that no one will be treated differently, all will be treated equally, can now see that with some of these alien foreign people this will not be so. As a Canadian I am offended and insulted by this action, and I would call it an act of racism, and I believe that this program and agenda called multiculturalism is nothing more but a big farce. It is not meant for the host Canadians but is there to promote others and their ways of doing things on the host Canadian people. This is just unbelievable. So,what say you? Care to comment? Over. Source:Immigration Watch Canada website.

The lawyer for 17 asylum seekers who crossed the prairies from the USA to Manitoba - two of whom had lost fingers to frostbite - had stated in an interview with CBC this morning, that Trudeau must change the US-Canada Third Country Agreement. This lawyer said that it's Canada's fault that these refugees had lost their fingers! He'd just said that in an interview with CBC news anchor this morning, I can't find any link to support that. He represents 17 asylum seekers - most if not all from Ghana, who'd lost their bid for asylum in the USA, and are awaiting deportation. Six of them are homosexuals, who could face death in Ghana. The blame being put on Canada sure made me all warm and fuzzy, and feeling so welcoming. The nerve. So, it's Canada's fault that these folks had chosen to brave the Manitoba prairies in the middle of winter, and two had lost some of their fingers? What does this mean for us? We'll be faced with the expenses of lawsuits, and possible compensations later on? Boy.....

I think that this is the pertinent point here. I don't know how they continue to do it, but somehow the family manages to get hundreds of millions from the federal government every 5-10 years with little/no strings attached. It's pretty clear by now that the present generation isn't capable of managing it effectively and that new leadership is required. Taxpayers have sunk over a billion into the company and have nothing to show for it. Call me crazy, but I don't think you should be allowed to consistently run your company in the red, fall years behind targeted production and development goals, ask for federal bailouts on a regular basis, and STILL get to maintain full control of your company.

Yes a change in management would probably be good.

I don't want them to go into bankruptcy. What I'd like to see is the family losing control and new management taking over. That is usually what does happen to companies with bad management. The continual bail-outs by both levels of government have, to a certain extent, stopped that normal process from taking place.

Bombardier has a pile of problems but it's also Canada's only domestic manufacturer of large aircraft. The company's expertise is fairly unique in Canada and could not easily be replicated by another Canadian company. While the company is a financial sink, maintaining this set of capabilities in Canada has some value for national security, sovereignty, independence, etc. That's probably worth some level of government funding.

That's pretty much all there is to say about this. Bombardier has been receiving federal subsidies for over 50 years now and it doesn't appear that they've ever repaid even half of that. Significant portions of that debt has been written off. This isn't a case of the company having a bad run and needing some support. This is systemic corporate welfare for a company that has consistently struggled to be profitable. It's throwing good money after bad and for the average Canadian, it's bad fiscal policy. It's textbook poor economics.

Bigotry in the U.S. (and Canada) hasn't changed at all because of President Trump. Whatever well documented bigotry that existed in either country is not increased beyond what it already was/is.

Procuring a replacement strike fighter for Canada's very old and dwindling number of CF-18s is not a concern for Trump or Putin. Both the USA and Russian Federation have an ample number of military aircraft now and into the future. As usual, Canada hasn't chosen anything yet (no contracts signed). It is the zombie file that refuses to die, regardless of ruling political party. Meanwhile, the 200th production F-35 has been delivered as of last month, and another 100 have been ordered (LRIP 10). The world can move on while Canada does what it always does. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/200th-operational-f-35-delivered/

The problem with that question is it depends on who you ask. It seems to me that to the Left - and the media - if you say a Muslim says he doesn't believe in terrorism and violence against others then he's a moderate. They don't care if you are a dedicated believer in Islam, including Sharia law, which means you believe in the codified inferiority of women, and that gays need to be in jail or dead. And they won't ask what you think about Jews either. On the other hand, if you're a white bread Canadian who goes to church every Sunday, and expresses some discontent with gay marriage, you're a far-right extremist.

What if you don't like people because of their behavior and beliefs, as opposed to what they look like? I mean, nobody hates people because of their beliefs more than progressives do, so why should everyone else have to stop?

Seriously? I can imagine half a dozen here who would cheerfully support such a thing.

They originally wanted a billion. They've received 1/3. The other 2/3 will be slowly slid across the table so we don't all get upset at once.

I perfectly understood, but you can't seem to see that the ban isn't about religion. It's been explained in simple terms. Can't get any simpler than that. What is that? Explain, and support your claim with something credible.

This will certainly add some fuel to the 'refugee fire' http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/west-edmonton-mall-wem-water-park-sexual-assault-1.3972344

Bottom line is "extremist Muslims" is a word now used for many things: 1-all Muslims 2-some Muslims 3-Muslims who wear coverings. It all depends on who is using the phrase and in what context they use it. The more broad and general it is applied to Muslims the more inaccurate it probably gets. In any generalization of an entire people, negative generalizations become problematic. None of us worry when the generalizations are positive. The point is such discussions invariably come down to people making subjective generalizations of how they perceive others. I urge people to avoid sweeping negative generalizations as to any point they make but at the same time we need to balance that with the crucial debate as to the values we believe may not be conducive to building a common Canadian vision. Challenge the belief, not the person or persons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Establishment_Clause

My problem is the charter of rights that allow minorities to push thier weight around and it is going to cause us a lot of grief in the future. White english people IMO get screwed in this country now. And if that means I am a bigot then so be it. I will never be afraid to stand up in this country and say what I want to. I also have a feeling the next one to replace trudeau will be the new immigration minister. He seems to be a alright dude, but when push comes to shove.................

I'm thinking about making some extra cash driving these illegals up to the Canadian border. I will include free hand and toe warmers as part of the package.

Never mind Iram,Steve Bannon has you at war with China in 5 year or so. Breitbart wouldn't lie would they? What a shit show!

Polled Americans would prefer to have Trudeau as their president. Trump still has to show his economic policies are something more than just placing a bunch of his billionaire buddies in positions where they can suck on the taxpayers teats and actually create some jobs. That is aside from those low paying jobs in Bangladesh making his shirts.

And for the numpties that say the F-35 lacks the ability to defend itself from other aircraft: Furthermore: And its not just a force multiplier for other aircraft, but naval and ground forces........with a radar capable of tracking something as small and fast as an artillery shell, giving the f-35 the ability to not only track and attack artillery to the point in which it was fired, but relay targeting information to other allied ground forces.......likewise, in a naval environment, the F-35 is capable of providing targeting data for ships and subs, allowing these platforms to remain "stealth" by not turning on their own search and fire control radars......... Purchasing any legacy aircraft, absent attrition aircraft, today is idiotic, even more so now that the F-35's price has fallen dramatically

Your understanding of Muslims looks to be very superficial. If you actually really knew Muslims, you would know that religion is not a deciding factor as to who they are. Muslims come from many different cultures. For example, a Saudi Muslim is much different than an Indonesian Muslim or a Turkish Muslim or an Iranian Muslim. Even within the countries, value of the people are different based on where they live, how they were raised and who they are as individuals. Your attempt to explain 1.5 billion people based on a religious affiliation is an immature way of thinking.

I agree! However we have some here who don't subscribe to that notion, they just blanket them all with the same. All Muslims are terrorists. Anyone who criticizes Israel is an anti-semite. ect ....

This.

Your comments are serious but I did get a chuckle with the dope smoking leftists. Actually from what you describe yes the dog sounds like its in charge and if that happens, that's not good. Dogs are pack animals. I love them but if they think they are no.1 over you in the pack, its going to be bad because a dog is a dog, they don't discuss being in charge, they show it by teeth, biting, urinating, jumping and attacking. Those are things that need to be nipped in the bud at months 1 to 9 of a dog's life. Just make sure your fences are in good shape. Classic or jazz music calms dogs down if you want to try that when you are outside. If the dog ever did get in your yard a noise blaster that repels bears is suggested as is a powerful water hose and walking backwords calmly and not looking in their eyes directly and getting into the house without turning your back. If the dog is as violent as you say it is you have the right to video it from your yard and report it to your city. The dog may need a muzzle. For all you know the idiots are treating the dog poorly or its sick. You should not have to live in fear of dogs. I am sorry to hear that.

Most SJWs are just plain idiots. The Israel question is really irrelevant for the topic of this thread. I am all for free speech, because it makes the idiots call themselves out when they post. However there are words that socially are unacceptable like 'nigger'. So there people now feel scared to say something that is offensive. Now if you are saying it just to be offensive, then you are a dick, but if you are trying to make a valid point with using 'nigger' in proper context .. either way say what you want.

So? How come Saudi Arabia is not on your list then?

Do you think it's willful ignorance to refuse to address the fact that he has "misspoken" the same line repeatedly, as I cited? Why won't you address that? What is trolly about a simple, relevant question?

Wow ,sorry for the big letters, no idea how I did that. lol

WTO complaint filed against Canada after $372M loans for Bombardier http://www.ottawasun.com/2017/02/08/wto-complaint-filed-against-canada-after-372m-loans-for-bombardier What is this going to cost us?

Excellent, then Argus should be able to link to a post where he disagreed with it on the basis of 'eliminating free speech'.

What happened to: d: All of the above

Don't you find it frustrating that he keeps repeating it, even though you both know it's not true? http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-murder-rate-debunked-2017-2

Why do you keep making stuff up that people never said and ignoring what they actually did say? You are saying he took one statistic and used it to claim the country's murder rate is at a 47 year high. A completed falsehood. There are only two explanations here. 1: He deliberately told a bald faced lie. 2: He really doesn't know WTF he is talking about. Take your pick.

What do you call it when somebody repeatedly misspeaks, even after being corrected many times? He misspoke the same misinformation during the election and was consistently corrected. Yet he continues to misspeak and rely on other people to relate their "alternative understanding" of what he really, really meant.

As noted by Army Guy (and General Hood), the numbers of aircraft only became an issue once the Liberals found a solution (after an extensive lobbying effort by Boeing) looking for a problem........ On this subject, the realization that the majority of the information on a planned Super Hornet purchase, by this government, has been leaked to the press should be most discomforting........and very ironic.

Contempt is simply a matter of who has the seats in parliament. If the Liberals were in a minority I'm quite sure there'd be contempt findings now. In any event, the demands for information was nothing more than political games, and I don't care much about political games.

Translated: why can't those dirty Jews just stop struggling and just hurry up and die? The neighbourhood they moved from was mostly concentration camps, and their lease was up there. Oh, and they were moved by consensus and collective political will of guilt ridden European countries. Who could have guessed that those same Jews, the ones who died by the millions during the war, would prove to be so uncooperative in doing it again in Palestine?

educate yourself https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/trump-wants-to-push-back-against-iran-but-iran-is-now-more-powerful-than-ever/2017/02/05/9a7629ac-e960-11e6-903d-9b11ed7d8d2a_story.html?utm_term=.dbab0583a045

You keep digging and announcing your lack of knowledge on this issue. They have a legal claim. I'm not going to continue being your teacher. Look it up on the internet. 30,000? Oi vey.

You specifically requested that I back up my statement and I backed it up with information that has been shared before. Now that you have faced the back-up you requested, you are calling it a deflection. The laws in Israel and the systematic unfair treatment of Palestinians is right there to be seen. Your denial of them will not change that. Here are the discriminatory laws, in Israel. The issue in Palestine has nothing to do with previous centuries. There is a beginning to what we`re seeing today and the beginning was when a handful of countries decided that it`s okay to transfer European Jews to Palestine from Europe and then to allow the locals to be forced out of their homes. This was the trigger. This continuous hate can be stopped, however. But that`s only after the world comes together, as they are through BDS, and force Israel to stop the racist and discriminatory treatment of Palestinians both in the occupied territories and inside Israel.

This have been backed up a number of times. You just refuse to acknowledge it. Here is one place you can start with to understand the discriminatory laws in Israel which clearly shows how Zionism is a racist ideology: In 2012, Adalah, the legal center for Arab minority rights in Israel, published a report, The Discriminatory Laws Database, which collected and analyzed more than 50 laws “enacted since 1948 that directly or indirectly discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel in all areas of life.” Here is a review of some of the patently discriminatory laws that are identified in the Adalah Database The most serious discriminations were established early and relate to land control and citizenship. First, the state took over and controlled approximately 93 percent of all lands within the 1949 cease fire lines, and the state has subsequently used this land preferentially for its Jewish majority by making land available to Jews for development, and denying building permits and the ability to develop land to Palestinians. Second, the state established discriminatory preferences about who could immigrate, return to, or stay—in short belong—in the land as a citizen. 1950 law about confiscation of Absentee Landlord Property. This law defines persons who were expelled, fled, or who left the country after November 29, 1947 as “absentee.” Property belonging to “absentees” was placed under the control of the State of Israel with the Custodian for Absentees’ Property. The Absentee Property Law was the main legal instrument used by Israel to take possession of the land belonging to the internal and external Palestinian refugees, and Muslim Waqf properties across the state. This law continues to be used to this day by quasi-governmental agencies in Israel to take over Palestinian properties in East Jerusalem, for example. 1950 Law of Return. This allows every Jewish person to immigrate to Israel and this extends to the children and grandchildren of Jews, as well as their spouses, and the spouses of their children and grandchildren. The flip side of this is that the rights of Palestinians and others to enter the state and become citizens, even if they were born in the area that is now the State of Israel, are extremely restrictive. This discrimination against the non-Jewish minority has been periodically reinforced. For example, the ban on family unification law of 2003 prohibits citizens of Israel from reuniting with Palestinian spouses living in the West Bank or Gaza. In 1952 the state authorized the World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency, and other Zionist bodies founded at the turn of the 20th century to function in Israel as quasi-governmental entities in order to further advance the goals of the Zionist movement, to the detriment of minorities. The Land Acquisition Law of 1953 transferred the land of 349 Arab towns and villages—approximately 1.2 million dunams in all (~468 square miles)—to the state to be used preferentially for the Jewish majority. In 1953, the Knesset bestowed governmental authorities on the Jewish National Fund (JNF or Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael) to purchase land for exclusively Jewish use. The state granted financial advantages, including tax relief to facilitate such purchases. In 1960, the state passed a law which stipulates that the ownership of “Israel lands”—namely the 93% of land under the control of the state, the Jewish National Fund, and the Development Authority—cannot be transferred in any manner. Although most Palestinians that remained in 1949 were granted Israeli citizenship, they were subject to martial law until 1966. Travel permits, curfews, administrative detentions, and expulsions were part of life until 1966. Once Palestinians were relieved from martial law, laws were passed to clearly define the primacy of ethnically Jewish Israelis. In 1969, the state passed a law that gave statutory recognition to cultural and educational institutions, and defined their aims, inter alia, as developing and fulfilling Zionist goals to promote Jewish culture and education at the expense of minority goals. There is a law mandating that Knesset session must be opened with a reading of portions of Israel’s declaration of independence that emphasizes the exclusive connection of the state of Israel to the Jewish people. There is a law that bans any political party that denies the existence of Israel as a “Jewish” state. In other words, a party that would advocate equal rights for all citizens of Israel irrespective of ethnicity would not be allowed to enter the Knesset. There are laws that establish separate educational systems which are then unequally administered. More recently, the Knesset has passed laws to defend against efforts to bring the Palestinian minority onto a more equal footing. In 2011 the Knesset passed a law that empowers hundreds of local Jewish communities to exclude applicants based on ethnicity or religion. The Supreme Court upheld this law in September 2014. In 2011 the Knesset passed a law prohibiting anyone from calling for a boycott of Israel, its institutions, or any person because of their affiliation with Israel, including the settlements in the occupied territories. The law creates a private right of action for persons targeted by a boycott to sue for damages. As Noam Sheizaf puts it: “You can boycott anything in Israel except the occupation.” This vague law is blatantly aimed at Palestinians who are supportive of the BDS movement—while it allows people like Avigdor Lieberman to call for boycott of Arab owned businesses with impunity. The law was upheld by Israel’s Supreme Court on April 15, 2015.

You continue to repeat the above misinformation. You are frequently corrected, but you keep coming back with it. I am beginning to think that you are not interested in being honest. Land laws + Citizenship + immigration laws are examples of how Muslims in Israel do not have every right in Israel a Jew does. Then there are systematic discrimination when it comes to how funds are dispersed in Israel when it comes to infrastructure and education. If you're in a Muslim majority neighbourhood in Israel, as compared to a Jewish majority neighbourhood, you will not be treated the same when it comes to fund disbursement. Beyond Jewish vs Muslim discrimination, there is also discrimination against black Jews. Zionism and its ideology, where supremacy is practiced and encouraged is the root problem of all of this. Zionism is racism.

Here is another place where you can see the article.

" It’s hard to admit that the Zionist ideology and its creation – Israel – have created a thieving, racist, arrogant monster that robs water and land and history, which has blood on its hands using the excuse of security" This opinion piece in Haaretz nails it. It's an important read, written by an Israeli Jew. Link

A Jewish and a Christian Iranian can marry a Jew or a Christian outside of Iran and then bring them into their country. A Jewish and a Christian Iranian can also buy land anywhere in Iran. This is not the case when you compare Arab Israelis with Jewish Israelis. The bottom line is that Jews and Christians in Iran are treated more equally to Muslims in Iran when compared to the treatment between Arabs and Jews in Israel.

Iran is not as free as Israel, of course. I don't think anyone disputes that. But that wasn't what you stated and that is not what you brought up in the post Hudson responded to. So try not to confuse yourself. Iranian Jews and Christians are treated as equally as the Muslim Iranians, whereas in Israel, the Muslims are not treated as equally as the Jews. Just to give you a couple of examples: 1) A Palestinian citizen of Israel cannot marry someone from another country and bring them to Israel, where any Jew can move to Israel, 2) There are unequal land rules when it comes to what religion you follow in Israel. In Iran, there are no such discriminating rules when it comes to people who are Jewish or Christian. Then of course, you have the Apartheid policies set by the Israeli government in the Occupied Territories (stolen land).